vResistance Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Where v is better than you truthlogic, is that he explains his position, and provides sensible links and a summary of their contents. You just post links with no description. We were apparently the same person this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaydeebee Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 We were apparently the same person this morning. Well truthlogic definitely has other accounts on the forum. 'truth' and 'logic' 2 things that just do not fit with him/her at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 We were apparently the same person this morning. Only according to one person. I've not yet seen you resort to the ranting, shouting methods that truthlogic relies on, so I've got no concerns you're both the same person. And I've got better things to do than worry about which people have got multiple accounts and who is actually who. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I did you the honour of watching the footage,I've seen it before,none of the film is very conclusive and shows nothing after 7.25. So you now agree it does exist? So I wasn't lying? Or misinformed? Oh, and you did me no honour by watching the videos. If you didn't want to, I'm not going to jump up and down and scream at you for not researching the subject completely before daring to speak. All ties in with the training exercise theory.the rest of the footage is missing because they didn't make the trains that blew up. It ties in with the official story as well. In fact, it goes against Anthony's story, as he says it's impossible for them to be in London at 0725*. Video footage of people in a station can only prove they were there at the time of the recording, nothing more. Edit: * The video from Kings Cross Thameslink station appears to have a timestamp in GMT rather than BST, so obviously it was 0823 when the train arrived, not 0723, meaning the footage linked covered their activity up until 0825. There is of course the other footage of them in the underground station with an 0826 timestamp which matches up with this DST clock error. Before people claim conspiracy on this because the clock is wrong, remember, that if the powers that be have altered the timestamps, why not just put the one which matches their story in rather than one which is off by an hour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthlogic Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 To be honest I don't know enough to have a strong opinion. I think it likely they would catch and offer him because he wasn't one of them,the US wouldn't want him of course because they needed to keep the threat alive and Bin'laden doing his job. Having family business links with the Bush family etc. These people generally have a strong sense of oath ( be it from Rambo movies or presidential remarks :-) ) They had offered him multiple times , All all they wanted was sanctions lifted off them , and the odd cruise missile ) Do we always put sanctions on a county before invasion ? That would be the tactical thing to do also ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 They had offered him multiple times, How do you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaydeebee Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 They had offered him multiple times , All all they wanted was sanctions lifted off them , and the odd cruise missile ) Solid proof please. You always demand proof for your other silly theories so it's about time you cam up with some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthlogic Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 Here's what he had to say. Quote: Prof Rory Ridley Duff. "I don't know what SF is, so I can't be one how different approaches to research reveal different things about the claims surrounding events at Canary Wharf on 7/7 As I play a leading role in research training at the highest level, it would be fair to say my employer does have confidence in my ability to design research, and I have received bursaries for Research Excellence every year I've been at the university. I also won a national competition for a PhD bursary in 2002. This paper was written only for student consumption. I cannot help that many people have taken it from my website and circulated it (and uploaded it) to many other websites. It has become a much talked about paper (much more so that all my other papers - of which there are now about 40). However, I am happy to add a sane voice to the hysteria surrounding 7/7. To correct some misconceptions: 1. The article refers to "John Hill" throughout, whilst acknowledging at one point that he calls himself Muad'Dib. 2. I do not believe you will find statements anywhere on the internet that I support John Hill (in the sense that you imply), but I do engage in debate about the quality of the evidence in his documentary, and the attempt by the BBC to challenge it. I support pursuit of the truth, not John Hill. If John Hill's work takes us closer to the truth, I support his work, not him. 3. I utterly reject the idea that I am doing anything other than exercising my own judgement in a case where a person has been prosecuted for nothing more than trying to see justice done (as they see it). I have never met John Hill, and did not correspond with him until he contacted me to clarify issues in the first draft of the paper. I corresponded also with the BBC and J7 to clarify issues in the paper. He's not been favoured, or excluded, from discussions to improve the paper. Both he, and the BBC, are challenged in the paper over their political motives. This said, I have no problem supporting any person who intelligently follows the evidence available and draws credible conclusions from it. If that means I 'support John Hill' then so be it." Rory Ridley-Duff Sheffield Hallam University Wow what a powerful great post Thank you very much v . Don't think I have ever seen a post like that on sf How old is it ? Send me links please ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthlogic Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 "Join the dots sunshine, join the dots". Imagine the prosecution saying that to a Judge at a trial Haha Point is what sort of case with evidence is relay against these guys ? WhAt ever happened with the second wave of bombers ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 They had offered him multiple times , Going back to your OP - most of the links don't work. Evidence that he was offered "multiple times" - as well as evidence the Taliban were in a position to offer him up please. Can't remember any video from the Taliban showing Bin Laden under arrest. We need proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.