Comments on: Too Easy to Knock http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248 Photography, Graphic Design, Art, Code... Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:16:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: fusi http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-66834 fusi Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:27:28 +0000 http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-66834 <p>"I suppose it’s my own fault for getting lulled once again into thinking the BBC are a news agency instead of a propaganda machine"</p> <p>haha bang on</p> “I suppose it’s my own fault for getting lulled once again into thinking the BBC are a news agency instead of a propaganda machine”

haha bang on

]]> By: Jenny Taylor http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-56282 Jenny Taylor Sun, 21 May 2006 15:57:34 +0000 http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-56282 <p>Fantastic thought , Why not consider changing things by becoming invoved in politics! and by the way it is i before e except after c !, Fire fox by the way is brill! aj</p> Fantastic thought , Why not consider changing things by becoming invoved in politics! and by the way it is i before e except after c !, Fire fox by the way is brill! aj

]]> By: Denyerec http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-54731 Denyerec Thu, 18 May 2006 14:08:04 +0000 http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-54731 <p>A lot of people would be quietened if a fully open, civillian review of all the available evidence was permitted. Most official sources have been linked in some way to beneficiaries and as such should be treated with caution. Of course this is one of the great weapons against "Conspiracy Theorists", the constant and unwavering notion supplied almost anonymously by the media that 'regulated', 'government', 'official' and 'corporate' reports are infallible.</p> <p>Is the 9/11 commission report intended to be a collation of facts or an emotive peice? If it is the former, then why do sections contain emotive language and present the conclusions of the facts alongside or before the facts themselves? (Refer to section 5.4, that one is rather poignant).</p> <p>The report admits it has no clear evidence of a money trail to Bin Laden, but waves conjecture around the place. "Money might have come from drug running", "Money might have come from charities" before capping it off with the trophy piece "Ultimately the question is of little practical significance".</p> <p>You have to admire it. I always thought people were innocent until proven guilty and guilt is something you really, really want to have very clearly outlined before you set about destroying a nation or two.</p> <p>I don't pretend to have my own theories, or subscribe to any particular version of events, be it aliens, gassing, or men in blue gloves. All I feel is that something is amiss and until all the inconsistencies are explained, think that public ridicule of others with a similar mindset should be avoided at all cost.</p> <p>One only need look back on how, say, Galileo was treated by the authorities to see that what may appear preposterous to officially endorsed thinking may not be so crazy afterall.</p> <p>(As a footnote, once again you make it clear your view is not impartial. Your statement of "Believing in little green men" is just another way of painting the "Conspiracy Theorists" with the same commonly seen brush of ridicule and derision.)</p> A lot of people would be quietened if a fully open, civillian review of all the available evidence was permitted. Most official sources have been linked in some way to beneficiaries and as such should be treated with caution. Of course this is one of the great weapons against “Conspiracy Theorists”, the constant and unwavering notion supplied almost anonymously by the media that ‘regulated’, ‘government’, ‘official’ and ‘corporate’ reports are infallible.

Is the 9/11 commission report intended to be a collation of facts or an emotive peice? If it is the former, then why do sections contain emotive language and present the conclusions of the facts alongside or before the facts themselves? (Refer to section 5.4, that one is rather poignant).

The report admits it has no clear evidence of a money trail to Bin Laden, but waves conjecture around the place. “Money might have come from drug running”, “Money might have come from charities” before capping it off with the trophy piece “Ultimately the question is of little practical significance”.

You have to admire it. I always thought people were innocent until proven guilty and guilt is something you really, really want to have very clearly outlined before you set about destroying a nation or two.

I don’t pretend to have my own theories, or subscribe to any particular version of events, be it aliens, gassing, or men in blue gloves. All I feel is that something is amiss and until all the inconsistencies are explained, think that public ridicule of others with a similar mindset should be avoided at all cost.

One only need look back on how, say, Galileo was treated by the authorities to see that what may appear preposterous to officially endorsed thinking may not be so crazy afterall.

(As a footnote, once again you make it clear your view is not impartial. Your statement of “Believing in little green men” is just another way of painting the “Conspiracy Theorists” with the same commonly seen brush of ridicule and derision.)

]]> By: paul reynolds http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-54730 paul reynolds Thu, 18 May 2006 12:48:30 +0000 http://www.denyerec.co.uk/posts/248#comment-54730 <p>As the 'journalistr' responsible, may I say that when you explain what happened to Mrs Olson, I might start believing in little green men. Is she hiding somewhere? And the other AA 77 passengers? All the facts about 9/11 are available either in 9/11 Commission report or the numerous technical journals which are probably of more use to theorists.</p> As the ‘journalistr’ responsible, may I say that when you explain what happened to Mrs Olson, I might start believing in little green men. Is she hiding somewhere? And the other AA 77 passengers? All the facts about 9/11 are available either in 9/11 Commission report or the numerous technical journals which are probably of more use to theorists.

]]>