video debunking 9/11 conspiracies

[Loki]

Ah, you're online DrJ.

Do you really still believe the ridiculous story you peddled about Huntley, DrJazzz? Or will you finally apologise?

 

[neilh]

He did? Sorry if I missed it. Kindly point to the post.

I apologised for the most heated of the Huntley threads, at the time, which I conceded was hasty and flawed. I then conceded - when we found out his previous misdemeanours - that although there is still much that puzzles me about the Huntley case - it certainly looked like the right person had been put away.

from here

to which, btw, you replied to, so i find it hard to believe you still don't know what he believes about the thing

 

[Loki]

ah that one, I'm sorry, it doesn't measure up to an apology in my book. You didn't see the original thread, where DrJazzz loudly proclaimed "Huntley is innocent!" and refused to listen to anyone who had doubts.

 

[neilh]

ah that one, I'm sorry, it doesn't measure up to an apology in my book.

well did you see the thread he refers to where he says he did? cos if you didn't, i don't see the need for him to apologise again just cos you didn't see it.
and even if it doesn't count for you as an apology, it does clearly state what he now thinks about huntley's guilt, and was read by you, so why are you still asking if he believes it?

 

[jacobs steel]

the official story, i suppose, would mean the version of events that the US government gives out, ie the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact of and incineration of fuel from, 2 passanger planes, which were hijacked along with a few others, by men trained by or ordered by osama bin laden, and that another was crashed into the pentagon.

Thanks

 

[Loki]

well did you see the thread he refers to where he says he did? cos if you didn't, i don't see the need for him to apologise again just cos you didn't see it.
and even if it doesn't count for you as an apology, it does clearly state what he now thinks about huntley's guilt, and was read by you, so why are you still asking if he believes it?

I don't think you have the faintest clue how many conspiracy threads DrJ has started off. Nor how reluctant he can be to apologise when he's shown to be talking utter shite, by people who actually bother to do the research which shows his claims to be rubbish. If he actually bothered to do his own research in the first place I might have more respect for him.

 

[neilh]

I don't think you have the faintest clue how many conspiracy threads DrJ has started off. Nor how reluctant he can be to apologise when he's shown to be talking utter shite, by people who actually bother to do the research to rubbish his claims.

as for the first one, i think i am, i've seen loads of them. as for apologising, i've seen loads of folk not apologising when claims have been found to be false. but in this case he's claiming he did originally apologise for it; did you see that or not?
and it still doesn't explain still asking him whether he believes it, when earlier in the week he clearly told his position on this.

 

[Loki]

as for the first one, i think i am, i've seen loads of them. as for apologising, i've seen loads of folk not apologising when claims have been found to be false. but in this case he's claiming he did originally apologise for it; did you see that or not?

DrJ never apologises for anything, in fact I remember him saying once that he doesn't care about the validity of his "evidence", just post it anyway! That was before you got here.

And I don't accept his loaded semi-apology, sorry.

 

[1927]

there's actually a really good film about the fake moon landings. i don't know how the filmmaker did it but he got rumsfeld and kissinger to give interviews for it, together with the former sectretary of president nixon and stanley kubricks wife. these guys lead you down a merry road saying how nixon demanded a contingency plan should the apollo mission fail, so he got stanley kubrick to direct the moon films and photos in a studio so they could say they got there even if they didn't.

of course at the end everyone who appears in the film all turns round and says "had you going you twat"

wish i could remember what it was called.

Operation Lune

 

[neilh]

DrJ never apologises for anything, in fact I remember him saying once that he doesn't care about the validity of his "evidence", just post it anyway! That was before you got here.

And I don't accept his loaded semi-apology, sorry.

i missed that one, but have been reading stuff here for a lot longer than join date - i just joined last summer when you had to to see the threads, then ended up seeing a thread about tinthepark i couldn't help reply to, then before i knew it was dragged in to post regularly against my original intentions (also being spurred on by ukhiphop forums becoming increasingly shite);
fair enough, you don't accept his apology, but would there be any way, mebbe by a specific thread or pm's or something that this whole issue could be sorted out once and for all? cos it's really distracting when it keeps getting dragged up again on different threads.

