Dylan Avery Gets Schooled By The BBC (Video)

I just finished that BBC program (thanks for the link), I have to say Jones, Fetzer, and Avery came off as scary stupid to me...

Wonder if the BBC will do a 2nd edition, or final cut of this show...

you know.... to cover the updates to the "truth"
 
Bottom line: Avery came across as the incredibly nasty, ignorant, scab-picking child that he is. The portrayal was entirely accurate.

"Wally Miller can say whatever he wants. People can say they saw this, say they saw that."

Those people were there, Avery, and you refuse to even talk to them. Instead, you're going to tell them what they did and saw, and take their quotes out of context in order to support your lies. You goddamned piece of excrement.
 
StoneRook said:
I just finished that BBC program (thanks for the link), I have to say Jones, Fetzer, and Avery came off as scary stupid to me...

Wonder if the BBC will do a 2nd edition, or final cut of this show...

you know.... to cover the updates to the "truth"
Click to expand...
They're doing a show on WTC 7 next.
 
Edx said:
Yes I have and you obviously have been reading. Ive stated many things in several different ways and Im not going to go to the trouble of listing it all out for you for you to just ignore again. If I seem a little confrontational its because Im frustrated by how totally closed so many of you are to any idea that a anti-CT film could possibily be wrong or bad. They do it too Miss! is not a justifiable defence. The idea that any attacking of CTs are good no matter what, is shamefull. This is the James Randi forum, you guys should know better. I am disapointed in all of you.



Looks like you werent paying attention.


Fine, but dont pretend there arent any witness' that dont seem to support the ideas of the CT claim. Dont pretend Robert Rodregex doesnt exist, dont pretend the Jersey Girls dont exist. Dont pretend only "drop outs" and CT evangalists have any criticisms of the official story..



Wrong again, as Ive already talked about. 3 CTs against 9 "experts" including the guy from Popular Mechanics for the debunkers and then several victims family members that were saying how horrible CTs are, and a "witness'" including a irrelevant Jewish lady to lend an emotional helping hand to their implication that they were anti-Semitic and an X-Files producer saying that CTs were insane. Sorry, thats not showing more support for the CTs.


This is the stuff that really annoys me. Why put that in quotes as if thats what I wrote? I specifcally said thats not what Ive been saying



And look you do it again. No wonder you agree with the film, it seems you like engaging in attacking a few strawmen of yourself, dont you?
Click to expand...


Willie Rodriguez will not tell his ever-changing story to anyone who doesn't pay him. Is that simple enough for you?
 
Edx said:
Its not logically incompatible, look at Zeitgeist. Has a tone of errors on it mainly from various other CT films, but one of the main points in Part 2 was about the prior warnings and intelligence they had.
Click to expand...

I have no interest in what Zeitgeist has to say. If you can't see that theory (a), which states that the US Government organised and executed the 9-11 attacks, is logically incompatible with theory (b), which states that the US Government had prior warning that al-Qaeda was planning the 9-11 attacks but was incompetent in planning and executing its response to those attacks, then you're not competent to express any opinions on anything.

Dave
 
Hilarious, thank you Gravy, Walter Ego, boloboffin and others (you know who you are) who put this stuff together.
 
Dave Rogers said:
I have no interest in what Zeitgeist has to say. If you can't see that theory (a), which states that the US Government organised and executed the 9-11 attacks, is logically incompatible with theory (b), which states that the US Government had prior warning that al-Qaeda was planning the 9-11 attacks but was incompetent in planning and executing its response to those attacks, then you're not competent to express any opinions on anything.

Dave
Click to expand...

Look outside the box for a second.

If the USG as a whole, planned and executed 9-11 then yes, your point stands.

But lets look at it from a different angle, and perhaps more likely (if 9-11 were an inside job).

A few individuals at the top knew about it. The actual set up (CD setup, hijacker recruitment, flight training, etc, etc) was outsourced and over looked on by the few top individuals in the government keeping the secret (CIA/FBI individuals, Executive branch individual, corporate heads, whatever).

So it is a real terror plan, and other governments catch onto it. The CIA doesn't because at least one top individual keeps it suppressed.

The other governments warn about it, like they did, but the information, like most intel, is fuzzy. So the plan goes ahead.
 
Sizzler said:
Look outside the box for a second.

If the USG as a whole, planned and executed 9-11 then yes, your point stands.

But lets look at it from a different angle, and perhaps more likely (if 9-11 were an inside job).

A few individuals at the top knew about it. The actual set up (CD setup, hijacker recruitment, flight training, etc, etc) was outsourced and over looked on by the few top individuals in the government keeping the secret (CIA/FBI individuals, Executive branch individual, corporate heads, whatever).

So it is a real terror plan, and other governments catch onto it. The CIA doesn't because at least one top individual keeps it suppressed.

