9/11 media happenings

[8den]

You should watch their documentary BK. Here it is:

It's not "their" documentary. It's a documentary that uses them. They don't endorse the batshit holographic planes shite that you do, they just have issues with the intelligence failures in the weeks and months in the run up.

*waits for Jazzz to admit to peddling shite*

Unless you're training for the world record in deep sea free diving I wouldnt hold your breath.

 

[qwertyman]

The holographic/blue screen airliner thoeries are not authentic 9/11 truth theories. If you actually believe that people actually believe the airliners were blue screen illusions, what is left for you anymore?

 

[Yossarian]

‘Not authentic’? Is there a Conspiracy Council or something that has to give its seal of approval for these things?

 

[laptop]

Is there a Conspiracy Council or something?

 

[Jazzz]

It's not "their" documentary. It's a documentary that uses them. They don't endorse the batshit holographic planes shite that you do, they just have issues with the intelligence failures in the weeks and months in the run up.

I don't 'endorse' holographic plane theories. I think real planes were used on 9/11.

Did you actually watch the doc?

 

[pk]

I don't 'endorse' holographic plane theories. I think real planes were used on 9/11.

That's odd.

I remember one of your early threads on this issue, Jazzz, from 2002.

It was entitled "9/11 - Here's How They Did It!".

It was where you gave us another of your la-la land theories based upon the planes not being real, but being holograms. And you defended your theory to the end.

Are you seriously going to deny posting that thread now?

It was one of your most fuckwitted to date... do you not remember posting that thread?

You should, because it was at that point I ceased to treat you with any credibility whatsoever, and simply began referring to you as a "deluded cunt", not much has changed in that respect I'll grant you.

Cast your mind back Jazzz, did you or did you not post that thread?

Tell the truth now...

 

[8den]

I don't 'endorse' holographic plane theories. I think real planes were used on 9/11.

Mind. Boggles. Do we need to go back to the thread where you link to a piece of sci fi and claim it's a military manual for holographic planes.

Wow disengenious much?

Did you actually watch the doc?

Yes I did, now Jazzz do you actualy remember what piece of spurious nonsense is your conspiracy theory de jour?

 

[pk]

I don't remember Jazzz ever actually distancing himself from the hologram theories he used to openly promote on this forum - until now.

When did you stop talking bollocks about holograms, and when did you clarify that you were indeed wrong about your initial beliefs, Jazzzz?

 

[Yossarian]

Jazzz on David Shayler:

David Shayler lambasts the official story!
________________________________________
The official story of 9-11 is now crumbling.

I have to say, it will come as a small satisfaction to watch the likes of editor, pk, Loki (and many others too, apologies if I miss your name out) have to pretend that of course they didn't believe the official nonsense at all.

The meeting tonight was well attended (500+) and I got through two boxes of DVDs. A welcome British speaker was David Shayler, who said

"I have come to the conclusion that they made it happen"

David Shayler on 9/11:

"they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes...Watch the footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center."

Seems near enough to an endorsement there…

 

[editor]

I don't 'endorse' holographic plane theories. I think real planes were used on 9/11.

But you believe that they were special planes that had been invisibly customised to fire invisible missiles, yes/no?

Oh, and try as you might to uninvent the past, I distinctly recall you claiming that holographic planes were used. If you recall, you foolishly quoted that sci-fi pretend sci-fi 'manual' set in 2012 and cited a small, panel-making holographic manufacturer as 'proof' of the existence of the technology until I pointed out your embarrassing error.

 

[pk]

Anyone got a link to this sci-fi manual?

Just to determine just how gullible Jazzz can be...

 

[TheArchitect]

I seem to recall that Jazz hates it when people remind him of the crap he spouted previously and usually denies ever saying it. This should be fun...

 

[TheArchitect]

Just to add to Jazz's pain

You know I've got to hand it to Jazz. I get so angry at the crap he spouts and the blatant lies, that I go and look for even better debunking evidence.

Here's a good one. This is a video showing the bluckling failure AS IT HAPPENS at the corner of WTC2. Notice in the background (a) lots of flames and (b) a definite lack of squibs.



Here's another. Note that the dust doesn't puff out until AFTER the first columns fail.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5405555553528290546

Then we have the lies about the building being totally pulverised. Certainly seems to be a lot of big debris left to me:

http://cryptome.org/wtc-fk/wtc-freshkills-full.htm

More exposes of Jazz' lies to follow.....

 

[fishfinger]

Anyone got a link to this sci-fi manual?

Just to determine just how gullible Jazzz can be...

The OP is here

Unfortunately, the link in the OP appears to be dead.

However, you can find some of it on http://www.archive.org

eg this

Have fun

 

[editor]

The OP is here

Airborne Holographic Projector

Bwahahaha!

 

[pk]

"squibs"

LOL!

A word used often by people who have allegedly become demolition experts overnight - by watching low resolution video clips.

Come on Jazzz - are you going to admit posting that thread entitled:

"9/11 - Here's How The Did It!" where you wibbled on about the aeroplanes being holograms until everyone called you a deluded cunt?

 

[Jazzz]

Oh, and try as you might to uninvent the past, I distinctly recall you claiming that holographic planes were used.

No I did not, although I can see that in your easygoing relationship with logic you would think that. I merely pointed out that such theories are not quite so discountable as one might think.

Yes, David Shayler is NPT. I am not.

Any more misrepresentations?

 

[Jazzz]

Here's another quote from the same thread

I can't say I've really looked into it [no plane theory], but I don't agree with it personally - although there's only one impact in question really, the South Tower, which was the only one televised. Doesn't change my respect for Shayler, who I've met and chatted to.

There is recognisable plane debris around the WTC - none of which has been been identified as coming from flights 11 or 175, but definitely a plane engine for instance.

My guess (and it's just my opinion) is that they were all drones, firing missiles. They had to fire missiles, because that created the explosions/fires which were the diversion for the WTC demolitions. South Tower was a big jumbo drone. The others were smaller affairs.

And this is basically the same theory that I held four years ago and posted on these boards, before there was any truth movement.

Is that clear enough for you editor/8den/pk?

 

[TheArchitect]

You know I've got to hand it to Jazz. I get so angry at the crap he spouts and the blatant lies, that I go and look for even better debunking evidence.

Here's a good one. This is a video showing the bluckling failure AS IT HAPPENS at the corner of WTC2. Notice in the background (a) lots of flames and (b) a definite lack of squibs.



Here's another. Note that the dust doesn't puff out until AFTER the first columns fail.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5405555553528290546

Then we have the lies about the building being totally pulverised. Certainly seems to be a lot of big debris left to me:

http://cryptome.org/wtc-fk/wtc-freshkills-full.htm

More exposes of Jazz' lies to follow.....

I expect you're having a bit of trouble responding to this Jazz, what with it being yet another peice of evidence which rubbishes your crappy self-taught, fact-free theories.


JazzLite (TM) - All of the theories, none of the facts. Coming soon to a woowoo site near you!

 

[TheArchitect]

I can't say I've really looked into it [no plane theory], but I don't agree with it personally - although there's only one impact in question really, the South Tower, which was the only one televised. Doesn't change my respect for Shayler, who I've met and chatted to.

There is recognisable plane debris around the WTC - none of which has been been identified as coming from flights 11 or 175, but definitely a plane engine for instance.

My guess (and it's just my opinion) is that they were all drones, firing missiles. They had to fire missiles, because that created the explosions/fires which were the diversion for the WTC demolitions. South Tower was a big jumbo drone. The others were smaller affairs.

And this is basically the same theory that I held four years ago and posted on these boards, before there was any truth movement.

[LOL] Man, that it funny.

1. There's bits of plane

2. Jazz is guessing

3. A jumbo drone - but no proof offered.

Jazz, do you have ANY idea about how to appraise and analyse evidence?

[LOL]

 

[TheArchitect]

The irony is, the evidence of aircraft parts is actually found on a woowoo site:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/aircraft.html


You'll notice that they have a section of fuselage, complete with windows and everything.

What were these jumbo drones? Normal planes?!?!


But what should we expect of the man who MADE UP a core safety factor of 600% and lies about (say) the extent of fires in the towers?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

What were these jumbo drones? Normal planes?!?!

Some of them were, but not all, because, well, that'd be too consistent.

 

[Pete the Greek]

Here's another quote from the same thread



Is that clear enough for you editor/8den/pk?

are you watching the bbc two 9/11 conspiracy files tonight?

 

[editor]

are you watching the bbc two 9/11 conspiracy files tonight?

Jazzz has already firmly made up his mind about that, without troubling himself to even watch it.

 

[TheArchitect]

A pint bet says that Jazz will claim the BBC is the mouthpiece of the NWO, unless it's quite positive re: conspiracy theories in which case it's a lone voice of freedom.

Jazz, before the programme, which do you think it'll be?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

A pint bet says that Jazz will claim the BBC is the mouthpiece of the NWO, unless it's quite positive re: conspiracy theories in which case it's a lone voice of freedom.

Jazz, before the programme, which do you think it'll be?

He's already said that a few pages back, not a quote but the words were along the lines of "hatchet job" i think. Why bother pushing him on this one? He was asked his opinion of what the BBC report was likely to be, he gave it. This merely allows him to pretend to be engaging while discussing trivia and ignoring the larger issues like his belief without evidence etc.

 

[Pete the Greek]

yep - I'd say that sums it up Bob.

Poor Jazzz...must be hard going living in a world that makes little sense and where no-one can ever be trusted.

I think there are places people can go to when they are feeling a bit strange like that.

 

[TheArchitect]

Poor Jazzz...must be hard going living in a world that makes little sense and where no-one can ever be trusted.

Perhaps his belief that his self-taught and intuative grasp of the issues trumps those of properly educated and qualified professionals gives him the warm glow necessary to keep going?

 

[Pete the Greek]

Perhaps his belief that his self-taught and intuative grasp of the issues trumps those of properly educated and qualified professionals gives him the warm glow necessary to keep going?

*strokes chin, quietly deliberates...*

I think you have something there

 

[Maggot]

Charlie Brooker summing it all up nicely in tomorrow’s Guardian:

‘Here’s what really happened on 9/11. A terrible crime was committed by a group of determined terrorists. Appalling mistakes were made both before and after the terrible crime. The terrible crime was capitalized upon. The world was shit before the terrible crime, and got steadily shittier afterwards. That’s it!

So please, please, stop pissing your pants about controlled demolitions and the like – you’re wrong. You’re wrong! And it’s OK to be wrong. You can still distrust or even hate the government. But on this one? You’re wrong. And continuing to bang on about it isn’t heroic, it’s embarrassing.

The rest of the world isn’t asleep. You’re just dreaming out loud.’

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguide/columnists/story/0,,2013858,00.html

(Edit to add URL)

That sums up my views on it too.