Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

editor said:
No thanks. I've got at least a thousand better things to do with my time.
.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I didn't expect you to accept the invitation. But the invitation is there none the less to anyone who knows 9/11 truth is conspiraloon nonsense and wants to put the 'counter argument'. Larry, you obviously KNOW how the secret state works. Do you want speak in defense of the official conspiracy theory? Anyone else?

If not don't complain that a platform is unbalanced
 
sparticus said:
Fair enough. I didn't expect you to accept the invitation. But the invitation is there none the less to anyone who knows 9/11 truth is conspiraloon nonsense and wants to put the 'counter argument'. Larry, you obviously KNOW how the secret state works. Do you want speak in defense of the official conspiracy theory? Anyone else?

If not don't complain that a platform is unbalanced
Click to expand...
Did you ask anyone to come and put a counter case?
 
sparticus said:
If not don't complain that a platform is unbalanced
Click to expand...
I would have though that it should be up to the organisers to present a balanced platform and not rely on thoroughly disinterested parties showing up.
 
I have not been involved in this event, but the offer has been made before to posters on this forum that if you are so sure you can put the 'counter argument' then step up and speak. Afterall you have this fantastic dossier kindly prepared by HMG to help you make your case

Nothing dodgy about this dossier is there?
 
And, once again, objections to specific theories are typified as wholesale acceptance of an entirely different position. "The moon is made of cheese!" "Where's your evidence?" "Well why don't you prove that it's made of butter?"
 
FridgeMagnet said:
And, once again, objections to specific theories are typified as wholesale acceptance of an entirely different position. "The moon is made of cheese!" "Where's your evidence?" "Well why don't you prove that it's made of butter?"
Click to expand...
Indeed. And that's why arguing with conspiraloon sis generally a complete waste of time.
 
FridgeMagnet said:
And, once again, objections to specific theories are typified as wholesale acceptance of an entirely different position. "The moon is made of cheese!" "Where's your evidence?" "Well why don't you prove that it's made of butter?"
Click to expand...

I'm glad you 2 know what you are on about because I'm sure as f*ck I don't
 
FridgeMagnet said:
And, once again, objections to specific theories are typified as wholesale acceptance of an entirely different position. "The moon is made of cheese!" "Where's your evidence?" "Well why don't you prove that it's made of butter?"
Click to expand...
Then there's the alternative version utilised above in relation to the Greens - if you support the call for another inquiry or a re-opening on a different basis to the original, you therefore agree that it was a conspiracy...
 
butchersapron said:
Then there's the alternative version utilised above in relation to the Greens - if you support the call for another inquiry or a re-opening on a different basis to the original, you therefore agree that it was a conspiracy...
Click to expand...
You're either with us, or you're with the lizards.
 
That's how CTers work - hammering home the same daft 'theory' till they can announce it to be 'fact', then advancing to the next fruitloop bit....
 
butchersapron said:
Then there's the alternative version utilised above in relation to the Greens - if you support the call for another inquiry or a re-opening on a different basis to the original, you therefore agree that it was a conspiracy...
Click to expand...

I disagree. There is a whole spectrum of belief in the 9/11 truth movement. The one thing it is united on is the need to reopen 9/11. So why the vehement opposition to a further inquiry?
 
sparticus said:
I disagree. There is a whole spectrum of belief in the 9/11 truth movement. The one thing it is united on is the need to reopen 9/11. So why the vehement opposition to a further inquiry?
Click to expand...
Because the (ahem) "9/11 truth movement" is riddled with DVD-shifting fruitloops, barking nutjobs, reality-untroubled obsessive and gullible idiots.
 
sparticus said:
I disagree. There is a whole spectrum of belief in the 9/11 truth movement. The one thing it is united on is the need to reopen 9/11. So why the vehement opposition to a further inquiry?
Click to expand...
On my part there isn't any. None at all.

I do think the more far fetched and loony people pushing for one, people like yourelf and Jazz have done enormous damage to any possibility of this ever happening though. You've turned a series of gaping holes in the official account into a bit part player in a truly stupid play by the ridiculous theories you come up with and circulate - you've pretty much done the states required disinfo for them with very little prodding and ruined any credibilty the campaign may once have had. 911 is now a joke.

I also find your naivity truly astounding - the people who you believe set in motion this gigantic conspiracy will agree to an independent inquiry, one that they can't influence in any way or shape at all? One in which they'll happily hand over all the relavent info and data, all the records all the files? One that will be free from any inteference or molestation? And this after you've just spent the last few years arguing that they are capable of going to almost any lengths to achieve their own ends? Of using the most extreme methods?
 
editor said:
The Greens are making total arses of themselves over this and recent conversations with one of their members tells me that they're simply buying into the same laughable, fact-free conspiraloonery shite that's been rightly laughed off these boards several times.
Click to expand...

Yes, stuff laughed off these boards for some reason, but it's not a joke shared by canadiens or new yorkers apparantly:


“As for the general public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians (63%, Toronto Star, May '04) and half of New Yorkers (Zogby, August 2004) agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20051021&articleId=1129

Why is it that urban has such problems over 911? If half the neo-cons fall along with libby, then it will be just a matter of time that the media find themselves able to go after the official story of 911.

In fact going by griffin in that link of mine, it could be any day that the dam lets its first drops leak through its protective walls...
 
butchersapron said:
On my part there isn't any. None at all.

I do think the more far fetched and loony people pushing for one, people like yourelf and Jazz have done enormous damage to any possibility of this ever happening though. You've turned a series of gaping holes in the official account into a bit part player in a truly stupid play by the ridiculous theories you come up with and circulate - you've pretty much done the states required disinfo for them with very little prodding and ruined any credibilty the campaign may once have had. 911 is now a joke.
Click to expand...

Settle down lad. I presume you make your comments with regard to this particular medium: urban75. I hardly think jazzz and sparticus are responsible for the american and british press' extreme reluctance to investigate themselves the undoubted holes in the official theory you rightly make reference to.

And nor can i accept 'people like them' stopped the media from doing any investigative work on those gaping inconsistencies.

Nah, the politics of power, fear, and media spin have stopped that.

But the fear is beginning to drop, the whitehouse is beginning to unravel, at least for the moment, and i don't doubt that once the conditions are right then the new york press at least will start digging.

And i can't wait for the spectacle.
 
fela fan said:
“As for the general public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians (63%, Toronto Star, May '04) and half of New Yorkers (Zogby, August 2004) agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01.”
Click to expand...
Ah. So you believe in UFOs then, yes?
 
Red Jezza said:
That's how CTers work - hammering home the same daft 'theory' till they can announce it to be 'fact', then advancing to the next fruitloop bit....
Click to expand...

What is a CTer anyway red? Or is it just a label to brush away certain people who say certain thigns that must not be allowed in the company of serious debaters?

As for people who don't believe the fantastic official version, they've done some sterling work, laid a lot of groundwork, done tonnes of research through archives, presented lots of circumstantial evidence, and once the prevailing political conditions are right, then when the mass media wish to investigate themselves, they will have so much material waiting for them to make their jobs a wee bit easier.

Maye we'll need a new term other than this boring old fart the 'CTer'. How about 'conspiricists' for those politicians that end up falling on their swords?
 
fela fan said:
Maye we'll need a new term other than this boring old fart the 'CTer'. How about 'conspiricists' for those politicians that end up falling on their swords?
Click to expand...
No, I still find 'nutjobs', 'DVD-shifting loonspuds' and 'conspiraloons' far more accurately describes the unresearched, wild drivel that gets posted here.
 
Red Jezza said:
That's how CTers work - hammering home the same daft 'theory' till they can announce it to be 'fact', then advancing to the next fruitloop bit....
Click to expand...

Yep, depressingly it works on some people...
 
editor said:
Ah. So you believe in UFOs then, yes?
Click to expand...

What do you think about those figures quoted in those polls then?

As for 911 it is simple, not to believe, but to KNOW that the official version has so much in it that demands investigation. Something that the american mass media have thus not found the courage to investigate.

But it seems the climate is getting better for all those people who wish to see justice done in the name of 911. I'm hopeful that the new york media will set the ball rolling.


[oh, and editor, no, to answer your question, no i don't believe in ufos. Hope that info is useful to you somehow]
 
fela fan said:
What do you think about those figures quoted in those polls then?
Click to expand...

That people are so disillusioned by the status quo that crazy paranoid theories are easy to believe?
 
fela fan said:
“As for the general public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians (63%, Toronto Star, May '04) and half of New Yorkers (Zogby, August 2004) agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20051021&articleId=1129
Click to expand...
That's fairly typical of the conspiraloon attitude to research. The opinion polls in question asked whether they thought there was some foreknowledge of the attacks, NOT that top US leaders "conspired to murder..."

Every single conspiraloon site distorts this survey finding. It's interesting to see that they also use their own distorting sites as sources rather than the primary source. It's purposely dishonest and typical of the attitude to the truth among the 'truth seekers'.
 
editor said:
No, I still find 'nutjobs', 'DVD-shifting loonspuds' and 'conspiraloons' far more accurately describes the unresearched, wild drivel that gets posted here.
Click to expand...

As is your right.

But my link was not 'unresearched, wild drivel', and nor has any of the few links i've ever posted up on the subject, including the above one.

How might you describe the likes of david griffin, gore vidal, howard zinn, nafeez ahmed, and so on? And need i present you again with the timelines of events provided by cooperative research, the very site i linked to that only includes mainstream media sources in its reporting?

All this come under your delightful colourful blustering vocabulary designed to shut me, amongst others, up?
 
fela fan said:
Settle down lad. I presume you make your comments with regard to this particular medium: urban75. I hardly think jazzz and sparticus are responsible for the american and british press' extreme reluctance to investigate themselves the undoubted holes in the official theory you rightly make reference to.
Click to expand...

I said people 'like' them, people who believe the most ridiculous theories about what happened from some warped inner phsychological motivation - people like them also exist in the US and they've provided the lazier end of media with the best excuse possible[i/] not to carry out serious in-depth examinations of the evidence or investigations of the official story.
 
editor said:
No, I still find 'nutjobs', 'DVD-shifting loonspuds' and 'conspiraloons' far more accurately describes the unresearched, wild drivel that gets posted here.
Click to expand...
your description is more apposite, but I was kinda aiming for linguistic brevity, iykwim....
 
gurrier said:
That's fairly typical of the conspiraloon attitude to research. The opinion polls in question asked whether they thought there was some foreknowledge of the attacks, NOT that top US leaders "conspired to murder..."

Every single conspiraloon site distorts this survey finding. It's interesting to see that they also use their own distorting sites as sources rather than the primary source. It's purposely dishonest and typical of the attitude to the truth among the 'truth seekers'.
Click to expand...

It talks about two surveys, so how can you talk about 'this survey finding'? Or are you succumbing to the very thing you accuse people of the 'conspiraloon attitude' towards research?

That link i just provided gurrier: is this one of your 'every single conspiraloon site'? How do we know what the gurrier conspiraloon site looks like, you know, just so that we can ignore it like?

I mean, if you want i can provide you with some links to well-respected writers, and research only utilising mainstream media sources.

Nor your fucking planet lizard crap so many here on urban exercise their feverish little minds over.

[but btw, i do agree with your comments about surveys, i'm not a fan of them at all, but even if they're half way wrong, it's still enough to post up in refuting editor's exaggeration]
 
fela fan said:
As is your right.

But my link was not 'unresearched, wild drivel', and nor has any of the few links i've ever posted up on the subject, including the above one.
Click to expand...
Purposely dishonest, blatantly distorted, wild drivel then.
 
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