Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

7/7 Home Office 'narrative' leaked: Iraq led to July 7

scalyboy said:
Maybe Jazzz started a new thread in response to my suggestion of a dedicated on-topic 9/11 thread - has it been binned?

I don't believe the phone calls were faked - even though it has been said that mobiles don't work at such altitudes, it doesn't make sense that those people weren't on board the planes. What happened to them if they weren't on the planes? Where did they go?
Click to expand...
Trouble is that all your questions have been asked. Repeatedly.

I asked the very same questions two tears ago here and I still haven't had a straight answer.

In that thread, Jazzz maintains the existence of "real-time voice emulation software" that can magically "convert one voice into sounding like another," while insisting that, "fooling a relative already in a state of emotional distress would unfortunately be pretty surefire."

Naturally, not a shred of proof of ever emerged to back up this wonder technology (one of the passengers wasn't even booked on the flight, so this wonder-technology would have to be able to perfectly fake the voices, personalities and foibles of people 'they' presumably had never heard before!)

If you read that thread, you'll see the familiar pattern emerging where Jazz and his pals constantly refuse to reasonably substantiate their wild claims and and others keep jumping from topic to topic whenever they find their latest tinpot theory doesn't fit.

Similar threads where Jazzz repeats the same thing all over again while insisting that the calls were faked can be found here:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1696828&
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1649315&

Despite the endless duplicity of threads, there's never any credible evidence being produced and that's why it's utterly pointless to keep on hosting these ridiculous discussions.
 
Hang on editor - this is just not on. I didn't get the chance to comment on the phone calls, because you binned the thread. But I see, as well as entering the issue as and when you see fit, you are describing my position for me. How utterly shabby. :rolleyes:
 
Oh, FFS, Jazzz, just expound your crackpot theories about the phone calls, instead of whining about your other thread.


(Anyway, it's obvious that other thread was binned because the Powers That Be won't allow discussion of the role of pixies.)
 
editor said:
Why not just answer the fucking question instead of this idiotic process of starting a new thread without bothering to hang around to either answer the question or make a point?

You're acting like a twat.

Now have you got any new evidence about these supposedly fake calls from the 9/11 planes or not?
Click to expand...
Well for one, this is Badger Kitten's 7/7 thread. I don't want her moaning that her threads have been binned because of your inability to handle 9/11 discussion. Fair enough?

Either be prepared to discuss the topic, or not. At the moment it seems you are not - nor are you prepared to let anyone else.
 
Jazzz said:
I haven't insisted that the calls were 'faked'.
Click to expand...

I don't see how they could have been faked. The stuff I find more interesting is the 'pulling' of WTC 7, and the Pentagon stuff.
 
Jazzz said:
Hang on editor - this is just not on. I didn't get the chance to comment on the phone calls, because you binned the thread. B
Click to expand...
I asked you to explain the phone calls in this thread.

Whether you chose to pointlessly start a new thread elsewhere (and then declare yourself too busy to actually add any content to it) is irrelevant.

Now why don't you just answer the fucking question?


:mad:
 
scalyboy said:
Hmm, yes, wellI suppose I can see that the same ground has been gone over before. Is that still an active thread or was it binned?
Click to expand...
Both threads are still open.
 
Jazzz said:
I haven't insisted that the calls were 'faked'.
Click to expand...
Yes you have.

In fact you were reminding us how easy it was for people to confuse complete strangers with their loved ones.
 
And I've said I don't want you to have any excuse to bin a thread on a different topic that someone else started.
 
Jazzz said:
And I've said I don't want you to have any excuse to bin a thread on a different topic that someone else started.
Click to expand...
Stop wriggling and answer the question please.

Feel free to add your answer to the active threads on the subject (listed above).
 
Jazzz said:
I'd rather have a fresh one to be honest, thanks.
Click to expand...
Ah. We're in for an extended wriggle again!

Despite there being at least three extant threads on the subject - excluding this one - you're still unwilling to give a straight answer to a straight question!

How many times have I asked now already?

:D :mad:

I'm sure others will be able to make up their own minds on your evasive debating techniques, but I have to say this "I'll only post my answer in a fresh thread" is a new one on me!

Some may say that your curious reluctance to add your new insights to existing, on-topic and relevant threads is just a dishonest ruse by you to try and distance yourself from your dubious claims contained in those threads.

And you know what? Judging by your continuing wriggling here, I'd be inclined to believe them.
 
Right, well you got your answer, fridgemagnet binned it in a fit of pique. If you want to discuss it further, unbin.
 
