'Conspiraloons' in the ascendancy?

[toblerone3]

I wonder if there is a single piece of evidence that would convince the bulk of the posters on this thread (ie non-9/11 CT posters) that 9/11 was in indeed an inside job?

I really doubt it. The mindset is similar to religious fanatics. They don't follow where the evidence leads - they drag the evidence to where they want it to lead. I mean you'd think dinosaur fossils would've been the clincher with christian fundies, but they still manage to twist it to fit their beliefs.... "god planted the bones to test our faith". Similarly, whatever evidence emerges to "prove" the official version of 9/11, the conspiraloons will regard it as falsified or otherwise irrelevant. They've decided what they want to believe, and they'll continue believing it because they want to.

You misunderstood me completely.

 

[Beanburger]

You misunderstood me completely.

See preceding post.

 

[8den]

Doh. He confused me by changing tack.

It would take a pretty big smoking gun to convince me that it was an inside job, purely because the alleged conspiracy doesn't make any sense.

• Why blow the pentagon up with a cruise missile when a perfectly good jumbo jet would have avoided a whole load of awkward questions?

• Why demolish the towers when the planes had already done a good job of trashing them?

• If you can pull of such a stunning conspiracy, why not plant some WMD in Iraq?

• Why bother crashing a plane into a field? Who the fuck even remembers that?

• Why stop at the pentagon? Wouldn't the white house have been a better target for a false flag op?

The whole thing is nonsensical and riddled with holes.

Yeah but his point was, what would be the thing that would convince you that it was an inside job, not the major flaws in the conspiracy theories

 

[Beanburger]

Yeah but his point was, what would be the thing that would convince you that it was an inside job, not the major flaws in the conspiracy theories

Fuck knows. Bush admitting it in public? It's so utterly unlikely, it's like asking what would convince me that jesus died and rose again and ascended into heaven.

 

[8den]

Fuck knows. Bush admitting it in public? It's so utterly unlikely, it's like asking what would convince me that jesus died and rose again and ascended into heaven.

I know, you should see Jazzz wriggle when the opposite question was put to him. It's fucking hilarious.

 

[Jazzz]

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.

It is perfectly valid to point out the lack of formal identification of any plane part: this is irrelevant to what I may or may not believe in different circumstances. For your information, with many formally identified parts I would certainly accept the planes were there.

You're like a screaming child.

Alas, I could only dream of your levels of mastery in this department.

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?

It's called 'following orders'. There is the famous example of the destruction of the crucial air traffic controllers tape - made while the events of the day were fresh in their minds of the six. It was cut up into small pieces and deposited in multiple bins. No-one has been held accountable for the criminal destruction of crucial evidence. Why is that?

The engine was found outside the pentagon Jazzz.

Okay. But of course, your piece has not been formally identified as being part of flight 77. Moreover, it does not even constitute one engine, let alone two.

Several of the pieces you earlier show - well the same applies to them. There has been much discussion of them and many doubts raised which I shall not repeat here but can be easily on the internet.

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.

erm, one the one hand you say how the hijackers were capable of carrying out a sophisticated operation and on the other say they couldn't possibly know where Rumsfeld and Cheney would hang out?

which brings us to the Pentagon Financial Irregularities

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 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.

You are in cloud cuckoo land! Do you really take that rubbish at face value? You don't just lose $2.3 trillion dollars down the back of the sofa, which is basically what Rumsfeld is saying. It's pure nonsense. The money has NOT been accounted for. Wasn't it handy of the terrorists to blow up the auditing department?



quotes:

"We know it's gone, but we don't know what they spent it on." - Jim Minnery, Defence Finance & Accounting

"Those numbers are pie in the sky! The books are cooked. Routinely, year after year after year." Franklin Spinney, Dep. Defense Analyst

Also do watch this and note the squirming.

 

[claphamboy]

You are in cloud cuckoo land!

lol

Where have you been all day Jazzz, out hassling pregnant women with your misinformation about the swine flu vaccine?

 

[Jazzz]

Fuck me, have you actually read the original post? You've participated in the hijacking and derailing of this thread (almost single-handedly), dragged it way off topic, used it as another platform for pursuing your own personal crusade, and you're whining about the moderation policy?

Actually I think you will find that editor introduced the topic of 9/11, demanding answers from me about the phone calls. Perhaps you would better blame him?