 

[editor]

You can see what some people claim is a 'pod' (whether it is or not, that's another question). You can see the missile flashes. You can see the debris flung out horizontally by the explosives. You can see them going off.

Really.

So how come all the zillions of people who have seen the same footage as you managed to miss this incredible sight?

Any ideas?

 

[Loki]

Once more neil, you don't know the half of it. DrJ's spouted such complete bullshit that us regulars have given up on him. One example: he started a thread proclaiming the AA flights didn't exist based on the findings of a conspiranoid web page. Both me and FridgeMagnet took the trouble to email the relevant authorities, and posted the (perfectly satisfactory) replies which debunked the whole premise of his thread. DrJ ignored our posts for several pages and in fact never acknowleged them.

 

[neilh]

Once more neil, you don't know the half of it. DrJ's spouted such complete bullshit that us regulars have given up on him. One example: he started a thread proclaiming the AA flights didn't exist based on the findings of a conspiranoid web page. Both me and FridgeMagnet took the trouble to email the relevant authorities, and posted the (perfectly satisfactory) replies which debunked the whole premise of his thread. DrJ ignored our posts for several pages and in fact never acknowleged them.

yeah, well, at the same time, it's brought up all the time on threads where there's plenty other folk discussing things, and as i said, plenty folk do that kinda thing, posting something then when it's proved wrong not as much as replying. i don't really see that as a reason why the huntley thing has to get brought up all the time on threads.

 

[neilh]

Really.

So how come all the zillions of people who have seen the same footage as you managed to miss this incredible sight?

Any ideas?

probably cos most of the other millions recognised the "pod" for what it was, a shadow/reflection.

 

[Loki]

yeah, well, at the same time, it's brought up all the time on threads where there's plenty other folk discussing things, and as i said, plenty folk do that kinda thing, posting something then when it's proved wrong not as much as replying. i don't really see that as a reason why the huntley thing has to get brought up all the time on threads.

Like I said, you appear to have no idea how often DrJ does this.

 

[sacx]

and you're talking nonsense. The only 'invisible' thing on September 11 was flight 77, which appears to have been invisible to numerous video cameras.

You can see what some people claim is a 'pod' (whether it is or not, that's another question). You can see the missile flashes. You can see the debris flung out horizontally by the explosives. You can see them going off.

As for 'rational discussion', well this is impossible with someone who believes that Building 7 collapsed without provocation!

You're really not doing yourself any favours by concentrating on all these bizarre, nutty theories. To my mind if there was a conspiracy it was surrounding how two airliners were able to crash in to the towers. How they were allowed the airspace in one of America's largest cities, and I would imagine one of the tightest controlled pieces of airspace in the country. It's why nobody in government has ever been prosecuted for gross negligence that still remains unanswered.

 

[Jazzz]

ah that one, I'm sorry, it doesn't measure up to an apology in my book. You didn't see the original thread, where DrJazzz loudly proclaimed "Huntley is innocent!" and refused to listen to anyone who had doubts.

I don't believe I ever proclaimed that he was certainly innocent. I put forward the possibility that he might be, which I really don't think I need apologise for, as we are meant to presume innocence until someone is found guilty.

And really, this was years ago now.

 

[Loki]

I don't believe I ever proclaimed that he was certainly innocent. I put forward the possibility that he might be, which I really don't think I need apologise for, as we are meant to presume innocence until someone is found guilty.

Your thread was titled "Huntley is innocent!" Or something close to that as much as makes no difference. Despite the jury reaching a different conclusion, presumably because they got their facts from someone other than Vialls.

Have you ever stopped to think that if the jury had believed the ramblings of your ilk, Huntley, a serial child murderer would still be on the loose?

 

[Loki]

And really, this was years ago now.

Oh, so that makes it OK

 

[Jazzz]

Really.

So how come all the zillions of people who have seen the same footage as you managed to miss this incredible sight?

Any ideas?

Well, it's there on the footage taken from behind the plane as it hits the South Tower. An interesting corollary to this is that this classic footage is no longer shown on the new documentaries.

More to the point...

How come all the cameras missed Flight 77?
How come the nose punched through three rings of the Pentagon while the engines simply vanished?
How come building 7 collapsed inexplicably?
How come none of the debris has been officially identified as coming from the right flight?
Was it a coincidence that the Pentagon just happened to be running several war game exercises that day, involving the hijacking of aircraft on the same routes, and these games weren't stopped when the real deal kicked off?
How come the President was left chatting with a bunch of seven-year olds when he should have been held to be in danger?
How come steel-framed buildings with little fire damage can collapse in free-fall time?
<there's many more>

And do questions like this bother editor a jot?

And are we honestly expected to believe that a muslim suicide hijacker is going to be flashing $$$$$ around on Vegas lapdancers before the big day?

Nuts. The official story is utterly, utterly hatstand.

 

[editor]

I don't believe I ever proclaimed that he was certainly innocent.

Yes you did. You were quite emphatic about it, starting several threads declaring his innocence ("police dog PROVES Huntley is innocent" etc), citing that deceitful cunt Vialls as one of your 'sources'.

Frankly it was embarrassing. You should be grateful I deleted it.

 

[editor]

Well, it's there on the footage taken from behind the plane as it hits the South Tower. An interesting corollary to this is that this classic footage is no longer shown on the new documentaries.

Reeeallly?

Why's that then, do you think?

Please explain.

 

[Loki]

Here we are again *shuffles off to bed *

 

[Jazzz]

Yes you did. You wre quite emphatic about it, starting a thread declaring his innocence (police dog PROVES Huntley is innocent), citing that deceitful cunt Vialls as one of your 'sources'.

In fact you later went on to claim an untrained pooch 'confirmed' his new-born-lamb-esque innocence too.

Frankly it was embarrassing. You should be grateful I deleted it.

You may be right, but if I remember I retracted that claim as soon as Stobart Spotter posted about the capabilities of police dogs. That's what we are here for, isn't it?

The fact that you guts keep bringing up Huntley just belies the fact that you are desperately trying to stick your heads in the sand where 9-11 is concerned. Why can't you stick to the topic?

And yes, maybe I've given too much credence to Joe Vialls in the past, but he's had very little to do with 9-11. In fact, IIRC, he believes flight 77 hit the Pentagon!

 

[Jazzz]

Reeeallly?

Why's that then, do you think?

Please explain.

If you remember, I predicted this would happen before the recent documentaries. The reason is, now people may have heard about the pod/flashes, they aren't going to give us another look for free. It's become 'iffy' evidence.

 

[editor]

You may be right, but if I remember I retracted that claim as soon as Stobart Spotter posted about the capabilities of police dogs. That's what we are here for, isn't it?

"We're" not here to post up offensive, disgusting lies that try to pass the blame for horrific child murders onto innocent parties and declare it as "fact".

 

[editor]

If you remember, I predicted this would happen before the recent documentaries. The reason is, now people may have heard about the pod/flashes, they aren't going to give us another look for free. It's become 'iffy' evidence.

So, it's an international, nay global, conspiracy involving every single major media corporation on the planet?

After all, they'd all have access to that footage, so they must all be in on its sudden 'censoring' along with zillions of journos/archivists/presenters/researchers etc etc, no?

So how's that been achieved, then?

 

[Wess]

You can see what some people claim is a 'pod' (whether it is or not, that's another question). You can see the missile flashes. You can see the debris flung out horizontally by the explosives. You can see them going off.

I didn't see anything of the sort and if it is the blurry pixalated pictures you posted up that your referring too...then all I can say is, You have got to be joking??
Actually Dr. J. I think the only people that can "see" those pods are people who would see anything they have been told too....there were no pods or missile flash's...

 

[Lock&Light]

And really, this was years ago now.

Unfortunately, once you revealed yourself to be such a sloppy researcher as you did on those threads, all your credibility vanished, never to return.

 

[fubert]

So, it's an international, nay global, conspiracy involving every single major media corporation on the planet?

yeah but as i understand, and, as ever i could be wrong there's only something like five prinicple corporations reporting or acting as source for most of the news that gets reports, at least at a top tier level.

<treading carefully on 911 thread bit>
this doesn't mean i believe in missles or buildings wired with explosives or pretty much anything beyond a huge usg intelligence fuck up/underestimation
</tco911tb>