Jump to content

September 11 Hijackers are Alive And Well


Recommended Posts

Guest johnoneill
Posted

"Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 28, 8:16 am, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

> "Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:q6cnj.2990$7d1.2684@news01.roc.ny...

> > johnoneill wrote:

> >> "Animal02" <Wherewere...@Wednsday.com> wrote in messagenews:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>

> >>>"johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote in messagenews:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>

> >>>>"John P." <Jo...@nospam.com> wrote in messagenews:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

>

> >>>>>"911review.org" <brad.te...@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>

> >>>>>>Hijackers Alive And Well

>

> >>>>>All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>

> >>>>>In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

> >>>>>taken of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

>

> >>>>>The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC

> >>>>>story,

>

> >>>>Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

> >>>>but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

> >>>>before it actually did...

>

> >>>Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>

> >> Care to explain?

>

> > They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the background. The report that it had collapsed

> > was obviously erroneous.

>

> > Follow the logic, Einstein?

>

> Yeah, Oppenheimer. I follow your logic. Too fucking bad your 'logic' stops

> there. And it is funny to see you 'making a point' and falling into my little trap,

> Vandar.

>

> Ok.

>

> They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the

> background. The report that it had collapsed was obviously erroneous.

>

> Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>

> Care to explain, brainiac?- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

I obviously don't have an exact name. But it would appear somone made

an announcement that WTC7 was in immenant (sp) danger of collapse and

the reporter thought it had happened already.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So, the BBC reporter was standing right in front of WTC7, and I think

CNN reporter was fucking LOOKING at WTC7 as he made that

report!

 

So, let me guess, EddieLiarboy... a 'coincidence'?

 

How indicative!

Guest johnoneill
Posted

"Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:32fe69a0-0068-41dc-8421-020a41309662@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 27, 10:22 pm, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

> "Animal02" <Wherewere...@Wednsday.com> wrote in messagenews:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>

> > "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote in messagenews:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>

> >> "John P." <Jo...@nospam.com> wrote in messagenews:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

> >>> "911review.org" <brad.te...@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>

> >>>> Hijackers Alive And Well

>

> >>> All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>

> >>> In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

> >>> taken

> >>> of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

>

> >>> The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC

> >>> story,

>

> >> Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

> >> but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

> >> before it actually did...

>

> > Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>

> Care to explain?

>Explain what? WTC7 was thought to be about to collapse. A BBC reporter

>got that information, misunderstood it and reported that it HAD

>collapsed.

 

Reheheheheheally? So, even if she was standing right in front of WTC7, she

'made a mistake'? Even the BBC anchor was fucking looking at the goddamn

building, EddieLiarboy!!

 

Hahah, so it was just a 'mistake', or rather a 'coincidence' , is that what you're

saying EddieLiarboy?

 

Just like Towers 'seemed' to be destroyed in a controlled demolition, right?

Just like it 'seemed' that flight77 literally disappeared, right?

Just like it merely 'seemed' that flgiht93 also pulverized and disappeared, right?

 

Shit, EddiLiarboy... a lot of 'coincidences' happened on 9/11.

 

BTW, have you heard what mr. Mineta said about patterns and programs, Eddie?

> But, according to the firefighters own testimony,

 

Which ones? Those who toe the official line, or do you mean those that reported

explosions in WTC1 and WTC2 prior to their collapses?

 

Did you mean those firefighters too, EddieLiarboy?

 

they

>believed, through evidence of the buildings behavior, that WTC7 was

>preparing to collapse three hours before it actually did!

 

Not only 3, EddieLiarboy... they thoght WTC7 is going to 'progresivelly'

collapse at 11.30 that day.

 

No one who

>was there says the building was hale and hearty up to the moment of

>its collapse or that said collapse surprised anyone!

 

Really? So, all of the supporting elements in WTC7 failed simultaneously?

 

Is that what you're saying, EddieLiarboy?

Posted

johnoneill wrote:

> "Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> On Jan 28, 8:16 am, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

>

>>"Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:q6cnj.2990$7d1.2684@news01.roc.ny...

