911 - please don't flame me

[fela fan]

He is not being threatened with a ban because of his 9/11 conspiracy-tastic opinions.

But i've never presented any theory except that i thought the USG knew what was afoot, and let it happen on purpose. Hardly conspiracy stuff.

You know full well i've hardly ever indulged in 'personal attacks' on these threads. For once i decided to give as good as i got.

I was wrong, but hey, i'm human, i couldn't help it. I'd finally had enough of you shoving words into my mouth for months on end.

You've reminded me about your rules and your board. I took heed.

And i also was reminded that all is not fair in life; your continual insults of me are not defamatory coz you don't know me, but what i say about you is, because i 'know' you. Tough shit. Take it or go mad. Okay, i can take it, no probs.

But i will continue to nondefamatorily expose what you say on these threads as being wrong, when you are wrong. Since it's a debating board, you can also expose me when i'm wrong.

But i sure wish you'd stop shoving language and stuff down my throat. I have never supported any one single 'conspiracy theory' on this forum (certainly not in the last few months). I fear you confuse my questions and analysis.

But you just don't listen...

 

[fela fan]

I don't recall inviting him and I'm under no obligation to put up with his insults.

Quite right, you're not under any obligation. I agree, it's your board. But, but, if you give them out to me for so long, so regularly, at the same time attributing stuff to me i've never said, countless times, does it really surprise you that for once, after two years, i decided to return it all to you?

A general unwritten rule in life is that you get what you give out...

 

[Jazzz]

He is being threatened with a ban because he is posting up defamatory and insulting material in breach of the FAQ.

Well then, I trust you will threaten yourself with the same penance, because the post before the one that provoked your threat, you referred to the good fela fan as a 'clueless halfwit'.

It is the most incredible chutzpah to throw insults like that around and then scamper for the rule-book when the retort is that you are somewhat impolite.

I don't recall inviting him and I'm under no obligation to put up with his insults.

You invited fela fan, as you did the rest of us, to 'debate the issues on one of the liveliest boards around' front page.

 

[editor]

Well then, I trust you will threaten yourself with the same penance, because the post before the one that provoked your threat, you referred to the good fela fan as a 'clueless halfwit'.

Learn the basics of libel and defamation law before making a tit of yourself. You can't defame an unknown entity posting under a pseudonym.

I've no problem with lively and robust debate, and I've put up with months of sustained personal abuse from fela (in clear contravention of the FAQ).

But he crossed the line with his latest onslaught that included claims that I "got off" by insulting people and that I harboured "hatred and a lack of respect for other human beings".

You invited fela fan, as you did the rest of us, to 'debate the issues on one of the liveliest boards around'

That vague 'invitation' is conditional on posters agreeing and adhering to the Posting FAQ.

If you find those terms unacceptable, don't post here. It's really that simple.

But if you think I'm going to put up with even more anonymous, defamatory personal abuse spewed forth on a regular basis from fela, you're very much mistaken.

PS Bonkers 9/11 conspiracy theories are not one of "the issues" mentioned or referred to on the u75 homepage.

 

[Jazzz]

Obviously, neither you nor fela fan are going to launch lawsuits against each other, stop being ridiculous.

I just think you should simply try to follow the standards that you demand of others. Play fair. Debate politely. Stop dominating every 9-11 thread with your incessant barrage.

And don't cowardly hide behind your FAQ and pointless legalities when someone stands up to you and lets you have a taste of your own stuff.

 

[editor]

And don't cowardly hide behind your FAQ and pointless legalities when someone stands up to you and lets you have a taste of your own stuff.

I don't recall telling fela that he "got off" on insulting people or that he had a "hatred and a lack of respect for other human beings".

Of course, you haven't the honesty to admit that he went too far with those comments - but that'll be because he's one of the tiny, tiny, tiny, microscopic percentage of posters who actually entertain your evidence free 'theories'.

Debate politely

Ah. You must mean like this:

editor, with the greatest respect, you are being an absolute GOBSHITE

 

[Ae589]

Holy shit, is this still going on?

Has anyone looked at the site?

I reckon I can can get us set up on a pretty reasonable server for £1k - and co-location for around the same per year, and we can fill the damn thing up with this rubbish and leave U75 alone...

...any takers?

 

[Loki]

This thread has gone down the route of all 9/11 threads.

 

[Lock&Light]

I reckon I can can get us set up on a pretty reasonable server for £1k - and co-location for around the same per year, and we can fill the damn thing up with this rubbish and leave U75 alone...

...any takers?

It has already been attempted by Dr. Jazzz, but, with the exception of CaroleK, there have been no more 'takers' for some while now.

Link

 

[fela fan]

I've no problem with lively and robust debate, and I've put up with months of sustained personal abuse from fela (in clear contravention of the FAQ).

But he crossed the line with his latest onslaught that included claims that I "got off" by insulting people and that I harboured "hatred and a lack of respect for other human beings".

That first bit is not true. The second bit i agree i crossed the line (and i apologise for that), but to say i've been posting personal abuse your way for months is just not true. I've been addressing the substance of your posts on these threads.

All the while i've received a lot of sustained personal abuse from you. I guess i stepped over the line due to cumulative damage: after months and months of being called all sorts of things, including regular descriptions of being 'stupid' or 'halfwit', i just lost it for a brief moment.

I doubt there's anything else in hundreds of exchanges between us that is defamatory on my part. You'll certainly be getting no more from me. I'm not in the business of defaming anyone, least of all people i don't know, but i am in the business of exposing what i think is wrong in debate.

Now, can we move on man?

 

[fela fan]

By the way DrJ, thanks.

 

[editor]

It has already been attempted by Dr. Jazzz, but, with the exception of CaroleK, there have been no more 'takers' for some while now.
Link

My oh my, there's some fascinating threads there dealing with global issues that really matter:

" Urban75 - encouraging global fascism - continued"
"Forum linked to by Urban75 bonkers 'radical' thought police"
"Link back to Urban75"

(sigh)

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

i just can't be arsed to comment any more i'll leave you to your sand pit...

 

[Jazzz]

<I'm sure editor would wish that I had a chance to respond to this questioning although he binned the other thread it came up on.>

Err, there were body parts blown out of the trains in the Madrid bombings. Nothing even remotely unusual about that.

There's loads of documented evidence of body parts being scattered after plane crashes and explosions. Heck, one sterwardess even survived after a plane was blown up in the skies at 10,000m!

Haven't you done you research (again)?

But if you've got any proof that the workers who found the hands or the New York Times (who carred the story) are lying, I'll look forward to reading it.

Have you got any proof, DrJ?

Anything at all?

No, there's nothing unusual about body parts surviving crashes. But in all of those cases, such as the Concorde crash you later refer to, identifiable plane (or train) debris also survives and, I dare say, the black boxes too.

In fact one of the notable things about 9-11 is the complete and utter lack of any photos showing body parts of the plane passengers or hijackers, or even those who died in the WTC.

You often say that you do not automatically believe aspects of the official story yet your confidence in this snippet released to a reporter, not backed up by a photo, is astonishing. Rather than ask for evidence before you believe it, you take it (no matter how implausible) as gospel truth, and then place the burden of proof on me to disprove it! So much for needing evidence before you believe something. What you are saying is that the simple word of authority (eg, the New York Times) is quite good enough for you.

In fact this wasn't the only such grisly report. Looking at 9-11 timeline you can find other ones - the whole body of a hijacker was claimed to be found (but strangely not identified for 24 months!). There were also reports of whole rows of seats with the passengers still in them, and a cockpit of one of the planes. Clearly, these reports are complete bullshit. Yet I'm sure there are gullible people around who would believe them if they came out in the New York Times... oh look one of them did!

It's instructing to note the quote about the black boxes.

“It's extremely rare that we don't get the recorders back. I can't recall another domestic case in which we did not recover the recorders.”
National Transportation Safety Board spokesman


"What luck for rulers, that men do not think"
Adolf Hitler

 

[WouldBe]

It's instructing to note the quote about the black boxes.

There was virtually nothing left of the WTC. How do you expect a black box made of aluminium to survive?

You have already commented on pools of molten steel being found. Aluminium melts at a lot lower temp than steel. Again how do you expect a black box to survive?

What if the black boxes ended up in the pool of molten steel. Would you still expect them to survive?

 

[editor]

“It's extremely rare that we don't get the recorders back. I can't recall another domestic case in which we did not recover the recorders.”

Maybe that's because there's never been a domestic case where fuel-laden airplanes have crashed into two of the tallest buildings in the world at high speed, causing them to collapse.

So your point is?

 

[fubert]

My oh my, there's some fascinating threads there dealing with global issues that really matter:

" Urban75 - encouraging global fascism - continued"
"Forum linked to by Urban75 bonkers 'radical' thought police"
"Link back to Urban75"

(sigh)

i liked the "us government is responsible for aids" thread (1 post) myself.

i liked that the dr who "unearthed a flowchart for the creation of a 'Special Virus Cancer Program', a bioweapon manufactured by the US Government" charges people $5 to download it.

 

[bigfish]

Maybe that's because there's never been a domestic case where fuel-laden airplanes have crashed into two of the tallest buildings in the world at high speed, causing them to collapse.

So your point is?

Really!

'The last time a plane crashed into a New York City skyscraper was July 28, 1945. A U.S. bomber flying through thick fog at about 200 mph crashed into the Empire State Building, one of the most recognized structures in the world.'

ABCNEWS

 

[editor]

Really!
'The last time a plane crashed into a New York City skyscraper was July 28, 1945. A U.S. bomber flying through thick fog at about 200 mph crashed into the Empire State Building, one of the most recognized structures in the world.'

Oh dear oh dear. This is desperate.

Not only was the bomber a much smaller plane carrying far less fuel, it hit a building of a completely different type of construction at a much, much slower speed.

The MIT analysis determined the first plane (to hit the WTC) was traveling 429 mph, and the second 537 mph...
http://tinyurl.com/39k3x

So, no relevance whatsoever then.

There's a surprise.

 

[Jazzz]

There was virtually nothing left of the WTC. How do you expect a black box made of aluminium to survive?

You have already commented on pools of molten steel being found. Aluminium melts at a lot lower temp than steel. Again how do you expect a black box to survive?

What if the black boxes ended up in the pool of molten steel. Would you still expect them to survive?

Black boxes are designed to be all but indestructible. If anything was to survive it's the black box. They are made of alloys (not just aluminium, and maybe titanium instead) designed to withstand extraordinary conditions.

This material is made of the most indestructible alloys known to man. They can take temperatures over 2000 Deg. F and never know that they had been hot! They can survive salt water immersion for a lot longer (years) than investigators would let them lay there. (They are usually found within a few days.

... The same type as used in the afterburner sections of the F-15's and F-16's--the parts that get white hot, over, and over, and over and still keeps on working. strange case of the black box and the indestructible passport

They can take impacts of 3,400g and they test them by firing them from cannons!

Do you seriously expect me to believe that all the black boxes for the WTC flights vanish (I think there's two on each aircraft), yet, when it comes to paper passports and the bound hands of stewardesses, these miraculously survive? Piffle!

There was a good reason why nothing remained of the WTC - there wasn't a single piece of concrete rubble left - it was blown up!

 

[bigfish]

So, no relevance whatsoever then.

Speaking of relevance, I see that you've binned the other 9/11 thread at precisely the moment relavent witness material appeared flatly contradicting your rather absurd notion that all the passengers and crew on board flight 77 perished in the Pentagon fireball.

So, after making such a wild claim, totally unsupportable in either reality or law, and after eyewitness accounts are then posted tending to completely repudiate your claim, you do what?

You axe the thread!

Great tactics... is this one going too?

Chop! Chop!

 

[editor]

Do you seriously expect me to believe that all the black boxes for the WTC flights vanish (I think there's two on each aircraft), yet, when it comes to paper passports and the bound hands of stewardesses, these miraculously survive? Piffle!

There was a good reason why nothing remained of the WTC - there wasn't a single piece of concrete rubble left - it was blown up!

It's really rather simple: humans aren't physically bolted on to the aircraft. Humans can be blown into lots of teeny weensy pieces that can be scattered a long distance from the crash (e.g. Concorde's crash)

A black box is secured to the plane's super structure. So if a plane crashes straight into one of the world's greatest towers which subsequently collapses it's hardly a surprise that the thing doesn't survive the immense pressure.

But I'm fascinated by your conspiracy claims. So can we add:
1. Rescue workers
2. New York Times
3. Pathology Lab workers and anyone else around at the time to your ever growing army of people involved in the conspiracy.

And if we're going to include your totally evidence free bonkers claim about the WTC "being blown up", then we'll have to add WTC security staff, explosives engineers, van drivers, labourers, installation specialists, office managers, cleaners and whoever else would have been involved with, or seen, workers installing huge amounts of explosives all over the WTC.

And if we go along wioth your equally evidence-untroubled fantasy about remote controlled, missile firing planes, call fakers and crew disappearers the crew involved in this conspiracy must be heading for the hundreds of thousands!

Funny how ne'er a peep has been heard from all these people, innit?

 

[editor]

Speaking of relevance, I see that you've binned the other 9/11 thread at precisely the moment relavent witness material appeared flatly contradicting your rather absurd notion that all the passengers and crew on board flight 77 perished in the Pentagon fireball.

Yes, that's right. Another evil conspiracy uncovered by bigfish!

(guffaw)

But who cares? There's barely a soul on these boards interesting in seeing the same old evidence-untroubled fantasies being rehashed again and again and again, so maybe it's time that this thread is also put to bed.

But if you're so very keen to keep repeating the same old tosh, why not join DrJ's forum where there'll be no beastly editor spoiling your 9/11 mantra chanting?

Or, even better, why not prove your commitment to 'the truth' by getting off your arse and starting your own site?

I mean, if you're so God-damn sure that you're right, why bother posting here? It's not like your exciting theories have actually managed to attract a huge audience here, is it?

 

[Jazzz]

That passports, bound hands, whole hijackers and rows of seats with passengers in them could survive while the indestructible black boxes - never before lost in a terrestrial crash - go missing is, totally implausible.

Do you similarly believe the claims about the rows of seats with passengers still in them found on the roof too, editor? Somehow, I guess you don't, but where the bound hands are concerned, that's gospel truth.

What is of interest here is your willingness to take anything that gets reported in the papers as fact. Indeed this is the crux of your whole argument! How can one possibly doubt the word of authority (in this case, the New York Times). Never mind that such a story could easily be planted by one person with a telephone - but somehow you conclude that one journalist copying the words of one spook implies that the whole staff of the paper was cloaked and daggered up.

Must we believe everything we read in the papers, editor?

 

[bigfish]

But who cares?

Well, quite clearly, you care, after all, you make more posts on 9/11 threads than just about everyone else combined, or at any rate, you always lead the individual post count by a mile!

There's barely a soul on these boards interesting in seeing the same old evidence-untroubled fantasies being rehashed again and again and again, so maybe it's time that this thread is also put to bed.

So why don't you stop rehashing them then?

You don't suppose lots of posters are repulsed by your ever present cod-logic arguments, makey uppie evidence and shear incessant flimflam, do you?

No, I rather thought not.

 

[Jazzz]

And yes bigfish, editor has the option, unlike other posters, of throwing the thread out of the pram. In my view, it's an option he overexercises somewhat.

 

[editor]

So why don't you stop rehashing them then?.

Good idea.

I'll put this one in the bin then.

Thanks for the suggestion.

I'll look forward to seeing your belief and passion in the 'rightness' of your cause being translated into your own website soon. There's a brand new 'tech section' on the site with loads of tips to help get you started.

Good luck and be sure to drop me a line if you get stuck with the coding.

 

[Jazzz]

I think bigfish was just suggesting that you might wish simply not to post on them, editor.

But... out of the pram it goes I guess....

 

[editor]

I think bigfish was just suggesting that you might wish simply not to post on them, editor.

Hey - you could give him some tips on his website too!

In fact, with all your webmaster experience, why don't you guys work on it together?!

Great idea, no?

 

[bigfish]

Why don't you just come out and say it editor: All free discussion and debate on the subject of 9/11 will be ruthlessly suppressed among the urban 'community' by order of the supreme ruler.

Isn't that roughly what "go and start your own boards" translates in to?

Night night thread.

Night night free speach.