• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A Dishonest Quoting by Killtown

I'm unsure as to why Killtown gets so much "press" and attention from sceptics. He's clearly an 8 on the whackjob scale (Chris being 10) and is as thick as two short planks into the bargain (witness the childish drawings and apparent lack of secondary/high school education).

Is it just his vocal and sensational approach, that makes him famous (or infamous)? Casual CTists are one thing, but I wish we could deny people like KT the oxygen of publicity. Or preferably the oxygen of air.
 
CurtC said:
Au contraire, it slowed down the ID movement so much that it's circling the drain now. They seem to be regrouping, putting a different tuxedo on creationism. First they tried "scientific creationism" which was shot down, and they changed the name to "intelligent design" which has now been shot down. It will be interesting to see its form in its next incarnation.

But anyway, the thing that really killed ID is that the Dover school board had to pay the legal fees of the plaintiffs. This fact has already, more than once, dissuaded other school boards from touching ID.
Click to expand...
Good stuff, Curt.

If you hit people in their pocketbooks, their hearts and minds will follow.
 
Big Les said:
I'm unsure as to why Killtown gets so much "press" and attention from sceptics. He's clearly an 8 on the whackjob scale (Chris being 10) and is as thick as two short planks into the bargain (witness the childish drawings and apparent lack of secondary/high school education).

Is it just his vocal and sensational approach, that makes him famous (or infamous)? Casual CTists are one thing, but I wish we could deny people like KT the oxygen of publicity. Or preferably the oxygen of air.
Click to expand...
Quite. Consider this rough outline I have (NOTE: incomplete atm):
Flight 93 myths to address:

A. SHOOTDOWN
1. The CTists

a. Intercept, shoot down
1. flight93crash.com
2. flight93crash.com Shoot Down
3. 911research.wtc7.net Flight 93
4. freedomfiles.org Flight 93
5. American Free Press - Flight 93
6. Renew America - Kovach - Part 1
7. Renew America - Kovach - Part 2
8. Renew America - Kovach - Part 3
9. Renew America - Kovach - Part 4
10. Renew America - Kovach - Part 5
11. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30682
12. WingTV - Flight 93
13. http://www.infowars.com/articles/world/canada_missle_reject_perplexes_us.htm
14. http://proliberty.com/observer/20011023.htm
15. http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2622
16. http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/93_shootdown.htm
17. http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2004/042104flight93.htm
18. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shootdown.html
19. http://www.911review.com/errors/phantom/flight93.html

b. Rumsfield “shoot down” comment
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0
2. http://www.infowars.com/articles/world/canada_missle_reject_perplexes_us.htm
3. http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2622
4. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42112

c. Claims of explosions prior to impact
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/
2. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shootdown.html

d. Bomb onboard
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_bomb.html

e. High-power Microwave Weapon
1. http://members.fortunecity.com/seismicevent/
2. http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/flight93.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Intercept, shoot down
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/missing_engine.html
2. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7&c=y
3. http://web.archive.org/web/20041101190530/http://www.pittsburghpulp.com/content/2002/11_28/news_cover_story.shtml
4. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#flight-93-was-shot-down

b. Rumsfield “shoot down” comment

c. Claims of explosion prior to impact
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/explosion_and_smoke.html
2. http://www.911myths.com/html/plane_holed.html

d. Bomb onboard

e. High-power Microwave Weapon

B. FAILURE TO SHOOT DOWN
1. The CTists

a. Failure to intercept
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/
2. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38207

b. Intercept, but inaction
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/
2. http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93.shtml