>>

>>>johnoneill wrote:

>>>

>>>>"Animal02" <Wherewere...@Wednsday.com> wrote in messagenews:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>>

>>>>>"johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote in messagenews:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>>

>>>>>>"John P." <Jo...@nospam.com> wrote in messagenews:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

>>

>>>>>>>"911review.org" <brad.te...@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>>

>>>>>>>>Hijackers Alive And Well

>>

>>>>>>>All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>>

>>>>>>>In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

>>>>>>>taken of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

>>

>>>>>>>The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC

>>>>>>>story,

>>

>>>>>>Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

>>>>>>but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

>>>>>>before it actually did...

>>

>>>>>Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>>

>>>>Care to explain?

>>

>>>They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the background. The report that it had collapsed

>>>was obviously erroneous.

>>

>>>Follow the logic, Einstein?

>>

>>Yeah, Oppenheimer. I follow your logic. Too fucking bad your 'logic' stops

>>there. And it is funny to see you 'making a point' and falling into my little trap,

>>Vandar.

>>

>>Ok.

>>

>>They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the

>>background. The report that it had collapsed was obviously erroneous.

>>

>>Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>>

>>Care to explain, brainiac?- Hide quoted text -

>>

>>- Show quoted text -

>

>

> I obviously don't have an exact name. But it would appear somone made

> an announcement that WTC7 was in immenant (sp) danger of collapse and

> the reporter thought it had happened already.

>

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> So, the BBC reporter was standing right in front of WTC7,

 

The BBC reporter was uptown from WTC 7, and it was behind her. She

wasn't standing right in front of it.

> and I think CNN reporter was fucking LOOKING at WTC7 as he made that

> report!

>

> So, let me guess, EddieLiarboy... a 'coincidence'?

>

> How indicative!

 

Prior to 9/11, could you have picked WTC 7 out of the skyline?

Posted

On Jan 29, 8:26 am, Vandar <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Prior to 9/11, could you have picked WTC 7 out of the skyline?

 

No. But that's not going to stop his posting nonsense.

Silent explosives and non radiating nuclear devices should give an

indication as to his technical knowledge

Guest Animal02
Posted

"johnoneill" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in message

news:fnkl00$mms$2@aioe.org...

>

> "Animal02" <Wherewereyou@Wednsday.com> wrote in message

> news:g5udnSX7rqfoygDanZ2dnUVZ_s6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>>

>> "johnoneill" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in message

>> news:fnjhml$7gk$1@aioe.org...

>>>

>>> "Animal02" <Wherewereyou@Wednsday.com> wrote in message

>>> news:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>>>>

>>>> "johnoneill" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>>>>>

>>>>> "John P." <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

>>>>>> "911review.org" <brad.team8@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Hijackers Alive And Well

>>>>>>

>>>>>> All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs"

>>>>>> are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen

>>>>>> alive. There have been no new photographs taken of the dead

>>>>>> hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are

>>>>>> anything but dead.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still

>>>>>> alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC story,

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be

>>>>> 'erronous',

>>>>> but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20

>>>>> minutes

>>>>> before it actually did...

>>>>

>>>> Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>>>

>>> Care to explain?

>>

>> Only a cluless moron like yourself needs to have "they made an erroneous

>> report" explained.

>

> No, I understand what you said the first time, AnimalLiar.

>

> Now, I'd like you to figure out who told BBC reporter that WTC7

> has collapsed?

 

You aren't very bright are you?

Free hint for the clueless.......no one tod her, the information was muddled

as it passed from person to person

>

> Do you have such information?

>

>>>> Poor cluless kook

>>>

>>> Haha, look who's talking!!!

>>

>> You the kook.

>

> It lloks like you're more of a kook than I have ever was, or ever will be.

 

Only in your fantasies.

 

>

>>

>>>

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> That does not catch the attention of our 'sane' John Pindelski.

>>>>>

>>>>> which indicated some people with

>>>>>> the same names as some of the dead hijackers were still alive. It's

>>>>>> true. Those people are, in fact, still alive, but none of them were

>>>>>> the dead hijackers from 9/11.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The story was based on the FBI's preliminary release of the hijackers

>>>>>> names, which did not include pictures. When the FBI released

>>>>>> photographs of the actual, dead hijackers, it became clear these were

>>>>>> not the same men. One of the key indicators was that these men were

>>>>>> alive, whereas the dead hijackers were dead - a clear and obvious

>>>>>> difference. Only someone with an extremely low IQ would not be able

>>>>>> to tell the difference between a living person, and a dead person

>>>>>> with the same name.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Likewise, although Jim Smith died in 1964, the other thousands of Jim

>>>>>> Smith's are, miraculously to some, still alive. Additionally, there

>>>>>> is a Jim Smith Lake, which is also not dead, nor is it a living

>>>>>> human - it's a lake. Obviously, to some of the 9/11 chowderheads,

>>>>>> every Jim Smith is a lake.

>>>>>

>>>>> John Pindelski is telling the truth? He should be trusted?

>>>>>

>>>>> Yeah, only if you were braindead.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>

>

Guest John P.
Posted

"Dumbass" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in a message

>>> Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>> Why do you think every time a reporter says

>> something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

> So, you're saying that those two reporters, from CNN and BBC, made it up?

 

Nope, you poor, illiterate moron. I wasn't saying anything. I was asking you

a question. The question is: Why do you think every time a reporter says

something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

>> If you'd do some research, you find there were

>> many erroneous reports in the 9/11 newscasts on 9/11.

> Even if a reporter is standing right in front of the building that did not

> collapse,

> although they are reporting that it has just collapsed?

 

Even if? The fact that there were many erroneous reports on 9/11 will

continue to exist as a fact, "even if" monkeys start to fly out of your ass.

Posted

In article <gIidnc0w_pFTPwPanZ2dnUVZ_rKtnZ2d@comcast.com>,

JohnP@nospam.com says...

> "Dumbass" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in a message

>

> >>> Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>

> >> Why do you think every time a reporter says

> >> something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

>

> > So, you're saying that those two reporters, from CNN and BBC, made it up?

>

> Nope, you poor, illiterate moron. I wasn't saying anything. I was asking you

> a question. The question is: Why do you think every time a reporter says

> something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

>

> >> If you'd do some research, you find there were

> >> many erroneous reports in the 9/11 newscasts on 9/11.

>

> > Even if a reporter is standing right in front of the building that did not

> > collapse,

> > although they are reporting that it has just collapsed?

>

> Even if? The fact that there were many erroneous reports on 9/11 will

> continue to exist as a fact, "even if" monkeys start to fly out of your ass.

>

>

>

 

Now THAT would be a major youtube hit!

 

Not to mention it would make Aunt Flo famous, and isn't that what he

wants to be, special?

 

Not as in special Ed.

 

BDK

Posted

In article <fnkl01$mms$4@aioe.org>, johnoneill@dmail.com says...

>

> "BDK" <BDK@magicsteel.com> wrote in message news:MPG.22071a9d572088f98c1ec@news.buckeye-express.com...

> > In article <fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org>, johnoneill@dmail.com says...

> >>

> >> "John P." <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote in message news:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

> >> > "911review.org" <brad.team8@gmail.com> wrote in a message

> >> >

> >> >> Hijackers Alive And Well

> >> >

> >> > All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

> >> >

> >> > In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

> >> > taken

> >> > of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

> >> >

> >> > The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC

> >> > story,

> >>

> >>

> >> Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

> >> but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

> >> before it actually did...

> >>

> >> That does not catch the attention of our 'sane' John Pindelski.

> >>

> >> which indicated some people with

> >> > the same names as some of the dead hijackers were still alive. It's true. Those people are, in fact, still alive,

> >> > but

> >> > none of them were the dead hijackers from 9/11.

> >> >

> >> > The story was based on the FBI's preliminary release of the hijackers names, which did not include pictures. When

> >> > the

> >> > FBI released photographs of the actual, dead hijackers, it became clear these were not the same men. One of the key

> >> > indicators was that these men were alive, whereas the dead hijackers were dead - a clear and obvious difference.

> >> > Only

> >> > someone with an extremely low IQ would not be able to tell the difference between a living person, and a dead

> >> > person

> >> > with the same name.

> >> >

> >> > Likewise, although Jim Smith died in 1964, the other thousands of Jim Smith's are, miraculously to some, still

> >> > alive.

> >> > Additionally, there is a Jim Smith Lake, which is also not dead, nor is it a living human - it's a lake. Obviously,

> >> > to

> >> > some of the 9/11 chowderheads, every Jim Smith is a lake.

> >>

> >> John Pindelski is telling the truth? He should be trusted?

> >>

> >> Yeah, only if you were braindead.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >

> > Even for you, that's a jump.

>

> Sure, BDK, sure. Keep comforting yourself...

 

I'll keep laughing at you, that's for sure. I don't need any comforting,

but thanks anyway.

 

BDK

Guest David Morgan \(MAMS\)
Posted

"John P." <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote in message....

> In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive.

 

Of course you can't see the _dead_ ones.... but several of the "alleged" or

otherwise FBI 'named' hi-jackers have been seen.

> There have been no new photographs taken of the dead hijackers.

 

You wouldn't kid me, would you?

> There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

 

That usually happens with DEAD people.

Guest Al Dykes
Posted

In article <gIidnc0w_pFTPwPanZ2dnUVZ_rKtnZ2d@comcast.com>,

John P. <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote:

>"Dumbass" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in a message

>

>>>> Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>

>>> Why do you think every time a reporter says

>>> something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

>

>> So, you're saying that those two reporters, from CNN and BBC, made it up?

>

>Nope, you poor, illiterate moron. I wasn't saying anything. I was asking you

>a question. The question is: Why do you think every time a reporter says

>something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

>

 

 

 

If everyone in the "Truth Movement" suddenly learned the meaning of

metaphor and simile, the Truth Movement told disappear in a puff of

smoke.

 

And it would be a good thing.

 

 

--

Al Dykes

News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.

- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail

Guest johnoneill
Posted

"Vandar" <vandar69@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:U%pnj.2883$Sa1.80@news02.roc.ny...

> johnoneill wrote:

>

>> "Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>> news:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

>> On Jan 28, 8:16 am, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>>"Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:q6cnj.2990$7d1.2684@news01.roc.ny...

>>>

>>>>johnoneill wrote:

>>>>

>>>>>"Animal02" <Wherewere...@Wednsday.com> wrote in messagenews:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>>>

>>>>>>"johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote in messagenews:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>>>

>>>>>>>"John P." <Jo...@nospam.com> wrote in messagenews:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

>>>

>>>>>>>>"911review.org" <brad.te...@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>>>

>>>>>>>>>Hijackers Alive And Well

>>>

>>>>>>>>All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>>>

>>>>>>>>In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

>>>>>>>>taken of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

>>>

>>>>>>>>The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC

>>>>>>>>story,

>>>

>>>>>>>Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

>>>>>>>but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

>>>>>>>before it actually did...

>>>

>>>>>>Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>>>

>>>>>Care to explain?

>>>

>>>>They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the background. The report that it had collapsed

>>>>was obviously erroneous.

>>>

>>>>Follow the logic, Einstein?

>>>

>>>Yeah, Oppenheimer. I follow your logic. Too fucking bad your 'logic' stops

>>>there. And it is funny to see you 'making a point' and falling into my little trap,

>>>Vandar.

>>>

>>>Ok.

>>>

>>>They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the

>>>background. The report that it had collapsed was obviously erroneous.

>>>

>>>Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>>>

>>>Care to explain, brainiac?- Hide quoted text -

>>>

>>>- Show quoted text -

>>

>>

>> I obviously don't have an exact name. But it would appear somone made

>> an announcement that WTC7 was in immenant (sp) danger of collapse and

>> the reporter thought it had happened already.

>>

>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>

>> So, the BBC reporter was standing right in front of WTC7,

>

> The BBC reporter was uptown from WTC 7, and it was behind her. She wasn't standing right in front of it.

 

Haha, Vandar fell again into my trap. And, as usual, unaware of it... he tries

to make an argument of it!

 

Sweet!

 

NO SHIT, Vandar? She was not exactly in front of WTC7?

 

No shit!

>> and I think CNN reporter was fucking LOOKING at WTC7 as he made that

>> report!

>>

>> So, let me guess, EddieLiarboy... a 'coincidence'?

>>

>> How indicative!

>

> Prior to 9/11, could you have picked WTC 7 out of the skyline?

 

Of course, Vandar. Who could have missed it? 47 storeys, came down in

approximately 7 seconds!

Guest johnoneill
Posted

"Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d6ef25f8-ebf0-4b9b-8284-4a195a23b198@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 28, 2:04 pm, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

> "Ed" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

>

> On Jan 28, 8:16 am, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> > "Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:q6cnj.2990$7d1.2684@news01.roc.ny...

> > > johnoneill wrote:

> > >> "Animal02" <Wherewere...@Wednsday.com> wrote in messagenews:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>

> > >>>"johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote in messagenews:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>

> > >>>>"John P." <Jo...@nospam.com> wrote in messagenews:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

>

> > >>>>>"911review.org" <brad.te...@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>

> > >>>>>>Hijackers Alive And Well

>

> > >>>>>All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>

> > >>>>>In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

> > >>>>>taken of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

>

> > >>>>>The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous

> > >>>>>BBC

> > >>>>>story,

>

> > >>>>Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

> > >>>>but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

> > >>>>before it actually did...

>

> > >>>Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>

> > >> Care to explain?

>

> > > They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the background. The report that it had

> > > collapsed

> > > was obviously erroneous.

>

> > > Follow the logic, Einstein?

>

> > Yeah, Oppenheimer. I follow your logic. Too fucking bad your 'logic' stops

> > there. And it is funny to see you 'making a point' and falling into my little trap,

> > Vandar.

>

> > Ok.

>

> > They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the

> > background. The report that it had collapsed was obviously erroneous.

>

> > Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>

> > Care to explain, brainiac?- Hide quoted text -

>

> > - Show quoted text -

>

> I obviously don't have an exact name. But it would appear somone made

> an announcement that WTC7 was in immenant (sp) danger of collapse and

> the reporter thought it had happened already.

>

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> So, the BBC reporter was standing right in front of WTC7, and I think

> CNN reporter was fucking LOOKING at WTC7 as he made that

> report!

>

> So, let me guess, EddieLiarboy... a 'coincidence'?

>

> How indicative!- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

I'd believe it was a serious error rather than believe they were

honestly screwing with people's heads. I mean, what's the point of a

conspiracy if you deliberately (sp) do something stupid like that?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

A 'serious error' done twice, Eddie?

Guest johnoneill
Posted

"Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:261cf798-dfa3-4cf4-9609-5baa4af2915b@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 28, 2:04 pm, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

> "Ed" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

 

>Did the building have "I am WTC7 and I haven't fallen yet!" written on

>it somewhere?

 

Wuahahahaha, Eddie, Eddie, you dumb fuck!

 

YEAH, it had a BIG, HUGE, ENORMOUS sign standing right there!

 

It was 47 storeys HIGH, moron!

 

Ahahahaha, Eddie, Eddie...

>I don't know where the CNN reporter was from,

 

Well, then, why the FUCK do you even bother 'explaining' ANYTHING,

if you haven't even seen the CNN video, retard?

 

Care to explain?

 

but how would a BBC

>reporter KNOW she was standing in front of the building she was

>reporting had fallen?

 

Errrrrm, like... she... was... a... fucking... reporter, MAAAAYBE?

 

You do know what reporters do, Eddie moron?

Guest johnoneill
Posted

"John P." <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote in message news:gIidnc0w_pFTPwPanZ2dnUVZ_rKtnZ2d@comcast.com...

> "Dumbass" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in a message

>

>>>> Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>

>>> Why do you think every time a reporter says

>>> something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

>

>> So, you're saying that those two reporters, from CNN and BBC, made it up?

>

> Nope, you poor, illiterate moron. I wasn't saying anything. I was asking you a question. The question is: Why do you

> think every time a reporter says something stupid, someone told him or her to say it?

 

So, reporting that WTC7 has collapsed, on both CNN and BBC is 'stupid'?

 

Haha... Pindelski, poor Pindelski...

>>> If you'd do some research, you find there were

>>> many erroneous reports in the 9/11 newscasts on 9/11.

>

>> Even if a reporter is standing right in front of the building that did not collapse,

>> although they are reporting that it has just collapsed?

>

> Even if? The fact that there were many erroneous reports on 9/11 will continue to exist as a fact, "even if" monkeys

> start to fly out of your ass.

 

Even if you're lying, and have been in these past 6 years, Johnny?

Posted

In article <fno38j$8bi$1@aioe.org>, johnoneill@dmail.com says...

>

> "Ed" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:261cf798-dfa3-4cf4-9609-5baa4af2915b@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

> On Jan 28, 2:04 pm, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

> > "Ed" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

>

>

> >Did the building have "I am WTC7 and I haven't fallen yet!" written on

> >it somewhere?

>

> Wuahahahaha, Eddie, Eddie, you dumb fuck!

>

> YEAH, it had a BIG, HUGE, ENORMOUS sign standing right there!

>

> It was 47 storeys HIGH, moron!

>

> Ahahahaha, Eddie, Eddie...

>

> >I don't know where the CNN reporter was from,

>

> Well, then, why the FUCK do you even bother 'explaining' ANYTHING,

> if you haven't even seen the CNN video, retard?

>

> Care to explain?

>

> but how would a BBC

> >reporter KNOW she was standing in front of the building she was

> >reporting had fallen?

>

> Errrrrm, like... she... was... a... fucking... reporter, MAAAAYBE?

>

> You do know what reporters do, Eddie moron?

>

>

>

 

Damn, Aunt Flo, that one is weird, even for you.

 

The explanation is that the reporters screwed up.

 

 

Of course, that indicates a conspiracy to you.

 

Rave on.

 

BDK

Posted

On Jan 29, 3:33 pm, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

> "Ed" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:261cf798-dfa3-4cf4-9609-5baa4af2915b@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>

> On Jan 28, 2:04 pm, "johnoneill" <johnone...@dmail.com> wrote:

>

> > "Ed" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:e83654fd-3529-4416-a0e7-44cfd7d61d97@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> >Did the building have "I am WTC7 and I haven't fallen yet!" written on

> >it somewhere?

>

> Wuahahahaha, Eddie, Eddie, you dumb fuck!

>

> YEAH, it had a BIG, HUGE, ENORMOUS sign standing right there!

>

> It was 47 storeys HIGH, moron!

>

> Ahahahaha, Eddie, Eddie...

>

> >I don't know where the CNN reporter was from,

>

> Well, then, why the FUCK do you even bother 'explaining' ANYTHING,

> if you haven't even seen the CNN video, retard?

>

> Care to explain?

>

> but how would a BBC

>

> >reporter KNOW she was standing in front of the building she was

> >reporting had fallen?

>

> Errrrrm, like... she... was... a... fucking... reporter, MAAAAYBE?

>

> You do know what reporters do, Eddie moron?

 

I think I know a little bit more than you j o'n. I realize that a

woman from England isn't going to know one 47 story building from

another in a city she wasn't familiar with in a chaotic situation the

likes of which hadn't been seen since the Blitz!

 

No, I haven't seen the CNN video, but there's no reason for you to be

insulting about it! (Not that you seem to need a reason to be

insulting.) In fact, it doesn't seem that anyone here is too familiar

with this video. If you have a link, I would appreciate looking at it.

Guest John P.
Posted

"Dumbass" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in a message

> It was 47 storeys HIGH, moron!

 

Good point Dumbass! All the other buildings in NYC are only like 3 or 4

stories tall. The only exceptions were WTC 7 and the two WTC towers. With

them gone, there are no tall buildings in NYC.

 

ROFLMAO!

Posted

In article <lqmdnS_Pv9tevD3anZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@comcast.com>,

JohnP@nospam.com says...

> "Dumbass" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in a message

>

> > It was 47 storeys HIGH, moron!

>

> Good point Dumbass! All the other buildings in NYC are only like 3 or 4

> stories tall. The only exceptions were WTC 7 and the two WTC towers. With

> them gone, there are no tall buildings in NYC.

>

> ROFLMAO!

>

>

>

>

 

Amazingly stupid, even for Aunt Flo/DeMented.

 

BDK

Guest Cardinal Chunder
Posted

johnoneill wrote:

> "Vandar" <vandar69@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:q6cnj.2990$7d1.2684@news01.roc.ny...

>> johnoneill wrote:

>>> "Animal02" <Wherewereyou@Wednsday.com> wrote in message news:rZidnQRWOMjs2wDanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...

>>>

>>>> "johnoneill" <johnoneill@dmail.com> wrote in message news:fnjfsn$24c$1@aioe.org...

>>>>

>>>>> "John P." <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote in message news:joCdnXl7SegUqgDanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com...

>>>>>

>>>>>> "911review.org" <brad.team8@gmail.com> wrote in a message

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Hijackers Alive And Well

>>>>>> All of the 19 hijackers in the Osama Bin Ladin video "The 19 Martyrs" are dead. That's how they became martyrs.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> In the 6+ years since 9/11, none of the dead hijackers has been seen alive. There have been no new photographs

>>>>>> taken of the dead hijackers. There is no evidence any of the dead hijackers are anything but dead.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The very old 9/11 kook myth that some of the dead hijackers are still alive was based on a single, erroneous BBC

>>>>>> story,

>>>>>

>>>>> Interesting how John Pindelski finds that particular BBC story to be 'erronous',

>>>>> but the BBC story in which a BBC reporter reported WTC7 collapse 20 minutes

>>>>> before it actually did...

>>>> Hey clueless....that story was erroneous too.

>>>

>>> Care to explain?

>> They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the background. The report that it had collapsed

>> was obviously erroneous.

>>

>> Follow the logic, Einstein?

>

> Yeah, Oppenheimer. I follow your logic. Too fucking bad your 'logic' stops

> there. And it is funny to see you 'making a point' and falling into my little trap,

> Vandar.

>

> Ok.

>

> They reported WTC 7 had collapsed. WTC 7 was seen still standing in the

> background. The report that it had collapsed was obviously erroneous.

>

> Who told them that WTC7 has collapsed, Vandar aka Oppenheimer?

>

> Care to explain, brainiac?

 

It's not hard to understand how it may have happened.

 

The BBC and every other news service in the world was stretched to

capacity, receiving dozens if not hundreds of sometimes conflicting

reports every single minute. If they reported WTC 7 had collapsed it was

either because a newswire or other source had reported it, or the

message that collapse was imminent was garbled during communication.

 

But this is too simple for some kooks. Much better to imagine the BBC

was in on this plot too right?

Guest Cardinal Chunder
Posted

johnoneill wrote:

> So, the BBC reporter was standing right in front of WTC7, and I think

> CNN reporter was fucking LOOKING at WTC7 as he made that

> report!

 

Do you think WTC7 was a popular and recognizable building? I doubt

anyone who didn't work in the proximity to it would have the slightest

clue what it looked like.

> So, let me guess, EddieLiarboy... a 'coincidence'?

>

> How indicative!

 

Wow, so two reporters who don't know what WTC7 looks like, report it has

collapsed, and this is evidence of what?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...