9/11 media happenings

[Jazzz]

Errr, hang on a sec - it was YOU who claimed that the towers were brought down by CD. It has been a central point of your arguments pretty much since day one. That Protec report (written by people qualified in the appropriate field) rips your claim to shreds, and you still refuse to somment on it.

What it is, bees, is that I can't be fucked spending hours constructing 10,000 word essays for people who really have little interest in a discussion but just want to throw brickbats and be awkward. You've amply demonstrated which category you fall into by this reply, haven't you? I've invited you to select three points from the PROTEC report, to which I'll address.

If you can't find three strong points in there, well that's not my problem is it?

 

[editor]

I've never claimed that 'Loose Change' was peer-reviewed. Nor have I 'put faith in it'. Don't get me wrong, I think its well worth watching but as a introduction. There is no question it has flaws.

Here. You seem to have missed my questions that directly relate to an earlier post of yours:

Do you know if the "peer reviewers" are actually qualified in the relevant areas of expertise needed YES/NO?

Do you agree that if they are not qualified in the relevant areas of expertise then claiming it to be "peer reviewed" is an entirely hollow claim YES/NO?

These are clearly very important questions to anyone searching for the truth about 9/11. Care to answer them?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

What it is, bees, is that I can't be fucked spending hours constructing 10,000 word essays for people who really have little interest in a discussion but just want to throw brickbats and be awkward.

Hipocritical shit. I've done exactly that for you only to get a "i can't be arsed to respond" in reply.

 

[Jazzz]

Hipocritical shit. I've done exactly that for you only to get a "i can't be arsed to respond" in reply.

I've rarely demanded jack shit of you BTL. The less I have to do with you the better. I think once, when occassion truly demanded, I repeated a question more than once in your direction. Funny that you accuse me of hypocrisy. It support my increasingly held view that posters will accuse me of their own character failings.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I can't be fucked spending hours constructing 10,000 word essays for people who really have little interest in a discussion but just want to throw brickbats and be awkward.

You do it all the bloody time. We waste the effort trying to educate you and you don't even read the damned things. Or more commonly, read them and pretend you haven't because it upsets your fragile little worldview. I spent ages ripping apart your delusions that NORAD were tracking everything larger than a baseball in the US airspace on 9/11, you respond with a single liner that is nothing but marketing blurb.

I waste my time demolishing your CD theories and polietly ask for a few lines summarising the timeline as you see it, you refuse claiming it's too much effort.

You're a cunt. Fuckoff.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

What it is, bees, is that I can't be fucked spending hours constructing 10,000 word essays for people who really have little interest in a discussion but just want to throw brickbats and be awkward. You've amply demonstrated which category you fall into by this reply, haven't you? I've invited you to select three points from the PROTEC report, to which I'll address.

If you can't find three strong points in there, well that's not my problem is it?

It has but a single point - it blows apart any claims that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. It is written by some of the most respected people in the world in this field.

So, why won't you comment on it?

I assume you won't comment on the other (properly peer reviewed) paper I just linked to either.

 

[Jazzz]

I can't be fucked spending hours constructing 10,000 word essays for people who really have little interest in a discussion but just want to throw brickbats and be awkward.

You do it all the bloody time. We waste the effort trying to educate you and you don't even read the damned things. Or more commonly, read them and pretend you haven't because it upsets your fragile little worldview. I spent ages ripping apart your delusions that NORAD were tracking everything larger than a baseball in the US airspace on 9/11, you respond with a single liner that is nothing but marketing blurb.

I waste my time demolishing your CD theories and polietly ask for a few lines summarising the timeline as you see it, you refuse claiming it's too much effort.

You're a cunt. Fuckoff.

I have never asked you to 'educate me' and truly that is a patronising euphemism for some extremely objectionable, demanding, and abusive posting. It's got to the point where when you log on, I log off.

I don't intend to lower myself to this level anymore BTL. If you feel your time is being wasted, as I have, there's a simple solution - don't bother. Of course, if I do that, I'll be accused of 'running away' or suchlike. Too bad.

 

[Jazzz]

It has but a single point - it blows apart any claims that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. It is written by some of the most respected people in the world in this field.

So, why won't you comment on it?

I assume you won't comment on the other (properly peer reviewed) paper I just linked to either.

And how does it do that, bees? Have you actually read it? Are you not capable of finding your three top points in it?

I could more easily say that Steve Jones' paper rips apart the theory of gravitational collapse, but we could go on like this all day.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I have never asked you to 'educate me' and truly that is a patronising euphemism for some extremely objectionable, demanding, and abusive posting. It's got to the point where when you log on, I log off.

I don't intend to lower myself to this level anymore BTL. If you feel your time is being wasted, as I have, there's a simple solution - don't bother. Of course, if I do that, I'll be accused of 'running away' or suchlike. Too bad.

Don't pretend to be a victim here Jazzz. I've tried polite, you throw it in my face.

You say you care about what really happened, you only want to hear about how your suspicions and instant assumption that the USG were at fault were right.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

And how does it do that, bees? Have you actually read it? Are you not capable of finding your three top points in it?

I could more easily say that Steve Jones' paper rips apart the theory of gravitational collapse, but we could go on like this all day.

Strange then, that there are people everywhere saying that Steve Jones is wrong, and yet I can't find a single soul argueing that that protec report is incorrect.

I wonder why that is?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Oh, and as for three points, why not simply take each of the "assertion" points in turn? Have you actually read the bloody thing?

 

[Jazzz]

Strange then, that there are people everywhere saying that Steve Jones is wrong, and yet I can't find a single soul argueing that that protec report is incorrect.

I wonder why that is?

