Breakthrough on British TV:BBC Question time Blackpool 22/9/

[ian neal]

Hi Pikey

Thanks for the complement.

However I wouldn't see this as being just the responsibility of Spun or that this thread is negative as long as the no-evidence accusations of shill, disinfo agent and wrecker are no longer used.

It was inevitable that the issue of using 'the pod evidence' would attract debate and I agree with Spun that these issues are definately best discussed and here is as good a place as any as long as it is in a respectful way by all parties. What I would hope will be recognised is that both 'sides': people who like the pod evidence and those who dismiss it can hold opposing views and yet be totally sincere.

I'll have a think about the freemasonry link and come back to you Spun

And one day I will get round to writing a brief history of how we came to be here, who knows who and a bit of background, but I can assure you that there is no one person, committee or cabal that runs this site. We came about chaotically and with little structure and so far we remain as such. There's certainly no particular ideology or approach to 9/11 truth that dominates the key activists behind this site

[Justin]

Hi Spun,

I can put your mind at rest concerning the Masonic influence of the Kirkby Lonsdale/Cumbria 9/11 Truth Group (I'm assuming it is us who you are alluding to). The two individuals concerned have from day one openly declared they are junior members of their local Masonic Lodge. They are simply seeking the Truth like we all are - especially the more esoteric side of things. You could not meet two more friendly or trustworthy people then they are. It is only when you start going up the pryramid of Masonry that you have to start asking questions about the veracity of their motives and agendas.

Hope this puts your mind at rest - and anyway, a lot of the 'other side' will be jumping ship as soon as the Truth starts to get out.

Let's play the ball and not the man!

Justin

[xmasdale]

[flamesong]

Well, there is little satisfaction in saying it, but once I realised that the missile pod was a figment which was palmed onto unsuspecting types like Dave von Kleist, the current debacle had to be anticipated.

I don't condone the personal attacks which have followed but I do question the judgement of David Boyle who, regardless of numerous requests and expressions of serious reservations about the pod material and the possible consequences, continued with it to the point of possible mutual self-destruction. I wonder what he hoped to achieve by raising such a potentially devisive issue. And as far as his demand for free speech is concerned, might I draw attention to this, no longer actively linked, page on my website:

http://www.flamesong.com/exhibition/indexold.html

You will notice that at the bottom I added in small text the words:

"Whilst it is to be congratulated on exposing the truth about September 11th and other important issues the Conspiracies Exhibition expresses views about some subjects which flamesong does not endorse."

I was advised that David Boyle was considering taking legal action for the addition which amounts to a standard disclaimer and which does not even appraoch the level of disagreement I feel towards what he promotes in his exhibition. Do I not have the freedom of speech to suggest that I might not agree with everything which David Boyle says?! Regardless, in the interest of unity I removed all links to the page.

Furthermore, do not the anti-pod people have the right to oppose the pod issue?! In my opinion, I think that if the 9/11 movement is to have any future, the pod issue needs to be addressed and hopefully disproved once and for all. There is enough evidence available to at least cast very serious doubt on its reliability and its origins.

Any calls for unity are hollow when made by proponents of the missile pod theory. If you sincerely seek unity, you would recognise the damaging devisive effect of hammering on about something which upsets your supposed fellow campaigners. In short, if you want unity, behave appropriately!

Perhaps the members of the Kirby Lonsdale group on here might remember the story I told about my personal experience of witnessing a very serious incident which nearly claimed the lives of myself and several of my shipmates. We watched in horror as a ship hit a harbour crane which fell onto another in a domino fashion. The final crane wobbled but did not fall. If it had fallen it would have landed on us. Afterwards we sat traumatised on the otherwise deserted harbour side. After about twenty minutes the police arrived followed by the press. Soon afterwards some members of the press were telling us what had happened.

I related this experience because I felt it was a multi-levelled metaphor for what I feared would happen to the 9/11 movement. Indeed, those who have been involved from the start are feeling that others have come along with second-hand information which is at best unreliable and at worst incorrect. I particularly find the job of having to deal with the missile pod question quite draining and resent the fact that I have to waste a great deal of time discussing it in order to present a reasonable case.

As I have been asked, and for the record, I have suggested that the flash might be due to static discharge. I worked with aircraft for over nine years and have seen and felt enormous static discharge which can be generated in a very short period of time, i.e. seconds. The generation of such a charge is catalysed by dry conditions which were certainly present on 11th September. I am not going to argue this case but it is enough to render the missile flash argument as inconclusive.

Secondly, there is footage of the second impact (conspicuously absent from letsroll911.org and In Plane Site) which is from a different angle which ought to show the pod more clearly - if it is not, as I suspect, an optical illusion caused by either the shape of the undercarriage fairing or the shadow cast by the starboard engine cast on the fuselage. The original footage was used in the French film 'The Barbarian Invasion'. For technical reasons to do with DV/Cine/DVD/DV transfer which I will not go it is not possible to pause a clear frame. If anybody wants to know the technical reason, please PM me. I don't want to start a debate about that. I ripped this footage from the DVD. It has not been retouched. However, by observing the outline of the fuselage which from this angle ought to clearly show any anomaly, there is nothing out of the ordinary. There are three different encodings downloadable from this page:

http://www.flamesong.com/911/barbarian.html

I discussed this evidence on more than one occasion with David Boyle who seems to have disregarded it for his own reasons.

And finally, as a matter of candour, as late as March 2005, I was still curious about the missile pod theory as can be seen on my website:

http://www.flamesong.com/911/flash.html

So in a sense I feel like a reformed smoker. Suffice to say that I feel that the evidence against is as strong if not stronger than the evidence for this theory. Regardless of which position one falls in, the botttom line as far as I am concerned is that this theory ought not to form any material part in the 9/11 debate. It can only be, as has been seen, seriously damaging. And as corrosive as this might sound, I suspect that anybody who persists in supporting this theory does not have the best interests of the 9/11 Truth Movement at heart, for whatever purpose.

[xmasdale]

I've just heard that Jay, who has been out of the country for the summer but is an activist in the London group, has also applied successfully to go on the next QT tomorrow in Brighton. We'll be travelling down together.

Noel

PS Just seen on TV Walter Wolfgang, an 82 year old Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, being thrown out of the Labour Party conference for heckling Jack Straw. I used to work with Walter in Labour Action for Peace in the days when I was a Labour Party activist. I'm going to try to contact Walter. Reckon he deserves congratulations and support.

[ian neal]

Hi Flamesong, good to see you here

Now I personally agree with you (as I have said before) that I would not use the pod evidence myself. That is not to say that I buy the Mark R line that this is deliberate disinfo either, atleast at the source. Just that in presenting the evidence it is one of the last places I would start

But that said I also know of sincere and knowledgeable 9/11 truth campaigners who do feel it is useful evidence and to the best of my knowledge have never had the original research disproven

My point being these are all just opinions. There are sincere 'pod people' and sincere 'non-pod people'. The fact that they disagree does not mean they cannot unite in common cause or that they need to label each other disinformationists.

Good luck tomorrow Noel

In yours or David's shoes, I would draw attention to all the notable doubters there are of the 9/11 myth (or see our front page). In my experience it is one of the most convincing arguments

[Ally]

[flamesong]

Precisely. The shadow of the fuselage is concentrated because it is on the same axis as the direction of the sunlight. The shadows of the wings are diffused because they are at right angles to it.

[Ally]

pictures > theories

[flamesong]

sorry > no

I'm not going to waste time explaining basic science. The 9/11 case is cut and dried without this kind of unnecessary obfuscation. I suggest you go out in the sushine and play with some sticks. It isn't my responsibility to fend off every half baked theory. As far as I am concerned, material like this only leads to detours from the main issues. I'm sorry I was drawn into this discussion and no doubt my withdrawl from it will illicit accusations of some sort or another but I've had my fill of the Roswell Syndrome, thanks.

[Ally]

What a surprise, slandering people instead of answering their questions.

...each to their own.

[flamesong]

slander > quote

[Graham]

Flamesong... what is your view on controlled demolition?

I see a pod and a missile. and a flash. (du tipped )

If anyone does get a question in on QT, is this not the easiest way of proving complicity? The towers fell at near freefall. Building 7 was faster.