 

[8den]

It is perfectly valid to point out the lack of formal identification of any plane part: this is irrelevant to what I may or may not believe in different circumstances. For your information, with many formally identified parts I would certainly accept the planes were there.

No thats a lie. The identification is there. Much in the same way the identification of body parts, and the the path of finding a body part to, to, the lab, to the DNA, to a family member's satisfaction has been achieved.

You pathetic truthers just demand that evidence needs to be publicaly available to you, despite the fact that this evidence is part of an ongoing murder trial.

It's called 'following orders'. There is the famous example of the destruction of the crucial air traffic controllers tape - made while the events of the day were fresh in their minds of the six.
It was cut up into small pieces and deposited in multiple bins. No-one has been held accountable for the criminal destruction of crucial evidence. Why is that?

And yet I can listen to all the NORAD and FAA controllers communications recorded via this

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608

vanity fair article.

Okay. But of course, your piece has not been formally identified as being part of flight 77. Moreover, it does not even constitute one engine, let alone two.

MUST BACK PEDDLE FASTER. Its an engine dickface. It directly contradicts your claim.

Several of the pieces you earlier show - well the same applies to them. There has been much discussion of them and many doubts raised which I shall not repeat here but can be easily on the internet.

Well if the internet says so...

erm, one the one hand you say how the hijackers were capable of carrying out a sophisticated operation and on the other say they couldn't possibly know where Rumsfeld and Cheney would hang out?

Yes. Yes you fucking moron. Do you think the pentagon tour tells you where the secret areas where the top brass are? How the fuck would you know where the offices of senior department of defence are bases. Ask? Expect them to be highlighted in neon? Are you fucking moron?

which brings us to the Pentagon Financial Irregularities

You are in cloud cuckoo land! Do you really take that rubbish at face value? You don't just lose $2.3 trillion dollars down the back of the sofa, which is basically what Rumsfeld is saying. It's pure nonsense. The money has NOT been accounted for. Wasn't it handy of the terrorists to blow up the auditing department?



quotes:

"We know it's gone, but we don't know what they spent it on." - Jim Minnery, Defence Finance & Accounting

"Those numbers are pie in the sky! The books are cooked. Routinely, year after year after year." Franklin Spinney, Dep. Defense Analyst

Also do watch this and note the squirming.

Jazzz you're ignoring the whole point of my quote. Fuck the right off.

It wasn't about a bunch of cash going missing it was about a massive bureaucracy bloated.

You claimed it was a massive financial fraud, and are now back peddling.

 

[William of Walworth]

I feel the thread is perhaps coming to an end for me, as editor's behaviour is becoming ridiculous, highly emotional and aggressive with misuse of moderation threats. The idea that he might get an independent moderator to deal with threads where he is a highly emotional and aggressive participant - well I don't have my hopes up too high.

You thing the editor was wrong to tell dwyer to stop disrupting this thread?

Have you actually read pages 63 and 64 (especially )?

You may have decided to sack me ( ) but it would really be in your own interest if you stopped imagining that dwyer either meant anything he said or that he was in any way helping you. He wasn't.

 

[Beanburger]

Actually I think you will find that editor introduced the topic of 9/11, demanding answers from me about the phone calls. Perhaps you would better blame him?

Bullshit. You were hijacking the thread and spreading JFK and Diana conspiracy theories pages before he'd even posted.

 

[William of Walworth]

It would take a pretty big smoking gun to convince me that it was an inside job, purely because the alleged conspiracy doesn't make any sense.

Why blow the pentagon up with a cruise missile when a perfectly good jumbo jet would have avoided a whole load of awkward questions?

Why demolish the towers when the planes had already done a good job of trashing them?

If you can pull of such a stunning conspiracy, why not plant some WMD in Iraq?

Why bother crashing a plane into a field? Who the fuck even remembers that?

Why stop at the pentagon? Wouldn't the white house have been a better target for a false flag op?

The whole thing is nonsensical and riddled with holes.

This is a pretty good summary IMO of just some of the questions '9/11 truthers' never, ever answer convincingly concerning their 'theories'.

