Claim of responsibility 'contains errors'

[FridgeMagnet]

Well isn't this nice. A little 911 backslapping love-in, with the obligatory slagging off of everyone who doesn't agree, of course.

This is not a 911 thread and it will not become a 911 thread. Anyone who can't address the topic should feel free to bugger off.

 

[Lock&Light]

I hope that this comment will not be accepted as I assume that this thread has by now found its way to the bin.

 

[Lock&Light]

Jammer, as we say in Nederland.

 

[Jazzz]

I saw Blair's statement after the bombings and even in his long list of fake speeches (Diana's especially, yes that was a secret service job too in my opinion) this capped the lot. Speak, pause for 1.5 seconds, look down, frown, walk away with frown etched onto face like its been painted there....bullshit)

This certainly deserved a mention squeegee, wasn't it unbearable? Once you think 'he's the most insincere ham actor' there's no going back. Maybe one day they'll get those body language experts to have a go at one of Blair's crisis speeches.

 

[Jazzz]

Cheers Bigfish. Missed you out. Don't know how you guys have survived all these months with the sick and ignorant abuse you get. Needed to get all that out but then realised that it wouldn't change a damn thing. Appreciate the support anyway. Good luck to all you open-minded people out there. There are more of us than would seem on these boards or the corporate (all of 'em) media. The truth will out. I wish sooner than later.

There are squeegee - everytime I attend an urban meetup, it seems a new poster comes and expresses agreement, but also mentions that they are too intimidated to post themselves. And others say they may not agree at all, but can't understand the personal abuse sustained at people who are just expressing and sharing their opinions.

 

[editor]

Incidentally, the last option was an added cuckoo option not in the original poll. The editor is obviously so desperate to impose his viewpoint that he will even resort to gerrymandering forum polls to try and get the result he wants. I mean, how credible is that?

If the editor was "so desperate to impose his viewpoint" he would have banned whining, endlessly repeating, FAQ-busting conspiraloon cut and paste kings like you years ago, idiot.

 

[editor]

There are squeegee - everytime I attend an urban meetup, it seems a new poster comes and expresses agreement, but also mentions that they are too intimidated to post themselves. And others say they may not agree at all, but can't understand the personal abuse sustained at people who are just expressing and sharing their opinions.

Sure they do.

So why are you so fucking scared of getting off your lazy arse and providing a forum for all these poor "intimidated " folks?

I've offered several times to assist you, so why haven't you got the courage of your conspiraloon convictions?

Is it because you know damn fucking well that the result would be a laughable ghost town?

 

[editor]

It would seem that the casualties while kept considerably lower thanks to the excellent work of the emergency services, were also kept low (use of only 10llbs explosives, in the past much higher) deliberately by the terrorists.
Why would this be the case?

My suspicions:

Whovever did this wanted to take the spotlight off Edinburgh and the insulting conclusion to G8. Media were beginning to focus on the various anarchist groups, which was getting higher on the news agenda, thanks to the public demand for it.

That's right. It's all because the government were absolutely terrified of the huge "public demand" for the powerful message that the anarchist groups were about to deliver.

 

[Lock&Light]

If the editor was "so desperate to impose his viewpoint" he would have banned whining, endlessly repeating, FAQ-busting conspiraloon cut and paste kings like you years ago, idiot.

Please, ed. Just bin this bullshit. There's then less need for bans.

 

[layabout]

Back up your claims or zip it, please as you're looking like a right arse.

Oh, and who are these mysterious "supporters" of mine you keep referring to? Name them please. Maybe I could sell them a badge or something.

You've got one though....not me....you know who....

 

[editor]

You've got one though....not me....you know who....

Grow up, troll boy. You're only hanging on here by a thread as it is.

 

[bigfish]

It's truly a sad state of affairs when such a large section of the Urban community wanting to discus their suspicions about 911 and other related issues on this forum are forced to run the gauntlet

What a load of bollocks...

In answer to the recent poll question: "Did Rumsfield and Chums want and allow 9/11 to happen?" 45.65% answered - Yes, quite possibly.

So there you go Jo. Despite the best efforts of the "it was AQ wot done it, honest guv" mob, of which you are a fully paid up member, almost half of those polled were of the opposite opinion to you.

You've been consistently asked too back up your ideas and you consistently fail to do so.

Stop lying you miserable little man.

 

[editor]

In answer to the recent poll question: "Did Rumsfield and Chums want and allow 9/11 to happen?" 45.65% answered - Yes, quite possibly.
.

"Yes, quite possibly" is not "Yes" no matter how much you try to twist and spin out this ancient and utterly irrelevant poll.

The complete lack of support for your endless bonkers rantings proves beyond any doubt that barely a soul supports your relentless conspiralooning here.

Why don't you fuck off and start your own fruitloop boards, free from my (guffaw") "desperately imposed" viewpoint and editorial 'censorship'?

But we both know you'll never do that because this is one of the very, very few high traffic sites that put up with your barking shite.

I think my tolerance is coming to an end on this matter now, however.

Time for you to stop leeching off the publicity of urban75 and get off your arse and put your money where your fruitloop mouth is, methinks.

 

[Pickman's model]

are you going to ban the sept 11 conspiraloons?

 

[bigfish]

are you going to ban the sept 11 conspiraloons?

Ooh look, an anti-authoritarian calling for a ban. How novel!

 

[Pickman's model]

Ooh look, an anti-authoritarian calling for a ban. How novel!

you're not really with it, are you?

 

[editor]

Ooh look, an anti-authoritarian calling for a ban. How novel!

If you find the editorial policy here soooo censorial and oppressive and if, as DrJ claims, masses of posters are simply too tewwified by the beastly atmosphere to share their tinfoil fantasies with the masses, I fail to see why you:

(a) continue to post here and
(b) haven't started up your own "desperate-editor"-free conspiraloon boards, where you'll never be told off for endlessly repeating the same fact-free shite for the zillioneth time or have your mile-long cut'n'paste odysseys trimmed.

I mean, why put yourself through all the stress of posting here when you could be as free as a bird to post an endless fluttering farrago of evidence-unhampered fruitloop yarns on your own site?

You and DrJ seem very sure that there's a huge audience here simply itching to post up their support for invisible pods firing invisible missiles into buildings invisibly wired with invisible explosives, so why not have the courage of your convictions and set up a board today?

I started urban75 because I felt that my beloved Cardiff City supporters were being misrepresented in the media so I did something about it.

I'd say that uncovering the greatest, most murderous conspiracy the world has ever known is just a tad more important than that, so why haven't you done something about it?

Or is endlessly whining here and posting up dubiously sourced 'facts' the best an armchair 'truth-seeker' like you can manage?

It's not much, is it?

 

[Jo/Joe]

In answer to the recent poll question: "Did Rumsfield and Chums want and allow 9/11 to happen?" 45.65% answered - Yes, quite possibly

Which can mean all sorts and is not going to be fixed over time is it? It doesn't mean anything. Don't try to imply that a sizeable portion of the WP users agre with you, because they clearly don't.

 

[Jazzz]

Sure they do.

So why are you so fucking scared of getting off your lazy arse and providing a forum for all these poor "intimidated " folks?

I've offered several times to assist you, so why haven't you got the courage of your conspiraloon convictions?

Is it because you know damn fucking well that the result would be a laughable ghost town?

What a perfect example of such personal and completely unnecessary abuse. Listen to yourself!

 

[editor]

What a perfect example of such personal and completely unnecessary abuse. Listen to yourself!

Anything but address the question again, eh?



And far from being "abusive", I've extended you the lengthy and oft-abused privilege of posting your conspiraloon drivel here. You should be grateful becase most other boards would have booted you off years ago (I note that even Indymedia have had enough of the conspiraloons too)

Still, what with all this dweadful "personal and completely unnecessary abuse" slopping around and posters too fearful to dare post up their undying support for your barking theories, I guess you'll be off to start a far more welcoming board any time now soon.

Err...um...errr.... won't you?

No? Why not? I mean, it's not like anyone's forcing you to post up your endlessly-repeated nonsense here or that there's no room for any other boards on the Internet...

 

[Jazzz]

If I may be permitted to return to the thread title...

Where is the server on which this Claim of Responsibility was posted?

... Riyadh?
... Baghdad?
... Tehran?

No! You may be surprised - or not - to learn that it is, in fact,

HOUSTON!

and it gets much more interesting...


"The server in Houston has intriguing connections. Everyone's Internet was founded by brothers Robert and Roy Marsh in 1998 and by 2002 had an income of more than $30m (now about £17m).

Renowned for his charitable work, Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary." Guardian Article

hmmmmmm!

 

[bigfish]

Well wattaya know, Houston eh, that well known centre of fanatical fundamentalist extremism and Big Oil.

 

[editor]

Renowned for his charitable work, Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary."[/I] Guardian Article

hmmmmmm!

You'll have to help me out here.
Instead of posting your usual vague references with (presumably) hints of dastardly conspiracies afoot, could you spell out your 'point' here please so I might share an understanding of what 'hmmmmmm!' means?

 

[editor]

Well wattaya know, Houston eh, that well known centre of fanatical fundamentalist extremism and Big Oil.

I do hope you're not going to be so stupid as to assume any geographical relevance to the location of a server because that would reveal an astonishing lack of understanding about how the Internet actually works.

So, what was your point?

 

[editor]

Where is the server on which this Claim of Responsibility was posted?

... Riyadh?
... Baghdad?
... Tehran?

No! You may be surprised - or not - to learn that it is, in fact,

HOUSTON!

See my post above before you embarass yourself any further.

 

[fubert]

If I may be permitted to return to the thread title...

Where is the server on which this Claim of Responsibility was posted?

... Riyadh?
... Baghdad?
... Tehran?

No! You may be surprised - or not - to learn that it is, in fact,

HOUSTON!

and it gets much more interesting...

the guy who registered the domain that the claim was posted on is in abu dhabi though. the content is just hosted in houston drj.

 

[scalyboy]

"Al-Qaeda in 'misreading the Quran' shock"

Who'd have thought it?

I agree. If one of those fundamentalist Christian nutjobs who shoot/bomb abortion clinics in the US made mistakes in quoting the Bible in a statement, would that then cast doubt on their involvement? I would say not - those types are not true Christians, just as 'Al-Qaeda' are not true Muslims...

 

[goldenecitrone]

Renowned for his charitable work, Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary.
hmmmmmm!

I heard that Roy Marsh also has the same hat size as the President. And what's more, they both share a passion for the Houston Oilers. Spooky!

 

[editor]

the guy who registered the domain that the claim was posted on is in abu dhabi though. the content is just hosted in houston drj.

I'm hopeful that the penny will drop with DrJ and bigfish shortly about how the web works.

 

[elbows]

Regardless of the conspirawibbling side of things, they are studying a 2nd claim of responsibility now arent they?

Studying such claims to see if there are errors in the religious content is a valuable part of real analysis of these things (I assume), its just a shame that the waters get muddied by people using such things to fit their own agenda.