Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Who the hell is Barry Jennings?

Options
1234568»

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Podman wrote: »
    You don't need me to tell you what to think, make up your own mind.

    Is there some aspect of the "official" version you have ever questioned?

    He has made up his mind - that's the point - it was made up based on the evidence - not blind faith in the goodness of the Bush administration or whatever. He's asking for instances of what you believe is specifically in doubt - given that that's your contention, not his.


  • Options
    #213
    Podman
    Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Podman


    Podman wrote: »
    You don't need me to tell you what to think, make up your own mind.

    Is there some aspect of the "official" version you have ever questioned?
    alastair wrote: »
    He has made up his mind - that's the point - it was made up based on the evidence - not blind faith in the goodness of the Bush administration or whatever. He's asking for instances of what you believe is specifically in doubt - given that that's your contention, not his.
    Your speaking for Di0genes now? It couldn't have happened on a better question, lol.

    No, he's asking me what I think he should have a problem with, read it right.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    Okay, please point out some aspect of the "official" version you think I should have a problem with?


  • Options
    #214
    Podman
    Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Podman


    alastair wrote: »
    I posted on a previous thread that I subscribe to the truth of the 9/11 commission report as to the events of the day. If anyone has an issue with the details, I'm more than happy to provide specifics as to why it's based on actual evidence as opposed to imagination.

    Can you point out the post, or is it just "somewhere on boards"?


  • Options
    #215
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Podman wrote: »

    No, he's asking me what I think he should have a problem with, read it right.

    Perhaps you might clearly explain the difference between highlighting your problems, and you highlighting your problems to the person asking for said problems?


  • Options
    #216
    Podman
    Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Podman


    alastair wrote: »
    Perhaps you might clearly explain the difference between highlighting your problems, and you highlighting your problems to the person asking for said problems?

    Just for the record, I don't entertain question fails, or arguments about them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Podman wrote: »
    Just for the record, I don't entertain question fails, or arguments about them.

    That's handy. I notice you are equally handy at ignoring the inconvenient answers to misinformed questions too. You're quite the package.


  • Options
    #218
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Podman wrote: »
    Can you point out the post, or is it just "somewhere on boards"?

    Try here.


  • Options
    #219
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Podman wrote: »
    You don't need me to tell you what to think, make up your own mind.

    Is there some aspect of the "official" version you have ever questioned?

    So that'd be a no then. And you wonder you get so much derision.
    That's exactly what certain people are saying.

    So when you said that, you are completely unable to name one of those certain people.
    Show me any thread where a CTer asks a question of the official story, or proposes a new theory, and doesn't have someone jump down their throat about it?

    Show me anything on this specific thread that hasn't already been discussed already on this forum.

    Infact I bet 50euro to the Santa Strike force that you cannot find a single point raised on this thread that hasn't already been trashed out on a previous thread on this forum.

    So yes posters occasionally get annoyed when someone comes up and says 'Did you know that some of the hijackers are still alive" or "The FBI don't want Bin Laden for 9/11" and think they're bringing something we hadn't heard and discussed before.


  • Options
    #220
    Podman
    Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Podman


    alastair wrote: »
    That's handy. I notice you are equally handy at ignoring the inconvenient answers to misinformed questions too. You're quite the package.
    alastair wrote: »
    That's a very loose take on answering questions tbh. I'd put it more in the 'making **** up' bracket.

    I'll answer those questions in my own time, I'm not here just to run around after you.


  • Options
    #221
    Podman
    Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Podman


    Di0genes wrote: »
    Certain people here are saying "the US government say they didn't carry out 911, and that's good enough for me?" Here? On this forum?

    Usernames and Quotes please.
    alastair wrote: »
    Yeah - kinda akward to explain how you believe a plane isn't there, and yet... it is. It's as if you buy into any claim that's made without any attempt to consistency of logic. For the sake of clarity maybe eveyone should reveal precisely what they believe - I'll go first - the truth of what happened on 9/11 is as presented in the 9/11 Commission report.