2. The Debunkers
a. Failure to intercept

b. Intercept, but inaction

C. DIDN’T CRASH
1. The CTists

a. Landed in Cleveland
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://www.rense.com/general56/flfight.htm
3. http://airgames.bravehost.com/flight93.html

b. Tail #’s
1. http://911search.bravehost.com/twintails591UA.html
2. http://airgames.bravehost.com/flight93.html

c. Plane crash in New Baltimore, PA
1. http://www.wingtv.net/flight93.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Landed in Cleveland
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/93_landed_in_cleveland.html
2. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - Confused with flight 1989
3. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - Lands in Cleveland?
4. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#flight-93-landed-in-cleveland

b. Tail #’s

c. Plane crash in New Baltimore, PA

d. Mayor’s comment
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/there_was_no_plane.html

e. Seen after 9/11
1. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg5.html - Spotted after 9/11?
2. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#flight-93-still-exists

f. Didn’t crash
1. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#flight-93-didnt-crash

D. PHYSICS OF THE CRASH
1. The CTists
a. Overriding autopilot
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/

b. Exceeding stress parameters and midair breakup
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/

c. Flight telemetry at impact
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

d. Debris and ground conditions
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93.shtml
3. http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2005/08/hopefully-my-last-analysis-of-flight.html

e. Crater fire damage
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

f. Coroner comments
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93Somerset.shtml

g. Debris distance
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/
2. http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_secondary_debris_field.html
3. http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/flight93/index.html
4. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shootdown.html
5. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

h. “Strange finds”
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93.shtml
3. http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/RedBandanas.htm

i. Unburned debris
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

j. 2nd engine pond location
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

k. Val McClatchey photo
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://flight93photo.blogspot.com/
3. http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/flt93.htm

2. The Debunkers
a. Overriding autopilot

b. Exceeding stress parameters and midair breakup

c. Flight telemetry at impact

d. Debris and ground conditions
1. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - No debris found?
2. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#the-physical-evidence

e. Crater fire damage

f. Coroner comments

g. Debris distance
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/missing_engine.html
2. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7&c=y

h. “Strange finds”
1. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#black-boxes-and-passports

i. Unburned debris

j. 2nd engine pond location

k. Val McClatchey photo

E. PROBLEMS WITH EYEWITNESSES
1. The CTists
a. Conflicting eyewitness statements
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Conflicting eyewitness statements

F. OTHER AIRCRAFT
1. The CTists
a. White jet
1. http://www.flight93crash.com/
2. http://www.flight93crash.com/second-plane-at-flight93-crash-site.htm
3. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
4. http://www.rense.com/general64/white.htm

b. C-130 sighted at time of crash
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

2. The Debunkers
a. White Jet
1. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7&c=y
2. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#flight-93-landed-in-cleveland

b. C-130 sighted at time of crash

G. THE LOCATION OF THE CRASH
1. The CTists
a. Service road coincidence
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

b. Crash site landowners
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

c. ANG and LEPC
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

d. Military flight corridor
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

e. Raytheon & Northrop locations
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

f. Warren Buffet jet
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Service road coincidence

b. Crash site landowners

c. ANG and LEPC

d. Military flight corridor

e. Raytheon & Northrop locations

f. Warren Buffet jet

H. TIMELINE
1. The CTists
a. NORAD timeline
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/flight93/index.html
3. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/flight_93_cvr.html

2. The Debunkers
a. NORAD Timeline
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_seismology.html

I. THE HIJACKERS AND PASSENGERS
1. The CTists
a. Hijackers
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

b. Passengers oddities
1. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html
2. http://www.wingtv.net/flight93.html
3. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/flight_93_passengers.html

c. Cell phone calls
1. http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93.shtml

2. The Debunkers
a. Hijackers
1. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#the-hijackers

b. Passenger oddities
1. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - All passenger remains identified
2. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - Human remains recovered

c. Cell phone calls
1. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4#the-cell-phone-calls

J. MEMORIAL
1. The CTists
a. Flight 93 memorial is Islam symbol
1. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05253/569055.stm
2. http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2005/11/redesigned-flight-93-memorial-still_30.html
3. http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003506.htm
4. http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-09142005-541451.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Flight 93 memorial is Islam symbol

K. FOREKNOWLEDGE
1. The CTists
a. Shanksville ERs warned to expect victims before crash
1. http://www.wingtv.net/flight93.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Shanksville ERs warned to expect victims before crash

