9/11 media happenings

[Dubversion]

Do you enjoy being the kind of person you call others eh mate?

thing is, brainiac, i can be accused of being many things, but smug and self-regarding probably wouldn't figure.

and it's not me that's giving dangerous credence to offensive, nasty conspiracy theories, and backing them up with 'evidence' from wherever i can, even if that back-up comes from some fairly appalling sources.

You're an arse

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Really?? Well, that would be up to you mate. Obviously i am according to you.

But then, who the fuck are you?

Probably the exact self-same as you call me.

Do you enjoy being the kind of person you call others eh mate?

It's this kind of smug, self-satisified ego wank that runs through a lot of CTers. A high and mighty holier-than-thou mindset in which they are guardians of some deep seated truth that us poor herd following idiots just haven't grasped.

Exactly like many cult followers...

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It was all going so well.

It was, and I hope it still can. I await Jazzzs response to my step by step questions with interest.

 

[fela fan]

You're as barking as the Great Barking Dogtree Of Barking on All Woofer's Day.

Seeing as you are clearly still unable to contribute anything even remotely on topic here, please fuck off and take your mirror with you, nutboy.

Thanks.

Hey, why don't you fuck off yourself eh? That's all you've been telling me recently. What kind of debating is that man? And trying to paint me as some kind of insane idiot.

Maybe you realise that you've got no argument on me. Is that why you paint me as a liar and a mental patient??

 

[fela fan]

It's this kind of smug, self-satisified ego wank that runs through a lot of CTers. A high and mighty holier-than-thou mindset in which they are guardians of some deep seated truth that us poor herd following idiots just haven't grasped.

Exactly like many cult followers...

Hey, you've just done a good job writing about yourself there man.
Well done.

 

[Dubversion]

And trying to paint me as some kind of insane idiot.

nobody needs to help you out with that..

 

[Dubversion]

Hey, you've just done a good job writing about yourself there man.
Well done.

that's all you've got, you tit.

it's like watching a kid in a playground going "takes one to know one, nyeeeuggh"

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Hey, you've just done a good job writing about yourself there man.
Well done.

So, by having an open mind, and being prepared to discuss any theory out there, I match that description?

You're a pompous arse fela.

 

[fela fan]

It was all going so well.

What, 70 odd pages mate??!!

You gotta be joking.

Anyway, thanks for the sane posts you've contributed since i've been looking at this thread.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

What, 70 odd pages mate??!!

Yep. 70 odd pages of reasonably well tempered debate, facts and analysis.

None of it from Jazzz, mind, but there you go

 

[fela fan]

So, by having an open mind, and being prepared to discuss any theory out there, I match that description?

You're a pompous arse fela.

Okay, fair enough, nothing i can do about that if that's what you think.

 

[Jazzz]

But that photo directly contradicts you. The steel structure is clearly heavily damaged. How can you deny this clearly visible massive damage?

I don't, I just think it was caused by something else.

But that assumes that all the damage occured at the same time, when the section that can be seen falling over starts to topple it is quite probable to assume that it's merely because the debris falling down managed to cut the steel members at that point.

I don't see how this makes sense, falling debris won't cut a spire.

That also directly contradicts your theory to the central section being blown at the base. It also contradicts the photographic evidence that shows large sections of the central core NOT being cut.

I don't follow this at all. But hey.

It's your turn to answer a question - you claimed that the family steering group 'hadn't done their research' and asked questions to which the answers had already been officially revealed, and then listed loads of them as 'unanswered' when the 9/11 Commission bizarrely refused to answer a question to which the answer was already in the public domain, thus giving the impression they might be covering something up.

And then of course you repeatedly insisted that you weren't talking bollocks but that you could find the links to the official answers if needed.

So go on, your turn...

 

[editor]

That must be about 15 off topic posts from fela by now. Anyone would think you're trying to disrupt the thread because you pal is getting his ass royally whipped.

Now, have you anything on-topic to contribute to this thread or not, or are you mindful of keeping up the thread-disrupting personal insults and mirror worship?

 

[Dubversion]

to be fair, i've been quite disruptive as well.

but it's cos this whole thing makes me really fucking mad - fair play to those with the patience to tackle it point by point for week after week, but i don't have it in me to bother. I just think jazz, fela and their fellow travellers are total gimps.

but i'll bow out..

 

[axon]

Intra-thread summary:

A series of questions for you Jazzz - all require a simple yes/no answer, and no research or looking on your part.

Do you believe:

1 - That missiles were fired from the two planes before they hit the towers?
2 - That the planes were not the flights we have been told they were?
3 - That calls from the planes were faked?
4 - That CD was used to help bring the towers down?
5 - That a missile, not a plane hit the pentagon?
6 - That this plane was taken, along with it's passengers, to locations unknown, by persons unspecified?

