"However R.E. leans toward an inside/mossad job bias a little too heavily and will turn off the more sceptical instantly, especially when they find out the film maker thinks he's the messiah.
Talk about dicrediting your own work."
It leans that way because of the evidence? Others are mentioned. Would you be happier with that part air brushed out?
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 575 Location: the eyevolution
Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:51 pm Post subject:
[quote="Andrew."]
Quote:
I'm not ridiculing him matey.
Quote:
"However R.E. leans toward an inside/mossad job bias a little too heavily and will turn off the more sceptical instantly, especially when they find out the film maker thinks he's the messiah.
Talk about dicrediting your own work."
Quote:
It leans that way because of the evidence? Others are mentioned. Would you be happier with that part air brushed out?
As I said I haven't ridiculed Hill.
If you think that pointing out that Hill discredits himself by declaring he is the messiah is a form of ridicule then that says more about your faith than me.
The style of R.E. assumes that 7/7 is an inside/outside job, have you ever tried to get a total sceptic to believe this assertion outright?
I have and it does not always work. You sometimes have to give them unbiased evidence first of all.
Quote:
You're asking me to advise the messiah?
Quote:
No, as I asked how?
What are you asking me for? If he's the messiah he's going to have to show how himself lol...why should we believe him over the many that have claimed the same?
George Ernest Roux (1903–1981), the "Christ of Montfavet," founder of the Universal Christian Church.
Sun Myung Moon (b. 1920), founder of the Unification Church. Claims he is the Second Coming of Christ.[9][10]
Charles Manson (b. 1934), leader of the "Manson family" who ordered his followers to kill in preparation for the end of the world. He also claimed to be Satan.
Yahweh ben Yahweh (1935–2007), born as Hulon Mitchell, Jr., a black nationalist and separatist who created the Nation of Yahweh and allegedly orchestrated the murder of dozens of persons.
Laszlo Toth (b. 1940) claimed he was Jesus Christ as he battered Michelangelo's Pieta with a geologist hammer.
Wayne Bent (b. 1941), also known as Michael Travesser of the Lord Our Righteousness Church, also known and the Strong City Cult, convicted December 15, 2008 of one count of criminal sexual contact of a minor and two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor in 2008.[11]
Iesu Matayoshi (b. 1944), in 1997 he established the World Economic Community Party based on his conviction that he is God and the Christ.
Jung Myung Seok (b. 1945), claims to be the Second Coming of Christ, founder of Providence Church, and convicted rapist.
Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda (b. 1946), a Puerto Rican preacher who has claimed to be "the Man Jesus Christ", who is indwelled with the same spirit that dwelled in Jesus. Founder of the "Growing in Grace" ministries.
Inri Cristo (b. 1948) of Indaial, Brazil, a claimant to be the second Jesus.[12]
Apollo Quiboloy (b. 1950), who claims that Jesus Christ is the "Almighty Father," that Quiboloy is "His Appointed Son," and that salvation is now completed. Proclaims himself as the "Appointed Son of the God" not direct to the point as the "Begotten Son of the God"
David Icke (b. 1952), of Great Britain, has described himself as "the son of God", and a "channel for the Christ spirit".
David Koresh (Vernon Wayne Howell) (1959–1993), leader of the Branch Davidians.
Maria Devi Christos (b. 1960), founder of the Great White Brotherhood.
Sergei Torop (b. 1961), who started to call himself "Vissarion", founder of the Church of the Last Testament and the spiritual community Ecopolis Tiberkul in Southern Siberia.
David Shayler (b. 1965), former MI5 agent and whistleblower who declared himself the Messiah on 7 July 2007.[13]
I notice on Hill's website there's a lot of talk about marijuana.
It says in various parts of the bible Christ will "come on a cloud".
Hey, maybe it really is a cloud of the good stuff.
But to answer your question, which of these best suits Hill's claim?
1.The coming of Christ will be instantaneous and worldwide[8]. "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." ~ Matthew 24:27
2.The coming of Christ will be visible to all.[9] - "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." Matthew 24:30
3.The coming of Christ will be audible[10] - "And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." Matthew 24:31
4.The resurrection of the righteous will occur[11] - "For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first." ~ 1 Thessalonians 4:16
5.In one single event, the saved who are alive at Christ's coming will be caught up together with the resurrected to meet the Lord in the air.[12] "Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord." ~ 1 Thessalonians 4:17
I dont see how it's up to me to tell the messiah how he is so?
"...and lo an internet forum moderater was called upon to advise the messiah through one of his faithful just how to best present himself to 6 billion people that he is what was promised to the world 2000 years ago..."
I have and it does not always work. You sometimes have to give them unbiased evidence first of all.
Agreed, people had these two and many other such videos on 9/11 etc etc.
http://www.jforjustice.co.uk/
** Documentary films about 7/7/2005:- 7/7 Ripple Effect, Ludicrous Diversion, Mind the Gap
And this is what He says about drugs and has been posted before, or at least I have given my view on drugs. So why are you trying so hard to lie about Him?
(edit)
And thank you for the help in showing the false ones which can be pointed out in seconds
It would help when searching for the truth, to find the real Scripture and be able to recognise it.
Matthew:
24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in the secret chambers; believe [it] not. (sorry elders of zion, not where you say)
24:27 For as the lightening cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.
You took the only part of my response to "How?" ( which was clearly meant to be humourous ) and created a strawman about me lying about Hill which I wasn't doing.
That's a strawman.
Quote:
(edit)
And thank you for the help in showing the false ones which can be pointed out in seconds.
So you have proof that none of those "messiahs" were so but none for Hill that he is?
Quote:
It would help when searching for the truth, to find the real Scripture and be able to recognise it.
Would that be The King James, The Good News, The Living, The New English, The Hebrew or The Septuagint version?
Quote:
Matthew:
24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in the secret chambers; believe [it] not. (sorry elders of zion, not where you say)
24:27 For as the lightening cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.
Desert? Lightning? Secret Chambers?
No mention of a Hill?
edit - The post I quote you from seems to be missing.
I didn't say these were Hill's words now did I. It's just on his website, or at least the website you linked to. I didn't say anything good or bad about drugs either.
You're strawmanning again. That stands out a mile.
I also do not smoke marijuana anymore, but not because I now fear and obey men. The Truth, and (real & strong/tough) Love are better than any substance, whether artificial or natural.
http://i.am/jah/drugs.htm
Here.
Oh, and you didn't know about Mr Shaler and his association with drugs.
Last edited by Andrew. on Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:58 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 575 Location: the eyevolution
Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:57 pm Post subject:
Andrew. wrote:
Quote:
I also do not smoke marijuana anymore, but not because I now fear and obey men. The Truth, and (real & strong/tough) Love are better than any substance, whether artificial or natural.
http://i.am/jah/drugs.htm
Here.
I didn't say Hill did smoke did I?
Another strawman.
What's Shayler got to do with Hill. Apart from being another "messiah"?
I dont care who does or doesn't take drugs. Stop strawmanning. It's poor debate.
Last edited by GodSaveTheTeam on Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 575 Location: the eyevolution
Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:10 pm Post subject:
Andrew. wrote:
Insinuation:
That which is insinuated; a hint; a suggestion or intimation by distant allusion; as, slander may be conveyed by insinuations.
Dear oh dear. The insinuation is yours. You are insinuating that my reference to Hill's website material is anything other than fact. It's on his website that you linked to. You asked me to read it so I did.
Quote:
No stawman, and i did not say you did directly, but a lie is a lie.
Yes it was a strawman. You cant prove that Hill is the messiah which was the topic we were talking about so you changed topic and made out I was attcking Hill.
You still haven't removed my private information. In accordance with the advice I've received about the Data Protection Act I'm being generous and giving you 36 hours before I proceed with a complaint to the Information Commissioner. As I said, I notice you've extended such a courtesy to someone who denies there's any need for a new 7/7 investigation/inquiry, so the fact you are refusing even when asked to extend that courtesy to me speaks volumes for your personal and moral integrity. Be warned, if the security of my email address suffers then I will be holding you personally responsible.
I think the Ripple Effect is a much better documentary and so do some others, There is a thread for this if you want to debate it.
