Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

9/11 media happenings

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jazzz said:
Just disproving that I am an 'idiot'. :p

could be fun, too.
Click to expand...

Jazzz you could be outwitted in a game of snakes and ladders

"The way the snake falls clearly means I fall on 37 not 4."
 
Jazzz said:
sorry to disappoint you laptop et al but the games challenge was in response to the 'idiot' jibe. Do you contend that idiots can reliably beat the intellectually superior at mind sports?
Click to expand...
Whether someone is any good or not at mind (ahem) "sports" is breathtakingly irrelevant to the thread.

The fact remains that in the key areas of this debate - structural engineering, metallurgy, demolition etc -you're nothing more than an unqualified, dabbling amateur, yet you continue to have the audacity and sheer arrogance to dismiss the expert analysis of people infinitely more qualified and experienced than you.
 
Jazzz said:
He did not, and I'll back myself to the hilt on this one MikeMcc. It's TA that doesn't understand what the DCR was. If he was right, how on earth can the safety factor be less than the specified steel strength?
Click to expand...
How on earth can a ratio be less than a strength. The ratio is dimensionless.
 
"There is no evidence to support the official 9/11 report, you shall see,
we conspiracy theorists need no evidence to prove that our ideas are correct, Allah be praised"

choppermugs.jpg
 
I am interested in just how a game of backgammon would disprove that Jazzz is an idiot, when all evidence points to the contrary.

Why don't you challenge The Architect to a basket weaving competition?
 
Jazzz said:
No they're not. They're widows trying to find out the truth about what happened. And finding that they can't get very basic answers to very simple stuff. Here's what they say about 'conspiracy theorists' - I note you've never commented on this quote:

"At first, we widows didn’t want to be seen with conspiracy people. But they kept showing up. They cared more than those supposedly doing the investigating. If you ask me, they’re just Americans, looking for the truth, which is supposed to be our right." Van Auken

You should watch their documentary BK. Here it is:


... and you would see that they ringingly endorse the work by Paul Thompson and his 9/11 Timeline. Funny thing when I quoted that a few pages ago editor rounded on me for quoting a 'conspiracy site'. And well, if you watch the film you would see that it addresses the defence failures on 9/11, suggests that the US military deliberately let Osama and his henchmen escape, in fact was protected by them when he needed kidney dialysis, that they helped create Al-Qaeda via funds transferred through the Pakistani ISI.. what else.. oh that WTC7 seemed a very strange and implausible collapse - much else that were I to post it, you would be barking 'conspiraloon'.

You should also read the questions that they posed to the 9/11 Commission, ones that went unanswered. Questions concerning Bush's conduct on the day. Questions asking about DNA identification of the hijackers. Questions about how on earth NORAD failed to intercept any of the four flights. Questions asking how passports can survive infernos. Questions about how the hijackers managed to get the visas.

In other words exactly the same questions that the 'conspiracy theorists' have been asking.

Yep, finally you recognise that you are on the same side as the conspiracy theorists with you and 7/7. But I don't hold out much hope for your success. The Jersey Girls are made from different stuff entirely. While they are simply demanding that the USG comes up with proper explanations for everything that happened you seem to be incredibly concerned with conspiracy-theorist bashing, am unfortunate trait picked up from urban75. Do you think they would be fobbed off with a reply like 'we don't have any proper footage on CCTV because it would upset grieving relatives?' would they hell. They haven't got to the bottom of 9/11 for sure yet but they forced the 9/11 Commission to happen at all and made Bush, Henry Kissenger, Paul Zelikow squirm.

Can I imagine you making Blair squirm? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

oh fuck off. Just fuck off.
I wasted some of my life watching Press for Truth, and the fact that the Jersey Girls know -as the BBC pointed out too - that the US Govt has been less than open about the failures to act on intelligence before 9/11, doesn't mean that they hold any truck at all with the bullshit batshit about the USG being behind 9/11.

Some conspiracy theorists have asked the same questions as the Jersey Girls, but then the conspiraloons go on and on and on and make up a load more questions which are based on stupidity and paranoia. As conspiraloons ask millions of questions it is not surprising that some of them are sensible or reasonable. There is a difference between asking questions, and asking questions then refusing to listen to the answers and instead peddling crap based on a paranoid belief system.