L. EVIDENCE RELEASE AND FALSIFICATION
1. The CTists
a. Gag orders
1. http://www.wingtv.net/flight93.html

b. FOIA requests
1. http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd232.htm

c. CVR is hoax
1. http://flyingimam.blogspot.com/2006/04/flight-93-cockpit-recording-is-hoax.html
2. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Gag orders

b. FOIA requests

c. CVR is hoax
1. http://www.911myths.com/flight93.transcript.pdf
2. http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/04/12/flight93.transcript.pdf
3. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg5.html - Cockpit recorder transcript released
4. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg5.html - Missing minutes from CVR?

M. GENERAL
1. The CTists
a. General CT site references
1. http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/attack/flight93.html
2. http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/index.htm
3. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/flight_93_index.html
4. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2001/10/22/hsorensen.DTL
5. http://flight93hoax.blogspot.com/
6. http://www.flight93crash.com/
7. http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight93.html
8. http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93.htm
9. http://letsroll911.org/articles/flight93shotdown.html

2. The Debunkers
a. Debris photos
1. http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
2. http://www.911myths.com/html/more_flight_93_photos.html
3. http://www.911myths.com/html/epa_report_photos.html

b. General
1. http://www.freetimes.com/story/681
2. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/flight93-air-traffic.htm
3. http://www.flight93memorialproject.org/
4. http://www.lolinfowars.co.nr/
5. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html
6. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - 9/11 Commission statement
7. http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg4.html - Official story?
8. http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change-4
Click to expand...

ETA: Point being, look at how many CTists links point to a KT website.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious about this posting by killklown....

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/02/911-rescuer-saw-explosions-inside-wtc.html
Click to expand...

Not the content of the 'interview' but simply the fact that he seems to claim to have conducted the interview himself.

Now firstly, who would willingly be interviewed by someone going under an internet nickname without demanding to know that person's real name?
I wonder if it is possible that the people killklown claims to have interviewed do actually know his name.

Secondly, if indeed people are willing to answer questions from a sooper seekrit internet investigator without knowing that persons real identity, what does that say about the interviewee? Can they be trusted? Would a person without an agenda be prepared to maintain the secrecy of killklowns true identity?

I'm just askin' questions here

(ooooops I forgot to number them...sheesh :D )
 
JonnyFive said:
I don't. I think the experience of Killtown in person would be a deeply unpleasant and frustrating one.
Click to expand...

Since I consider it and it's accomplices to be beneath contempt and of no real importance - which I would happily say in it's face (even if that face is where I suspect it is on it's body - it would merely be interesting and possibly even "feel-good" to meet it.:D :D :rolleyes: :jaw-dropp :jaw-dropp :jaw-dropp
 
Further to my previous post, another curio (to me anyway) is why people are willing to talk to these amatuer slueths anyway. Perhaps it's a particularily American phenomena, but I'm fairly certain that had I been a witness to some traumatic event and someone contacted me for an interview, unless they were law enforcement or an acredited journalist, I'm not going to give up my time to speak with someone just because they happen to have a website. This most certainly also applies to the Elite Pentagon Research team who seem to have had very little difficulty in convincing people to talk to them.

So am I a crotchety old git or do you colonials feel the same way?
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Quite. Consider this rough outline I have (NOTE: incomplete atm):


ETA: Point being, look at how many CTists links point to a KT website.
Click to expand...

You have got to get a better hobby.

How long did it take to put that all together? How many brain cells did it cost you? I think my head would explode about 1/4 of the way through that....
 
uk_dave said:
Further to my previous post, another curio (to me anyway) is why people are willing to talk to these amatuer slueths anyway. Perhaps it's a particularily American phenomena, but I'm fairly certain that had I been a witness to some traumatic event and someone contacted me for an interview, unless they were law enforcement or an acredited journalist, I'm not going to give up my time to speak with someone just because they happen to have a website. This most certainly also applies to the Elite Pentagon Research team who seem to have had very little difficulty in convincing people to talk to them.

