Cynthia McKinney, Monday 8th March

[butchersapron]

Irrelevant. Your saying that IH told you after the event that they'd attended - expressly against CH rules. It's utterly besides the point whether they'd told you beforehand they intended to attend or not.

 

[Jazzz]

Irrelevant. Your saying that IH told you after the event that they'd attended - expressly against CH rules. It's utterly besides the point whether they'd told you beforehand they intended to attend or not.

oh dear, I think you are just getting more and more ridiculous

As part of the campaign it is my business to know this information.

 

[butchersapron]

It's the same point i've made from the start of this exchange. You hid behind ch rules wheh challenged on here and broke them when it suited. Gross, politician style hypocrisy. Not a massive shock to learn it's how you carry on in your truth-quest to be honest. I do though, appreciate your open public declaration that the breaking of these rules is totally acceptable for those involved in your campaign.

 

[Jazzz]

It's the same point i've made from the start of this exchange. You hid behind ch rules wheh challenged on here and broke them when it suited. Gross, politician style hypocrisy. Not a massive shock to learn it's how you carry on in your truth-quest to be honest. I do though, appreciate your open public declaration that the breaking of these rules is totally acceptable for those involved in your campaign.

Desperate, utterly desperate. When you are completely defeated, just shout nonsense all over again.

That, I truly cannot stop you doing!

 

[teuchter]

Jazzz, do you know for sure that these two Lib Dem aides that this IH guy told you attended are the same ones that you phoned up? Because if so, IH obviously told you the names of at least two people who attended in which case BA is correct and it would seem that these confidentiality rules have been broken. To whom does one report the breaking of these rules?

The thing is that you didn't need to reveal this rule-breaking in order to demonstrate that there were aides/MPs in there because you said yourself that the meetings are only open to aides/MPs except for a "handful" of others there to oversee security.

 

[Jazzz]

Jazzz, do you know for sure that these two Lib Dem aides that this IH guy told you attended are the same ones that you phoned up? Because if so, IH obviously told you the names of at least two people who attended in which case BA is correct and it would seem that these confidentiality rules have been broken. To whom does one report the breaking of these rules?

Bullcrap! I'm part of the campaign. I could have easily been there on the door checking the names off. These were my contacts and it was my business to know whether they actually came.

There is no public revelation of anyone's name.

Let's note that you assume they were both Lib Dem. I said no such thing.

 

[Jazzz]

"Dear Chatham House, the identity of someone that attended a meeting under the Chatham House Rule was publicly revealed... I can't say who"

 

[teuchter]

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/about/chathamhouserule/

Q. Can a list of attendees at the meeting be published?
A. No - the list of attendees should not be circulated beyond those participating in the meeting.

It does seem that unless you participated in the meeting, which you said you didn't, this rule has been broken.

Also I think you need to take note of this:

Q. Can participants in a meeting be named as long as what is said is not attributed?
A. It is important to think about the spirit of the Rule. For example, sometimes speakers need to be named when publicizing the meeting. The Rule is more about the dissemination of the information after the event - nothing should be done to identify, either explicitly or implicitly, who said what.

You need to get in touch with whoever posted that youtube clip, as a matter of urgency, to see that it is taken down.

 

[Jazzz]

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/about/chathamhouserule/

It does seem that unless you participated in the meeting, which you said you didn't, this rule has been broken.

Also I think you need to take note of this:



You need to get in touch with whoever posted that youtube clip, as a matter of urgency, to see that it is taken down.

Look Teuchter

Why don't you leave the worrying over the rule and this meeting to those involved in it? I have no such list of attendees, and both Cynthia McKinney and Dr Nafeez Ahmed are happy to be identified.

 

[teuchter]

I was just worried that the rules might have been inadvertantly broken.

By the way are you a believer in the stuff about December 21 2012 and how it will mark a new era for humanity and all that?

 

[Jazzz]

I was just worried that the rules might have been inadvertantly broken.

By the way are you a believer in the stuff about December 21 2012 and how it will mark a new era for humanity and all that?

I don't know. My crystal ball is a little cloudy

 

[8den]

I'd jump in here, but jesus Jazzz your argument that Mc Kinney believes its an inside job is based on her body language? For Fucks sake!

 

[existentialist]

I'd jump in here, but jesus Jazzz your argument that Mc Kinney believes its an inside job is based on her body language? For Fucks sake!

And despite the fact that she wasn't actually visible in shot when Enormous Farts was saying the crucial words, either. There isn't a metaphor that goes far enough beyond "grasping at straws" to describe his desperate attempt to extricate himself.

Kudos to butchersapron - a poster whom I don't usually like very much - for having the patience and tenacity to hand Jazzz just as much rope as he needs to hang himself. Repeatedly.

 

[claphamboy]

I'm a lap-dog of Lord Obama and the US state

Well the evidence is clear from this thread that you are certainly more than just a butcher, clearly you're a gourmet chef too - as not only have you have skinned and boned Jazzz, but stuffed him, roasted him and served him up on a silver plate with a sprig of parsley on the side.

 

[kyser_soze]

I have to say I'm pretty appalled by Jazz and his associates use of a convention like the CH rules, which let's face it guarantees the anonymity of the rich and powerful from scrutiny.

What have you and your merry band got to hide, Jazz? For people campaigning for truth and transparency, hiding behind CHR seems...well, I don't need to spell it out, do I?

 

[claphamboy]

More to the point - she's not even in the bloody shot when he calls 911 an 'inside job' - 4:30 onwards. She appears later nodding to an entirely different claim - that the US executive of the bush regime took power from congress. You fool. One short post and you fucked up two points

You're the joke. If she disagreed with Splitting the Sky there is no way she would sit behind him nodding away supporting him to the hilt. Of course, you didn't even watch the clip.

The times of those two posts - classic.

Seek medical help Jazzz, before they come looking for you.

 

[claphamboy]

The last presentation by reinvestigate911.org to the House of Commons

At no point have these people given a presentation to the House of Commons, what's with this bullshit?

 

[claphamboy]

Did she even talk about 9/11 at this meeting?

Only in the sense of 'look at the time, it's 9.11 already'.

 

[kyser_soze]

At no point have these people given a presentation to the House of Commons, what's with this bullshit?

Innit? In an office, in the HoC building.

But this is similar to the theme of

Not believing the 9/11 Commission = Believing that it was a FF op by the CIA

I have seen her body language, and it says she believes something she's never said.

that's been running through the thread.

 

[claphamboy]

If you had a semblence of decency about you existentialist you'd have had the grace to apologise for some of your rubbish

Pot, kettle, etc.

So, why are you here? Please don't bother. I have no hope that you are going to make useful contributions. The ones you have made so far have been truly abysmal. So let's stop wasting each other's time.

Pot, kettle, etc.

I'm sorry but my line has been entirely consistent. Your statement is 100% false. You are making it up as you go along.

Pot, kettle, etc.

This is all so simple. You won't find William Rodriguez, another leading campaigner, specifically stating that 9/11 was an inside job either! Although he not only has the t-shirt, he has one of my t-shirts! And you can expect Cynthia to have one of mine too after the next print run.

He's not only been there, done that, but he has the T-shirt too.

FFS, Jazzz, give up the day job - you're a comedic genius.

Why are you still confused? I have not said that she specifically and unambiguously mentions that 9/11 was a false flag operation. Indeed, I have been very careful to point out that as the political face of the movement, this is not for her to say. It is for her to call for a proper investigation. Nevertheless, it is certainly the case that she believes it. I have no doubt about this whatsoever.

And this is what it all boils down to yet again, Jazzz believes therefore he is right and everyone else is wrong, and why the fuck can't everyone just accept that?

The first rule of truth-seeking club is, you do not tell the truth about what you actually believe...

 

[Jazzz]

Well the evidence is clear from this thread that you are certainly more than just a butcher, clearly you're a gourmet chef too - as not only have you have skinned and boned Jazzz, but stuffed him, roasted him and served him up on a silver plate with a sprig of parsley on the side.

Except that isn't true, is it.

Even if you are as thick as two planks, you can know that because he stopped his 'back of the net' self-applauding and instead just resorted to angrily repeating himself over and over again. (Of course, now I've pointed out his oversight, don't be surprised if he remembers it)

sorry claphamboy! maybe next thread.

 

[claphamboy]

I am in close contact with this campaign...

You're on their e-mailing list?

 

[butchersapron]

You genuinely don't understand how foolish you've been made to look, how devious, how dishonest, how loopy do you jazzz?

 

[8den]

Kudos to butchersapron - a poster whom I don't usually like very much - for having the patience and tenacity to hand Jazzz just as much rope as he needs to hang himself. Repeatedly.

Ditto. And that's as close to a compliment I'll give the man.

 

[claphamboy]

No, I wasn't needed.

Translation - would you invite a total nutter?

 

[Jazzz]

I'd jump in here, but jesus Jazzz your argument that Mc Kinney believes its an inside job is based on her body language? For Fucks sake!

All leading politicians know how important body language is. Or indeed, what it means to wear a t-shirt associated with a cause. Or even just to hang out with someone publicly. When you see Cynthia McKinney travelling vast distances so she can hang out with a man that the rest of the peace movement didn't want to know about - what does that tell you? What is it about Splitting the Sky that made her travel to Canada? It's really not very difficult.

Anyone who thinks Cynthia McKinney accepts a word of the official story is basking in delusion.

 

[8den]

You genuinely don't understand how foolish you've been made to look, how devious, how dishonest, how loopy do you jazzz?

No he doesn't, and in a few months time, he'll be back making the same debunked points. Arguing with Jazzz is like hitting your head against a brick wall, you do it because it feels so good to stop.

 

[Jazzz]

You genuinely don't understand how foolish you've been made to look, how devious, how dishonest, how loopy do you jazzz?

nice try, but somewhat desperate. Give it up ba.

 

[Blagsta]

nice try, but somewhat desperate. Give it up ba.

desperate

 

[existentialist]

Except that isn't true, is it.

Even if you are as thick as two planks, you can know that because he stopped his 'back of the net' self-applauding and instead just resorted to angrily repeating himself over and over again. (Of course, now I've pointed out his oversight, don't be surprised if he remembers it)

sorry claphamboy! maybe next thread.

No, I think claphamboy's right on the money here. What's more, BA - who, I will probably never tire of saying, is not someone whose views I usually support - didn't just truss him up (in his own falsehoods) like a chicken once, he did it TWICE. And the only reason he had the opportunity to do that was because Jazzz, in some kind of "everybody's out of step except ME!!!1!" fugue, continued to insist that black was white after the first one, maintaining that, on some kind of Mandelbrot technicality, buried 16 layers deep, he had actually been telling the truth from the very beginning, and it was reality at fault, not his narrative.

I suspect this post is going to cost me a fortune in gimp suits