Jazzz said:
Right, well you got your answer, fridgemagnet binned it in a fit of pique. If you want to discuss it further, unbin.
Click to expand...
So remind me why existing threads dealing with the topic you want to discuss are now deemed unsuitable places for Mr Jazzz to answer directly related questions, please?

The FAQ specifically asks posters to check that there's not threads already extant on topics they wish to discuss - so why do you think those rules shouldn't apply to you?
 
editor said:
So remind me why existing threads dealing with the topic you want to discuss are now deemed unsuitable places for Mr Jazzz to answer directly related questions, please?

The FAQ specifically asks posters to check that there's not threads already extant on topics they wish to discuss - so why do you think those rules shouldn't apply to you?
Click to expand...
Oh for god's sake... there's five active threads on potatoes... starting a fresh thread is better than bumping a really old dead one, unless there is some very good reason. But, as you wish.
 
Jazzz said:
Oh for god's sake... there's five active threads on potatoes... starting a fresh thread is better than bumping a really old dead one, unless there is some very good reason. But, as you wish.
Click to expand...
Have you actually got any new, credible evidence to add, or are you just going to pointlessly regurgitate the same stuff all over again for the zillioneth time?

If that's the case, you'll simply be doing your bit to ensure that the thread hits the bin.
 
Conservatives call for independent inquiry into London bombings

Who thunk it? Tories smell opportunity:

Conservatives have repeated their calls for a fully independent investigation into the July 7 London bombings after two official inquiries raised more questions than they answered.

Following publication of separate accounts of the atrocities drawn up by the Government and by Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, Shadow Home Secretary David Davis declared: "This process has frankly raised more questions than answers. Can we now have what we should have had from the start - not a public inquiry, but a fully resourced independent inquiry into what was clearly a major failure of our intelligence systems."
Click to expand...
Link
 
Prole said:
The narrative is a crock!
They caught the 7.40 Thameslink from Luton BTW.
Click to expand...
So what about the poor sod who is still in hospital after having his legs blown off by the cunting bomber?

He looked directly at - and later clearly recognised - the bomber as he set off the bomb in his tube carriage.

Feel free to produce your evidence that he's lying, along with a credible reason for his supposed deception.

Can you do that, or is his truth not good enough for you?
 
laptop said:
You were on that train? You saw them? You know someone who did? And neither of you stopped them?
Click to expand...
I was quoting the narrative, we know the 7.40 was cancelled.

Danny Biddle was in a coma for months after the explosion. He claims to have stood opposite Khan and saw him detonate the bomb, Biddle was then blown out of the doors.

The narrative claims that Khan was seated.
 
Prole said:
I was quoting the narrative, we know the 7.40 was cancelled.

Danny Biddle was in a coma for months after the explosion. He claims to have stood opposite Khan and saw him detonate the bomb, Biddle was then blown out of the doors.

The narrative claims that Khan was seated.
Click to expand...

Right... So say this morning you have a fleeting glimpse of some guy... Could you remember everything there is about him accurately, and then tell someone months later...? Espcially after going through the trauma of having a bomb going off in your face, body parts being ripped off, and being in a coma for months...

:rolleyes:

Why the Editor lets this thread continue is beyond me...
 
Look you lot.. I lost my ex boyfriend in that Bombings disaster can we keep a little respect?

It is painful enough to deal with it without you lot bitching about it.

Sure it raises questions of course it does its a nightmare and the government got caught with its pants down.


Thats is incidentally why they have squashed the public inquiry because it would show that they were to blame.
 
Rohen said:
Look you lot.. I lost my ex boyfriend in that Bombings disaster can we keep a little respect?

It is painful enough to deal with it without you lot bitching about it.

Sure it raises questions of course it does its a nightmare and the government got caught with its pants down.


Thats is incidentally why they have squashed the public inquiry because it would show that they were to blame.
Click to expand...
Rohen,

It must be painful for you to read this kind of thread.

Given the nature of Urban75, however, and the kinds of "debate" that usually arises on these kind of threads, you may consider it a sensible choice not to read them.

Just a thought.

:)

Woof
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DrRingDing
King Abdullah accused the UK of ignoring Saudi's forewarning of the 7/7 bombing.
Replies
24
Views
3K
selamlar
S
T
The 7/7 Report
103 104 105 106 107
Replies
3K
Views
80K
detective-boy
D
I
  • Locked
7/7 - The London Bombings, Islam & the Iraq War
Replies
4
Views
1K
editor
editor
C
What no 7/7 bombers release video tape thread?
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
maldwyn
maldwyn
mod
Democratic? No public enquiry on the 7/7 bombings.
18 19 20 21 22
Replies
653
Views
26K
tollbar
T
Back
Top Bottom