Re: WTC Towers: The case for controlled demolition



On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:10:18 -0500, Phil Cartwright
<pcartw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Government Shill #2 wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:35:12 -0500, Phil Cartwright <pcartw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Actually, yes it was.

But actually, yes you did.

Yes you did.

Yes I was.

No, actually, it is not.

Whine, blub, sob, whine... Repeat.

Hrm. Another content-free, pure-namecalling post by someone who doesn't
know how to respect Followup-To: headers. It seems there's a lot of
these hereabouts!


What more can you realistically expect from coincidence theorists?


.



Relevant Pages


Loading