911: What makes you suspicious - now with added extra poll option!

[mauvais]

Greatest thread ever!

Please, for the love of the lizards, don't bin it - archive it.

 

[pk]

Yup, it's sad, but I won't be threatened by Jazzz, whatever he's on about.

 

[Jazzz]

ok, well I'll tell you what that was about, since I'm not going to bullied by you, no matter how low you are stooping, and I'd like to clear the air on this, because it's really no big deal.

You remarked to me that you thought I was on to something with the 9-11 stuff but would never dare admit it on these boards.

I've never given any assurance to you of my confidence, and there's little in that that isn't abundantly clear anyway.

 

[pk]

ok, well I'll tell you what that was about, since I'm not going to bullied by you, no matter how low you are stooping, and I'd like to clear the air on this, because it's really no big deal.

You remarked to me that you thought I was on to something with the 9-11 stuff but would never dare admit it on these boards.

I've never given any assurance to you of my confidence, and there's little in that that isn't abundantly clear anyway.

Is that it?

Fuck that... I thought you were on about something else...



Erm... sorry.

 

[Jazzz]

Well, that was it... you didn't think I was going to spill the beans about your secret drug-fuelled love trysts with The Queen and her corgis? I'm keeping quiet about those!

Oh dear.

apology accepted... I confess I was about to print out the thread and take it to the police, though...

 

[Badger Kitten]

I must include your recent offerings as the same low-level of debate as pk, badger kitten. I am not aware of anyone maintaining that the *the tube wasn't blown up on 7/7, I certainly don't, yet you put words into my mouth - and anyone else who dares question the official narrative - that I say that.

Are you suggesting along with pk that Buncefield was a case of terrorism? If so, that means you think that HMG can lie through their teeth on the issue. If not, well we agree and that leaves pk as the conspiracy theorist on the issue. I don't see where you are coming from tbh.

* see here 'Exploded Bus was a fake on 7/7 'claim
'no bombs - it was a power surge on 7/7 ' claim.

No I am not suggesting Buncefield was terrorism.

 

[Badger Kitten]

and I do not know why I bother, or awhy nyone else does.

I am relatively knew and I have deja vu.

 

[editor]

. For editor to complain about me on her behalf is outstanding chutzpah.

For you to willingly break the FAQ concerning a person's privacy - and continue to do so even after being warned - makes me wonder why you chose to do something that could have endangered the entire site's future.

Much as I like you in real life, I'm running out of reasons why you shouldn't be banned for your wilful, malicious, arrogant behaviour.

I'm really fucking annoyed.

 

[Derian]

Is that it?

Fuck that... I thought you were on about something else...



Erm... sorry.

pk apology shock horror!!!

lizards have struck again. welease the weal pk!

 

[Derian]

Late, end of week, everyone tired and scratchy.

No-one ever flames or swears at me even when I provoke 'em

Please. In the interests of this otherwise bin bound thread. Get enraged with me and start an alternative call out, that'd be well

 

[editor]

Late, end of week, everyone tired and scratchy.

No-one ever flames or swears at me even when I provoke 'em

Please. In the interests of this otherwise bin bound thread. Get enraged with me and start an alternative call out, that'd be well

Shut the fuck up you fucking bullshitting cunt.


(how's that? )

 

[Derian]

Shut the fuck up you fucking bullshitting cunt.


(how's that? )

Perfick

Love you lots editor

 

[editor]

Perfick

Love you lots editor

Happy to be of assistance!

 

[Derian]

Happy to be of assistance!

'twas a good first attempt.

<polishes sworn at badge>

 

[Jazzz]

For you to willingly break the FAQ concerning a person's privacy - and continue to do so even after being warned - makes me wonder why you chose to endanger the entire site's future.

Much as I like you in real life, I'm running out of reasons why you shouldn't be banned for your wilful, malicious, arrogant behaviour.

