| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
sounds good.
although i'm going to start up www.cunningandsociallyawarepeoplefor911truth.com
which does not in anyway exclude working class people. but does exculde trigger happy speculation
the ptb are very cunning i'm sure you'll agree. we have to try and be atleast equally cunning if we're going to have any kind of success. playing into their hands isn't very clever
i've got a lot of respect for shaylers bravery.
but at some point you've got to take a step back and consider things a bit more rationally. suggesting that the planes were not real is based on very very flimsy evidence and is very very dangerous. credible sounding folk such as shayler have to be aware of the line the public percieve between conclusion and speculation.
i really think the whole lot of us need to divulge in positive debate about speculation and conclusion and pyschology and stuff
i've been out drinking so this might not sound how i meant it to sound
_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Ok Timmy - put youself in David Shayler's shoes
The interviewer says - "well Timmy you think 911 was an inside job and you say it was not Mohammad Atta and co flying those planes - well just who was?"
What would you say? |
i would speculate that the planes were remote controlled. i would make it clear i was speculating and that further investigation was required in order to conclude anything
_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TimmyG wrote: | | Quote: | Ok Timmy - put youself in David Shayler's shoes
The interviewer says - "well Timmy you think 911 was an inside job and you say it was not Mohammad Atta and co flying those planes - well just who was?"
What would you say? |
i would speculate that the planes were remote controlled. i would make it clear i was speculating and that further investigation was required in order to conclude anything |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | TimmyG wrote: | | Quote: | Ok Timmy - put youself in David Shayler's shoes
The interviewer says - "well Timmy you think 911 was an inside job and you say it was not Mohammad Atta and co flying those planes - well just who was?"
What would you say? |
i would speculate that the planes were remote controlled. i would make it clear i was speculating and that further investigation was required in order to conclude anything |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
There is past precident for remote controled aircraft. Not so with holograms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyb
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1025
Location: SW London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
Well at least we have proof of remote control planes. I'm still waiting for the No Planers to address the evidence question. Andrew said he wanted to discuss is yet hasn't addressed the question form John White about the strongest evidence for this theory.
_________________
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheggerz
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
Posts: 14
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:55 am Post subject: Shayler on Sky |
|
|
Just want to thank DS for brilliant guerilla-journalism in getting so much peak time air talking about 911 and 7/7. It was truly inspirational.
I thought he handled the NPT OK but we shouldn't go there at all as I and many other people like Alex Jones (if anyone has done more wide-spectrum research than AJ I would like to know who) will never ever give credence to it.
As Annie says we don't need to go there. People can only take in a few points at a time, especially with such a mind-blowing concept as the inside job of 911.
In my view we need to stick to a top 5 points of attack which for me would be
1) WTC7 - no plane hit, Silverstein on PBS
2) twin towers demolition - no steel building fallen in history
3) Operation Northwoods - for precedent
4) PNAC 2000 document - for motive
5) 9 of 19 hijackers still alive and no names on flight manifests.
How can people hearing this for the first time take in any more than that?BTW These are just my top 5, everyone should have their own but please no NPT or Pentagon (the MSM honeypot topic).
The only other thing I would do in an interview is give more background to admitted false flags like Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, Reichstag burning. This is why AJ's Terrorstorm is powerful, these facts warm people up with incontrovertible facts and precedent, making it easier to understand how 911 is just another example in history.
We also need to quote websites for people to go and research 911, why not www.nineeleven.co.uk ??
Lets not forget the MSM always expect us to be able to prove 100% everything that happened on 911. This is missing the point!! We have more than enough evidence for a trial and criminal conviction of the perpetrators, thats all we need so let's not fall into the trap of trying to explain the whole thing from start to finish.
Well done again David
Cheggerz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skeptic
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good work by David.
I think a simple way of avoiding the NPT trap in interviews is to frame the context - simply explain that because the official story can be shown to be false, we do not know what the truth about 9/11 is. The reason we have so many different wild theories being asserted is that many people realise that the official story is false and because we have no official investigations they are forced to speculate. It's all too easy to be forced to give a complete narrative of what happened that day when really all that need be done is disprove the official narrative. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyb
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1025
Location: SW London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
It was good work at the start but I failed to see any trap set by the interviewer. Dave mentioned it may not be planes without being led that way, the interviewer didn't really pick it up and then he mentioned it again near the end, once again without being led but this time it got picked up. After the New Statesmen article it would have been wiser to steer clear. Operation Northwoods, Able Danger, War Games, ISI's money wire to Atta, the put options, etc would have provided so much more impact.