[flamesong]

I think that the evidence of a controlled demolition is very compelling.

[mason-free party]

Spun..will you retract your absurd comment about Jimmy Walter being a disinfo artist...here's what you said:

"As for evidence I ask you to check the most respected web sites about 9/11 (not ones connected with disinfo artist Jimmy Walter or known double agent sites such as WING TV) you will find most books and sites shun the missile theory because it is a distraction - cleary aimed at polluting information and causing confusion. All true global 9/11 activists know this - who have been investigating the event for years. "
http://www.oilempire.us/pod.html
http://www.questionsquestions.net/blog/041116walter.html <DISINFO
http://www.oilempire.us/inplanesite.html

Without Jimmy Walter's input i don't think the 9/11 movement would have taken off like it has.I have a copy of Confronting the Evidence in front of me...on the front cover it has a picture of the explosions...on he inside cover it has a picture of the small hole in the pentagon and a picture of the pentagon walls still intact and the lawn free of wreckage..
NOT ONE PICTURE OF THE POD/MISSILE FLASH....hardly a disinfo artist,is he?although the pod/missile evidence should not be ignored,the switching of the planes seems highly probable and wreckage would have proven that fact if it hadn;t been disposed of quickly.Jimmy will go down in history and when these zionist creeps have been run out of the Whitehouse and banged up for a very long time,hopefully he will stand for President.

NOW RETRACT YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT JIMMY WALTER OR IN MY OPINION YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FROM ANY 911 TRUTH FORUM...ITS ABSURD!

I think Spun should take note of this quotation regards pod/missile..

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident.

-- Arthur Schopenhauer, philosopher, 1788-

Now let us move on and stop this character assasination of David Boyle also...he is a good man doing stirling work for the 9/11 truth.


www.Reopen911.org - 'Confronting The Evidence' - Here you can obtain a free DVD called 'Confronting The Evidence'. It has an outstanding level of precise detail and compelling evidence that will leave you overwhelmed by the sheer volume of substantiated fact, that once seen will
leave you in no doubt that this was indeed
a 'False Flag' job. Many damning video
clips are available online at: www.reopen911.org/pictures_and_videos.htm Special Note: Many of these are original mainstream media items which were
shown ONLY ONCE as 9/11 was happening & deliberately NEVER SHOWN AGAIN.

[Pikey]

For those who have been following this thread I thought that I would paste the following forum pm which I sent to Spun on 28/9/. It remains in my message outbox(i.e Spun has not accessed it).

"That was pretty low of you to reveal my first name Spun on the website and for the record I am not an associate of David Boyle nor am a pod/missile man so please rescind from putting disinfo on the website.I have put the Q's I would have asked if selected on the website and for your info the Cumbria group advised David Boyle not to use the pod/missile theory because of its controversy.

You state a third party is providing you with info about the Cumbria group. Who would that be Spun?

Please reveal to me who you are and when we met Spun. If you are supporting the 911 Truth campaign you will reveal who you are and do the honourable thing and apologise, to David Boyle, me and others you have insulted as well as the Cumbria group for inferring it has a hidden agenda because two of its members are masons."

I thought that the silence and absence since his/her last post on this site as Spun was due to suffering from a dizzy spell, however the prolonged silence does concern me about Spuns welfare.

Let us know that your OK Spun because there are dark forces at work out there! A pm response to my pm would be appreciated also.

[hampton]

Has anyone got a copy of the questiontime video?

Incidently National Geographic has just aired the 4 part 4hr 'inside 9/11'.
It was an hilarious attempt to go along with the official story.
It was pathetic :
Building 7 didn't get a mention,
It's now NEADS instead of NORAD,
The Pentagon plane disintegrated,
The steel in the WTC melted,
etc, etc.

Has anyone got the first two parts?

Also supposedly there was a 9/11 documentary on Sky One a while back, just before the Channel 4 one.

Anyone got a copy of that?

[Seb]

[flamesong]

You could try:

http://conspiracycentral.net:6969

or

http://thepiratebay.org

you will need a BitTorrent client.