Perhaps because it's only on urban75 that anyone has paid attention to the thing?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Perhaps because it's only on urban75 that anyone has paid attention to the thing?

Or, in other words, you can't actually put forward any argument to its points?

How about taking each of the "assertions" in that report in turn? They are pretty clear.

 

[Jazzz]

okay, I'll do the first three, unless you choose otherwise. But you may have to wait until tomorrow

 

[WouldBe]

Jo911bby.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

okay, I'll do the first three, unless you choose otherwise. But you may have to wait until tomorrow

First three sounds fine to me, but for the love of god, use credible* sources in anything you do....




*And no, Steve Jones is not a credible source

 

[Paul Marsh]

Jesus, is there really 126 pages on this?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Jesus, is there really 126 pages on this?

No, it's all a conspiracy, sorry.

 

[Loki]

okay, I'll do the first three, unless you choose otherwise. But you may have to wait until tomorrow

thrilling, can't wait

 

[Jazzz]

Jesus, is there really 126 pages on this?

I make it 79.

But I may see things differently. My page has 20 posts I think

 

[MikeMcc]

Just noticed this on Implosionworld, there's a good reason why radio control ISN'T used for setting off explosives:

HANDHELD RADIO CAUSES PREMATURE DETONATION
April 2001- A member of the International Society of Explosives Engineers, Gordon Revey, has reported that a 4-watt handheld radio recently caused the detonation of an electric detonator on a U.S. blasting project.

According to Mr. Revey, the blaster “lost several fingers and incurred severe damage to both hands” as a result of the event. Mr. Revey also reports that the radio was closer than the minimum distance mandated by the Institute of Explosive Makers Radio Frequency Table for the radio in question. The names of the blaster and his employer, as well as the accident location, were not disclosed.

Source

This idea has been put forward on woo-woo sites as a means of getting around the problems of miles of detonating cord strung out all over the place. Great until someone has a radio transmitter nearby. Bit inconvienient to have an ND (negligent discharge) of that size!

 

[fela fan]

Funny that you accuse me of hypocrisy. It support my increasingly held view that posters will accuse me of their own character failings.

It is a sound view to take mate. It rarely goes wrong!

Here, look at this from bob the lost:

"I waste my time demolishing your CD theories and polietly ask for a few lines summarising the timeline as you see it, you refuse claiming it's too much effort.

You're a cunt. Fuckoff."

The precious man wastes his precious time, and then blames you for it!!!! What happened to taking responsibility for oneself??

As for him calling you a 'cunt', taking the meaning he is giving this word, it fits him down to a tee, and is a million miles from being you. And of course he's a hypocrite, anybody who calls someone else one is inevitably one themself, and that is rather delicious irony really.

See, it works all the time!

 

[fela fan]

Strange then, that there are people everywhere saying that Steve Jones is wrong, and yet I can't find a single soul argueing that that protec report is incorrect.

I wonder why that is?

Bees, i'm sure you can accept that this is no sound argument, that everyone says this, and one person says that, so it must be this.

Plenty of historical precedents for one person sticking their neck out and getting highly abused for what they say, only for it to subsequently become fact and truth, and accepted as so.

And maybe you need to look harder for that single soul?? And please note the use of your language, bringing in adjectives to try and boost your position. A soul is the same as a single soul...

 

[MikeMcc]

Bees, i'm sure you can accept that this is no sound argument, that everyone says this, and one person says that, so it must be this.

Plenty of historical precedents for one person sticking their neck out and getting highly abused for what they say, only for it to subsequently become fact and truth, and accepted as so.

And maybe you need to look harder for that single soul?? And please note the use of your language, bringing in adjectives to try and boost your position. A soul is the same as a single soul...

So you don't know of any factual problem with the Protec report either?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

It is a sound view to take mate. It rarely goes wrong!

Here, look at this from bob the lost:

"I waste my time demolishing your CD theories and polietly ask for a few lines summarising the timeline as you see it, you refuse claiming it's too much effort.

You're a cunt. Fuckoff."

The precious man wastes his precious time, and then blames you for it!!!! What happened to taking responsibility for oneself??

As for him calling you a 'cunt', taking the meaning he is giving this word, it fits him down to a tee, and is a million miles from being you. And of course he's a hypocrite, anybody who calls someone else one is inevitably one themself, and that is rather delicious irony really.

See, it works all the time!

How far up jazzz's arse is your nose? Have you seen it in the last financial year?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

And maybe you need to look harder for that single soul?? And please note the use of your language, bringing in adjectives to try and boost your position. A soul is the same as a single soul...

WTF are you jibbering on about now

 

[fela fan]

So you don't know of any factual problem with the Protec report either?

I don't even know what the protec report is mate. I don't care. I retain an interest in 911, but in my opinion the climate is wrong at the moment for any attempts to investigate the lunatics who made so many mistakes leading up to the day and on the day itself, and to hold them responsible.

911 i'm afraid is symptomatic of the way the hegemony is allowed to continue its rampant path to destroying so much of the world's humanity and natural world. When people really want to take care of each other and their planet, then the likes of 911 will be properly investigated by impartial and independent people.

Until then, rule by deception and self-delusion will continue.

 

[fela fan]

How far up jazzz's arse is your nose? Have you seen it in the last financial year?

I'm approximately 10,000 kms distant from most of you lot.

It's nothing to do with jazzz, just that when i see violent bastards i like to call them for their anti-human actions.

 

[fela fan]

WTF are you jibbering on about now

I wasn't jibbering bees, you were just having comprehension problems. It's really not that difficult, try again.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I don't even know what the protec report is mate. I don't care

Oh for fucks sake...