    There, exactly what you wanted.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    So when you said that, you are completely unable to name one of those certain people.
    (premature)


    I would like to know though, if anyone has the balls to start a thread with the same attitude, and defend their beliefs with the same vigor as they attack others.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    alastair wrote: »
    The point of the Deep Throat evidence was not the veracity of the informer - it was the veracity of the evidence he pointed them towards.
    The Washington Post took two years to piece together the information and draw logical connections between the players and events .

    So if what Deepthroat, W&B and all the others were saying was so 'veracious', why do you think it took so long to topple Nixon and the rest of them? Why did it take so long for the tide of public opinion to turn?
    Did W&B just turn in their copy on day one and sit back and watch the dominos fall?
    Or would the two sentences above be you just trying to have your cake and eat it?
    Again, read the point that was being made, stop answering the issues you want to answer, does your argument no favours.


  • Options
    #223
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Podman wrote: »
    Easy, Here. And you can keep your Santa Strike Force, I'll have the 50 euro though.

    Hmm, by my count Barry Jennings has come up in this forum about a dozen times prior to this thread. Case in point.

    Oh, and the secret service man in your final video was pretty well prepared given that he was in his own work building with whatever gear the secret service require to have in stock for a city the size of New York. He made another appearance in tonights broadcast of 9/11 Attacks - 102 minutes that changed the world, along with more comprehensive footage of the wtc 7 lobby, sans any bodies on the floor.


  • Options
    #224
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    So if what Deepthroat, W&B and all the others were saying was so 'veracious', why do you think it took so long to topple Nixon and the rest of them? Why did it take so long for the tide of public opinion to turn?
    Did W&B just turn in their copy on day one and sit back and watch the dominos fall?
    Or would the two sentences above be you just trying to have your cake and eat it?
    Again, read the point that was being made, stop answering the issues you want to answer, does your argument no favours.

    I'll just have to repeat what I already stated (given that you clearly haven't taken it in again):
    The point of the Deep Throat evidence was not the veracity of the informer - it was the veracity of the evidence he pointed them towards. It's that absent veracity if evidence that distinguishes their approach to the Truthers. The Washington Post took two years to piece together the information and draw logical connections between the players and events - unlike the truthers. The issue isn't about trusting in government, or stopping digging - it's in filter


  • Options
    #225
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    alastair wrote: »
    I'll just have to repeat what I already stated (given that you clearly haven't taken it in again):

    Did you have trouble with simple maths at school Alastair?
    You evidently can't see the inherent contradiction in your answer in terms of what I was asking you to consider. Oh well.
    By your own logic you would be a member of this http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/
    Once upon a time 99.99% of people believed the earth was flat and they had evidence to prove it, i.e. What they could plainly see with their own eyes, then along came somebody with an incontrovertible fact that changed everything.....but sure that could never happen again, could it?


  • Options
    #226
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Did you have trouble with simple maths at school Alastair?
    You evidently can't see the inherent contradiction in your answer in terms of what I was asking you to consider. Oh well.
    By your own logic you would be a member of this http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/
    Once upon a time 99.99% of people believed the earth was flat and they had evidence to prove it, i.e. What they could plainly see with their own eyes, then along came somebody with an incontrovertible fact that changed everything.....but sure that could never happen again, could it?

    Actually and once again, embarrassingly for you, the myth of flat earth is exactly that. A myth. It was understood by the 3rd century BC that the Earth was a sphere.

    Or as the historian Jeffrey Robinson put it;
    "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat"

    http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/history/1997Russell.html

    I'd really stop digging now, both your examples have proven to be completely erroneous.


  • Options
    #227
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    :rolleyes::rolleyes: 'Once Upon A Time' does not preclude the first three centuries.

    And guh once upon a time we didn't know you could bang rocks together to make fire.

    You're getting more and more spurious with each post. Yes at times we have discovered new facts that change our world view. But these "facts" presented in this thread are neither "new" or indeed "facts". So until someone comes out with credible evidence that "9/11 was an inside job"
    Don't be deliberately dense to try to avoid the issue, the analogy I am making is clear, discuss or sit quietly at the back of the class please, nobody likes a smart alec.

    The analogy is as clear as mud. I don't see how Aristotelian history is in any way related to proving that the US government planned and executed the 9/11 attacks.