1. YES
2. YES
3. Don't know. They were either faked, or the real person somehow tricked into making the call knowing it wasn't real, or the plane (flight 93) was falsely hijacked 'an exercise' with the passengers believing it was real, and some may have been fakely reported (e.g. Ted Olson). A mixture of methods may be very effective.
4. YES
5. YES
6. either YES, or it never took off at all. Could have been Cleveland.

Does Jazz have any evidence for the above points?
1. No.
2. No.
3. No.
4. No.
5. No.
6. No.

And a further Q, has Jazzz demonstrated that the planes and subsequent fires could not have caused the collapse of the towers?.......No! Not even close strangely. I think the nearest we got was the agrument about whether the central core could be free standing. Which unfrotunately doesn't disprove that planes and fires can topple a skyscraper.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

but it's cos this whole thing makes me really fucking mad - fair play to those with the patience to tackle it point by point for week after week

What makes me mad is that a group of paranoid fuckwits are using the deaths of several thousand people as a tool for selling books and DVDs.

We haven't been told the truth about what happened on 9/11, and never will be unless we accept certain truths and ask the right questions of the right people, something that the "truth" movement has shown themselves utterly incapable of doing.

 

[editor]

1. YES
2. YES
3. Don't know. They were either faked, or the real person somehow tricked into making the call knowing it wasn't real, or the plane (flight 93) was falsely hijacked 'an exercise' with the passengers believing it was real, and some may have been fakely reported (e.g. Ted Olson). A mixture of methods may be very effective.

4. YES
5. YES
6. either YES, or it never took off at all. Could have been Cleveland.

Just for the record, here's a summary of what Jazzz believes in:

1 - Invisible missiles were fired from the two pretend planes before they hit the towers
2 - The 9/11 planes were magically switched (no one saw this)
3 - The calls from the planes might have been faked by the CIA Instant Perfect Impersonation Squad who are able to fake 100% convincing conversations between loved ones - even from passengers who weren't originally booked on the flights
4 - The towers were brought down by invisibly installed invisible bombs (no one saw these either)
5 - A missile, not a plane hit the Pentagon (but everyone was fooled by some sort of mass delusion mind ray into thinking they'd seen a plane)
6 - The plane's passengers weren't on the planes at all, but were in fact taken elsewhere (no one noticed this) and mercilessly slaughtered by fellow Americans, none of whom have ever mentioned a word of it since.

And, of course, thousands of engineers, scientists and independent experts around the world who have examined the evidence must all be in on it too, or threatened into silence by the all powerful USG.

Welcome to the deluded fantasy world of Jazzz.

 

[Roadkill]

Originally Posted by beesonthewhatnow
A series of questions for you Jazzz - all require a simple yes/no answer, and no research or looking on your part.

Do you believe:

1 - That missiles were fired from the two planes before they hit the towers?
2 - That the planes were not the flights we have been told they were?
3 - That calls from the planes were faked?
4 - That CD was used to help bring the towers down?
5 - That a missile, not a plane hit the pentagon?
6 - That this plane was taken, along with it's passengers, to locations unknown, by persons unspecified?

Originally Posted by Jazzz
1. YES
2. YES
3. Don't know. They were either faked, or the real person somehow tricked into making the call knowing it wasn't real, or the plane (flight 93) was falsely hijacked 'an exercise' with the passengers believing it was real, and some may have been fakely reported (e.g. Ted Olson). A mixture of methods may be very effective.
4. YES
5. YES
6. either YES, or it never took off at all. Could have been Cleveland.

1. So you think missiles were fired from the planes despite the fact that they were passenger jets with no provision for carrying missiles and, more improtantly, despite the fact that none of the TV footage of the planes hitting the towers shows anything resembling missiles being fired from the aeroplanes?

2. Well what planes were they, then? Where are the planes we've been told they were and, more importantly, what happened to the passengers?

3. If hijacking Flight 93 was an 'exercise,' then who carried it out? Why did the plane come down? How did they 'fake' the calls from passengers? If it was never hijacked, where is it?

4. This thread has amply disproved that one.

5. Again, where's the aeroplane? Where was the missile fired from? Was the damage to the Pentagon any more consistent with a missile strike than an aeroplane?

6. Where are the plane and its passengers now?

The bottom line is that if the answer to any of bees's questions is 'yes,' then there must be a fuckload of people out there who know about it, or who saw something suspicious, and have kept quiet. Where are these people? Why has not a single person spoken out?

In short, where is your evidence for any of this?

 

[Jazzz]

<deep breath>

OK Jazzz, now the tricky bit, one question at a time.

1 - Missiles being fired from the planes. Please show some evidence, from a credible source, to support this. This will need to include details of how on earth you attach missiles to a commercial aircraft, and reasons why you would need to, considering that you also believe CD was used to bring the towers down.

I refer to my post #942 which really addressed this issue quite thoroughly, and seeing as that was a lengthy reply to your good self really makes me wonder if you are going to play editor's 'groundhog thread' game. If you think that the US military - capable of building stealth fighter bombers - is not capable of taking a 767 and attaching missiles to it, well you're in cuckoo land. I do not have proof. You asked what I believed. You might like to ask the USG for proof that the planes that crashed were the ones they said they were.

Oh, and why the (live in the case of the second plane) TV footage showed no trace of any such missiles (or were they, like all the CD operatives and explosives, invisible?)

Aha! You haven't watched it in slo-mo, have you?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Aha! You haven't watched it in slo-mo, have you?

I've seen the impact of the plane on broadcast quality digital tape, frame by frame.

Have you?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I refer to my post #942 which really addressed this issue quite thoroughly,

That post does nothing but state your beliefs. I now ask you to produce evidence to support these. If you can't produce any, I have another question - just what on earth is it that has taken you to these conclusions?

 

[Yossarian]

I refer to my post #942 which really addressed this issue quite thoroughly

Post 942 is just a flight of fancy with only a passing mention that 'maybe missiles were used' - it hardly addresses anything.

 

[editor]

I refer to my post #942 which really addressed this issue quite thoroughly,

No it doesn't, so why try to pretend it does?
It's not like you're fooling anyone with this blatant denial of reality - your words are there for all to see!

 

[Yossarian]

I do not have proof. You asked what I believed.

 

[pk]

I've seen the impact of the plane on broadcast quality digital tape, frame by frame.

Have you?

Yup - so have I, from three angles, on digital beta tape, which I'm prepared to bet the cost of the beta machine (£30,000) Jazzz has not done.

There Were No Fucking Missiles.

When we debated this stupid aspect of the fairy tale back in 2002, I went and checked with master tapes recorded at the BBC on September 11th.

All Jazzz has seen is grainy crusty clips found on the internet, which have undoubtedly been tampered with by people paid by the racist and anti-semitic American Free Press if he thinks he can see missiles.

Jazzz even conceded in 2002 that he could be mistaken.

Now it seems after he's watched Loose Change a couple of times (again, sourced from and paid for by the racist and anti-semitic American Free Press) his social life evidently revolves around these deluded muppets who think it's fun to harrass and stalk survivors of the 7/7 attacks because their Eye Witness Testimonies go against their cult beliefs, he can't be seen to go against them, especially if he's got t-shirts to sell them.

It's a cult. Full of cunts.

As I will be keen to point out to them when I attend one of their meetings very soon, which I will also be videotaping - whether they like it or not.

Should make for some interesting clips for the Youtube website anyway.

Anyone with an ounce of sense would recognise AFP as the bunch of right wing cunts they are - most of them make the neocons look sane.

Oh and that's AFP as in American Free Press, the main source for most of this conspiranoid bullshit - NOT the Agence France Presse, which is the respectable news agency that the Americans copied the initials of, purely to fool gullible people like Jazzz into thinking they had credibility.

 

[pk]

Oh and Jazzz - you can tell Martin Noakes his song is a load of crap, he should be charged with crimes against music.

 

[TheArchitect]

I do not have proof

And just for the hard of reading, like Jazz

I do not have proof

That's right. Jazz accuses the US government of killing 3,000 of its own people but has no proof.

Incredible.

 

[editor]

This Sunday on BBC:
9/11: The Conspiracy Files
"We all know what happened on 9/11, the day the world changed. Or do we?"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6160775.stm

Allow me to predict Jazzz's response in advance:

1. The program interviews lots of dubious, woefully unqualified sources spouting barking shite and arrives at a pro conspiracy conclusion:
"Brilliant! The truth seekers have prevailed!"

2. The program interviews a host of hugely qualified independent experts whose carefully considered analysis concludes that the events were more or less as the 'official' version.
"Cover up! BBC are in on it too! Shills everywhere! People too scared to speak out!

 

[Pete the Greek]

I recently discovered a site owned by some lad in the states, who calls himself Maddox. Has anyone heard of him?

He has a rather tongue in cheek, cutting view on the 9/11 conspiracies on his site.

Don't want to post the link without permission, as I may be acting improperly by doing so, but if you type Maddox in google, the first hit will be the name of the site "The best web page in the Universe" - click on that and the second piece down is about his views on 9/11 conspiracists in general.

Thought it was very funny and worth a look - for anyone who's interested.

 

[Loki]

South Park does the 9/11 conspiracy

http://mrtwig.net/ep/1009.html

Good for a laugh.