9/11 military tapes released - Pentagon lied to the 9/11 commission

[beesonthewhatnow]

Shame a lot of the conspirasheep claim to be scientists.

Scary, innit?

 

[fela fan]

From that link:

"I want to add here that I think that the publication of books and the existence of websites all devoted to the counter-orthodoxies – which effectively accuse the US Government in general, and range of individuals in particular, of mass murder of fellow-US citizens – are a tribute to Western principles of democracy and freedom of expression. By the same token I am free, along with others, to publish works that challenge the counter-orthodoxies. I want to make it absolutely clear however that I do not support the US Government in its response to 9/11. I simply believe that the approach taken by those who accuse it of complicity in the attacks is misguided. I believe that these accusations will founder on a lack of evidence, and that the same energy could be used to work, using democratic principles, to show where Bush and his colleagues have really gone wrong. I believe this to be their blanket refusal to learn about Islamic culture, history, and tradition; in particular their failure to credit radical Islamic movements their valuable and popular socialist and welfare dimensions; and their attempt to impose Western values on Islamic countries by force"


Couldn't put it any better than that really.

That would be because your conjecture matches that person's conjecture. Purely subjective, and added to that the elitist position that some take, including here on urban, that if only those conspiracy nutters wouldn't get in the way of us and our real, democratic, ways of investigating the white house criminals, then something might be done about bringing them to book.

Yer an elitist snob bees, along with the rest of editor's gang.

If you really couldn't put it better than that, a load of personal conjecture and tosh, then you're really not much up to the mark are you mate. I thought you lot dealt in evidence anyway, not about making things fit to one's own fixed ideas of what happened.

Next you'll be telling the forum you think bush is a criminal.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

That would be because your conjecture matches that person's conjecture. Purely subjective, and added to that the elitist position that some take, including here on urban, that if only those conspiracy nutters wouldn't get in the way of us and our real, democratic, ways of investigating the white house criminals, then something might be done about bringing them to book.

Yer an elitist snob bees, along with the rest of editor's gang.

If you really couldn't put it better than that, a load of personal conjecture and tosh, then you're really not much up to the mark are you mate. I thought you lot dealt in evidence anyway, not about making things fit to one's own fixed ideas of what happened.

Next you'll be telling the forum you think bush is a criminal.

Summary:

You're being mean to me, i'm going to tell my mummy.

Personal conjecture? Do fuck off untill you've read the link you silly, silly boy.

 

[fela fan]

Summary:

You're being mean to me, i'm going to tell my mummy.

Personal conjecture? Do fuck off untill you've read the link you silly, silly boy.

Mean? I don't give a fuck bob. I"ve been listening to this same crap for five years. Tell my mummy? How fucking old are you?

If the strength of one's debate was based on the lack of abuse, then you peraonally have a pretty piss-poor debate.

And furthermore i'm hardly likely to take instructions off you as to what my reading habits should be.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Mean? I don't give a fuck bob. I"ve been listening to this same crap for five years. Tell my mummy? How fucking old are you?

If the strength of one's debate was based on the lack of abuse, then you peraonally have a pretty piss-poor debate.

And furthermore i'm hardly likely to take instructions off you as to what my reading habits should be.

Ah but it's not. It's based upon facts, reason and logic, the abuse is an optional extra.

I don't care if you read harry potter or Nietzsche, but if you're too lazy to read the counter arguements you're wasting your own time as well as ours (guess which i care more about) by posting here.

Your post (#842) was nothing but built up bile and an accusation of intellectual dishonesty. Come back when you've got something worth saying.

 

[editor]

If the strength of one's debate was based on the lack of abuse, then you peraonally have a pretty piss-poor debate.

So, what's your considered response to this article, please:
http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm

 

[look again]

So, what's your considered response to this article, please:
http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm

Disclaimer

I am trained in science but my day job for the last twenty years is in the visual arts.

So you are forced to rely on an artist now?

You lads really are struggling.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Heh, no mention of the article written by the demolitions company then? Nor any counters to even an artist's ability to rip your beloved reverend's work to pieces?

Didn't think so.