The other governments warn about it, like they did, but the information, like most intel, is fuzzy. So the plan goes ahead.
Click to expand...
Take that bold sentence and remove the CD part. You now have the only MIHOP scenario that makes any sense. Any skeptic could buy into the possibility that a few CIA operatives recruited and trained 20 Arabs, and the rest is as it seems. Forget CD, forget missiles, space beams or nuclear devices.
Why the "truth" movement can't see that this is the most plausible scenario of them all is beyond us. Not saying it is even remotely true, and there are probably logic holes in that as well, but if you guys want to get off the crazy train and go with semi-plausible reality, then go with that.

Does this make sense?
 
Reality Believer said:
Take that bold sentence and remove the CD part. You now have the only MIHOP scenario that makes any sense. Any skeptic could buy into the possibility that a few CIA operatives recruited and trained 20 Arabs, and the rest is as it seems. Forget CD, forget missiles, space beams or nuclear devices.
Why the "truth" movement can't see that this is the most plausible scenario of them all is beyond us. Not saying it is even remotely true, and there are probably logic holes in that as well, but if you guys want to get off the crazy train and go with semi-plausible reality, then go with that.

Does this make sense?
Click to expand...

Totally makes sense.

The problem is that some believe the WTC collapses are what will open this case up. Unfortunetely that means going the path of CD.

Your post has total merit. Claiming CD has shifted the burden of proof; especially for such a huge claim.
 
Sizzler said:
Totally makes sense.

The problem is that some believe the WTC collapses are what will open this case up. Unfortunetely that means going the path of CD.

Your post has total merit. Claiming CD has shifted the burden of proof; especially for such a huge claim.
Click to expand...

Quite an absurd approach to try and open an investigation into the CIA in my opinion.

Wonder why they don't just, you know, start with the CIA instead of jerking around for 6 years.
 
Reality Believer said:
Take that bold sentence and remove the CD part. You now have the only MIHOP scenario that makes any sense. Any skeptic could buy into the possibility that a few CIA operatives recruited and trained 20 Arabs, and the rest is as it seems. Forget CD, forget missiles, space beams or nuclear devices.
Why the "truth" movement can't see that this is the most plausible scenario of them all is beyond us. Not saying it is even remotely true, and there are probably logic holes in that as well, but if you guys want to get off the crazy train and go with semi-plausible reality, then go with that.

Does this make sense?
Click to expand...

I still don't see a motive that outweighs the risk here. Bush already had legal grounds to invade Iraq, and the Afghanistan War was a loss from day 1. Bush knew that before overthrowing the Taliban and did it anyway.

The risk = Execution of perpetrators at minimum. Possible revolution and overthrowing of longest lasting democracy in human history. Probable worldwide unrest for years.

The reward = ???
 
Sizzler said:
The problem is that some believe the WTC collapses are what will open this case up. Unfortunetely that means going the path of CD.
Click to expand...


The *cough* "problem" is that some conspiracy promoters claim controlled demolition, some claim therm*te, some claim pod planes, some claim remote missiles, some claim space beams, some claim "mini-nukes", some claim no planes, some claim video fakery, some claim "da Joos", some claim voice morphing, some claim flyovers, some claim shootdowns, some claim spooky faces in the smoke, some claim numerology, some claim that the hijacked flights actually landed in Cleveland, some claim that the passengers are still alive, some claim that the hijackers are still alive, some claim bombs, some claim remote control planes, some claim planes decked out as other planes, some claim complicity by thousands of people, some claim faked crash scenes, some claim ...well, you get the idea.

In the circumstances, is it even remotely surprising that the vast majority of the population dismisses 9/11 conspiracy theories out of hand?
 
Last edited:
cisco said:
I still don't see a motive that outweighs the risk here. Bush already had legal grounds to invade Iraq, and the Afghanistan War was a loss from day 1. Bush knew that before overthrowing the Taliban and did it anyway.

The risk = Execution of perpetrators at minimum. Possible revolution and overthrowing of longest lasting democracy in human history. Probable worldwide unrest for years.

The reward = ???
Click to expand...
See, now we are debating tangible points with that scenario. Not physical and logistical impossibilities. I should have been a troofer. Could pwn you skeptics with my mad skillz!:boxedin:
 
Sizzler said:
Totally makes sense.

The problem is that some believe the WTC collapses are what will open this case up. Unfortunetely that means going the path of CD.

Your post has total merit. Claiming CD has shifted the burden of proof; especially for such a huge claim.
Click to expand...


When will you apologize for masquerading as an agnostic?
 
Anyone wanna bring up the list of people who would have to be involved in this little caper to be pulled off to appease those who like to insist it was just a handful of people involved who are suppressing everything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom