Re: 200+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns' Found in the Mainstream Media

[Peter Twydell]

In message >, TRUTH
> writes
>For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
>
>
>
>http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html


Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody right.

Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to newsgroups where
your chance of encountering anybody who might even think about any of it
being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back together?
(Apart from the known nutters, of course)

Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

[Dan]

TRUTH wrote:
> Peter Twydell > wrote in news:+1usDfBfrW
> :
>
>> In message >, TRUTH
>> > writes
>>> For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
>>
>> Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody right.
>>
>> Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to newsgroups where
>> your chance of encountering anybody who might even think about any of
> it
>> being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back together?
>> (Apart from the known nutters, of course)
>>
>> Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
>
>
>
> Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the evidence before posting such
> childish nonsense. The WTC was taken down by controlled demolitions.
> THAT'S where the evidence points. And since there's no evidence
> otherwise, you loose.
>
> So take your kooky opinions to alt.imagullibledickhead.xx. You understand
> that, moron?

Before you get too excited you should read the cite you provided. It
contains a few errors the most glaring of which is the statement > #30
>
> 9/11 - FAA bans takeoffs at 9:26 am for all civilian, military, or law enforcement aircraft (FAA, Time)

FAA didn't then, and does not now, have authority over military
flight operations.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[mrtravel]

TRUTH wrote
>
> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy?

Exactly.. Can you imaginge going to court and saying you recognize the
criminal that shot you, but couldn't remember if it was at a supermarket
or a gas station?


Your version of the truth is that a much smaller military plane crashed
into the Pentagon. The "evidence" you are pointing to also contradicts
your other statements.

From http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

"New techniques for navigation and flight control are used on the
767-200... An automatic flight control system coupled with a computer
allows storage of an entire flight plan and gives automatic guidance and
control of the aircraft from takeoff to landing." - NASA

You said earlier that it was the plane was controlled remotely and the
Arabs onboard couldn't have made it crash, because they couldn't have
flown it to the correct location. You also indicated it was controlled
from a remote location.

[TRUTH]

mrtravel > wrote in news:AEjLf.51613$dW3.2725
@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:

> TRUTH wrote
>>
>> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
>> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy?
>
> Exactly.. Can you imaginge going to court and saying you recognize the
> criminal that shot you, but couldn't remember if it was at a
supermarket
> or a gas station?
>
>
> Your version of the truth is that a much smaller military plane crashed
> into the Pentagon. The "evidence" you are pointing to also contradicts
> your other statements.
>
> From http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
>
> "New techniques for navigation and flight control are used on the
> 767-200... An automatic flight control system coupled with a computer
> allows storage of an entire flight plan and gives automatic guidance
and
> control of the aircraft from takeoff to landing." - NASA
>
> You said earlier that it was the plane was controlled remotely and the
> Arabs onboard couldn't have made it crash, because they couldn't have
> flown it to the correct location. You also indicated it was controlled
> from a remote location.
>
>



If that's your way of seeing things, then your thinking is faulty and
there's absulutely nothing I can say

[Dan]

TRUTH wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:eThLf.22983$Ug4.6352@dukeread12:
>
>> TRUTH wrote:
>>> Peter Twydell > wrote in news:+1usDfBfrW
>>> :
>>>
>>>> In message >, TRUTH
>>>> > writes
>>>>> For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
>>>> Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody
>>>> right.
>>>>
>>>> Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to newsgroups
>>>> where your chance of encountering anybody who might even think about
>>>> any of
>>> it
>>>> being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back together?
>>>> (Apart from the known nutters, of course)
>>>>
>>>> Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
>>>
>>>
>>> Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the evidence before posting
>>> such childish nonsense. The WTC was taken down by controlled
>>> demolitions. THAT'S where the evidence points. And since there's no
>>> evidence otherwise, you loose.
>>>
>>> So take your kooky opinions to alt.imagullibledickhead.xx. You
>>> understand that, moron?
>> Before you get too excited you should read the cite you provided.
>> It
>> contains a few errors the most glaring of which is the statement > #30
>>> 9/11 - FAA bans takeoffs at 9:26 am for all civilian, military, or
>>> law enforcement aircraft (FAA, Time)
>> FAA didn't then, and does not now, have authority over military
>> flight operations.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>
>
>
> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy? How about
> applying that type of thinking to the government's version of 9/11!

I said nothing of the kind, did I? I pointed out an error in a cite
YOU provided. The same cite that implies a link between 9/11 and a
television show and a never implemented operation from 1962.

You were busy spewing your filth at someone who said what most of us
are thinking, but are too polite to say.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[mrtravel]

TRUTH wrote:
>
> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy? How about
> applying that type of thinking to the government's version of 9/11!


- Salman Rushdie 'given US air ban week before terrorist attacks'

This isn't the same as Salman Rushdie actually being banned, is it?
He only says he was.

What, exactly, does this have to do with 9/11?
Why would banning him indicate the government caused the plane crashes?

[TRUTH]

Dan > wrote in news:ASjLf.23568$Ug4.8809@dukeread12:

> TRUTH wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in news:eThLf.22983$Ug4.6352@dukeread12:
>>
>>> TRUTH wrote:
>>>> Peter Twydell > wrote in news:+1usDfBfrW
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> In message >, TRUTH
>>>>> > writes
>>>>>> For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
>>>>> Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody
>>>>> right.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to newsgroups
>>>>> where your chance of encountering anybody who might even think
about
>>>>> any of
>>>> it
>>>>> being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back together?
>>>>> (Apart from the known nutters, of course)
>>>>>
>>>>> Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the evidence before posting
>>>> such childish nonsense. The WTC was taken down by controlled
>>>> demolitions. THAT'S where the evidence points. And since there's no
>>>> evidence otherwise, you loose.
>>>>
>>>> So take your kooky opinions to alt.imagullibledickhead.xx. You
>>>> understand that, moron?
>>> Before you get too excited you should read the cite you provided.
>>> It
>>> contains a few errors the most glaring of which is the statement > #
30
>>>> 9/11 - FAA bans takeoffs at 9:26 am for all civilian, military, or
>>>> law enforcement aircraft (FAA, Time)
>>> FAA didn't then, and does not now, have authority over military
>>> flight operations.
>>>
>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
>> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy? How about
>> applying that type of thinking to the government's version of 9/11!
>
> I said nothing of the kind, did I? I pointed out an error in a cite
> YOU provided. The same cite that implies a link between 9/11 and a
> television show and a never implemented operation from 1962.
>
> You were busy spewing your filth at someone who said what most of us
> are thinking, but are too polite to say.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>


What the hell's wrong with you? How about looking at the mainstream media
articles and stop nitpicking? btw, your version of events is filth with
no proof

[TRUTH]

mrtravel > wrote in news:q0kLf.51620$dW3.50062
@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:

> TRUTH wrote:
>>
>> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
>> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy? How about
>> applying that type of thinking to the government's version of 9/11!
>
>
> - Salman Rushdie 'given US air ban week before terrorist attacks'
>
> This isn't the same as Salman Rushdie actually being banned, is it?
> He only says he was.
>
> What, exactly, does this have to do with 9/11?
> Why would banning him indicate the government caused the plane crashes?
>



If you can't put all those articles in context then there's nothing I can
do for you. Sorry.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Stop replying to this idiot.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Stop replying to this idiot.

[Dan]

TRUTH wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:ASjLf.23568$Ug4.8809@dukeread12:
>
>> TRUTH wrote:
>>> Dan > wrote in news:eThLf.22983$Ug4.6352@dukeread12:
>>>
>>>> TRUTH wrote:
>>>>> Peter Twydell > wrote in news:+1usDfBfrW
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message >, TRUTH
>>>>>> > writes
>>>>>>> For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
>>>>>> Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody
>>>>>> right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to newsgroups
>>>>>> where your chance of encountering anybody who might even think
> about
>>>>>> any of
>>>>> it
>>>>>> being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back together?
>>>>>> (Apart from the known nutters, of course)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the evidence before posting
>>>>> such childish nonsense. The WTC was taken down by controlled
>>>>> demolitions. THAT'S where the evidence points. And since there's no
>>>>> evidence otherwise, you loose.
>>>>>
>>>>> So take your kooky opinions to alt.imagullibledickhead.xx. You
>>>>> understand that, moron?
>>>> Before you get too excited you should read the cite you provided.
>>>> It
>>>> contains a few errors the most glaring of which is the statement > #
> 30
>>>>> 9/11 - FAA bans takeoffs at 9:26 am for all civilian, military, or
>>>>> law enforcement aircraft (FAA, Time)
>>>> FAA didn't then, and does not now, have authority over military
>>>> flight operations.
>>>>
>>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
>>> media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy? How about
>>> applying that type of thinking to the government's version of 9/11!
>> I said nothing of the kind, did I? I pointed out an error in a cite
>> YOU provided. The same cite that implies a link between 9/11 and a
>> television show and a never implemented operation from 1962.
>>
>> You were busy spewing your filth at someone who said what most of us
>> are thinking, but are too polite to say.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>>
>
>
> What the hell's wrong with you? How about looking at the mainstream media
> articles and stop nitpicking? btw, your version of events is filth with
> no proof

I call this filth: "Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the
evidence before posting such childish nonsense."

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[khobar]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> Stop replying to this idiot.

Why? Without him some newsgroups would be dead. Besides, don't you think
it's funny that, ultimately, he resorts to the same "your thinking is
faulty" response time and time again? I do.

