Comments on Anything that defies my sense of reason....: Jane Standley, Jane Stanley, Richard Porter, BBC World News, Saloman Brothers, 47 WTC7 Stor(e)ys & the number 23

There was plenty of smoke behind Jane Standley'...

2011-02-26T04:04:35.806+00:00

There was plenty of smoke behind Jane Standley's lovely head that afternoon - The mirrors bit came in eventually to haunt her for the rest of her life!
Just imagine if the transmission had continued for just 3 minutes more and she heard the rumble through the window, JUST IMAGINE HER FACE!

I've just seen this article and I think the an...

2010-07-24T18:47:08.371+01:00

I've just seen this article and I think the answer is "a bit of avant-garde reporting from 23 minutes into the future". Good stuff!

Hey Aninnymouse,You got your information regarding...

2007-03-12T05:04:00.000+00:00

Hey Aninnymouse,

You got your information regarding WTC7 from NIST's provisional paper WHICH OFFERS NO CONCLUSIONS why the building fell. What you are relying on is NIST's computer modelled hypothesis derived from a total dearth of physical evidence, scant and inconclusive documentary evidence, and conflicting first responder testimony, anotherwords an hypothesis devoid of any data which can be observed and tested any place but upon a laptop. Get jiggy with yourself. Garbage in, garbage out yo. Hey Antagonist, of a piece with the Feeb's WTC7 cockup is the emergence Fri. March 9 on the nineeleven.co.uk messageboard YouTube video which captured snippets of Channel 5's 9/11 coverage. Here the female presenter announces the collapse of the second tower before it happens. How does she know? She tells us. She is getting updates from the WTC website. Not only does this mysterious website tell her of the collapse in waiting, they give her the reason why the building will collapse. Watch it for yourself, and while you're at it, notice how Channel 5's news staff sneaks in falling debris footage from the implosion of the first tower in support of the WTC website's theory of the collapse mechanism of the second tower. One has to wonder whether this mysterious WTC website (mysterious to me) was also the source of the Feeb's erroneous information concerning WTC7. The address of this YouTube video, if the evil gits haven't taken it down, is http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=60128#60128

The Western World has all but lost interest in the...

2007-03-11T18:01:00.000+00:00

The Western World has all but lost interest in the endlessly repeated canards that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition OR particle weapon beams from space. Thanks to all those well informed scientists in the "inside job" community for making that all clear to us.

7WTC came down because of massive debris from the falling Twin Towers and a raging inferno fed by 50000 gallons of fuel oil where the buildings steel frame cantilevered over enormous emergency power generators.

Now, perhaps the hard core "inside jobbers" can go back to "proving" how the Holocaust never happened, JFK was killed by the CIA's Cuban Mafia, and the moon landings were faked.

Thomas Friedman has already proved the world is flat.

Mate, keep up the good work. This is excellent.

2007-02-28T20:42:00.000+00:00

Mate, keep up the good work. This is excellent.

Hi Stef, Interesting that you mention Blairwatch p...

2007-02-28T18:22:00.000+00:00

Hi Stef,

Interesting that you mention Blairwatch post dedicated to such things, they even posted a link to this. A definite about turn from Blairwatch in a manner not entirely unlike that of Mr Monbiot's recent little hissy fit, as documented here and elsewhere.

A couple of examples of Blairwatch of yore with reference to 7/7:

"Others are suggesting a Public Inquiry will achieve nothing and are suggesting an inquiry by the public will prove more illuminating than a Public Inquiry ever would. These are not conspiracy theorists, they are asking questions about the inconsistencies and impossibilities in the 'media narrative'. On the back of his post questioning the media version of events, the Antagonist has set up a forum to try and get answers to some of these questions. Others are suggesting a Public Inquiry will achieve nothing and are suggesting an inquiry by the public will prove more illuminating than a Public Inquiry ever would. These are not conspiracy theorists, they are asking questions about the inconsistencies and impossibilities in the 'media narrative'. On the back of his post questioning the media version of events, the Antagonist has set up a forum to try and get answers to some of these questions." -- Ringverse 20.12.05

Also:

"I want to say here, that I do not subscribe to the Conspiracy Theories that abound about 7/7. But I do not accept that the 'narrative' of the day's events stands up to scrutiny. The antagonist is asking questions here, not offering answers. He shouldn't have to, we should be having a full and frank transparent public enquiry. Anything less is an insult to the families of the dead, and the survivors, not to mention criminally negligent." -- Ringverse 06.01.06

All of which is pretty reasonable, fair and balanced. So who knows what changed. I just went back to see if Ringverse was still posting and he is. However, his latest post is about dealing with Tony Blair -- war criminal and mass murderer -- by sending a text, paying £1.50 for an old song and achieving the illusion of democracy and justice through individual acts of coordinated capitalism. Or something like that.

Just read this amusing post on the Blairwatch site...

2007-02-28T17:37:00.000+00:00

Just read this amusing post on the Blairwatch site

www.blairwatch.co.uk/node/1509

Listen guys, you've posted the same thing time after time on Blairwatch. We do not believe the theories based on the evidence you present. We're also concerned that you also appear to get a lot of your 'evidence' from neo-nazi sites.

You are welcome to post here on other subjects, but we're bored of the same old story you're spamming us with.

Therefore we will delete any further posts by yourselves on 9/11 and 7/7.