Talk Conspiracy Member Posts

 

muscatred's Profile

Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
Correct Score Competition:

Not entered
Correct Score Competition
Flat Out Racing:

Not played Flat Out Racing


No Profile Picture uploaded

Team:


Where from:


Favourite player:


Best team moment:


Interests:


Timezone:




muscatred's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To muscatred's Posts

 

 

To muscatred's last 5 rumours posts

 

To muscatred's last 5 rumour replies

 

muscatred's rumours posts with other poster's replies to muscatred's rumours posts

 

24 Nov 2016 23:28:58 Thread on 9/11 below continued here.

Can you be more specific [on 9/11], I'm not sure what you're referring to.

muscatred

{Ed033's Note - If you don't know much about 9/11 (and obviously you do not), then a start is to read a scientific study put into a book - Dr. Judy Wood's book called 'Where did the Towers Go?'


If you won't do that then how about watching the below, which has scientific analysis using 3D models followed by some facts and some theories.

Richard D. Hall - 9/11 3D Analysis 2016 Update


1.) 25 Nov 2016 13:24:02
I'm sure that's the book my pal showed me, if it is its a little pricey if your not into 9/ 11. I'm sure he said it was around £30.


2.) 25 Nov 2016 16:01:52
Edd033, I remember years ago on YouTube I came across a video of one of the crashes. The video was titled with numbers obviously to deter it being found by those willing to take it down. It was amateur footage. It was footage that I never seen before or seen again. The camera man is sitting right beneath its flight path and he's probably 100 metres away from the tower which it hits.

However as the camera is looking upwards and as the plane / drone enters, the video turns to that old fuzzy grey screen. Basically proves the real football and probably damaging footage was deleted or destroyed. That's why I don't particularly take notice of the videos made available. Because they've been edited or don't show enough. Wings missing and almost cartoon imagery. Even the videos close to towers have the explosion noises edited out. Thus you're making a conclusion of tampered evidence/ videos. It's a shame.

{Ed033's Note - yes, 9/11 allowed the start of the 'Greater Israel' project.


3.) 25 Nov 2016 17:22:26
I wasn't referring to 9/11 but to franky's question about the VIP thing.

As an aside, I watched that when you first posted it. I actually thought it was a really interesting exercise and well put together but what's fascinating is that his conclusions fly in the face of his own investigation. He's gone to all this effort and come to the conclusion that the footage of planes flying into the buildings is genuine but he still can't admit that planes flew into the buildings.

He tries to justify this by presenting some other evidence as fact when it isn't (simulations show that that airspeed was easily possible and soft materials not being able to damage harder materials is nonsense) . Sorry Ed, you'll have to find something a bit more convincing.

{Ed033's Note - I'm not here to try to convince people of anything only to show them some stuff they may not be aware of and let them make their own mind up.


4.) 25 Nov 2016 18:32:15
That's one thing I respect you for ed033! You don't edit pick or choose just put the info out there. I still can't get my head round 9/11 and I don't doubt anything. Keep posting the stuff ed. been a revelation since I found this page.


5.) 25 Nov 2016 18:54:41
Ino mate. As long as Israel is protected then the world will see no end of war.


6.) 25 Nov 2016 23:06:08
'Simulations show that that airspeed was easily possible'.

It is abundantly clear you know nothing about aviation.

The maximum operating speed for a 767 is 360 knots, and according to the NTSB UA175 was flying at 510 knots just before it allegedly hit WTC2. That is not possible at 700' above sea level. At least not without the wings snapping off. Ask any pilot if a 767 can do 510 knots at 700 feet. But what would they know?


7.) 28 Nov 2016 10:39:33
Muscat I would like to see you answer Rians assertion out of interest, I have a close family friend who is a commercial airline pilot, and will be having this discussion with him tonight, if possible. cheers.


8.) 28 Nov 2016 15:53:15
Hi Jonesy, There are two points up for debate here, the first is whether a 767 could achieve the speeds quoted and the second is would a 767 hold together at that speed. The first part is the speed, 360 knots is the max operating speed of a 767 at sea level but this is a prescribed limitation not a physical one, there is no doubt that a 767 could go faster than this if the throttle is fully opened and the plane is in descent.