Please so not make ''asking some of the same questions as some conspiracy theorists' about intel failures and response on the day'' conflate with
'' supporting the conspiraloons theories that the Goverment planned and ordered the attacks.''

Because that would be a lie.


As well you know, despite your wriggles.

The Jersey Girls in one quote seem to be more tolerant of conspiraloons hanging onto their sensible cause to get answers and trying to subvert it than I am, but perhaps they haven't had the same level as hate mail as me, or been libelled on stupid websites, perhaps they haven't had sick letters sent to their father, and antisemitic DVDS sent to their flat, like I have. The Jersey Girls' tolerance seems to me to have been grotesquely abused by the attempts of loons to use them to give credibility to their conspracy theories.

And fuck off because I am not on the same side as the conspiraloons ghoulishly picking over 7/7 and finding mistakes and loose threads in a rolling, multi-sourced media staory and ongoing police investigation, because they too start from the basis of a lie, that the UK Govt was complicit in 7/7. That the bombers were ''innocent''. That there was a ''power surge, not bombs'', or that ''the bombs were under the trains'', that the bus at Tavistock Square was full of ''actors and stuntmen'', and ''pyrotechnics'', ugh.

As to the CCTV, there have been requests to release it by survivors, partly to shut up the sick conspiraloons. The coroner, who has not yet made his report, is looking at whether to release some of it before the report into the deaths of the victims and the bombers.

I have pushed back against for months against sick conspiraloon shit, once I found my account being twisted and lies about me being published all over the internet, and found myself at the centre of some particularly offensive conspiracy theories. And I've been insulted and had harassment for speaking out against it.

And the only reason I bother is because I am campaigning for an inquiry, and I do not want the sane, clear eyed campaign for a 7/7 inquiry to be infected with the anti semitic drivel, the paranoid delusions and the laughable, tasteless muderer-exoneration of the 7/7 conspiraloons. They do people who were involved a huge disservice by muddying the waters with their pathetic fantasies. They make it easier to dismiss it. And that is not fair.And so I will fight back, tiresome though it is, because yes, I do tyake personal attacks personally, and I hate seeing something I beleive in twisted by freaks.

And I've been in a room of people - survivors - making Tessa Jowell and John Reid squirm, twice, and you can hold your horses until Crevice ends and see what happens then in terms of continuing media pressure for an inquiry.

And you can finally fuck off, as I said and carry on having your arse whipped publicly on this thread, to general hilarity.

Ta
 
Jazzz, if you could interrupt your toast-making for just a moment, do you know of any evidence that either

1) shows controlled demoliton
2) That planes and fires could not have caused the collapse

Now, this challenge excludes repeating evidence that has already been debunked.
 
Cool as fuck website that report comes from too!! :D

AND you can see from the demolitions they've got there that WTC was clearly NOT CD of any description...
 
MikeMcc said:
Found a thorough debunking of the controlled demolition theory (and disposal of the metalwork): Here
Click to expand...
I'm sure Jazzz will be along soon to tell those demolition professionals that his backgammon skills over-ride all their training and analysis.
 
Backgammon indeed. Any fule knows that only an expert at MB's Kerplunk would be properly qualified to comment on issues like these...

:mad: :mad: ;)
 
i reckon fred dibnah could have proven alll this.. pity he is dead..

hmmmmm....

could it be that the gov offed fred in order to help with the cover up?
is there no end to the depths they will plunge?
 
Originally Posted by Badger Kitten
.... that the bus at Tavistock Square was full of ''actors and stuntmen''...
Click to expand...


editor said:
What?!!! What sick demented cunt said that? URL, please!
Click to expand...


Do you want the URL posted or PM-d?

Here's a quote from the blog in question...
When considering the notion of the exploding bus being a product of Peter Power's crisis management exercise, it is crucial to remember that prior knowledge of these exercises is kept to a minimum - a strictly need-to-know basis - to ensure that the emergency services and the individuals involved react naturally and 'treat it as real as possible'.

