BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Flyattic

Listed below are comments made by Flyattic between Monday, 23rd June 2008 and Tuesday, 15th December 2009.

«Newer
Older»

COP15: Climate 'scepticism' and questions about sex 3:50pm on 15 Dec 2009 Another badly thought out piece of pop psychology by a peon without a basic understanding of either psychology or the environment. I'm glad i don't own a television. Can you imagine paying for "information" like this?
No mystery 3:09pm on 08 Oct 2008 Having researched this for over 3 years i have come to the conclusion that the coincidence theorists are literally not all there in the brain department. You put plain facts in front of them which they refuse to acknowledge. They have resorted to belittling comments and insults and quite honestly are either braindead or being payed vast amounts of money.

Building 7 is a hilrious case. They even had to come up with a never before encountered (made up) natural phenomenon (thermal expansion) to explain the collapse .

I recently saw the we are change video confronting mike rudin and to be honest the fear in his eyes at facing the truth was highly evident for all to see. The problem is, the people who have been researching and finding out about this subject for the last 7 years have massive amounts more knowledge on the subject than mike, and yet he gets to make a propaganda piece distorting the truth through omission of fact (the worst type of reporting imaginable)

I am sorry to say this mike. but you sold out. i hope it was worth it. in fact i'm sure it was.
Impossible conspiracies 1:49pm on 09 Jul 2008 Anglophone wrote "Altogether though it remains (to me)inconceiveable that anyone would, or could put this together and expect it to remain secret. As I have mentioned before, given the trillions of dollars spent, the economic damage done by spiralling oil prices, the loss of life and above all, the very public demonstration of the limits of US power, it has to rank as one of the least succesful conspiracies of all time!"

Your completely correct. It hasn't remained secret and is the most widely believed "conspiracy theory" ever , thus making it the least successful. I think you'll find the banks, the oil companies, the arms contractors and the building contractors are making a complete mint off this situation. Isn't it funny that they are the exact same people who give the largest shares of capital to the political parties in America. CRAZY!
Impossible conspiracies 1:41pm on 09 Jul 2008 in the end the balance of evidence both supports the demolition theory and counts against the fire theory. Although it is clear the BBC attempted at the end to put a pro fire spin on its documentary, it is interesting to note that by the numbers, the film actually supports the demolition theory! "Overall this film was much better than the BBC’s first film, which was completely laden with straw men, personal attacks, and charged emotions. Unfortunately, this film also suffers from this disease in parts, and the filmmakers appear to try to magnify its effect. Overall the film is educational for those who have not seen the evidence on WTC7, although the clear bias is designed to assuage the average viewer’s curiosity and imply that the mystery is solved. What is clear though is this: When viewed on the balance of evidence, the logical hypothesis is that WTC7 did not collapse due to fire, and that it is likely, just like the 9/11 attacks themselves, that the hand of man was actively involved."

http://www.infowars.com/?p=3209
Impossible conspiracies 1:40pm on 09 Jul 2008 why are posts on this board pre-moderated?

"Pre-moderation - every single message is checked before it appears on the board. All of the BBC's children's message boards are supervised in this way. "
Controversy and conspiracies III 6:05pm on 07 Jul 2008 mike rudin wrote

"In my last blog earlier this month about the London bombings of 7 July 2005 there was a lot of concern expressed by people who say that when they question such events they're told they're "mad, crazy or in a state of shock". I haven't done this and won't."

did you not watch the last 10 minutes of your own documentary?

oh and you cut silversteines little "pull it" speech one sentence short. yours ends with "so i told them to pull it" but the full interview ends with "and we watched the building come down" not sure why you would take this out but its irresponsible.

Not a great documentary really. a good opportunity gone to waste in my eyes. far more people could have been interviewed and the xfiles'ish music could have been taken out. You didn't really answer any questions with this but still clearly managed to alienate the alternative theorists even more from the public with the last 10 minutes.

Why did the CIA have headquarters in the most structurally insecure building EVER built? I think a new investigation needs to be made into which other buildings in the world are built in such a manner and should be dismantled.
Controversy and conspiracies III 4:25pm on 02 Jul 2008 Wow this blog post really brought out the official story theorists. I would like to state again that anybody who uses the word conspiracy theory as a derogatory term really needs to get their head checked. Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism.

it is very possible that wt7 may have eventually collapsed from fire, i don't think any alternative theorists dispute this. But it would have collapsed in an asymmetrical way and probably only partially (these are basic laws of physics, which for some reason don't apply to official theorists)

People have to realise that the official theory is just that A THEORY. No scientific facts have yet to surface in anyway from the official theorists, yet countless journals from scientists and engineers showing science in action are flooding the alternative theorists. This is why we, the critical thinkers are asking questions rather than towing the offical line.

Its even got to a laughable position where the alternative theory's are being debunked by blatantly propaganda sites. Do you really want to believe a website like JOD9/11 that has an advisory board with a man called "shagster" on it? then go straight ahead.

The upcoming WT7 report has a segment that states that just before collapse a fireball shot out of all the windows. Apparently according to nist there is no logical reason for this. well i have one crazy theory for you, but i don't think you want to hear it.

also anyone who thinks a conspiracy of this magnitude takes anymore that 10 people is living in an alternative reality. Have none of you heard of a thing called a "lie" its what people use to manipulate subordinates.

I really cant see the use of arguing with defenders of the official theory anymore. they are faceless entities who for all we know could be the same sweaty geek typing under different names. Instead of defending their official facts (of which there are none) they attack the theory of others. which is exactly what a conspiracy theorist does.

But hey, peak oil just hit and before long they will be living in run down city's fighting over copper wiring with the rest of us wondering what happened. we shall smile and pat them on the head and tell them about the history they hid from themselves for so long, invite them back to our sustainable communitys and all be friends again.
Controversy and conspiracies II 8:15pm on 29 Jun 2008 Something else has always troubled me about this whole 9/11 thing. If the only three buildings in history to have ever collapsed from fire all collapsed perfectly and symmetrically into their own footprints, why the heck do we need controlled demolition experts.

If anything 9/11 proves that we have no need for these so called demo experts and any buildings that need to be brought down in future can simply be brought down by any old bloke with some firelighters and some petrol. it would save millions.

no need for weeks of planning and expert placement of explosives. just start a fire. simple. sorry controlled demo experts, looks like your job was never needed in the first place.
Controversy and conspiracies II 5:23pm on 28 Jun 2008 I'm pretty sure that even if a moral and upstanding member of the bbc was to uncover that 9/11 was a inside job there is categorically NO WAY it would be broadcast.

I think people who believe in the official report feel that they are banging their heads against a brick wall when they talk to people with "alternative theorys" (conspiracy theory is an offensive term and should not be used in a non biased investigation) but they have to recognise that alternative theorists feel the exact same way.

Even if the american government didnt actually plant explosives in the trade centre buildings there is still so much evidence to support al-qaeda is a CIA "asset" that it would hardly even matter if the trade centers were brought down by CD.

The trade centres are merely an interesting and easily studied part of the CIA/al-qaeda alternative theory. Please for anyone who hasn't read "crossing the rubicon" i suggest you do.
Controversy and conspiracies 3:33pm on 23 Jun 2008 Just watched the trailer for this program and it looks like its going to tread the tried and tested structure of every conspiracy program ever made.

I am pretty sure the first 2/3 of this program will attempt to convince the watcher that building 7 was an inside job by showing cleverly edited footage of just enough of the truth to have the average jo believe.

Just as the watchers are beginning to question their perception of what really happened that day. The beeb will more than likely then begin to introduce holes in their edited footage with "experts" which will leave the viewer with a warm fuzzy feeling that "phew it wasn't an inside job after all" It's a very clever technique that can be used in all manner of ways.

Basically this program is going to be popular mechanics take 2 .

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Flyattic