A guy called John Bursill claims to have used a simulator to recreate the flight of United 175 and was able to achieve 654mph in level flight at 2000ft and 674mph in a shallow dive, much higher than the 560mph that United 175 is claimed to have been traveling on 9/11.

Of course his findings have been refuted by pilots for truth. The idea that a 767 would break up at that speed is based on an investigation by Pilots for Truth into an Air Egypt 767 which crashed. I found a thread on metabunk.org that tackled this with the conclusion that PfT had either misread the report or were wilfully lying.

The bottom line is that this is a theoretical debate as Boeing aren't too keen to test this with a real plane. It comes down to which internet source you believe is more credible, the sources I read made sense and effectively refuted the claims of Pilots for Truth and, as I'm someone who thinks planes did hit the towers, I'm inclined to believe that a 767 is perfectly capable of doing what the official narrative claimed it did.

I'd be interested to hear what your friend says, I too know someone, an ex-Army Air Corp pilot who now flys airliners out of Dubai, I'm not sure what model he flys but I might bother him for an opinion.


 

 

23 Nov 2016 22:08:51
Some of you may have noticed my posts and that fact that my views are in opposition to a lot of what is said on here. I accept that some conspiracy theories have a kernel of truth to them but I believe most are a result of people being selective in the evidence they choose to believe. I think it's clear that Apollo 11 landed on the moon, that Al Qaida highjacked 4 planes on Sep 11th and flew them into various buildings and I don't believe the Rothschild family control the world.

In terms of the US election I think it's laughable that people thought the election was going to be rigged in favour of Clinton but today I experienced the power of conspiracy theories for myself.

I saw a link to an article that argued that voter fraud did take place but in fact in favour of Trump, it didn't cite much evidence other than that voting patterns were unusual and that the 'just enough votes' nature of Trump's victory in four swing states was suspect. You have no idea how much I want this to be true and I find myself battling my better judgement on the issue.

For interest I link the article. I wonder what the other posters think of it.


goo.gl/mqliAZ

muscatred

{Ed033's Note -
1. Nobody has ever said on here that the Rothschild family control the world. They clearly don't but they do have a fair amount of influence

2. It's completely unclear whether Apollo 11 landed on the moon or not

3. Wtf - It's seriously not clear that Al Qaeda highjacked 4 planes on Sep 11th and flew them into various buildings. (this web site is way too advanced for you)


1.) 23 Nov 2016 22:26:20
I'm all for disagreements. Voter fraud did happen. Clinton had 3 million votes from unregistered illegal voters and dead people.


2.) 23 Nov 2016 22:31:10
Do you work for them muscatred? You'd make an excellent politician mate.


3.) 23 Nov 2016 23:18:05
I think you miss the military more than you're willing to admit. Being obeyed. Always being right (which of course you always are) . Not actually thinking freely, but not realising it. Thinking everyone else is wrong. Naturally.

Good luck with that.


4.) 24 Nov 2016 00:53:02
muscatred out of interest what do you class as a conspiracy?


5.) 24 Nov 2016 00:55:21
Building 7. That is all I will say, I recon you will not even know what it is, which speaks volumes.


6.) 24 Nov 2016 09:45:09
You are on this site enough muscatred?! I for one ain't exactly too sure about the twin towers, sandy hook etc. I have seen loads of alternative explanations and don't really buy any of them. But it wouldn't surprise me at all if there's a shred of evidence in them. You just have to make your mind up. Some of it will be true some will be ambiguous and some will be absolute BS.


7.) 24 Nov 2016 10:47:11
Hey Franky, I don't think I have an unusual definition of a conspiracy theory. Basically it's any alternative narrative to the one published by the relevant authority coupled with an assumption that the authority is deliberately trying to deceive the public.

Chrisp, I'm familiar with Building 7, I'm familiar with a lot of the more common theories, I read a lot of what is posted and shared here because I'm fascinated with the culture. My opinions are based on comparing the arguments in support of the official narrative to the alternative one.

If we look at 9/11 the facts are that four buildings collapsed and a number of others were damaged. The debate is what caused that damage, on the balance of the evidence I've seen I believe the most likely explanation is that terrorists hijacked four planes with the intention of flying them into various land marks.

In the case of the WTC they succeeded in crashing into the twin towers resulting in a chain of events that culminated with the twin towers and WTC 3 and 7 collapsing. The alternative explanations which attempt to argue a different narrative all have flaws far more significant than the official one so, on balance I see no reason not to believe the official story.

{Ed033's Note - i suppose if you either ignorantly or deliberately miss out 90+% of the evidence (which is what the 'authorities' do), and add in some dis-info from the 'authorities', you can arrive at the same conclusion as the 'authorities'.

How did the 'authorities' come up with Oswald (the lone assassin) shooting JFK and 3 bullets being fired by Oswald?, by deliberately ignoring 90+% of the evidence to the contrary and adding in some dis-info of their own.


8.) 24 Nov 2016 13:42:29
the guildford four and hillsbourough were once considered conspiracies that have now been debunked as truth, now 40 years later with the the guildford four justice will be not done as most of the perpetrators will be dead, the same thing will happen with hillsbourough and also the vip sex scandal .

what I am trying to say is all three examples are not as big as a 9/ 11 even thou all are terrible and are a miscarriage of justice then once you realise that the people in charge knew and still tried to hide the facts even now .

does not mean you have to agree with every conspiracy on here but writing it off because official establishment organisations tell you to trust official explanations seems very naive feller.


9.) 24 Nov 2016 16:09:44
Hey Franky, I think you misunderstand me, I don't automatically side with the official narrative, the reason I generally side with it is that I don't find the arguments supporting the alternative particularly compelling.


10.) 24 Nov 2016 19:13:40
ok what's your view on the current ongoing vip sexual abuse claims?


11.) 24 Nov 2016 21:46:53
It's a difficult one frankly . Once previous so called conspiracys get debunked then people will naturally question reality and anything is thrn possible. I wouldn't put anything past the powers that be. But I also can't accept the alternative theorys in the 9/ 11 stuff. I wouldn't put it past them but there are 100's of alternate versions only 1 if any of them can be right! But at the end of the day they are just theory's. I've seen videos where so called steel engineers say that this couldn't happen and this would happen!

But who are these people I don't know them or their credentials so why would I believe them. I've worked with plenty of steel engineers and people with 30+ years in construction and demolition who I know and know their credentials who have all said that the way the towers fell is very normal in their professional opinion.

So who do you believe! like I say I'd put nothing past anyone in power but I'd never say I know that it was definitely dodge until hard evidence comes out and like frankly pointed out above the truth sometimes comes out. There are loads of things that come on this site that I believe are 100% but for me the twin towers stuff is still filed under I don't know.


12.) 24 Nov 2016 23:12:45
if that was the only strange fact about 9/ 11 then you would have a very strong point but as you know there are a number of strange incidents revolving around 9/ 11

towers turn to dust

terrorist passport found unmarked

BBC and CNN, announced the destruction of WTC 7 long before it happened.

bin laden family allowed to fly out of the usa

the pentagon cameras not working also the most secure area allowing a so called plane/ missile

i could go on mate and you prob know all this anyway, but like I said to many things do not add up not just melting steel theory that makes 9/ 11 the biggest tv screened snuff movie .


13.) 25 Nov 2016 00:05:44
'The way the towers fell is very normal in their professional opinion'.

Normal how?


14.) 25 Nov 2016 09:33:33
By the way sanogo, the NIST report is just a theory and it is full of spurious claims that are not supported by sound scientific analysis.


15.) 25 Nov 2016 18:42:46
Rian, I'm no steel engineer and have no knowledge personally. The point I'm making is that I've watched loads of videos and read loads of articles on the subject and I'm non the wiser.

I've heard experts say that it was normal and others say it was not normal. I don't know mate I really don't and stay away from the subject usually. Your asking me to answer a question from a conversation with said people over 5 years ago. They did go into detail and I remember st the time not understanding what they were going on about. The only thing I do know that not one single theory has been proven! Only anomalies in the official line.


16.) 26 Nov 2016 13:50:11
I hear you Sanogo. Just remember the official theory (The NIST report) has also not been proven. It's just theory, and bad theory at that.


 

 

09 Nov 2016 07:41:00
Well, it seems the polls (and me) were wrong. Kim, Ed, you got what you wanted, I hope I'm wrong about what's going to happen next too.

muscatred

{Ed033's Note - Well whatever happens, while Trump is President, he's got to be better than Hillary.


1.) 09 Nov 2016 08:19:16
Delighted.

{Ed033's Note - The funny thing is that there's loads of people who think the world is falling apart because first we had Brexit and next we have Donald Trump as President.

At the same time, you have other people [the 'awake' ones] thinking the exact opposite.


2.) 09 Nov 2016 08:58:28
It's nothing to do with polls been wrong. As mentioned on here a thousand times. The polls only purpose is to try and influence the way people vote. There is no maths to it as the result suggested.


3.) 09 Nov 2016 09:26:27
Exactly. All year the polls have been proven wrong. Because they are there to influence not report. Same as the media.

Got what I wanted? I've said before Trump was hardly the best candidate. But he took on the whole media and won. Goes to show you need more to win than just parading "celebrities" on a stage and talking down to people.

What I wanted was a winner who would improve Russo-American relations and stop Cold War 2 and worse. Clinton was the one with all the anti Russian rhetoric.


4.) 09 Nov 2016 09:36:22
what do you think is going to happen Muscat, surely nothing worse than if Hillary got in?


5.) 09 Nov 2016 09:07:36
Edd033 it's Cringe worthy to listen to the tears of msm. talking about white supremacy (give me a break), sexism and fascism. Complete rubbish only used to divide and instil fear into people. Couple of weeks needed for the dust to settle.

Listening to hillary supporters would ruin your day. I'm delighted he's in. I don't agree with everything but I now hope he keeps his word and makes an even bigger hole in the corrupt establishment.

{Ed033's Note - The Hillary supporters should 'wake up' to the fact that main stream media was deliberately lying to them all long about the poll numbers and deliberately lying that Trump had no chance of winning.

The Hillary supporters should 'wake up' to the fact that not only were they being deliberately lied to then, but they are being deliberately lied to right now.

But so many of them have the politically correct disease that they won't figure out that all the MSM does, is lie.


6.) 09 Nov 2016 11:17:24
I agree with KP, Hillary would have increased tension between the US and Russia, whereas Trump has shown no interest in this. Trump also will be less likely to endorse an Israeli attack on Iran.

I also hope this marks the beginning of the end of the Clinton political dynasty.


7.) 09 Nov 2016 11:18:11
MrJonesy, I do not believe that Clinton would have done anything significantly different to any president of the last 30 years, it would simply be business as usual. That's not a great thing but it's not bad either.

My fear with Trump is that he can't 'make america great again' and when he fails he will promote the idea that it's everyone else's fault that America is in decline. This will further polarise the nation and sour relations with the rest of the world. My feeling is that he will hasten the decline of America not halt it.


8.) 09 Nov 2016 11:05:06
Ed, I think you know that I'm not very respectful of the opinions expressed on this site. Where you say awake, I say gullible; when you rail against the political correct, I see thinly veiled bigotry. I come on this site because I enjoy the irony that you attack what you call the main stream media for it's lack of integrity and agenda whilst sharing fake stories and and having an agenda of your own.

My problem is that my world has become complacent, the society I live in laughs off the idea of Hillary going to jail as a silly story no one believed to be credible, we thought that no one who said the things Trump said could ever get the support necessary to be president, we were sure that everyone would see just as clearly as we did that Brexit was a terrible idea. We were wrong.

I hope that Trump's election is the final straw in that complacency and the west will start to swing back the the center but today I am genuinely worried that this is just the start, that our future is an insular one that blames others for our problems, that is hugely depressing to me.

{Ed033's Note - So you still haven't 'woken up' to the fact that main stream media was lying all along, and you still believe them.


9.) 09 Nov 2016 13:00:28
What we are seeing is a reaction of ordinary people against an out of touch political elite too concerned with pushing their agenda and unconcerned about the impact it causes.

Now, the same as after the brexit result, we see the same people smearing a chunk of the electorate as racist xenophobic uneducated plebs.


