| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 08, 2009 8:09 am Post subject: Sun09Aug - TALKSPORT - 1.30am Dylan Avery |
 |
|
I was listening to "The mother of all talk shows" last night and when George had finished, Ian Collins was on and he said he will be talking to Dylan.
I think it will be very early tomorrow morning but have sent an email to check.
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe someone should ring in and ask Avery to round up all the people who saw "the planes" on 9/11.
If he managed to find say, ten people who claimed to have seen them and interviewed each one independently to verify each story against all the others, would that put pay to the fakery crowd?
Nope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
5:30 Pacific time, which I think is 1:30 GMT tomorrow morning
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2009 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
50% Inside Job
50% Official Conspiracy Theory so far.
Graham is a bit cocky which is the usual MO for most of these late night Jockeys.
He has urged everyone to see the new LC though which is fair enough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
illeagalhunter
Moderate Poster
Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 106
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2009 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Anybody got a MP3 of this |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Linda
Validated Poster
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 558
Location: Romford Essex
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2009 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I listened to his program.
It was MIKE GRAHAM that interviewed Dylan Avery.
Mike Graham is a stupid fool and does not believe 9/11 was an inside job.
He was very critical and kept arguing with Dylan. Dylan stood his ground and fought back. Dylan Avery is a friend of mine on Facebook he has a new DVD coming out in September. He has left out some of the stuff from previous DVDS as he said it was impossible to prove.
Dylan and I often send each other links on facebook, he is very aware as to what is going on in this world. He has a good brain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe the reason Mike Graham has brought up 9/11 on his show is because I resently sent him some dvds with plenty of Lizard info on them!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Who made this? Coz its got Judy Wood's website on there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stephen wrote: |
Who made this? Coz its got Judy Wood's website on there. |
Thats what I thought! 
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stephen wrote: |
Who made this? Coz its got Judy Wood's website on there. |
All the ad's were cut out by these fair hands.We put all manner of websites on there for all tastes.
| Stephen wrote: | | Maybe the reason Mike Graham has brought up 9/11 on his show is because I resently sent him some dvds with plenty of Lizard info on them! |
This show may have happened despite your fine efforts Stephen. Avery gives a mention to someone called Pete who is responsible for setting up the interview apparently.
Though I'm sure your letters helped. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GodSaveTheTeam wrote: | | Stephen wrote: |
Who made this? Coz its got Judy Wood's website on there. |
All the ad's were cut out by these fair hands.We put all manner of websites on there for all tastes.
| Stephen wrote: | | Maybe the reason Mike Graham has brought up 9/11 on his show is because I resently sent him some dvds with plenty of Lizard info on them! |
This show may have happened despite your fine efforts Stephen. Avery gives a mention to someone called Pete who is responsible for setting up the interview apparently.
Though I'm sure your letters helped. |
Yeah, I sent loads of Lizards pics and everything!!! Oh, and some stuff about 9/11  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | All the ad's were cut out by these fair hands.We put all manner of websites on there for all tastes. |
Happy Xmas.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stephen wrote: | | Quote: | | All the ad's were cut out by these fair hands.We put all manner of websites on there for all tastes. |
Happy Xmas. |
I'm sensing a little over-anticipation of the festive season Stephen. It's only August. 
Remember to be a good little boy 'til Santa comes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| IMO Mike Graham could be a payed op. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The debunkers are out in force for this one.
They love attacking the segment 6 of 14.
Probably because the presenter gets Avery a bit heated about Alex Jones.
The pack mentality is somewhat amusing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The pack mentality is somewhat amusing. |
I find it very worrying the way things are going now. I can see it every day people just beleive what there told, even more they will use the TV as an excuse to become even more toxic, the brian washing is doing its job well filks just alow them selfs to be brain less dummies. The pack mentality is nothing new of course but theres something different with this laterst collective group mob. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed.
Trouble is they've got free reign.
No one's coming back at them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GodSaveTheTeam wrote: | Agreed.
Trouble is they've got free reign.
No one's coming back at them. |
You mean the mob not the Global ellite? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the agenda moving faster then most have the time to keep there social engineering programme is speeding up most people dont have a clue the changes that have been made can already be seen can anyone one or thing stop them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyway I'm not being funny but Dylan Avery comes across as weak in this interveiw.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IanFantom
Validated Poster
Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 296
Location: Halifax, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I found that interview rather interesting.
| Stephen wrote: | | IMO Mike Graham could be a payed op. |
I don't think there's much doubt about that, except that I suspect that in the UK things work more by privilege. He might have got his position by such means.
| Stephen wrote: | | Anyway I'm not being funny but Dylan Avery comes across as weak in this interveiw. Crying or Very sad |
I though Dylan did brilliantly. No-one could have got through that lot unscathed. Dylan has my admiration. At one stage I was thinking that if it were me I'd quietly accuse the host of usurping the show and putting himself up as the expert, and insist on taking the questions myself. At that point Dylan disappeared for a while 
I found the broadcast interesting because it provides good study material for anyone interested understanding commonly used techniques of debunking. I've been through it at a lowly level, and I can see the identical techniques being used by the same sorts of people at all levels, right from the tiny membership association to national radio on issues of terrorism and warfare.
At first they start off quite credibly, and you wouldn't even suspect a thing. Then they plant a few seeds of doubt that they can build up later into something you haven't said. Then they escalate the whole thing and tell everyone that they are being reasonable and having to put up with abuse, when in fact they are the ones being abusive.
Whilst they do this, they bring in accomplices. Initially, they, too, will seem quite credible, but then they build up a crescendo of innuendo, suggesting, bit by bit, that the victim is a 'conspiracy theorist', or 'paranoid', or some other sort of nutter.