 

[editor]

Disclaimer

I am trained in science but my day job for the last twenty years is in the visual arts.

So are you going to produce an intelligent response to that article or is posting up silly pictures as good as it gets?

 

[look again]

I can only guess you're in some sort of denial where you simply ignore the bits that don;t fit your half-arsed theory:

No I am relying on the very definite statements from two experts.

I don't know why you are arguing so much in face of all the evidence, i.e. both towers withstood the impacts without any problems.

Are you relying on the uneducated theory, that the planes caused the towers to come down?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

<waits for another load of conceited bilge to issue forth from Fela>

<adjusts mirrors>

Fuck me

Any tips on the 3:30 race?

 

[look again]

Heh, no mention of the article written by the demolitions company then? Nor any counters to even an artist's ability to rip your beloved reverend's work to pieces?

Didn't think so.

Why can't you lads find just one structural engineer, out of the hundreds of thousands you claim to support the official theory?

Why is something as simple as that proving to be so difficult?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Why can't you lads find just one structural engineer, out of the hundreds of thousands you claim to support the official theory?

Why is something as simple as that proving to be so difficult?

We've done that, a hundred times and more. If i do a search for it and show you these will you admitt that you may be wrong? (Not are wrong, i doubt you'll ever admitt that no matter what proof you're exposed to, but a maybe) If not then i'm not going to waste my time.

 

[look again]

So are you going to produce an intelligent response to that article or is posting up silly pictures as good as it gets?

I got as far as the bit where he said he was an artist.

You claim to have science on your side, yet you have incredible difficulty finding a structural engineer to explain the so called collapses in any detail.

Are you still relying on the pancake theory?

 

[look again]

We've done that, a hundred times and more. If i do a search for it and show you these will you admitt that you may be wrong? (Not are wrong, i doubt you'll ever admitt that no matter what proof you're exposed to, but a maybe) If not then i'm not going to waste my time.

That depends on whether he is able to explain the so called collapses in detail, and without using ridiculous speculation about the steel being melted by jet fuel, just like these two idiots tried to do.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540044.stm

It was the fire that killed the buildings. There's nothing on earth that could survive those temperatures with that amount of fuel burning," said structural engineer Chris Wise.

"The columns would have melted, the floors would have melted and eventually they would have collapsed one on top of each other."

The buildings' construction manager, Hyman Brown, agreed that nothing could have saved them from the inferno.

"The buildings would have stood had a plane or a force caused by a plane smashed into it," he said.

"But steel melts, and 24,000 gallons (91,000 litres) of aviation fluid melted the steel.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

That depends on whether he is able to explain the so called collapses in detail, and without using ridiculous speculation about the steel being melted by jet fuel, just like these two idiots tried to do.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540044.stm

It was the fire that killed the buildings. There's nothing on earth that could survive those temperatures with that amount of fuel burning," said structural engineer Chris Wise.

"The columns would have melted, the floors would have melted and eventually they would have collapsed one on top of each other."

The buildings' construction manager, Hyman Brown, agreed that nothing could have saved them from the inferno.

"The buildings would have stood had a plane or a force caused by a plane smashed into it," he said.

"But steel melts, and 24,000 gallons (91,000 litres) of aviation fluid melted the steel.

No, that's not what i asked nor what you said.

Why can't you lads find just one structural engineer, out of the hundreds of thousands you claim to support the official theory?

Yes you are an idiot

I am finding it harder and harder to belive you're not here on a windup. No one is this stupid.

 

[look again]

No, that's not what i asked nor what you said.

Yes you are an idiot

I am finding it harder and harder to belive you're not here on a windup. No one is this stupid.

They are forced to lie to support the official story and you just lap it up?

Stupid people believe liars because they are told exactly what they want to hear.

People who continue to believe liars after thay have been exposed are in denial.

What does that make you?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

They are forced to lie to support the official story and you just lap it up?

Stupid people believe liars because they are told exactly what they want to hear.

People who continue to believe liars after thay have been exposed are in denial.

What does that make you?

What utter hipocritical shite.

You ask for engineers, you are given them, then you state that they are under coercion, hell they must be to disagree with you.

Now, stop and think for a second, why am i supposed to be in denial and you are not? I read your link and your source doesn't have a clue, you were too afraid to read the countering source because...?

 

[look again]

What utter hipocritical shite.

You ask for engineers, you are given them, then you state that they are under coercion, hell they must be to disagree with you.

Now, stop and think for a second, why am i supposed to be in denial and you are not? I read your link and your source doesn't have a clue, you were too afraid to read the countering source because...?

I just exposed your so called experts as liars.

Your belief is based on what these liars are telling you, which is just sad.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I just exposed your so called experts as liars.

Your belief is based on what these liars are telling you, which is just sad.

No you didn't.

You said they were liars. I say you're crazy. Does that make you crazy look again?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

.

 

[fela fan]

So, what's your considered response to this article, please:
http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm

I don't have so much time these days, but in the opening paragraph he said:

"I believe that the truth is in fact more alarming: US and UK foreign policy is based on ignorance, not malice."

I have to choose my time more wisely and i'm not sure it's worth reading on after this. It's a bloody hoot man.

 

[fela fan]

Your post (#842) was nothing but built up bile and an accusation of intellectual dishonesty. Come back when you've got something worth saying.

Pragmatics dear bob. You've only been here a short time, others have been ding donging on this topic for over four years.

I was talking to that bees person, the context was unique between him, me, and my text. If it was bile (which is subjective), then it was deserved bile.

As for coming back, i've said all i have to say on this topic many times. It is pointless carrying on after a while. So i just remain here to try and expose the hypocrisy of the likes of yourself who insist on staggering incompetence as the reason the attacks took place.

One of the funnier ones is watching those who like to claim the moral high ground. Another one is listening to them describing the behaviour patterns of others while simultaneously missing the irony that they are in fact describing them very selves.

Funny old world innit.

 

[fela fan]

Yes you are an idiot

I am finding it harder and harder to belive you're not here on a windup. No one is this stupid.

You're not seriously giving that link the time of day are you?? If you believe all that then you're bloody naive or self-delusional.

You have fixed ideas, face up to it bob. I know you think others do, but you expose this truism frequently as belonging to you.

 

[ska invita]

last in?

 

[Techno303]

I got as far as the bit where he said he was an artist.

You claim to have science on your side, yet you have incredible difficulty finding a structural engineer to explain the so called collapses in any detail.

Are you still relying on the pancake theory?

There is a documentary that is currently being advertised for next week on either Channel 4 or Five. I forget which. It seems to focus around the few emergency service personnel that survived the collapse of one of the towers and then remained trapped under the debris. One of the guys says (paraphrasing) “You could hear the 'thump, thump, thump' as each one of the floors collapsed onto the other on their way down…”.

Should be an interesting documentary.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Why can't you lads find just one structural engineer, out of the hundreds of thousands you claim to support the official theory?

Why is something as simple as that proving to be so difficult?

Try reading the link posted you tiresome twat.

 

[editor]

I just exposed your so called experts as liars.

Your belief is based on what these liars are telling you, which is just sad.

I've had enough of this deluded fucking idiot endlessly repeating the same fact-free shite. He's clearly not interested in taking part in any kind of meaningful discussion.

User banned.

Nutters 'Sheeple'-accusing, bigoted gun nuts, ranting xenophobes, cut'n'pasters, God-squad, disruptive 'comical' alter-egos, conspiraloons, fruitloops and small minded bigots are not welcome.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

You're not seriously giving that link the time of day are you??

Lets see, it's written by somone with a clear understanding of the scientific method, takes references from credible and verifiable sources, is presented in a clear manner, and draws reasonable conclusions from the evidence put forward. Oh, and the author states that he welcomes comments and corrections from others.

So, yeah, I will, although I can see why you wouldn't, seeing as you have admitted before you aren't bothered by actual facts.



eta: wrong link on my part, thought you were refering to the one I posted, but the comment still stands...

 

[WouldBe]

I just exposed your so called experts as liars.

Your belief is based on what these liars are telling you, which is just sad.

Then your expert Steve Jones is also a liar as the seismograph clearly shows the towers took 10 seconds to fall not the 6 seconds he claims. Oops.