The Pious Pawn
I Can
editor said:
you have a way with words !! thats for sure
Unwarrented Censorship
- Thread starter ianrcrane
- Start date
you have a way with words !! thats for sure
editor
hiraethified
Questions too tricky for you, eh?banjoboy said:
Best stay cosseted with your reality-untroubled 'truth seekers' and avoid having to deal with those awkward and unpleasant conspiraloon-busting facts - like your idiotic claim about the 7/7 exercises.
What an arse you made of yourself there!
editor said:What an arse you made of yourself there!
That's what it's all about isn't it? Deriding people with the wrong opinions, laying into them, attempting to humiliate them, appealing to the common crowd to wade in with similar bully blows.
I cannot for a minute begin to fathom your obsession over this topic.
But not the stuff you mention.banjoboy said:
The videos of the buildings coming down prove nothing more than how (as in a sequence of events) they came down. They, in themselves, prove absolutely nothing as to why. In any event, a layman may point out that the collapse from the top down is absolutely the opposite to controlled demolitions, which start at the bottom.
So there were high temperatures in the rubble. The thermal images simply prove that there were, again nothing as to why.
There are workers on film describing what they saw and heard. They go on to describe what it is (which in at least some cases needs to be questioned) and how it got there (which is beyond their competence to explain). Witnesses OFTEN describe things in exaggerated or hyperbolic ways. The witnesses I have heard almost all refer to things "sounding like" bombs going off. What does snapping steelwork sound like? (I'll give you a clue - it can sound like a loud bang).
The things you quote (like almost everything else I have ever seen or heard about 11 September or 7 July) are grounds for mounting an investigation and seeking expert opinion. They are absolutely NOT hard evidence for the things you seem to think they are.
editor said:
qed, for those posters following this thread.
You harp on about evidence and the like over 911 and 7/7, yet you have just let fly with a magical example of subjectivity at its best.
The funny thing is that we're all hypocrites at times: if we judge others, we automatically become one. And it obviously includes you editor. Yet you can't even admit it, and prefer to label others with this accusation.
Which makes you a DOUBLE hypocrite. Rest easy man.
But surely this dilemma has arisen many times before: using spies in wartime or the cold war, using informers even in lower level drugs or organised crime investigations - ultimately someone needs to sit down and say "well, which is the lesser evil - we lose the asset (have to pull them out and gve them a new identity in another country) - or we let this go ahead and prevent even worse things happening".detective-boy said:
I don't quite see how these dilemmas can ever be avoided even by having fuller disclosure in court (you'd still have to put your informer or asset on the stand) or that having dilemmas like this mean the system is "corrupted". Of course a system can be corrupted - may well have been (I am not an NI expert) - but surely these dilemmas will always arise and the best youy can do is have some kind of policy for deciding what to do and weighing up the two "evils" to see which is the "lesser"?
I suppose you are arguing that this should be done by a judge and the court system - but don't they only get involved when a case is actually brought to court, rather than at the investigation 'coal-face' as it were?
If judges were going to rule on which phone taps should be used and which not, then wouldn't they need to start getting involved in the detailed operations of the people using these taps in the first place even before cases were turned into prosecutions and brough to court - in which case they would cease to be an impartial judge of the case surely?
Badger Kitten
oof
fela fan said:
Erm... possibly they have looked at the conspiraloon arguments and found them to be bumwipe? And they don't want to give bumwipe theories valuable PR?
At the moment, ianrcrane and banjoboy. Wouldn't like to name previous names without research and, to be honest, can't be bothered.fela fan said:
The point is that (as you yourself have said) you just want to ask questions, not substitute some alternative theory. Those that do the latter are those who drown you out by pissing everyone else off. And it is not just here (in fact, it is more important in the real world because it DOES give the authorities a way out of engaging with difficult questions).
Badger Kitten
oof
Badger Kitten said:
Absolute bullshit.
You pass yourself off to be some kind of expert over this 7/7 event, just coz you were there. Yet, and in calling for a public enquiry over this event, you then say this to me about the 911 event. Can you not see the irony here??
Now then BK, you just tootle off and scan the contents of this link
http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/project.jsp?project=911_project
and repeat your assinine comments to me. Reducing the whole of 911 to 'bumwipe'??? Do you really expect people to take you seriously with such a dreadfully poor level of debate?
(a) Maybe they are waiting to see what comes out of the release of the narrative and intend to subject that to scrutiny (especially as any investigative journalist would have great difficulty investigating anything without access to the evidence, which is not in the public domain); orfela fan said:
(b) Maybe Kylie Minogue, Michael Barrymore and George Galloway are not involved in any capacity.
detective-boy said:
Thanks for the reply.
But fuck man, you've been here as long as me!! And all you can say is two names that have just turned up in the last couple of days.
Editor and the others keep harping on about these 'conspiraloons', and have done so for years. I'd like to know who they are.
C'mon, you have to do better than that. And whether you can be bothered or not man is not really the issue. We are constantly informed over the topic of 911, and more recently 7/7, about how these 'loonspuds' hijack these threads.
Again, who are they?
Welcome to the world of being a "celebrity" - a public figure that everyone feels they have the right to say whatever they like about and who they treat not as a real person but as just another object or character in their own stories.Badger Kitten said:
Not that I know what this is like, but that is what it looks like to me.
The idiotic thing is that they seem to spend more time attacking yourself, Milan Rai, Maya Evans et al than they do actually questioning the supposed agents of the "powers that be" - eg the politicians, police and newspapers etc.
I'd focus on getting on with what you are doing and only give them as much attention as it takes to dismiss their claims every so often.
Every credit for actually allowing some of them to speak at meetings and so forth rather than chucking them out or barring them from attending (which frankly I'd be very tempted to do if they kept turning up with the intention of disrupting meetings). However, I'd not bother in getting into long discussions with them as they will sap your energy and piss you off no end - a bit like trying to engage with people who phone up to sell you double glazing or people trying to convert you to marxism or moonism. IMO its enough to set the record straight and let others know that you are being harassed which allows other people to back you up.
Badger Kitten
oof
A conspiraloon claiming the bus bomb was faked, lovely. Calls himself 'The Antagonist', the 'Fantasist' would be more accurate.
More
This was the loon that dragged me into this whole wierd world.
By taking my original account from u75 and the BBC and insisting I was describing a power surge...
FFS
More
This was the loon that dragged me into this whole wierd world.
By taking my original account from u75 and the BBC and insisting I was describing a power surge...
FFS
detective-boy said:
The biggest event of our times, of our generation, and that's your answer!!
No mate, try again. And in any case, what is this 'narrative' you speak of?
Watergate: presumably they had no evidence when they set out to investigate the event, just a suspicion. But once investigation takes shape, then stuff gets found... no? Have i got this wrong somehow?
TeeJay said:
No. TeeJay, I don't. I have no serious problems at all. If you have a problem, and that problem is me then I think it is you who should think about seeking help.
I have re-read the posts relating to this issue and I have got to say you have lost me.TeeJay said:
You raised the issue in response to my suggestion that, in cases where there was no criminal prosecution to publicly set out and test the evidence, there needed to be some alternative arena for doing so.
You said that this would bring the problem of revealing evidence gathering techniques, etc.
I simply pointed out that that need not be the case. There are safeguards in place in the criminal system and there is no reason why they could not be applied to any new system.
The existence of the dilemma does not prove the system is corrupted. It is when everything turns around, to focus on the preservation of the asset at the cost of the victims we all set off to defend in the first place that I would define the system as corrupted. That does not happen often in my experience. There is no reason to believe it would arise in relation to my proposed new system.
No. I SAID here's two names but, without research which I can't be bothered to do, I wouldn't like to name any others.fela fan said:
Your selective hearing is that of a conspiraloon!
Badger Kitten
oof
Thanks Teejay. I don't engage with them anymore, and have put comment moderator on my blog.
It is quite empowering to say here what an absolute pain in the arse all this has been, over the last 9 months, and to finally say what has been going on. I have enaged enough with fruitbats, and have said to them that I will not be giving them any more time from now on. I was trying to disassociate myself from them, but this has had the unfortunate effect of giving them publicity. Still, hopefully nobody is in any doubt that it is possible to want an independent enquiry into 7/7 - something and I some other survivors and families have been after for many months - and not to be a complete loonspud.
Having a pop when they pop up here is fun, though, some excellent refutations and points by other posters to inspire and cheer me on a wet Sunday.
It is quite empowering to say here what an absolute pain in the arse all this has been, over the last 9 months, and to finally say what has been going on. I have enaged enough with fruitbats, and have said to them that I will not be giving them any more time from now on. I was trying to disassociate myself from them, but this has had the unfortunate effect of giving them publicity. Still, hopefully nobody is in any doubt that it is possible to want an independent enquiry into 7/7 - something and I some other survivors and families have been after for many months - and not to be a complete loonspud.
Having a pop when they pop up here is fun, though, some excellent refutations and points by other posters to inspire and cheer me on a wet Sunday.
fela fan said:
As you well know, a number of the more persistent offenders have been banned, and have been lost to memory, but a short list would certainly include:
Jazzz
fela fan (despite your protestations)
bigfish
Windsor
Azrael 23
That's five. Five too many.