It all ends up with them talking across the truther, with ums and ah's, and 'oh dear's, so that anyone with their left brains switched off will go along with the general consensus.
Such a process can take place over the duration of a single interview, or it can, within a given community, take several years.
Some common techniques of persuasion are
* to use intonation rather than arguments
* to use insinuation rather than facts
* to use nouns rather than verbs
* to misrepresent what the person has said
* to attack what the person hasn't said (the straw man argument)
* to accuse the person of getting emotional whether or not it's true
* to attack the person's loyalty, such as in helping the opposition, or merely of having nothing but disdain for the people in charge
* to reverse the situation, by accusing the person of what they are guilty of themselves
* to undermine the expertise of the person, often by claiming that they themselves are 'professionals'
As time goes on and the truth gets out, the opposition will step up its attacks, becoming more and more explicit and less and less subtle, eventually reaching near panic. At that stage, the truther needs just to stick to his guns. Nowadays, all this gets recorded and put on the Internet, and so, looking back on things, people can see how ludicrous some of the debunking is.
What do the debunkers achieve by this? I think by this stage it is a purely defensive manoeuvre. It may well keep many of the sheeple in their camp, but it won't bring any of the goats over. The undecideds will become more undecided.
Now imagine a rerun of Dylan's interview in the form of an AGM, with half a dozen Mike Grahams at the front, and a scattering of shills in the audience. They can build the whole thing up until it pretty well resembles a Nazi rally. That's pretty well what happened to me at, of all places, the AGM of the Esperanto Association in May. I'd been trying since the age of 13 (in 1958) to understand how the Germans could have been whipped up into a frenzy before the war, and wondering whether it could happen in the UK. I did't feel I could understand that until that AGM.
It's important for people to come to terms with that, rather than turning away from it, as most people do.
Once the truther can accept that key people amongst those who are attacking him are misrepresenting things intentionally, then he finds it much easier to keep cool, and to study them as objects rather than as feeling humans.
I think Dylan did brilliantly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| IanFantom wrote: | I found that interview rather interesting.
| Stephen wrote: | | IMO Mike Graham could be a payed op. |
I don't think there's much doubt about that, except that I suspect that in the UK things work more by privilege. He might have got his position by such means.
| Stephen wrote: | | Anyway I'm not being funny but Dylan Avery comes across as weak in this interveiw. Crying or Very sad |
I though Dylan did brilliantly. No-one could have got through that lot unscathed. Dylan has my admiration. At one stage I was thinking that if it were me I'd quietly accuse the host of usurping the show and putting himself up as the expert, and insist on taking the questions myself. At that point Dylan disappeared for a while
I found the broadcast interesting because it provides good study material for anyone interested understanding commonly used techniques of debunking. I've been through it at a lowly level, and I can see the identical techniques being used by the same sorts of people at all levels, right from the tiny membership association to national radio on issues of terrorism and warfare.
At first they start off quite credibly, and you wouldn't even suspect a thing. Then they plant a few seeds of doubt that they can build up later into something you haven't said. Then they escalate the whole thing and tell everyone that they are being reasonable and having to put up with abuse, when in fact they are the ones being abusive.
Whilst they do this, they bring in accomplices. Initially, they, too, will seem quite credible, but then they build up a crescendo of innuendo, suggesting, bit by bit, that the victim is a 'conspiracy theorist', or 'paranoid', or some other sort of nutter.
It all ends up with them talking across the truther, with ums and ah's, and 'oh dear's, so that anyone with their left brains switched off will go along with the general consensus.
Such a process can take place over the duration of a single interview, or it can, within a given community, take several years.
Some common techniques of persuasion are
* to use intonation rather than arguments
* to use insinuation rather than facts
* to use nouns rather than verbs
* to misrepresent what the person has said
* to attack what the person hasn't said (the straw man argument)
* to accuse the person of getting emotional whether or not it's true
* to attack the person's loyalty, such as in helping the opposition, or merely of having nothing but disdain for the people in charge
* to reverse the situation, by accusing the person of what they are guilty of themselves
* to undermine the expertise of the person, often by claiming that they themselves are 'professionals'
As time goes on and the truth gets out, the opposition will step up its attacks, becoming more and more explicit and less and less subtle, eventually reaching near panic. At that stage, the truther needs just to stick to his guns. Nowadays, all this gets recorded and put on the Internet, and so, looking back on things, people can see how ludicrous some of the debunking is.
What do the debunkers achieve by this? I think by this stage it is a purely defensive manoeuvre. It may well keep many of the sheeple in their camp, but it won't bring any of the goats over. The undecideds will become more undecided.
Now imagine a rerun of Dylan's interview in the form of an AGM, with half a dozen Mike Grahams at the front, and a scattering of shills in the audience. They can build the whole thing up until it pretty well resembles a Nazi rally. That's pretty well what happened to me at, of all places, the AGM of the Esperanto Association in May. I'd been trying since the age of 13 (in 1958) to understand how the Germans could have been whipped up into a frenzy before the war, and wondering whether it could happen in the UK. I did't feel I could understand that until that AGM.
It's important for people to come to terms with that, rather than turning away from it, as most people do.
Once the truther can accept that key people amongst those who are attacking him are misrepresenting things intentionally, then he finds it much easier to keep cool, and to study them as objects rather than as feeling humans.
I think Dylan did brilliantly |
Hey thanks for that. Yeah i think Dylan did brill under the circumstanes. I was wong to say otherwise. Your right to bring up the Nazi stuff as well. What i found interesting is that Graham at one point tryed to link truth seeking with terrorist activity! At that piont I would of fineshed the interview.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