Paul Nixon

[khobar]

"TRUTH" > wrote in message
...
> Dan > wrote in news:24lLf.23578$Ug4.8465@dukeread12:
>
> > TRUTH wrote:
> >> Dan > wrote in news:ASjLf.23568$Ug4.8809@dukeread12:
> >>
> >>> TRUTH wrote:
> >>>> Dan > wrote in news:eThLf.22983$Ug4.6352@dukeread12:
> >>>>
> >>>>> TRUTH wrote:
> >>>>>> Peter Twydell > wrote in news:+1usDfBfrW
> >>>>>> :
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In message >, TRUTH
> >>>>>>> > writes
> >>>>>>>> For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
> >>>>>>> Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody
> >>>>>>> right.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to
> >>>>>>> newsgroups where your chance of encountering anybody who might
> >>>>>>> even think
> >> about
> >>>>>>> any of
> >>>>>> it
> >>>>>>> being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back
> >>>>>>> together? (Apart from the known nutters, of course)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the evidence before
> >>>>>> posting such childish nonsense. The WTC was taken down by
> >>>>>> controlled demolitions. THAT'S where the evidence points. And
> >>>>>> since there's no evidence otherwise, you loose.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So take your kooky opinions to alt.imagullibledickhead.xx. You
> >>>>>> understand that, moron?
> >>>>> Before you get too excited you should read the cite you
> >>>>> provided. It
> >>>>> contains a few errors the most glaring of which is the statement >
> >>>>> #
> >> 30
> >>>>>> 9/11 - FAA bans takeoffs at 9:26 am for all civilian, military,
> >>>>>> or law enforcement aircraft (FAA, Time)
> >>>>> FAA didn't then, and does not now, have authority over military
> >>>>> flight operations.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to
> >>>> mainstream media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not
> >>>> trustworthy? How about applying that type of thinking to the
> >>>> government's version of 9/11!
> >>> I said nothing of the kind, did I? I pointed out an error in a
> >>> cite
> >>> YOU provided. The same cite that implies a link between 9/11 and a
> >>> television show and a never implemented operation from 1962.
> >>>
> >>> You were busy spewing your filth at someone who said what most of
> >>> us
> >>> are thinking, but are too polite to say.
> >>>
> >>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> What the hell's wrong with you? How about looking at the mainstream
> >> media articles and stop nitpicking? btw, your version of events is
> >> filth with no proof
> >
> > I call this filth: "Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the
> > evidence before posting such childish nonsense."
> >
> > Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >
>
>
>
> That response from me was directed to the asswipe who insulted me. An eye
> for an eye

Why don't you provide some evidence to support your, eh, claims then?

Paul Nixon

[Peter Twydell]

In message >, TRUTH
> writes
>Peter Twydell > wrote in news:+1usDfBfrW
:
>
>> In message >, TRUTH
>> > writes
>>>For those who don't trust "alternate" websites
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
>>
>>
>> Terry Pratchett wrote "The truth will make you fret". Too bloody right.
>>
>> Why do you persist in posting this crap? Especially to newsgroups where
>> your chance of encountering anybody who might even think about any of
>it
>> being true is about as likely as the Beatles getting back together?
>> (Apart from the known nutters, of course)
>>
>> Try alt.imagullibledickhead.xx instead.
>
>
>
>Heah asswipe, I'd advise you to look at the evidence before posting such
>childish nonsense. The WTC was taken down by controlled demolitions.
>THAT'S where the evidence points. And since there's no evidence
>otherwise, you loose.
>
Nice bit of repartee there, your mother must be proud of you.

What exactly is the childish nonsense in my post?

'You loose'? What the hell does that mean? 'You not tight'? Your
spelling is as poor as your logic and your manners.

>So take your kooky opinions to alt.imagullibledickhead.xx. You understand
>that, moron?

That's rich, you calling me a moron! Who's the one with the kooky
opinions? Who's posting all the nonsense? At least MY IQ is bigger than
my chest measurement.

I still wonder why you're bothering with the people in this newsgroup.
Or bothering them, for that matter.
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

[mrtravel]

TRUTH wrote:

> mrtravel > wrote in news:q0kLf.51620$dW3.50062
> @newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
>
>
>>TRUTH wrote:
>>
>>>So what you're saying is that a website that gives links to mainstream
>>>media must be 100% accurate, otherwise it's not trustworthy? How about
>>>applying that type of thinking to the government's version of 9/11!
>>
>>
>>- Salman Rushdie 'given US air ban week before terrorist attacks'
>>
>>This isn't the same as Salman Rushdie actually being banned, is it?
>>He only says he was.
>>
>>What, exactly, does this have to do with 9/11?
>>Why would banning him indicate the government caused the plane crashes?
>
> If you can't put all those articles in context then there's nothing I can
> do for you. Sorry.

Can you?
Other than Salman Rushdie stating he was banned, do you have any source
confirming he was actually banned?