So am I a crotchety old git or do you colonials feel the same way?
Click to expand...

You call up and say "I am an investigator" or "I am a reporter". You don't mention with who or what unless asked and even then you do so as vaguely as possible.
 
Wow. This is probably one of the most blatant examples of "quote-mining" that I've ever seen.
 
uk_dave said:
Further to my previous post, another curio (to me anyway) is why people are willing to talk to these amatuer slueths anyway. Perhaps it's a particularily American phenomena, but I'm fairly certain that had I been a witness to some traumatic event and someone contacted me for an interview, unless they were law enforcement or an acredited journalist, I'm not going to give up my time to speak with someone just because they happen to have a website. This most certainly also applies to the Elite Pentagon Research team who seem to have had very little difficulty in convincing people to talk to them.

So am I a crotchety old git or do you colonials feel the same way?
Click to expand...

You're wrong. 82.6% of Brits would talk about their parents' sex life to any nincompoop with a website or a camera, in the hope it would get them on "Big Brother" one day. :boxedin:
 
valis said:
You call up and say "I am an investigator" or "I am a reporter". You don't mention with who or what unless asked and even then you do so as vaguely as possible.
Click to expand...

But if you were the interviewee it would be stupid not to ask, surely?
 
Lurker said:
Just how dishonest can Killtown be?
Click to expand...

i quickly jogged through that sickening blog of KT's. more holes there than a gravedigger convention.
he certainly seems like a bad lot. i wonder does val know of her character assasination there?

BV
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Yes, she does.
Click to expand...

she should complain to his isp/his webspace/his blog providers everybody. if they don't remove his vitriol she should sue their arses. the man is webstalking her. surely there are US agencies that would help curtail his harrassment of her?

BV
 
bonavada said:
she should complain to his isp/his webspace/his blog providers everybody. if they don't remove his vitriol she should sue their arses. the man is webstalking her. surely there are US agencies that would help curtail his harrassment of her?

BV
Click to expand...
Well, at least the 911review.org domain appears to be self-hosted (on cursory examination), so unless they are violating their ToS with their provider not much can be done there. Hazarding a guess, the "owners" of 911review.org have a ToS set up with the people they host that washes the "owners" hands of the content that their "customers" content to get them out of any issues with the pipe's provider and the "owners" of 911review.org aren't going to pull his stuff.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Well, at least the 911review.org domain appears to be self-hosted (on cursory examination), so unless they are violating their ToS with their provider not much can be done there. Hazarding a guess, the "owners" of 911review.org have a ToS set up with the people they host that washes the "owners" hands of the content that their "customers" content to get them out of any issues with the pipe's provider and the "owners" of 911review.org aren't going to pull his stuff.
Click to expand...

surely there must be some recourse for the lady? i remember a test-case where providers were forced to shut down a site containing some infringement. sorry i cannot remember any details. i'm fairly sure it was the US but it may have been the UK. the "handwashing" of content became a non-starter for the defence. 911review.org, if refusing to remove KT's libels become knowingly complicit surely? i am not a law expert. maybe others could clarify?

BV
 
bonavada said:
surely there must be some recourse for the lady? i remember a test-case where providers were forced to shut down a site containing some infringement. sorry i cannot remember any details. i'm fairly sure it was the US but it may have been the UK. the "handwashing" of content became a non-starter for the defence. 911review.org, if refusing to remove KT's libels become knowingly complicit surely? i am not a law expert. maybe others could clarify?

BV
Click to expand...
Here's a pretty good primer on libel law in the US:
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/press/press08.htm
This phrase in particular jumped out at me:
it is almost impossible for a writer to be found guilty of libel if the writing deals with opinions rather than facts.
Click to expand...

The general truth of the matter is that US libel laws tend to favor free speech, that winning an internet libel case is notoriously difficult, and that people who successfully sue for libel in the US are generally rich, patient, and have a clear-cut case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom