'Conspiraloons' in the ascendancy?

[Beanburger]

It seems a monstrous injustice, but such is life. I'll live. But this uncertainty is a torment beyond endurance.

Fuck's sake. Get a grip! It's only the internet! Switch off your PC and go and do something productive with your time!

 

[Jazzz]

There just isn't enough facepalm in the universe...

oh hi bees.

So, how did your application to join Pilots for 9/11 Truth get on? Did you hear back?

 

[phildwyer]

Anyone fancy chipping in for a Xmas present for Clapham Boy & 8den?

Hmmm... let me think about that for a minute...............







































................................. Nah.

 

[trevhagl]

New York Times review from 2007 of a TV programme. Review refers to the Botham book from which the TV programme was adapted...



Let's just say the full NYT review looks suitably sceptical ....

reviewed by Clapham Boy?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Really, this is quite ridiculous now.

Am I allowed to participate in this thread or not?

If I am banned, so be it. It seems a monstrous injustice, but such is life. I'll live. But this uncertainty is a torment beyond endurance. Am I or am I not banned from this thread?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Tut tut, selectively quoting a single word from someone's post in order to shore up your insinuations of persecution.
Shame on you.

 

[claphamboy]

just saw a book today "The Murder of Princess Diana" by Noel Botham. Anyone fancy chipping in for a Xmas present for Clapham Boy & 8den?
Had a quick flick thru it and Diana said something along the lines of "people close to me are in grave danger" - so even SHE must've been a conspiracy theorist ho ho!

Really, this is quite ridiculous now.

Am I allowed to participate in this thread or not?

If I am banned, so be it. It seems a monstrous injustice, but such is life. I'll live. But this uncertainty is a torment beyond endurance. Am I or am I not banned from this thread?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

oh hi bees.

So, how did your application to join Pilots for Truth get on? Did you hear back?

Or did Jazzz tip them off?

This thread is seriously delivering a laugh a minute this afternoon.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Fuck's sake. Get a grip! It's only the internet! Switch off your PC and go and do something productive with your time!

How can he, in the face of such a monstrous injustice being done to his person?

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Unbelievable!

You make absolutely NO COMMENT WHATSOEVER . . .

<paragraphs of evasion>

. . .

A singular thing I've noticed is that you always always always evade a direct question along the lines of "well Jazz, tell us what YOU think happened".

Why is that?

 

[claphamboy]

A singular thing I've noticed is that you always always always evade a direct question along the lines of "well Jazz, tell us what YOU think happened".

Why is that?

Another question that he always always always evades is - do you have a reliable source for that?

 

[editor]

Instead, you are quite bizarrely demanding that - in order to explain all the inconsistensies surrounding the official evidence and story - I have to come up with the detailed explanation of events that fits all the facts.

I am asking you come up with a remotely sane explanation of events that would make your evidence-free, gore-fest remotely possible.

You see, when you start wildly accusing people of being involved in mass murders, gross human mutilations, mass slaughters of passengers, plane disappearing tricks and cover ups involving the tacit involvement of hundreds if not thousands of people, it's up to you to explain how this act may have been achieved.

However, if you don't have a single shred of evidence to support your murderous accusations then I advise you to shut the fuck up because the ghoulish human slash'n'burn fantasies you're posting up here are positively sick.

Oh, and for the fourth time: could you explain who Calum Douglas is, what his relevant qualifications are to your claims and if his findings have been independently verified and properly peer reviewed?

 

[Knotted]

Another question that he always always always evades is - do you have a reliable source for that?

That's a far less significant point than the one Dashing Blade raises in my opinion.

 

[Jazzz]

A singular thing I've noticed is that you always always always evade a direct question along the lines of "well Jazz, tell us what YOU think happened".

Why is that?

Why should I, when this is something I am campaigning to discover?

 

[William of Walworth]

Why should I, when this is something I am campaigning to discover?

As your official online spin doctor and campaign advisor can I suggest in the spirit of positive helpfulness that you review your truth seeking methods and approach?

Top tip : dwyer's posts are of no genuine assistance whatsoever to your position re '9/11' on this thread.

Other (more general) tip : see my earlier post further up this page, as well as rereading post 1501 at the top of the previous page.

More tips to follow later, as required ...

 

[William of Walworth]

reviewed by Clapham Boy?

Don't be an arse trev. Ignore criticism if you like but cheap shots make you look idiotic.

That advice comes in at £9:70 inclusive of VAT -- a bargain, I'm sure you'll agree

 

[Knotted]

Why should I, when this is something I am campaigning to discover?

Because if the truth is unimportant in the immediate, then it is unimportant after a long campaign (which will probably bare no fruits in any case).

 

[Jazzz]

As your official online spin doctor and campaign advisor

I'm sorry William, but I am afraid I have to fire you.

I thank you for your service thus far and wish you every success in the future.

 

[editor]

Why should I, when this is something I am campaigning to discover?

For the fifth time: could you explain who Calum Douglas is, what his relevant qualifications are to your claims and if his findings have been independently verified and properly peer reviewed?

You linked to this guy to support your argument, so why can't you answer these questions - or don't you actually care if he's a credible source or not, so long as he trots out stuff that pleases your conspiraloon ears?

Oh, and I'm still waiting for your explanation about the body parts being magically slipped into the forensic lab and what happened to the plane and the passengers.

 

[Yossarian]

Why has Jazzz been allowed to hijack this thread and steer it into twin towers of insanity, anyway?

The theory about Illuminati operatives strolling around the Pentagon and strewing body parts like diabolical Johnny Appleseeds sounds like a fresh invention, but other than that he seems to be just regurgitating the same old stuff.

 

[Beanburger]

Why has Jazzz been allowed to hijack this thread and steer it into twin towers of insanity, anyway?

I've been wondering about that for ages. It's a blatant hijack of the original topic. This wasn't meant to be another thread discussing his insane theories, was it?

 

[Knotted]

Why should I, when this is something I am campaigning to discover?

There is also the point that if you are unwilling to theorise seriously about what happened, then you are unlikely to know how to campaign successfully.

In a way this is the most disingenuous thing you have said. All these conspiracy theories remain as conspiracy theories. JFK, moonlandings, Diana - it doesn't matter - no conspiracy theorist has ever uncovered anything.

If you're not willing to test your own ideas, it shows that deep down inside you believe the official version completely and totally. I think you are wrong to do so. There most probably were dodgy goings on in the background. No need to fear the truth.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Why should I, when this is something I am campaigning to discover?

OK, let's make it even easier.
Do you have a theory (but you're unwilling to share) or not?

 

[Knotted]

OK, let's make it even easier.
Do you have a theory (but you're unwilling to share) or not?

I'll be willing to bet Jazzz won't answer that.

Think of Jazzz as an "intelligent design" advocate, and imagine you've just asked him if he believes in the biblical account of creation. That's exactly the right question to ask. No need to play footsy over the technical arguments.

 

[cesare]

That prisonplanet site looks like profiteering. Fair enough, there doesn't seem to be the far right links that are so obvious in many of the conspiracy theory sites - but shopping carts and ads upon ads! Bloody hell, I hadn't realised there was so much money to be made out of this conspiracy theory lark

A fool and his money etc

 

[claphamboy]

That prisonplanet site looks like profiteering. Fair enough, there doesn't seem to be the far right links that are so obvious in many of the conspiracy theory sites - but shopping carts and ads upon ads! Bloody hell, I hadn't realised there was so much money to be made out of this conspiracy theory lark

A fool and his money etc

Alex Jones is a massive moneymaking machine in the U.S., his radio show is carried on dozens of radio stations and he uses it to interview the authors and publishers of books and videos he sells as well as promoting his own published material, all of which is sold via both the prisonplanet and infowars websites.

 

[8den]

Even if it is true, which it isn't, it's completely beside the point.

No, it's precisely the point. The forensic evidence is something you dismiss because it's in the public domain. You start screaming about serial numbers because it's something you can't have. You're like a whinging child.

Forging evidence is difficult. It leaves a trail. There are very few people with full knowledge of the plot. They cannot get the vast majority of people under them to lie and cheat.

Exactly Jazzz, which is why your claims about the Forensic evidence being faked is fucking crap.

They can order them to NOT investigate, to ignore stuff, to bluster and destroy evidence. But getting them to forge evidence and flat out lie - that's far harder.

Do you have basis to support this puerile conjecture and speculation. Do you really think that thousands of FBI agents, Flight Crash Investigators, and Federal Employees are just going to destroy evidence, ignore evidence, just because they're told to?

May I repeat - NO PIECE of aircraft has been identified as coming from flight 77. I thought you'd got that by now.

No it has. You're just belligerently ranting about this at this junction.

The problem with the engines is the lack of holes going in.

The engine was found outside the pentagon Jazzz. The right wing clipped a power substation before the pentagon, sheering the engine off. Your basic ignorance of the facts is once again exposed.

If there is no hole in the wall for them, then they must have been outside. But they certainly were not.

The photo I showed directly contradicts this nonsense.

To avoid that, one must ascribe to the 'magic wings' theory where the wings (and fantastically heavy engines) do not crash into the wall, but fold up and enter through the same tiny hold as the nose of the aircraft.

Oh christ.

It is also possible that the body parts were not scattered around, but simply introduced along the way to the DNA identification labs, and the investigation arranged so that that may be got away with. As you recall, most of the bodies were from Pentagon Staff.

Aside from the passengers?

A fact which I think phildwyer will appreciate about those staff - they were the bookkeepers and financial auditors, low ranking. Why did the terrorists go to the trouble to target low-ranking auditors instead of the other side of the Pentagon - easier to hit - which had the top brass in it?

OH OF ALL THE CHRIST ALMIGHT STUPID.....

Jazzz would you fucking listen to yourself? How. the. fuck. would. the. terrorists. know. where. the. top. brass. was? Before. The. Attack.

Of all the sunday fucking morning quaterbacking.

Consider that only the day before, September 10th, Rumsfeld had had to admit that $2.3 TRILLION had vanished from the Pentagon's accounts (normally that news would have been released on a Friday to best bury it, instead it came on the Monday)

JAZZZ THIS SORT OF CRAP GOT DEBUNKED WITH LOOSE CHANGE VOLUME 2

Jesus fucking wept. 2005 called and want their conspiracy theories back.

You lazy fly, you just vomit up this crap and regurgitate it back up at a later date.

Rumsfeld said nothing of the sort. And even if he did, do you not think that gosh the greatest fraud in history, an amount of money that dwarves the financial collapse, might. I don't know. Just. Maybe. Maybe. Have. Been. Picked. Up again. At SOME POINT IN THE FOLLOWING 8 YEARS!

Here's what he actually said.

The adversary's closer to home. It's the Pentagon bureaucracy. Not the people, but the processes. Not the civilians, but the systems...

In this building, despite this era of scarce resources taxed by mounting threats, money disappears into duplicative duties and bloated bureaucracy—not because of greed, but gridlock. Innovation is stifled—not by ill intent but by institutional inertia.

Just as we must transform America's military capability to meet changing threats, we must transform the way the Department works and what it works on...

Our challenge is to transform not just the way we deter and defend, but the way we conduct our daily business...

The men and women of this department, civilian and military, are our allies, not our enemies. They too are fed up with bureaucracy, they too live with frustrations. I hear it every day. And I'll bet a dollar to a dime that they too want to fix it. In fact, I bet they even know how to fix it, and if asked, will get about the task of fixing it. And I'm asking.

They know the taxpayers deserve better. Every dollar we spend was entrusted to us by a taxpayer who earned it by creating something of value with sweat and skill -- a cashier in Chicago, a waitress in San Francisco. An average American family works an entire year to generate $6,000 in income taxes. Here we spill many times that amount every hour by duplication and by inattention.

That's wrong. It's wrong because national defense depends on public trust, and trust, in turn, hinges on respect for the hardworking people of America and the tax dollars they earn. We need to protect them and their efforts.

Waste drains resources from training and tanks, from infrastructure and intelligence, from helicopters and housing. Outdated systems crush ideas that could save a life. Redundant processes prevent us from adapting to evolving threats with the speed and agility that today's world demands.

Above all, the shift from bureaucracy to the battlefield is a matter of national security. In this period of limited funds, we need every nickel, every good idea, every innovation, every effort to help modernize and transform the U.S. military....

The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.

We maintain 20 to 25 percent more base infrastructure than we need to support our forces, at an annual waste to taxpayers of some $3 billion to $4 billion. Fully half of our resources go to infrastructure and overhead, and in addition to draining resources from warfighting, these costly and outdated systems, procedures and programs stifle innovation as well. A new idea must often survive the gauntlet of some 17 levels of bureaucracy to make it from a line officer's to my desk. I have too much respect for a line officer to believe that we need 17 layers between us....

The MONEY NEVER DISAPPEARED. NEVER. Rumsfeld was talking about streamlining and improving financial transactions between various DOD departments to combat waste, and bad book keeping.

Jesus wept.

 

[8den]

A great many eyewitnesses failed to spot a plane. We've been over that many times. The initial reports were of a bomb.

H DEAR. Feel that Jazzz thats a pwnage in the post

Pentagon Witness List.

Because Jazzz tends to ignore this kind of stuff, I'll post up the details.

From the lists above, 136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and

104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.

7 said it was a Boeing 757.

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.

2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.

April Gallop, who was tens of feet from the impact hole

APRIL GALLOP WAS IN THE SODDING BUILDING. SHE WASN'T NEAR A WINDOW!

is currenly suing Rumsfeld and Cheney:

Not because she doesn't think she was injured by plane impacting the building, a typically dishonest piece of cojecture Jazzz.

 

[Beanburger]

H DEAR. Feel that Jazzz thats a pwnage in the post

Pentagon Witness List.

That's possibly one of the best pieces of pwnage that I've ever had the pleasure of experiencing.

 

[phildwyer]

That's possibly one of the best pieces of pwnage that I've ever had the pleasure of experiencing.

You're a wanker mate.

 

[Beanburger]

You're a wanker mate.

I'd be hurt, but frankly your use of expletives and personal attacks has undermined the credibility of your argument, and while I previously felt fairly certain that I was a wanker, I'm now seriously considering the possibility that I might not be.

 

[8den]

You're a wanker mate.

FOOL! YOU HAVE BEEN CAST ASSUNDER FROM THIS THREAD!!!!

POST ON IT NO MORE, OR THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE...DWYER



Phil I take it back, I totally get why you come out with crap like that, it's awesome fun to type. But Phil seriously though that kind of language underminds your point. Whatever that is, at the moment.