 

[William of Walworth]

The mindset is similar to religious fanatics. They don't follow where the evidence leads - they drag the evidence to where they want it to lead. I mean you'd think dinosaur fossils would've been the clincher with christian fundies, but they still manage to twist it to fit their beliefs.... "god planted the bones to test our faith". Similarly, whatever evidence emerges to "prove" the official version of 9/11, the conspiraloons will regard it as falsified or otherwise irrelevant. They've decided what they want to believe, and they'll continue believing it because they want to.

And that mindset is why they don't and can't answer them ...

 

[8den]

Oh and Jazzz post 1556? Y'know the "no one saw a plane?"

 

[claphamboy]

Oh and Jazzz post 1556?

I don't think he saw it.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I wonder if there is a single piece of evidence that would convince the bulk of the posters on this thread (ie non-9/11 CT posters) that 9/11 was in indeed an inside job?

I really doubt it. This isn't science where a single experiment can disprove a theory, the way to do it would be with a lot of supporting evidence of a low grade that directly contradicts the commonly held theory, a coherent alternate theory that is self consistent and logical and quite possibly a member of the conspiracy admitting to it and detailing HOW it was done.

A single piece of evidence? That'd have to be some amazing evidence, I can't think of anything that would be convincing enough on it's own to convince me that it was a deliberate conspiracy. Not because a confession from whatever mastermind did it wouldn't be sufficent, but because it's hard to justify putting that much reliance on a single source.

The key thing is that it's easy to disprove a theory. If the CT'ers had done that then their alternatives might get a bit more attention. 8 Years on and no alternate theory that even gets close to being plausible.

 

[editor]

Actually I think you will find that editor introduced the topic of 9/11, demanding answers from me about the phone calls. Perhaps you would better blame him?

Hi Jazzz. I've been very polite to you, yet still you rudely refuse to answer questions directly related to your own claims.

If you've no interest in discussing the issues you personally introduce to the debate, then there's no point in allowing you to keep shovelling up wild unsubstantiated claims accusing people of committing mass murder.

Here's my post again. Please have the courtesy of answering it.

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 stop posting them because the ghoulish human slash'n'burn fantasies you're posting up here are positively sick.

Oh, and for the EIGHTH 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?

 

[editor]

Actually I think you will find that editor introduced the topic of 9/11

As for this witless claim, you'll find you've just revealed your lamentable research skills to be as hopeless as ever.

I did not introduce 911 to this thread. 8den did in post #17, followed by Beanburger in #60 and then WoW in #70, followed by a ton of others.

I didn't even join the thread until it was way over 500 posts long and didn't even mention 911 then, or in the first batch of subsequent posts.

If you can't get simple, easy-to-check facts like this right, what hope is there of you uncovering a cunning global conspiracy of deception, hi-tech wizardry and mass murder?

 

[8den]

As for this witless claim, you'll find you've just revealed your lamentable research skills to be as hopeless as ever.

I did not introduce 911 to this thread. 8den did in post #17, followed by Beanburger in #60 and then WoW in #70, followed by a ton of others.

I didn't even join the thread until it was way over 500 posts long and didn't even mention 911 then, or in the first batch of subsequent posts.

Look Editor, no one likes you introducing facts into this sort of business.

 

[Jazzz]

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 stop posting them because the ghoulish human slash'n'burn fantasies you're posting up here are positively sick.

Oh, and for the EIGHTH 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?

I dealt with your main question ages ago.

I'm sorry if the answer was not what you were looking for, but that's your tough titty. Kindly stop spamming your post over and over again.

As for Calum Douglas and Pilots for 9/11 Truth why not do your own research, and draw your own conclusions. I am not here to hold your hand, sorry.

Good Evening.

 

[8den]

As for Calum Douglas and Pilots for 9/11 Truth why not do your own research, and draw your own conclusions. I am not here to hold your hand, sorry.

Good Evening.

So ah you rely on them but, expect others to check out why.

Fucking pathetic.

 

[Jazzz]

Oh and Jazzz post 1556? Y'know the "no one saw a plane?"

Oh yes. Well that one was totally ridiculous, because I never said "no one saw a plane", except in your grasping imagination.

 

[Jazzz]

So ah you rely on them but, expect others to check out why.

Fucking pathetic.

It's just an editor thing.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I dealt with your main question ages ago.

I'm sorry if the answer was not what you were looking for, but that's your tough titty. Kindly stop spamming your post over and over again.

As for Calum Douglas and Pilots for 9/11 Truth why not do your own research, and draw your own conclusions. I am not here to hold your hand, sorry.

Good Evening.

You mean you refused to give an answer. As you are doing for Calum Douglas.

This is a discussion board not a cryptic clue board.

 

[editor]

As for Calum Douglas and Pilots for 9/11 Truth why not do your own research, and draw your own conclusions. I am not here to hold your hand, sorry.

It's become obvious by your painful wriggling that Calum Douglas has zero relevant qualifications and his claims have not been properly researched or peer reviewed. Yet you choose to believe them. That speaks volumes of your near-religious need to believe.

As for the future of your conspiracy claims here, I'll make it simple.

If you refuse point blank to entertain reasonable and related questions concerning the provenance, credibility and integrity of the sources you're entirely basing your wild claims on, then any future threads will be binned without warning.

This is not a place for you to continuously slap up evidence-free accusations of mass murder and hideous body mutilation without any debate. We are not a handy free billboard for your bonkers beliefs, and I'm not willing to see urban75 provide a platform for your own-way conspiraloon proclamations or give publicity to the sick sites that you constantly reference.

We made our policy clear on 911 threads some time ago: if there is no credible, new evidence being presented, the threads will be binned. It appears you have zero credible, new evidence. Again.

 

[Jazzz]

Y'know thats sort of lovely. To suggest "we are one and same" and to equate that we are equal spiritual beings, and in the next breath to suggest that I am somewhat inferior to you, man thats special. It's like saying we're all higher beings but I'm more higher than you.

Is the child 'inferior' to the old man?

 

[Jazzz]

It's become obvious by your painful wriggling that Calum Douglas has zero relevant qualifications and his claims have not been properly researched or peer reviewed. Yet you choose to believe them. That speaks volumes of your near-religious need to believe.

So I take it you don't accept the NIST computer models into the collapses of the towers then, since they are not peer-reviewed. Interesting.

Game Set and Match to me, I believe

 

[Bob_the_lost]

So I take it you don't accept the NIST computer models into the collapses of the towers then, since they are not peer-reviewed. Interesting.

Game Set and Match to me, I believe

Sorry, the NIST authors had no qualifications and who only carried out the most cursory research? Nor has their work been scrutinised by anyone at all?

You're migrating from pet lunatic to troll.

Yes, we know you haven't read much, if any of the report. We all remember when you said that they hadn't taken thermal conduction into account when it was not only there but easy to find.

 

[Jazzz]

Sorry, the NIST authors had no qualifications and who only carried out the most cursory research? Nor has their work been scrutinised by anyone at all?

The computer models haven't. At least no-one can properly check them because they aren't releasing the details. It seems they reverse engineered the model to get the results they wanted.

With Calum Douglas and Pilots for 9/11 Truth, they are positively inviting others to do their own analysis and explain how the data in the FDR works when plainly doesn't follow the right trajectory. The FBI refuses to do so or make any comment.

To put it another way - there is no analysis of the data from the FDR which correlates with the impact of flight 77.

Another problem which I haven't mentioned is that the data file on the FDR was created four hours before it was supposed to have been discovered! Was there any time stamp which actually worked properly on 9/11? Because this one is wrong. The pentagon security camera was wrong. The Portland video which filmed Atta was wrong. I think all the others had something wrong with them too.

 

[editor]

So I take it you don't accept the NIST computer models into the collapses of the towers then, since they are not peer-reviewed. Interesting.

Game Set and Match to me, I believe

You're even more deluded than I ever thought possible, and here you are engaging the classic conspiraloon topic shift back to something that was discussed to death years ago. I feel sorry for you to be honest.

You can't even see how desperately tragic you've become, posting up any old garbage from any old DVD shifting nutter, and constantly scrambling around for microscopic 'irregularities' while ignoring the overwhelming body of hard evidence that's all around you.

I've asked you this endlessly but I'll ask one more time in the hope of a reply: you've had eight years here to freely post up all the damning proof and evidence you believe proves 911 an inside job.

You've been at total liberty to use these boards to state your case and post up quotes and links over tens of thousands of posts, yet less and less people bother paying attention to you now. I doubt if even 0.1% of active members believe you now.

Why is that do you think? Are we stupid sheeple too dumb to see the 'truth' that you insist is so obvious?