I have done absolutely no behaviour as you describe. I referred to the poster concerned by name because that's how she used to be known, it was her login title, the name everyone used to call her. Nothing but habit, and when reminded not to I stopped.

I can promise you that you will have no complaint from the poster concerned about me.

I have done absolutely nothing to endanger the site's future. If a few others have by making horrendous slurs against fellow posters based on nothing but rumour - I haven't.

I understand you now realise the seriousness of that issue. Well, don't blame the messenger. You should have listened to me earlier instead of ignoring it. And if you are concerned about your own site, you should value those who speak up like I did, and not those who will throw crap around at other posters. There's a very good example right here;

Threats of physical violence

I am utterly staggered that another poster makes a threat of physical violence a few posts ago, even to the extent of making a reference to the street I live in - and you are threatening me with a ban for breaking the rules?

Christ.

Concern about the site means, to me, concern about all the posters who are on it with me. What about you? Are you going to ban those who defend other posters, or those who threaten them?

Take a deep breath, and look at the way you are going editor.

 

[MikeMcc]

I did once Techno on these boards in my own words. It basically descended into the usual bollox so excuse me if I don't repeat it.

But if you want to focus on one element, would you care to show me in the NIST report a credible explanation as to how there was near instanteous failure across the full span of the floor where a collapse initiated

What!? It shows that no such thing happened. One damaged corner collapsed and damaged the rest of the supporting columns leading to a staggered collapse across the rest of the structure.

 

[MikeMcc]

Why? Genuine question. In the debate on the physics.org forum someone came on to have witnessed oil depot fires and said that even with millions of gallons of blazing fuel inside you could still touch the outer skin of the steel holder - steel which was far thinner than used in the central support columns. And look at the Buncefield depot blaze - after days of mostrous inferno the skin of some holders was still intact - pretty warped, yes, but still there. The central columns were fantastically thick and would conduct any heat up and down, there was absolutely no evidence of an inferno in the south tower, and any fire that there was in either tower only burned for around 90 minutes. It would barely have warmed it.

However, even you assume that the fires could have heated up the central supports, you can't possibly claim that they could have heated them significantly all the way up and down the towers - utter nonsense. I don't even guess that that is claimed! So, what made them collapse?

But when the upper stories collapsed onto the lower structure there was no way on earth they were going to withstand it, no matter what size the structural steel was!

 

[editor]

I have done absolutely no behaviour as you describe. I referred to the poster concerned by name because that's how she used to be known, it was her login title, the name everyone used to call her. Nothing but habit, and when reminded not to I stopped.

You're a liar, plain and simple.

She'd specifically asked for her name to be removed from this site which I did, at some considerable effort, going through hundreds of posts where people had mentioned her name.

And then you showed up weeks later on another of your fucking moronic 'truth seeking' trips, stoking up the issue and slapping her name all over the site again. I asked you to stop. Instead, you carried on posting up her name. All over the shop. You did not stop when you were asked to. That is a lie.

Example warning 1:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=3975737&postcount=418
Warning 2:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=3975770&postcount=426
... and Jazzz continues to post up her name:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=3975785&postcount=431

I spent fucking ages going through all your posts (and those quoting yours) removing her name, so don't try and bullshit me with this 'it was an honest mistake' bullshit. You knew damn well what you were doing. Twat.

Oh, and pk - calm down for fuck's sake. Post people's addresses up and you get banned.

Just because Jazzz is incapable of respecting people's privacy, that's no excuse for you to act the same.

 

[fela fan]

Don't bother Fela.

The editor and the other apologists for the official legend are so dug into their position you are not going to dig them out. That would be all well and good if they were familiar with the basic questions and evidence that surround 9/11 (such as the intelligence, air defense or fire engineering failures) but most are not as their posts repeatedly demonstrate. That's not arrogance, but simple observation. I would go back and illustrate this from the pityful postings of the Ed, Wouldbe, etc if I could be arsed but I can't.

So for example you can post a link to 30 odd pages of tightly researched and referenced evidence on the intelligence failures and you will still be told that there is no evidence to challenge the US govt account. It's disenguous bullshit and you, me and everyone else is wasting our time arguing about 9/11 here

I only come here for entertainment mate. I find myself with a far more open mind on this topic than those who scream 'conspiraloon' all the time.

Interestingly they KNOW that the USG had nothing to do with the attacks. Nothing seems dodgy to them at all.

Amazing.

 

[editor]

I find myself with a far more open mind on this topic than those who scream 'conspiraloon' all the time..

God loves a dreamer.

 

[fela fan]

There's a huge credibility gap between saying that Govt intelligence had indications of possible terrorist attack methods and that Govt decision makers (particularly at VP/Presidential) level were aware of those specific threats though.

I can only speculate on how many threats listening protocols like Echelon and intelligence services can pick up globally, but I suspect there are thousands upon thousands of possible threats. It's far from beyond belief that oversights were made in which threats should receive priority.

It's somewhat like claiming that, in the aftemath of a bizarre assassination attempt, that there had actually been reports of the possibility of a poison tipped umbrella after all, but it wasn't taken as seriously as more seemingly plausible, prosaic ideas.

In the wider scheme of things, that isn't evidence of a conspiracy Sparticus and you know it. It's a possible indication, but it's nowhere near a smoking gun or credible evidence of govt. wrongdoing.

No, it isn't evidence of a conspiracy. And yes, oversights can be made.

But the intelligence coming from non-US sources was vast, and painted rather a common picture. To have ingored it all would in effect mean negating the need to ever bother with intelligence again, coz that is precisely why countries do intelligence. Why bother gathering information if you're then going to do nothing with it?

Smoking guns will only occur upon investigation. None has ever been carried out by the mainstream media. And anyway, what is all this about 'smoking guns'? When there is suspicion, there ought to be an investigation. Then you weed out facts.

 

[fela fan]

"Apologist", my arse you pathetic little dreamer.

Four years on and you still haven't produced a single shred of credible 'proof' of your little boy fantasies.

You wouldn't know the 'truth' if it picked you up on a date, flirted with you in the pub, got you pissed and shafted you up the arse all night long - and then made you breakfast in the morning.

Aren't you embarrassed by your singular lack of success in persuading anyone here that your crackpot, nutjob yarns are true?

Aren't you embarrassed by your crass rudeness to posters that think differently to you?

 

[editor]

Aren't you embarrassed by your crass rudeness to posters that think differently to you?

Perhaps you should look to see who was hurling around the insults about posters being 'apologists' first, dreamer.

And then say sorry, if you've got the honesty.

 

[fela fan]

In short keep lying and ignoring/distorting the evidence presented by the 9/11 truth movement.

And he's damn professional at this mate, while at the same time utilising the height of rudeness towards those that think differently to him.

 

[fela fan]

...

You see I'm not alone in trying to reason with you over the years, politely pointing out the flaws in your wild fact-free suppositions,

...

Politely?

 

[fela fan]

Why is it so difficult to believe in extremist terrorists training to fly planes wanting to strike at the US because of their unpopular foreign policies, again? Remind me?

Oh, that is very easy to believe.

The problem is that there is so much dodgy stuff about the official version of events, and when we factor in previous deeds in history by those in power who want more and more power, it leaves some people with a lot of suspicion.

 

[fela fan]

We will never be in accordance on the issue of 9/11 - you're full of shit.

Tell you what - on the record - don't ever fuck with me, Jazzz, whatever it is you're threatening.

That is your one and only warning.

oooh, what a big man. Big dick too eh mate?

 

[editor]

Seven posts in a row and no one's interested! It's BB onanism in action!

 

[fela fan]

God loves a dreamer.

Don't tell me you believe in God??? Where the fuck is evidence of God? C'mon, peer-reviewed articles and links please. I need proof.

 

[fela fan]

Seven posts in a row and no one's interested!

Well, you are.