Al Qaeda a myth says Russian
- Thread starter Raisin D'etre
- Start date
The only boring thing about this thread ed has been your persistent attempts at sabotaging it. Kindly desist. I don't need you to tell me that it is "the same old shite, albeit in a different clothes", I can think for myself. As for your petulant demands for people to solve what happened on 911, whatever happened to having an open mind, looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on that? The good aspects you bring to the debate Mr Editor are your critical questions, as you cast your critical eye on the evidence, posters cannot get away with shoddy, half-baked analysis, as a result, the information and arguments have to be sound. I give you credit for that ed. If Bigfish has a theory about what happened on 911 based on his research over the past three years, at least let him present it. Demanding that he solve it first and work backwards is the wrong way to go about demonstrating that the official version of 911 is flawed.
But you just said you are afraid your boards are going to be taken over by 'conspiraloons'!
The truth may not always be the majority view - but let me remind you of what has happened since I first posted about 9-11. On the first thread, only two posters expressed any support for me - Rorymac and Ernestolynch. Since then a 9-11 thread is normally many posters (you now say we are 'ganging up) against you and a couple of others.
The BBC could say exactly the same arguments against the guy who wrote 'the power of nightmares' when it censored out his BAFTA speech recently - except they didn't, because they know what a load of cack it would have been to make an 'appeal to popularity'.
There's two possibilities here - either the official story to 9-11 is basically
1) True
2) Utter and complete codswallop
If 1), then if you permit free discussion of 9-11, you run of the risk of having a few threads that you aren't interested in going on. And maybe attracting a few posters like bigfish, or raisin, to the site - big fucking deal.
But if 2) is the case, then you should realise that you are unwittingly AIDING AND ABETTING the most monstrous regime in the history of the fucking planet.
I'm not exaggerating.
Your call.
The truth may not always be the majority view - but let me remind you of what has happened since I first posted about 9-11. On the first thread, only two posters expressed any support for me - Rorymac and Ernestolynch. Since then a 9-11 thread is normally many posters (you now say we are 'ganging up) against you and a couple of others.
The BBC could say exactly the same arguments against the guy who wrote 'the power of nightmares' when it censored out his BAFTA speech recently - except they didn't, because they know what a load of cack it would have been to make an 'appeal to popularity'.
There's two possibilities here - either the official story to 9-11 is basically
1) True
2) Utter and complete codswallop
If 1), then if you permit free discussion of 9-11, you run of the risk of having a few threads that you aren't interested in going on. And maybe attracting a few posters like bigfish, or raisin, to the site - big fucking deal.
But if 2) is the case, then you should realise that you are unwittingly AIDING AND ABETTING the most monstrous regime in the history of the fucking planet.
I'm not exaggerating.
Your call.
PS if it descends into the invisible planes etc. then you can say see "I was right"
I do take exception to the implications here. What do you mean? Some of the older posters will recall Ed took exception to me analysing the Butler inquiry re: Dr Kelly's suicide and that is why he calls me a "conspiraloon", not that I mind. But lets be clear, I don't subscribe to the invisible missiles, planes, etc although I am skeptical about what happened and would like to know more. In other words, I am trying to keep an open mind.DrJazzz said:
And another reason why ed marches into a thread and labels me a "conspiraloon" is because I usually pipe up at these points to argue for free expression. For this I take endless assaults that carry on over pages. This you can check for yourself. As a result I am now castigated a "conspiraloon".
I do honey, I do! 
mwah X
mwah X
For sure, I wasn't trying to pigeon hole anyone. And there are plenty of other such posters. It speaks volumes that posters maintaining an open mind about 9-11 are feeling that the official version cannot be challenged here on urban75.Raisin D'etre said:
I watched the documentary 'how the towers fell' last night. Extraordinary, given that this programme was touted as explaning how they fell! One expert was quoted as saying 'it looked exactly like a controlled demolition' (something I think posters failed to notice). The South Tower was held to have collapsed - not from the central core - but from an isolated fire in the NE corner. It fell away from the side the plane crashed into! They then showed a computer model of the South Tower collapse which showed the central core left standing. And then cut to the whole lot coming down! Nice going chaps! Assumptions such as 'it seems all the fireproofing simply blew away' were blindly made. There were an awful lot of 'it seems' and similar caveats, betraying the straw clutching going on.
They also showed a fair bit of the interviews with the firefighters at Ladder 6, who survived the collapses. Unfortunately they didn't show the same firefighters saying it was just like a whole load of bombs going off.
There's no 'invisible planes' or 'missiles' going on raisin - actually there is one - the only 'invisible plane' theory belongs to the USG, who maintain the theory that flight 77 hit the Pentagon without providing us - although they should have many sources - of a single photo depicting it on its way.
Indeed, I know having watched endless videos at Global Research showoing the collapse of the towers. However, Ed seems to think that all 911 skeptics believe that holograms or invisible missiles were used to dupe the public. So Im just clarifying that I don't come from that particular school of skeptics.DrJazzz said:
One question that has not been explained about the fires is how a woman was able to walk all the way to the exterior of the building while apparently inside there was a raging inferno, hot enough to make the steel buckle and collapse. Also the collapse of Building 7. Silverstein, the landlord, was recorded as saying that he had asked the fireman to "pull" the building, i.e. detonate explosives and bring it down, because there was a fire in the building which when viewed on video looks superficial. The media have never asked how it was the fires ever got started in Building 7. Too many loose ends.
Raisin D'etre said:
Normal fare raisin, normal fare. It's happened down the ages (even mr jesus!). The comical thing these days is that all kinds of media and politicians never stop reminding us we have freedom of speech etc etc. Even on urban we're told this, but the same mechanics are at play. Sure, we do have freedom of expression, but fuck me you're gonna have to pay for it.
Think what the majority thinks, and life will be easy, question what the herd thinks and you will be attacked, hopefully until you cease to question.
It's basically why humans have still not resolved how to live without wars.
Raisin D'etre said:
I first thought of you as a 'conspiraloon' (or a loon at any rate) when you posted up all that nonsense about Saddam Hussein having been captured at some other time than officially announced on the basis of when dates ripen on Iraqi trees.
Lock&Light said:
This is where you let yourself down mate.
Ignore the poster, deal with the post.
Reason being is that no-one gets it all right or all wrong. Trick is to listen to what's being said, rather than letting your reaction be coloured depending on who's doing the talking.
Y'see, you never know when you might miss an opportunity of learning something...
L&L - You unfairly accuse Fela. He had nothing to do with the dates debacle on urban. Ed and I had a long running debate over the pics the US used at the site where Saddam was supposedly discovered based on the dates which kept me amused one Saturday afternoon. Like the story of Firdos Square, a classic propaganda coup, the story of Saddams capture has also been called into question since.
Raisin D'etre said:
I don't know why you think I've accused fela of anything.
It's you I was talking about, and I remember that debate very well as I also took part in it. It was at that time that I realised that your judgement is sadly flawed.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Beautiful!
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
nino_savatte said:Beautiful!
nino_savatte said:Beautiful!
The only thing that lets ignore down is when people quote ignored posters...
If I'm really on your ignore list, twat, then ignore me for God's sake.
And picky, stop your snivelling. It's not nice.
And picky, stop your snivelling. It's not nice.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Raisin D'etre said:
Aye! Unfortunately when I access Urban via my Yahoo inbox I can still read the ignored person's drivel.
The same thing happens in hotmail too - not a problem as I tend to read online and delete urban mail en-masse daily, unless someone deletes a post and Im curious... 
I must admit I also thought that about Raisin, at the time I thought it a ridicules theory and the proof (ripe dates ?) backing it up even more so. But, having said that, some of the best posts on the Israel/Palestine conflict and the Mid East have come from Raisin. Always well written and researched.Lock&Light said:
I believe it was terrorists in hijacked planes that brought the WTC down (and crashed a plane into the Pentagon) and for many reasons ( it's not the first attack on the WTC, a truck with a few ton of explosives was planted in the basement of the WTC a few years ago, and many planes have been hijacked by terrorists in the past).
We all know that the American Government lie's, and that they (Bush Gov.) used 911 for their own purposes, political and otherwise.
But just because they grabbed the opportunity and ran with it does not mean they were responsible for it happening or indeed that they "let it happen"...Perhaps they could have done more to prevent something like this happening but you can imagine the jumping up and down from the public if they did to the domestic flights previous to 911 what they did just after it up till now...
I just don't believe it would be possible to keep such a thing quiet...there's way to many greedy, selfish, sneaky, ambitious, money hungry, back stabbing, etc etc etc cunts in politics for it to stay quiet. I mean ffs, think of the money the person who knew something could aquire?...or bring down the Presidency etc...
I also have doubts re; the existence of Al Qaeda. The spin Doctors would have made this into the biggest possible threat they could have so as to justify the invasion of Iraq etc...I think it were terrorists, but not the organised world wide organisation the Bush Government and it's media propaganda would have us believe.
I wish Ed hadn't deleted those precious posts so I could enjoy them once more! I loved the way Ed quoted Websters Online Dictionary as proof that the dates in the pic were the right colour!Wess said:
Similar threads
- Locked