_________________
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| andyb wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
Well at least we have proof of remote control planes. I'm still waiting for the No Planers to address the evidence question. Andrew said he wanted to discuss is yet hasn't addressed the question form John White about the strongest evidence for this theory. |
The official figures from the Bureau of Transportation statistics indicate that neither AA 11 nor AA 77 flew on Sept, 11 2001. This solves the question of what happened to them. Nothing. Because the flights did not exist. This is consistent with other evidence which shows that they were not the objects responsible for the Pentagon and Nth WTC tower incidents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | andyb wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
Well at least we have proof of remote control planes. I'm still waiting for the No Planers to address the evidence question. Andrew said he wanted to discuss is yet hasn't addressed the question form John White about the strongest evidence for this theory. |
The official figures from the Bureau of Transportation statistics indicate that neither AA 11 nor AA 77 flew on Sept, 11 2001. This solves the question of what happened to them. Nothing. Because the flights did not exist. This is consistent with other evidence which shows that they were not the objects responsible for the Pentagon and Nth WTC tower incidents. |
This is the strongest evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iro
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 376
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TimmyG wrote: | if shayler mentioned the no planes theories in this interview then i'm very dissapointed.
as far as i can see any progress made will have been made by the 'other side' |
that is my opinion also.
far from agreeing with john white who stated diplomatically that the 20 minutes of good david did talking brilliantly about the core aspects of 9/11 was counterbalanced by the last 2 minutes of 'no planes' i think the last two minutes completely destroyed the work he built up earlier in the interview.
David smirked as he talked about it and the camera held the shot long enough to make him look like a nutter - even though he clearly is not a nutter. There is nothing constructive in talking about this on the precious few occasions someone connected to this movement gets major and lengthy airtime - especially in an environment like that interview where david had a free reign more or less
what a total waste of time in the end. i have a deep respect for david - but he's going to do more damage than good and reinforce the nutty stereotypes of this genre of investigation by continuing to peddle unproven and at least shaky and doubtful 'theories' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Andy
Dave's using the Sky interview tonight on his show. How about coming on and debating this? We'll buy the beers!
Regards
Annie
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallious wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | andyb wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
Well at least we have proof of remote control planes. I'm still waiting for the No Planers to address the evidence question. Andrew said he wanted to discuss is yet hasn't addressed the question form John White about the strongest evidence for this theory. |
The official figures from the Bureau of Transportation statistics indicate that neither AA 11 nor AA 77 flew on Sept, 11 2001. This solves the question of what happened to them. Nothing. Because the flights did not exist. This is consistent with other evidence which shows that they were not the objects responsible for the Pentagon and Nth WTC tower incidents. |
This is the strongest evidence? |
Tell me Fallious - you earlier said you did not know what happened that day - although you are absolutely certain and will argue till you are blue in the face that it was not the no planes theory ----------------------------
That leaves hijacking and remote controlled ----------------what evidence do you have for either of these --------------even the most flimsy evidence will do for a start if you cannot offer anything tangible
So le's have it spill the beans |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermate wrote: | | Strawman? Shill? Fruitcake? Who knows. |
Hi Thermate
I think you'll find that I have consistently argued against talking about the NPT in public. While it's it's an area of academic interest, and we should research all possibilities, it is absolutely NOT helpful for campaigning purposes.
I just don't like name-calling and labels - it's divisive, and in this case, unjust.
Regards
Annie
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: | Hi Andy
Dave's using the Sky interview tonight on his show. How about coming on and debating this? We'll buy the beers!
Regards
Annie |
does the show take callers?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skeptic
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
what frequency is the show broadcast on?
thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: | | I just don't like name-calling and labels - it's divisive, and in this case, unjust. |
Yeah, well I'd just finished watching the interview and was struggling to think of a reason why he'd forcibly push NPT, unprompted.
_________________
Make love, not money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ally wrote: | | utopiated wrote: | | Annie wrote: |
But the guy speaks the truth as he sees it, and I have to say that in all his years of whistleblowing he hasn't been pulled up factually yet.
|
Apart from on Pam Am flight 103...
|
Very true...... |
I have enjoyed this thread!!
One final comment. How exactly has Shayler been proved wrong about this? A Libyan IO has been convicted for the Lockerbie attack.
It amazes me that two such dedicated truth seekers have fallen for this particular lie. Please read my book (it's in libraries, you don't have to buy it), which shows in detail the way in which this particular CT has evolved.
Immediately after the attack, MI6 leapt in and said the attack was carried out by an Iranian-backed terrorist group. This information came from one unreliable source. Then, the painstaking forensic case was carried out by many intelligence agaencies and police services internationally, and the trail led back to Libya. The motive was there, the modus operandi was there, and the forensics were there.
But MI6 didn't want to lose face, plus they were keen to frame Iran, in the same way and for the same reasons that we see Iran under threat today.
So despite all the evidence, MI6 continued to brief all and sundry that it was the Iranians. In fact, there was a big PR push in the mid-1990s, precisely at the time Dave headed up the Libyan desk in MI5 and he spent many hours going over the details and refuting these claims in reports to Whitehall. So he knew the accusations inside out.
He also pushed to give the evidence to the UK Lockerbie families, to help set their minds at rest. MI5 refused, on the grounds that the case was sub-judice, and the families became convinced there was some sort of cover-up going on. In contrast, the US families were told the evidence, and are satisfied with the verdict of the Scottish court.
The fact that Shayler has fought against one of the big modern CTs should increase his value to this campaign, as it shows he doesn't leap uncritically onto the back of every random theory floating around.
Regards
Annie
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | Fallious wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | andyb wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
Well at least we have proof of remote control planes. I'm still waiting for the No Planers to address the evidence question. Andrew said he wanted to discuss is yet hasn't addressed the question form John White about the strongest evidence for this theory. |
The official figures from the Bureau of Transportation statistics indicate that neither AA 11 nor AA 77 flew on Sept, 11 2001. This solves the question of what happened to them. Nothing. Because the flights did not exist. This is consistent with other evidence which shows that they were not the objects responsible for the Pentagon and Nth WTC tower incidents. |
This is the strongest evidence? |
Tell me Fallious - you earlier said you did not know what happened that day - although you are absolutely certain and will argue till you are blue in the face that it was not the no planes theory ----------------------------
That leaves hijacking and remote controlled ----------------what evidence do you have for either of these --------------even the most flimsy evidence will do for a start if you cannot offer anything tangible
So le's have it spill the beans |
2 seconds on google...
http://www.oilempire.us/remote.html#robotwarplanes
10,000 words of flight test reports, related articles images and movies.
And if you could do the same for hologram technology please... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK, Dave's show is broadcast in London on Resonance 104.4 fm. Outside the M25, it's an internet job.
And no, it doesn't take callers - the station is run on a shoestring and doesn't have the technology, I'm afraid.
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermate wrote: | | Annie wrote: | | I just don't like name-calling and labels - it's divisive, and in this case, unjust. |
Yeah, well I'd just finished watching the interview and was struggling to think of a reason why he'd forcibly push NPT, unprompted. |
And name calling helps how, precisely??
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyb
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1025
Location: SW London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: | Hi Andy
Dave's using the Sky interview tonight on his show. How about coming on and debating this? We'll buy the beers!
Regards
Annie |
Anything for a free beer! He is a good speaker though so it would be a very tough debate. Re the calls, why not post questions here and I can raise them in the show?
_________________
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: |
One final comment. How exactly has Shayler been proved wrong about this? A Libyan IO has been convicted for the Lockerbie attack.
It amazes me that two such dedicated truth seekers have fallen for this particular lie. Please read my book (it's in libraries, you don't have to buy it), which shows in detail the way in which this particular CT has evolved.
Immediately after the attack, MI6 leapt in and said the attack was carried out by an Iranian-backed terrorist group. This information came from one unreliable source. Then, the painstaking forensic case was carried out by many intelligence agaencies and police services internationally, and the trail led back to Libya. The motive was there, the modus operandi was there, and the forensics were there.
But MI6 didn't want to lose face, plus they were keen to frame Iran, in the same way and for the same reasons that we see Iran under threat today.
So despite all the evidence, MI6 continued to brief all and sundry that it was the Iranians. In fact, there was a big PR push in the mid-1990s, precisely at the time Dave headed up the Libyan desk in MI5 and he spent many hours going over the details and refuting these claims in reports to Whitehall. So he knew the accusations inside out.
He also pushed to give the evidence to the UK Lockerbie families, to help set their minds at rest. MI5 refused, on the grounds that the case was sub-judice, and the families became convinced there was some sort of cover-up going on. In contrast, the US families were told the evidence, and are satisfied with the verdict of the Scottish court.
The fact that Shayler has fought against one of the big modern CTs should increase his value to this campaign, as it shows he doesn't leap uncritically onto the back of every random theory floating around.
Regards
Annie |
I don't buy this bull on Libya being behind it and neither does QC Robert Black who's done painstaking research on the subject, you really expect me to believe the bomb started of in Malta? And the key witness behind the conviction of the Libyan has even less credibility than George Bush. It seems more like Shayler doesn't want to lose face after publishing a pile of baloney framing Libya for the crime. I remember the first two years after the crime the finger pointed everywhere except Libya then suddenly Gaddafi was the bogey man because it was 'politically convenient', did you miss the recent Scottish Herald report about the CIA FIXING the trial for this reason?
Don't you think MI5 would have fed Shayler a bile of nonsense 7 years after the crime was actually committed? I do.
Have you read Ian Ferguson's book?
Cover Up of Convenience: The Hidden Scandal of Lockerbie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
and you say 911 was an inside job yet Zacarias Moussaoui was recently convicted of his link to it? They obviously fix trials for politically convenient reasons all the time.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/moussaoui/moussaouiho me.html
| Quote: |
"He killed the 9/11 victims as surely as if he had been at the controls of one of those airplanes."
--U. S. Attorney Robert Spencer, in his opening statement in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui |
Last edited by Ally on Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: | | And name calling helps how, precisely?? |
It made me feel better. And may offer some clues on why the most prominent UK 911 Truth campaigner would pimp NPT.
_________________
Make love, not money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ally
Of course I know they fix trials. For heaven's sake, look what happened to Dave!! It doesn't mean that happens every time though.
All I'm suggesting is go to a library, get my book out, and read up on the relevant sections. They raise some interesting questions. They're also very good at demonstrating precisely how the media is controlled by the intelligence agancies.
Then get back in contact with me about this.
BTW I LOVE your wall chart in critics' corner.
Regards
Annie
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: |
It amazes me that two such dedicated truth seekers have fallen for this particular lie. Please read my book (it's in libraries, you don't have to buy it), which shows in detail the way in which this particular CT has evolved.
|
that's patronising considering it took you and Dave FOUR YEARS to realise 911 was an inside job. That amazes me!
Last edited by Ally on Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:08 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallious wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | Fallious wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | | andyb wrote: | | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: |
Well if you came out with remote controlled on tv - there would be just as much disbelief as no planes |
Well at least we have proof of remote control planes. I'm still waiting for the No Planers to address the evidence question. Andrew said he wanted to discuss is yet hasn't addressed the question form John White about the strongest evidence for this theory. |
The official figures from the Bureau of Transportation statistics indicate that neither AA 11 nor AA 77 flew on Sept, 11 2001. This solves the question of what happened to them. Nothing. Because the flights did not exist. This is consistent with other evidence which shows that they were not the objects responsible for the Pentagon and Nth WTC tower incidents. |
This is the strongest evidence? |
Tell me Fallious - you earlier said you did not know what happened that day - although you are absolutely certain and will argue till you are blue in the face that it was not the no planes theory ----------------------------
That leaves hijacking and remote controlled ----------------what evidence do you have for either of these --------------even the most flimsy evidence will do for a start if you cannot offer anything tangible
So le's have it spill the beans |
2 seconds on google...
http://www.oilempire.us/remote.html#robotwarplanes
10,000 words of flight test reports, related articles images and movies.
And if you could do the same for hologram technology please... |
THIS IS NOT EVIDENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="andyb]Anything for a free beer! He is a good speaker though so it would be a very tough debate. Re the calls, why not post questions here and I can raise them in the show?[/quote]
Cheap at the price.
On mature reflection, wouldn't this just highlight the very issues we don't want to bang on about in public?
However, it would be an interesting debate. What do people think?
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Annie wrote: | Hi Ally
Of course I know they fix trials. For heaven's sake, look what happened to Dave!! It doesn't mean that happens every time though.
All I'm suggesting is go to a library, get my book out, and read up on the relevant sections. They raise some interesting questions. They're also very good at demonstrating precisely how the media is controlled by the intelligence agancies.
Then get back in contact with me about this.
BTW I LOVE your wall chart in critics' corner.
Regards
Annie |
I done this last week and you ignored my thred. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