A much better documentary than what? My own?
I honestly don't think that's a debate worth having. Call me arrogant if you must, but my film is better than Ripple Effect for a billion reasons.
Quote:
Quote:
I couldn't include everything, and the issue of the warning is a bit convoluted. There seems to have been a warning, but who sent it to whom, and exactly when, is one of those things where the reporting all contradicts the other reporting. Though it was officially denied, so it almost definitely happened.
It's some of the most important to some people, this pre knowledge.
Nonetheless, it isn't that important to me. I find the issue of the Saudi warning, the pre-7/7 surveillance of the alleged bombers, and the whole Operation Crevice question to be far more important. Hence they went in the film.
Quote:
Quote:
Little or no mention of the counterfeit Israel companies that run the close-d circuit TV.
As above it's very important to some people.
As I explained, the issue has been covered in other films, and to my knowledge there is little or no new information since those other films were made. Hence, I'd just be duplicating what people can find elsewhere. It seemed like a waste of time to me.
Quote:
Quote:
I don't think there's much evidence for 'hits' at Canary Wharf, and it is only particularly important if you are, a la Ripple Effect, trying to construct an inside job narrative. I wasn't. I could, but I'm not going to, at least not in a serious film.
There is much evidence for this.
Care to present some of it, rather than just asserting its existence?
Quote:
Quote:
Louis Fernandez (the cameraman) didn't say he thought people were involved in a drill, he said he expected to see a film crew. Obachike goes much further than just expressing disbelief at what he saw, he says the whole thing was either a drill, a mock-up, or an inside job. I am not aware of any corroboration of Obachike's story, and if you are then by all means tell me about it.
I'll take another look.
(edit) P14: 06:39 witness from top deck? And Louis Fernandez 07:25
A guy in a white shirt,… there wasn’t a drop of blood on it,… with the injuries you would think you know,…. It’s as though he had just been placed there.
As I said in the film, it appears Obachike took these stories and expanded on them, elaborated them into an inside job narrative. Neither the witness from the top deck (she has an Italian name I think but I can't remember offhand) nor Louis Fernandez say they thought they were seeing a drill. Daniel not only says he thought it was a drill or an inside job, he claims to KNOW it was a drill or inside job. Hence, his version is not corroborated.
Quote:
Quote:
I think you are assuming, as John Hill does, that there was an exercise going on in Tavistock Square. We don't know that this is the case. It might well be, but of course if you build assumptions onto assumptions you end up with something unrealistic.
Yes so do many other people and Peter Power told us so clearly there was an exercise going on. So 7/7 Ripple effect says he should be questioned further on this.
7/7 Ripple Effect claims that it was through this exercise that Peter Power (or someone working with him) recruited four Muslim patsies and yadda yadda yadda, conspiratainment hogwash, obligatory comparison to 9/11, throw Mossad in to curry favour with the anti-Jews and anti-Zionists.
It's dreadful production that shouldn't be taken in the slightest bit seriously. It starts with a desired conclusion, while sycophantically pretending to be employing Occam's Razor. It is a farce at best, and probably propaganda to try to discredit those who are genuinely researching 7/7.
Andrew. wrote:
Seeds of Deconstruction:
Is just to short on some facts that should have been mentioned as they are facts,
Would you care to mention some of these 'facts'? You keep asserting that they exist without giving name to them.
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 12:45 pm Post subject:
Vinciguerra wrote:
@ Tony,
You still haven't removed my private information. In accordance with the advice I've received about the Data Protection Act I'm being generous and giving you 36 hours before I proceed with a complaint to the Information Commissioner. As I said, I notice you've extended such a courtesy to someone who denies there's any need for a new 7/7 investigation/inquiry, so the fact you are refusing even when asked to extend that courtesy to me speaks volumes for your personal and moral integrity. Be warned, if the security of my email address suffers then I will be holding you personally responsible.
Gosling please address this. You should not post private pms nor individuals real names or email addresses without their express permission. You have been asked to remove it so DO.
On edit: See your own rules (which you threatened Vinciguerra with suspension for breaking!!!)
Quote:
8. Don't post PMs or other private communications on the public forum without the permission of the originator.
Any contravention of these rules may lead to your immediate suspension or banning by any of the moderators depending on the severity of the rule break.
_________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
7/7 Ripple Effect claims that it was through this exercise that Peter Power (or someone working with him) recruited four Muslim patsies and yadda yadda yadda, conspiratainment hogwash, obligatory comparison to 9/11, throw Mossad in to curry favour with the anti-Jews and anti-Zionists.
Yada yada Mr Seker, ‘ey up a' te faffin’
It's clear to many of us, and it's not worth talking to you because if I said white you'd say black.
Ah Tony, this is a cheap shot, particularly given what I explained above about critical faculties, attention spans and so forth.
Quote:
But the two have a similar feel to them.
If you think that then you've completely missed the point. If anything, my film is an antidote to the poison of Ripple Effect. Remember what I said about the Conspiracy Files episode. They would struggle to take anything said in my film and ridicule it, but approximately 30% of the entire script of Ripple Effect is unfounded allegations and spurious arguments, thus providing the debunkers with plenty of material. Throw in the obligatory Muslim who doesn't believe in the official story (Dr Naseem) and a couple of 'professional conspiracy theorists' in the form of you and Nick Kollerstrom, and they had all the footage they needed to present a calculated, psyop-inspired hit piece that tarred everyone involved in researching 7/7 with the same brush. If we're serious about change, we have to respond to their tactics with better ones.
7/7 Ripple Effect claims that it was through this exercise that Peter Power (or someone working with him) recruited four Muslim patsies and yadda yadda yadda, conspiratainment hogwash, obligatory comparison to 9/11, throw Mossad in to curry favour with the anti-Jews and anti-Zionists.
Yada yada Mr Seker, ‘ey up a' te faffin’
It's clear to many of us, and it's not worth talking to you because if I said white you'd say black.
Andrew Edmans
Are you really seeking to speak for anyone but yourself here? This is pretty childish stuff.
7/7 Ripple Effect claims that it was through this exercise that Peter Power (or someone working with him) recruited four Muslim patsies and yadda yadda yadda, conspiratainment hogwash, obligatory comparison to 9/11, throw Mossad in to curry favour with the anti-Jews and anti-Zionists.
Yada yada Mr Seker, ‘ey up a' te faffin’
It's clear to many of us, and it's not worth talking to you because if I said white you'd say black.
Andrew Edmans
Are you really seeking to speak for anyone but yourself here? This is pretty childish stuff.
You have made 8 posts, and make Alex Jones look like a saint. A shandeh un a charpeh. Comprehend?
And please learn to read "and" in context, please. Salem.
Last edited by Andrew. on Tue Sep 14, 2010 2:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
You still haven't removed my private information. In accordance with the advice I've received about the Data Protection Act I'm being generous and giving you 36 hours before I proceed with a complaint to the Information Commissioner. As I said, I notice you've extended such a courtesy to someone who denies there's any need for a new 7/7 investigation/inquiry, so the fact you are refusing even when asked to extend that courtesy to me speaks volumes for your personal and moral integrity. Be warned, if the security of my email address suffers then I will be holding you personally responsible.
Gosling please address this. You should not post private pms nor individuals real names or email addresses without their express permission. You have been asked to remove it so DO.
On edit: See your own rules (which you threatened Vinciguerra with suspension for breaking!!!)
Quote:
8. Don't post PMs or other private communications on the public forum without the permission of the originator.
Any contravention of these rules may lead to your immediate suspension or banning by any of the moderators depending on the severity of the rule break.
Indeed.
Not to mention that when you register for this site you are told:
Quote:
As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised.
This forum system uses cookies to store information on your local computer. These cookies do not contain any of the information you have entered above; they serve only to improve your viewing pleasure. The e-mail address is used only for confirming your registration details and password (and for sending new passwords should you forget your
current one).
With some of your question-s, I've been asked not to post on this thread. (history part)
This is bizarre. You claim my film is inaccurate, then when I ask you to qualify that you refuse and insult me, then admit you've been asked (by who I wonder?) to not post on this thread.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