  • Options
    #228
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Podman wrote: »
    This quote is from the link I gave, Tell me where is this specific secret service man discussed anywhere else?

    Sure if you can explain why the presence of a Secret Service agent at the site of terrorist attack next door to his office is part of the conspiracy sure.
    Again, there goes alastair, making **** up to suit you.
    Just say whatever you like, people know you guys do that anyway.

    Careful you've dropped a few of those straws you're clutching at.

    And you should know, that a post that mentions Barry Jennings does not automatically address all the points made in this thread which is about Barry Jennings.

    How is the Secret Service agent related to Barry Jennings?


    Toys for sick children indeed... Pints for cronies more like.
    You're claiming that the Santa Strike force is con?


  • Options
    #229
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Di0genes wrote: »
    So you don't have any way of proving 911 was an inside job?

    No, I don't and never claimed to have, but as you now agree, 'it is possible'. Class dismissed.


  • Options
    #230
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    No, I don't and never claimed to have, but as you now agree, 'it is possible'. Class dismissed.

    Did I ever deny it was possible? Has anyone on this forum? It's possible the towers were knocked over by giant invisible unicorns. Or by a team of highly trained ninja monkeys. It's just very unlikely.

    I will entertain people with theories substantiated by facts. Something lacking for 9/11 conspiraloons.


  • Options
    #231
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Di0genes wrote: »
    Do you have anything to add to the debate aside from tenuous analogies and feeble attempts at sarcasm?

    For somebody throwing out plenty of ridicule and abuse you are awful sensitive go tobann.


    Seriously though..... Fabulous gains were made by vested interests (oil business, arms industry etc) as a direct result of what happened that day. It has always been in America's interests to keep it's relationship with the middle east unstable, the last thing they want is it populated with strong nations. Because of the above I will be suspicious of the 'official' 9-11 version until my dying day. As I don't have the resources to investigate myself I have to rely on the loons and the more serious questioners to do the digging.
    Ben Dunne being caught snorting coke in a hotel in Florida upset the applecart here in ways nobody foresaw and who knows what might happen down the road. There are numerous examples of things like this happening. Ten years is but a blip.
    You cannot seriously contend that a government and corporate world that have been guilty of exploititive and criminal behaviour in the past are above suspicsion. that's just head in the sand idiocy. Even if the conspiracy was only -the selective ignoring of intelligence- it is a conspiracy nonetheless.
    Corruption in the highest office of the land has no scale in my opinion, given the trust we invest in elected representitaves.
    So I exit this thread as I came in: keep digging.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Seriously though..... Fabulous gains were made by vested interests (oil business, arms industry etc) as a direct result of what happened that day.

    Opportunism isn't a crime.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    It has always been in America's interests to keep it's relationship with the middle east unstable, the last thing they want is it populated with strong nations.

    An uncertain middle east pushes up oil prices which is the last thing America would want.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Because of the above I will be suspicious of the 'official' 9-11 version until my dying day. As I don't have the resources to investigate myself I have to rely on the loons and the more serious questioners to do the digging.

    No problem with being suspicious but suspicion and evidence are very different. There seems to be an automatic distrust of the US government but I don't see them being any more or less likely to lie to me than anyone else.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Ben Dunne being caught snorting coke in a hotel in Florida upset the applecart here in ways nobody foresaw and who knows what might happen down the road. There are numerous examples of things like this happening.

    How did it upset the applecart exactly?
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Ten years is but a blip.

    Ten years and many thousands of people supposedly involved and not one speaks out. They all sit back and except mass murder of their own people. :confused:
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You cannot seriously contend that a government and corporate world that have been guilty of exploititive and criminal behaviour in the past are above suspicsion. that's just head in the sand idiocy. Even if the conspiracy was only -the selective ignoring of intelligence- it is a conspiracy nonetheless.
    Corruption in the highest office of the land has no scale in my opinion, given the trust we invest in elected representitaves.

    Governments are made up of individuals. Individuals with ordinary lives, friends and family. So while some of these individuals will cover up certain things it's incredibly unlikely large numbers of them will cover up mass murder of their own citizens. So unlikely IMHO that it didn't happen.


  • Options
    #233
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Di0genes wrote: »
    Sure if you can explain why the presence of a Secret Service agent at the site of terrorist attack next door to his office is part of the conspiracy sure.

    Podman's post is gone, but I'm assuming he didn't like the fact that the Secret Service had their offices in that building (not even next door - the guy was in the lobby of his own building)?
    The Secret Service had its largest field office, with more than 200 employees, in WTC 7
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

    (floors 9 and 10 - 85 thousand square feet)


  • Options
    #234
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    alastair wrote: »
    Podman's post is gone, but I'm assuming he didn't like the fact that the Secret Service had their offices in that building

    Alternatively he discovered that the proposed bet went to charity, and he got annoyed.

    For Nullaero eta all, I'd like to let you know I'll make a Santa Strike force donation in Podman's name to ensure the charity gets the cash it deserves.
    (not even next door - the guy was in the lobby of his own building)?

    Well exactly. For ****s sake the secret service team that travel with the president always carry.

    A) a surface to air rocket.

    B) several litres of the presidents blood.

    AND travel with him accepting the fact that part of the job involves throwing yourself in the line of a bullet.

    And you're amazed that an office, that includes the job of securing the national leader of a major super power, has breathing apparatuses at hand?


  • Options
    #235
    muincav
    Registered Users Posts: 810 ✭✭✭muincav


    quote from Di0genes--You're getting more and more spurious with each post. Yes at times we have discovered new facts that change our world view. But these "facts" presented in this thread are neither "new" or indeed "facts". So until someone comes out with credible evidence that "9/11 was an inside job"



    Why? Has someone got "credible" evidence it wasnt? I mean real evidence, not that crap that the US media feed us.....
    Diogenes--why are you even on here?


  • Options
    #236
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    muincav wrote: »
    Why? Has someone got "credible" evidence it wasnt? I mean real evidence, not that crap that the US media feed us.....
    Diogenes--why are you even on here?

    See we're not making any claims. We're saying that given the evidence the official version makes sense. What do you have an issue with?


  • Options
    #237
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    muincav wrote: »
    quote from Di0genes--You're getting more and more spurious with each post. Yes at times we have discovered new facts that change our world view. But these "facts" presented in this thread are neither "new" or indeed "facts". So until someone comes out with credible evidence that "9/11 was an inside job" Why? Has someone got "credible" evidence it wasnt? I mean real evidence, not that crap that the US media feed us.....

    Yeah. Credible evidence it wasn't The onus is on the person making the claim. You can claim that Jesus rode to the moon on a elephant, that doesn't mean I have to prove that he didn't.

    And as you've seen on this and other threads my evidence doesn't all come from tv.

    Diogenes--why are you even on here?

    Honestly? Well we had a team of 14 agents covering this site 24/7. Then for some reason our NWO handlers decided Demonspawn needed 12 on him at all time. It's a bitch but the overtime helps.


  • Options
    #238
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    This makes for interesting viewing.



  • Options
    #239
    Podman
    Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Podman


    alastair wrote: »
    Podman's post is gone, but I'm assuming he didn't like the fact that the Secret Service had their offices in that building (not even next door - the guy was in the lobby of his own building)?

    You can assume what you like but it wasn't me who deleted it. Maybe Di0genes saw he was losing the bet and ran off telling tales?

    After all, he did claim to be taking the money from charity instead of his own pocket.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    And you're amazed that an office, that includes the job of securing the national leader of a major super power, has breathing apparatuses at hand?

    Do you guys even know what your arguing about?

    I'm not questioning why he had a bag on his head.
    I'm not questioning whether he worked there.
    I'm not asking what connection he had to Jennings.

    The bet depends on this unanswered question from four days ago...
    Tell me where this specific secret service agent is discussed anywhere else?


  • Options
    #240
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Podman wrote: »

    Do you guys even know what your arguing about?

    I'm not questioning why he had a bag on his head.
    I'm not questioning whether he worked there.
    I'm not asking what connection he had to Jennings.

    The bet depends on this unanswered question from four days ago...
    Tell me where this specific secret service agent is discussed anywhere else?

    I think I've encountered a new degree of sad. :o

    But if that's the way you want to play it...

    So - when do you pay up?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement