Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Shayler - talk in Brixton - Wed. 2nd Nov.

editor said:
Because I suspect that the party's credibility will be seriously damaged by them enthusiastically delving into the dodgy world of 9/11 conspiraloonery. I think it'll alienate potential voters who will find it a pointless and rather strange distraction to the Green's message.

Don't you agree?

Or do you think showing a fruitloop 9/11 film is going to turn into some sort of vote spinner for the Green Party?
Click to expand...


Ok ed..keep your knickers on!!!! i agree that perhaps sideing with Mr S. won`t do them any favours....BUT why should we dismiss this in such a manner. After all Urban ( and all attached other linked sites) are here to diseminate all kinds of information that`s not freely available to the mass public.that`s why i come here any way.
The amount of times i have been directed to sites ( from posters here) where by i would never have had a clue has been totally inspiring so perhaps a little less judgementallity ( ?) on your part would not go amiss..
Yes I`m sure your bored with all the " who really ploughed the planes into the twin towers shit..but dont become cynical about every thing else..thats all.
Democracy and URBAN is about letting vent their views no matter how they appear and the other posters here are there to challenge them....
 
This one looks like a *talk* - but there have been *debates* organised in the past: hence "talks and debates". I expect that the audience will be able to put forward contrary views and ask questions etc.

Shayler isn't a Green Party spokesperson. Lambeth Green Party is putting on the event, but I don't see that this proves that it endorses every single thing that he says. Many organisations put on talks and debates by controversial figures without necessarily agreeing with what they are saying. Often it is because there is a level of public interest in the issue.

I can't speak for Shane et al so it would be better to ask him how and why he came to be doing this Shayler thing - but I do know that putting on a talk isn't the same thing as agreeing with every single thing that the guest speaker says or thinks. After all - Shayler was speaking at the Anarchist Bookfair last weekend as well. Does this mean that he represents anarchism? Or maybe they simply thought there would be some interest in what he had to say?

I can imagine that you might have people come and talk at Offline without agreeing 100% with all their views. Noone would imagine that what they said would necessarily represent u75 "policy" or what you believe, so I don't see why the same thing would apply to Lambeth Green Party.
 
editor said:
Because I suspect that the party's credibility will be seriously damaged by them enthusiastically delving into the dodgy world of 9/11 conspiraloonery. I think it'll alienate potential voters who will find it a pointless and rather strange distraction to the Green's message. Or perhaps maybe wonder if they're not just losing the plot a bit (note how well the same kind of conspiraloonery goes down here).

Don't you agree?

Or do you think showing a fruitloop 9/11 film is going to turn into some sort of vote spinner for the Green Party?
Click to expand...


I agree completely....but then again... ;)
 
TeeJay said:
I can't speak for Shane et al so it would be better to ask him how and why he came to be doing this Shayler thing - but I do know that putting on a talk isn't the same thing as agreeing with every single thing that the guest speaker says or thinks. After all - Shayler was speaking at the Anarchist Bookfair last weekend as well. Does this mean that he represents anarchism?
Click to expand...
...or that anarchism, like environmentalism, has its share of people attracted to conspiracist ideas...
 
editor said:
I think it's a catastrophic blunder for the Green Party to get involved in this barking 9/11 bullshit.
Click to expand...

Just come in from a weekend away, and normally i'd attempt to get to the end of the thread before replying to posts.

But: the catastrophy, the REAL catastrophe, is the silence of the mainstream media in dealing with this, the most important political event of our times.

Urban, a website set up to offer an alternative voice to the mainstream media, unfortunately got sucked into this all, and has effectively silenced in recent times any chance of debate on the topic.

You talk of catastrophes without even a tiny understanding of the word.

Shame.

Now i'll look at what everyone else is saying on this thread...
 
Free speech, free debate: just close it down eh.

What a pile of tosh i've just read.

And you call yourselves supporters of debate???

Stick your head above the parapet and watch it get knocked to fuck.

I might have known the fruitcake fela fan would stick his stupid oar in...

A 'catastrophe'?? Yet again the usual meaning of a word has been subordinated.

I think it disgraceful how debate on 911 here has been stifled.

I expect the bin any minute now. It's happened countless times when i've hit the bone.

But there again, i'll be told that i'm 'barking'.

It's your country, your website, youi have to deal with it. Rock on suckers.
 
Mods forum: that fela's on again. Rubbish the bastard. Flood the attempt of debate.

[everyone has their own context in life: mine is dealing with stifling debate on this topic]
 
TeeJay said:
Shayler isn't a Green Party spokesperson. Lambeth Green Party is putting on the event, but I don't see that this proves that it endorses every single thing that he says.
Click to expand...
When I see a Green Party person enthusiastically inviting me to a 9/11 "it's all a conspiracy" they've organised, I don't think I'd be alone in assuming that the Green Party actively support the conspiraloonery.

What was worse was the person handing me the flyer had bought into a lot of the kind of 'found on the internet' half baked facts that jazzz regularly trotted out here before each and every one of his yarns was shown to be utter tosh.

And that doesn't bode well for the credibility of the party, if you ask me.

But that's only my reaction, of course.
 
fela fan said:
Mods forum: that fela's on again. Rubbish the bastard. Flood the attempt of debate.
Click to expand...

"Shut the fuck up, moron."

Right on cue. So easy to predict.

Magical debating by the way mate.
 
fela fan said:
Mods forum: that fela's on again. Rubbish the bastard. Flood the attempt of debate.
Click to expand...

"Paranoid as well, I see.

Are you pissed?"

Even more of it. Some things never change eh?
 
not sure what your beef is, fela - why should anyone trust anything shayler's got to say about anything?

:confused:
 
bristle-krs said:
not sure what your beef is, fela - why should anyone trust anything shayler's got to say about anything?

:confused:
Click to expand...

I don't care two hoots about shaylor mate.

Well, that's not strictly true actually. He's a whisteblower, and i like them.

Anybody who questions the official version of 911 gets my interest. My biggest question, of many, about the topic is the almost absolute silence about the most pre-eminent of political events in our lifetime in the mainstream media.

Listen to the editor and you'd form a certain opinion about that.

But i'm made of sterner stuff. I've watched how the debate of this massively important event has been steadily eroded on this website.

Fucking sad too man.
 
I'm mystifed as to why lambeth Greens are getting involved with this - they seem like a relatively sane and sensible lot, and i've normally giot a lot of time for ol' shane
 
fela fan said:
I expect the bin any minute now. It's happened countless times when i've hit the bone.
Click to expand...
fela - you didn't start this thread, so I don't see why you would want to see it get binned.

This thread isn't here to debate 9/11 conspiracies - it is here to let people know that Shayler is going to be giving a talk in Brixton in a week's time: something that is probably of interest to a whole range of people, even if they don't like or agree with Shayler.

Editor has kindly allowed the thread to remain and not sent it to the bin.

If you feel that it would be a good thing for people to know about this meeting then please try and avoid getting this thread binned.

Thank you.
 
fela fan said:
Anybody who questions the official version of 911 gets my interest. My biggest question, of many, about the topic is the almost absolute silence about the most pre-eminent of political events in our lifetime in the mainstream media.
Click to expand...
You live in a parallel universe where 911 wasn't the most mediated event in history?

fela fan said:
But i'm made of sterner stuff. I've watched how the debate of this massively important event has been steadily eroded on this website.
Click to expand...
Actually, you're made of stupider stuff. The 'debate' has been a bunch of fucking morons believing anything at all from anybody at all, no matter how transparently self-interested they are, as long as it contains some hint of conspiranoid bollocks. Jazz's latest story is a case in point. Somebody just made the whole thing up ffs. They weren't even trying too hard and hence it still reads like a paddy irishman joke.
 
fela fan said:
But: the catastrophy, the REAL catastrophe, is the silence of the mainstream media in dealing with this, the most important political event of our times.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand this assumption at all. How in hell's name does discussing whether 9/11 was a conspiriacy or not help the worlds different social movement dealing with the backlash that it has wreaked?

Whether or not it was a conspiracy, the Americans used it for their political means (i.e licence to invade Afghanistan and Iraq) and the UK used it as the basis for a massive amount of repressive legislation to be introduced against non-white and muslim people. These are realities that have to be dealt with, not speculation like these loony conspiracies.

Even if there was some subterrenean plot, its not like the US are going to put up their hands and say 'oops, you got us their... we'll just back track on the last four years of imperialist expansion' is it?

Shayler has the interest of two parties in mind... himself, and the publishers of his tedious book which he takes every opportunity to plug.
 
Red Jezza said:
I'm mystifed as to why lambeth Greens are getting involved with this - they seem like a relatively sane and sensible lot, and i've normally giot a lot of time for ol' shane
Click to expand...
His email (and phone number) is listed earlier in the thread.
 
i feel sorry for the sane majority of greens over this!

and just to reply to teejays irrelevent point - shayler may have spoken at the anarcho bookfair but he had to sneak in under an assumed name, and his presence there was strongly contested - i know for a fact that the organisers would not have allowed him if they had known.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
...or that anarchism, like environmentalism, has its share of people attracted to conspiracist ideas...
Click to expand...
Ahem. Shayler had to sneak in under a false name. On the other hand Respect organised a public meeting with the express purpose of letting shayler expound his seriously dodgy loonspuddery. This time the greens have decided to shoot themselves in both feet and seriously undermine their reputation among the non-delusional fraction of the population by giving him a platform.

Now, I think it was a downright disgrace that the 9-11-anoids were at the bootsale, but I think it's stretching things a long way to pretend that these loonies have a particular cachet among anarchists.
 
As far as I am concerned I am still waiting for the evidence to support the official story of both 9/11 and 7/7. Until then it remains a wild conspiracy theory.

Has anybody yet explained why the owner of the WTC said that tower 7 was brought down with a controlled demolition when there was no way the explosives could have been put in the towers, because it was on fire (despite not being hit by a plane)? The twin towers also fell exactly the same way as the admitted controlled demolition despite the fact the fires were nearly out, fire could not have melted steel and no steel building has ever collapsed from fire. The wreckage was then shipped out to China before any investigation could take place, which is a crime known as interfering with a crime scene.

Maybe some of you should go along and listen to the evidence rather than squabbling and attacking Shayler on other issues. I think publicity for his book is a weak argument also.
 
CRANKSHAFT-4D31-.jpg
 
For what it is worth, personally I find this whole topic pretty repugnant. It is also of zero help to the Party, especially at a time when people should be focusing on winning local elections - a subject further from the concerns on the doorstep I cannot imagine than 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Matt
 
One thing alot of conspiraloons claim is that the temperatures were not high enough to melt steel. This is true however steel loses strength as it gets heated it doesn't have to melt for it to collapse. At 600C it loses significant strength and over 800C it loses 9/10ths of it's strength. These temperatures are attainable. You don't need the 1500C plus temperatures people like Shayler claim.

They have siome nice soundbites but once you start looking at the sciene it falls apart.

FFF
 
lastmanineurope said:
As far as I am concerned I am still waiting for the evidence to support the official story of both 9/11 and 7/7. Until then it remains a wild conspiracy theory.

Has anybody yet explained why the owner of the WTC said that tower 7 was brought down with a controlled demolition when there was no way the explosives could have been put in the towers, because it was on fire (despite not being hit by a plane)? The twin towers also fell exactly the same way as the admitted controlled demolition despite the fact the fires were nearly out, fire could not have melted steel and no steel building has ever collapsed from fire. The wreckage was then shipped out to China before any investigation could take place, which is a crime known as interfering with a crime scene.

Maybe some of you should go along and listen to the evidence rather than squabbling and attacking Shayler on other issues. I think publicity for his book is a weak argument also.
Click to expand...

are you David Shayler?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
David Shayler says he's the New Messiah
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
197
Views
19K
editor
editor
S
William Rodriguez talk London Monday July 9
2 3
Replies
69
Views
7K
editor
editor
S
Has Shayler Lost the Plot?
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
7K
smokedout
S
Back
Top Bottom