If you don't inform the emergency services, you certainly don't inform members of the general public either and, as no-one would tolerate the random exploding of innocent civilians as part of routine crisis management exercises that take place all the time, these exercises employ clever pyrotechnics, stuntmen, and actors ('players' as Peter Power refers to them) to portray the parts of the 'civilians' and 'victims' involved in the crisis to be managed - just like in the movies where lots of things go bang all the time leaving lots of apparently horrific walking wounded, dead people and body parts in the aftermath.

This is precisely how you blow the roof clean off a diverted double-decker bus and leave a bundle of people standing on the top deck looking otherwise unharmed because, being hired hands, they knew the roof was going to be lifted off, with the back of the bus being the source of the energy required to do so. The Antagonist has no access to the remnants of the bus to determine whether the bus curiously diverted to Tavistock Square had been otherwise tampered with to create the devastating appearance and leave a top deck full of survivors but this must also be considered as a factor in the staging of a realistic 1,000 man crisis simulation exercise...
Click to expand...

and...oh, dear...denial of bombs follows....:rolleyes:

If The Antagonist's observations are correct and the Number 30 bus full of stuntmen and actors was diverted as part of Peter Power's 1,000 man crisis management exercise in Central London into Tavistock Square and 'exploded' in front of the offices of Fortress GB, then we are left only with the simultaneous 'exploding' trains to explain which MetroNet and the media attributed for some time on the day to a power surge. This is a perfectly normal and rational explanation for what occurred, supports the survivor accounts perfectly and yet this story has somehow become an incredulous conspiracy that is beyond the realms of comprehension
Click to expand...
.
 
jesus that 'the antagonist' bloke's either on the world's sickest windup or he's barking :eek:
strange how he didn't think of the most obvious explanation for the 'power surge' story; one of the many, many things the people running public transport in London are not very good at - 2 in fact - are crisis response and news management.
they panicked and spouted bollocks quite simply
 
Badger Kitten said:
oh fuck off. Just fuck off.
I wasted some of my life watching Press for Truth, and the fact that the Jersey Girls know -as the BBC pointed out too - that the US Govt has been less than open about the failures to act on intelligence before 9/11, doesn't mean that they hold any truck at all with the bullshit batshit about the USG being behind 9/11.
Click to expand...
Well I wonder if you were watching the same documentary I was, because I just started watching it again. And it takes half an hour in before the intelligence failures are even mentioned, by which time it's addressed NORAD's failure to defend the skies on the day, Bush's conduct, the lack of concern over the three unprecedented and unusual collapses and the apparation corruption and stonewalling of investigations. All stuff that people have been decrying me for asking, and moreover demanding that if I'm just 'asking questions' I had better come up with an alternative theory.

And later on the documentary goes on to suggest that the USG deliberately let Bin Laden escape - several times - and in fact looked after him when he needed kidney dialysis. Is that not 'conspiraloon' stuff? And then there's plenty more. The intelligence failures are simply a small part of that programme.

Some conspiracy theorists have asked the same questions as the Jersey Girls, but then the conspiraloons go on and on and on and make up a load more questions which are based on stupidity and paranoia. As conspiraloons ask millions of questions it is not surprising that some of them are sensible or reasonable. There is a difference between asking questions, and asking questions then refusing to listen to the answers and instead peddling crap based on a paranoid belief system.
Click to expand...
You've got this all the wrong way around. Instead of trying to draw your line between the 'acceptable' conspiracy theories and the 'conspiraloon' - bending it however you see necessary to make sure that the Jersey Girls are on your side, you should be saying - it's up to the USG to prove its story on what happened on 9/11. That's what the Jersey Girls are doing. The Jersey girls have aligned themselves squarely with those asking the questions and refusing to accept the official accounts until they have been proven. That means dotting all the i's and crossing the t's. That means asking questions about why NORAD failed to intercept any of the four flights. It means asking questions about why Bush talked to a bunch of schoolkids when secret service agents should have been hustling him bodily out to a safe location. It means asking about DNA identification of the hijackers. etc etc.

Please so not make ''asking some of the same questions as some conspiracy theorists' about intel failures and response on the day'' conflate with
'' supporting the conspiraloons theories that the Goverment planned and ordered the attacks.''

Because that would be a lie.
Click to expand...
I have not misrepresent the Jersey Girls. They do not accept the finding of the 9/11 Commission. They want 'truth' whatever that may be. They don't believe they have it.

The Jersey Girls in one quote seem to be more tolerant of conspiraloons hanging onto their sensible cause to get answers and trying to subvert it than I am, but perhaps they haven't had the same level as hate mail as me, or been libelled on stupid websites, perhaps they haven't had sick letters sent to their father, and antisemitic DVDS sent to their flat, like I have. The Jersey Girls' tolerance seems to me to have been grotesquely abused by the attempts of loons to use them to give credibility to their conspracy theories.

And fuck off because I am not on the same side as the conspiraloons ghoulishly picking over 7/7 and finding mistakes and loose threads in a rolling, multi-sourced media staory and ongoing police investigation, because they too start from the basis of a lie, that the UK Govt was complicit in 7/7. That the bombers were ''innocent''. That there was a ''power surge, not bombs'', or that ''the bombs were under the trains'', that the bus at Tavistock Square was full of ''actors and stuntmen'', and ''pyrotechnics'', ugh.

As to the CCTV, there have been requests to release it by survivors, partly to shut up the sick conspiraloons. The coroner, who has not yet made his report, is looking at whether to release some of it before the report into the deaths of the victims and the bombers.

I have pushed back against for months against sick conspiraloon shit, once I found my account being twisted and lies about me being published all over the internet, and found myself at the centre of some particularly offensive conspiracy theories. And I've been insulted and had harassment for speaking out against it.

And the only reason I bother is because I am campaigning for an inquiry, and I do not want the sane, clear eyed campaign for a 7/7 inquiry to be infected with the anti semitic drivel, the paranoid delusions and the laughable, tasteless muderer-exoneration of the 7/7 conspiraloons. They do people who were involved a huge disservice by muddying the waters with their pathetic fantasies. They make it easier to dismiss it. And that is not fair.And so I will fight back, tiresome though it is, because yes, I do tyake personal attacks personally, and I hate seeing something I beleive in twisted by freaks.

And I've been in a room of people - survivors - making Tessa Jowell and John Reid squirm, twice, and you can hold your horses until Crevice ends and see what happens then in terms of continuing media pressure for an inquiry.

And you can finally fuck off, as I said and carry on having your arse whipped publicly on this thread, to general hilarity.

Ta
Click to expand...
The Jersey Girls are PART of the 9/11 Truth Movement and certainly 'tolerate' conspiracy theorists because, unlike you, they haven't made it their priority to attack their fellow citizens who are also asking questions. You've decided to make a massive deal out of some erroneous CT and launch offensives with all your might (I seem to remember you remarking that it was for your entertainment). You went on to their territory, their forums with all your vitriol. And so if some of the more paranoid of the CTs think that you are somehow trying to disrupt them, and have given you stuff back as a result, well you were.

You should stop ruining your own cause by attacking the CT lobby and focus your energies on auditing one story in it's entirety - the official one. You should assume nothing - what kind of auditor does? It's up to our government to prove it to the nation.

As for CCTV images with the bombers on their journeys, well we still haven't got any official confirmation that it exists whatever the coroner has waffled. If you wanted a good question to demand an answer to, ask for a breakdown of which bombers are captured on which bits of film at what time. How can they refuse that?

And I'm sorry but I've not had my 'arse whipped' on the this thread at all. Quite the reverse. Everyone thought that TheArchitect would have my number but found that he didn't at all. Sorry to disappoint.
 
press release from Ian Henshall, author of '9/11 Revealed'

BBC Programme on 911 Conspiracies repeats many canards.

19 February 2007

There were fatal misstatements of fact and key omissions in the BBC's programme on the nine eleven "conspiracy theories" which aired last night. The programme highlighted the most sensational and lurid allegations including a bizarre anti-semitic rumour which can only increase tensions in the Middle East. It ignored more widely held theories that rogue elements in the CIA facilitated the 911 attacks to help establish the war on terror.

1. The programme claimed that the Washington's official 911 investigation found no conspiracy. However it was built in to the terms of reference of the 911 Commission that no individual in the US should be singled out for blame, even accusations of incompetence were not allowed. When commission chair Thomas Kean commented that heads should have rolled there was a storm of protest in Washington and Kean withdrew his remarks.

2. The programme claimed that the official NIST investigation of the collapsing towers confirmed the official story. However the evidence produced by NIST did not support the NIST conclusions. NIST also made it clear that it had made no attempt to explain the most suspicious elements of all: the speed of collapse and the total destruction of the central core down to ground level. This canard has been repeated across the mainstream media most recently by George Monbiot in a bizarre article in the Guardian comparing "conspiracists" to a virus.

3. The programme suggested that the "conspiracy theorists" were causing grief to the relatives of the victims. They failed to mention that it was the relatives of the victims whose pressure led to the creation of the 911 Commission and that a large number of victims relatives angrily dispute the official story. Indeed one victim, William Rodriguez, an eyewitness who claims the bombs were set in the basement of the buildings, is touring Britain at the moment. The BBC has refused to interview him on any of its programmes.

4. The programme stated that the debris trail from flight ninety three was consistent with a crash rather than a shoot down. It closely examined the weakest evidence and failed to mention the strongest evidence. It appeared to misunderstand the allegations that a mystery plane landed in Cleveland airport.

5. The programme stated that there "happened to be" a "routine defence training exercise" on the morning of the nine eleven attacks. It failed to mention that these "routine" exercises contained a hushed up "anti-hijack exercise" which only came to light with the unofficial release of secret tapes from NORAD. The BBC must have been aware of the contents of these tapes because they ran an excerpt on the programme.

6. The programme falsely stated that the Pentagon "gave inaccurate information" to the official inquiries due to "human error in the fog of war". But the inquiries took place some years later. In fact 911 Commission officials determined that the falsehoods from the Pentagon were not due to the fog of war and there were grounds for bringing criminal prosecutions against Pentagon officials.

7. The programme failed to mention the blocking of FBI officials in Minnesota who correctly suspected that Zacharias Moussaoui was involved in a plot to fly planes into the World Trade Centre weeks before the attacks. Despite sixty memos to FBI headquarters these officials were refused permission to examine Moussaoui's laptop on legally spurious grounds. However the programme had a murky and confusing description of a second similar incident.

Ian Henshall is the UK's leading author on the subject with 911 Revealed favourably reviewed in The Daily Mail and the Sunday Times and letters carried in The Guardian. However the programme makers made no attempt to contact him.

Is there a conspiracy across the media to spread canards and misinformation? No.

Is there shoddy research, incompetence and a refusal to admit newsrooms bought a lemon from the CIA? Yes.

Is there a policy to smear dissenters as "conspiracy theorists" approved by top management at the BBC? Presumably, after all the official story is a conspiracy theory too, and a widely discredited one at that.

Ian Henshall
 
Sometime Jazzz'll get to a point, when he does that we can demolish him or show his lack of thought and/or research up as per usual. You just have to wait for him to try and engage first.
 
Jazzz said:
And I'm sorry but I've not had my 'arse whipped' on the this thread at all. Quite the reverse. Everyone thought that TheArchitect would have my number but found that he didn't at all. Sorry to disappoint.
Click to expand...

But strangely you haven't presented any evidence for either controlled demoliton, or explained why planes and fires couldn't have led to the WTC collapse.
I think that you thinking you haven't had your arse whipped on this thread is another of your delusions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
If the US govt organised 9/11 in order to justify a war in Afghanistran...
Replies
12
Views
37K
Citizen66
C
Dillinger4
'9/11 Truth Movement' and Academia
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
537
Views
29K
kyser_soze
K
friedaweed
  • Poll
So 9-11. Who really did it?
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
Crispy
Crispy
DrRingDing
  • Locked
Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job
15 16 17 18 19
Replies
543
Views
34K
FridgeMagnet
FridgeMagnet
M
9/11 a conspiracy?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
221
Views
13K
Jazzz
Jazzz
Back
Top Bottom