10.) 09 Nov 2016 17:30:17
Like keeping a worker ant happy! As long as things don't change then I'm fine with that, as long as your still breathing it's ok isn't it?


11.) 09 Nov 2016 17:33:12
Muscatred, the whole of the world is all off ours and not just yours. I say this because everyone is in the same predicament in that the elites do not care about us.


12.) 10 Nov 2016 07:26:16
Hey Musc there's nothing wrong with disagreeing! and for proper discussion and solutions there must be two sides to every discussion, and I respect yours, so I think you should have the dignity and not the hypocrisy you have shown in saying people should accept differing views yet you don't respect theirs.

And I think the world is far from complacent right now, how can you say its complacent when humanity is clearly trying new things to survive, new leaders, new movements, fighting more. If that's complacency I don't wanna see what the world would look like if we get agitated.


 

 

 

muscatred has no Banter Posts

 

 

muscatred's rumour replies

 

Click To View This Thread

11 Sep 2017 00:05:22
Don't normally post on this page but seeing how this is politics I'm weighing in.

Remainers marched because Brexit is going the the way that every remainer feared. The pound is screwed, exports aren't increasing and the government has no idea what to do. Right now we're marching head long at a cliff for no other reason than a feeble obligation.

Last year we didn't know what we were voting for because nobody, on either side of the argument, explained what they planned to do. Every major leaver, including Farage, told us we could stay in the single market. Now we know that's not on the cards.

Leavers fear another vote because you know you'd be crushed. The country has seen how important the eu is to the economy, it's realised it can't stay in the single market, it's seen how screwed the NHS would be without migrants and it's realised that both major parties are incapable of offering a better option.

Last year we only thought Brexit would be a disaster, now we know it will be, that's why another vote is needed.

muscatred

{Ed033's Note - This site is not here for people to repeat whatever the main stream media puts out, it's for people that can use their own minds.


 

 

Click To View This Thread

30 Nov 2016 15:41:45
This argument falls apart the moment you suggest the practice of homosexuality and pedophilia are comparable. The difference is a matter of consent, an adult choosing to participate in an activity that causes no harm to themselves or others is perfectly fine, the same cannot be said for any activity in which there is a victim. It in no way follows that the normalisation of homosexuality will lead to the normalisation of criminal perversions.

muscatred

{Ed033's Note - i think a point to consider is that those people who are 'awake' recognise that there is an anti-human agenda and the perpetrators of this negative agenda always use the step by step method to move their agenda along. This is done so that the majority who are 'asleep' get used to a step and so the next step along is not a shock to them and they accept the new step as 'nothing to see here'.

As we have seen in UK, they have tried to lower the age of consent multiple times in recent years.


 

 

Click To View This Thread

28 Nov 2016 15:53:15
Hi Jonesy, There are two points up for debate here, the first is whether a 767 could achieve the speeds quoted and the second is would a 767 hold together at that speed. The first part is the speed, 360 knots is the max operating speed of a 767 at sea level but this is a prescribed limitation not a physical one, there is no doubt that a 767 could go faster than this if the throttle is fully opened and the plane is in descent.

A guy called John Bursill claims to have used a simulator to recreate the flight of United 175 and was able to achieve 654mph in level flight at 2000ft and 674mph in a shallow dive, much higher than the 560mph that United 175 is claimed to have been traveling on 9/11.

Of course his findings have been refuted by pilots for truth. The idea that a 767 would break up at that speed is based on an investigation by Pilots for Truth into an Air Egypt 767 which crashed. I found a thread on metabunk.org that tackled this with the conclusion that PfT had either misread the report or were wilfully lying.

The bottom line is that this is a theoretical debate as Boeing aren't too keen to test this with a real plane. It comes down to which internet source you believe is more credible, the sources I read made sense and effectively refuted the claims of Pilots for Truth and, as I'm someone who thinks planes did hit the towers, I'm inclined to believe that a 767 is perfectly capable of doing what the official narrative claimed it did.

I'd be interested to hear what your friend says, I too know someone, an ex-Army Air Corp pilot who now flys airliners out of Dubai, I'm not sure what model he flys but I might bother him for an opinion.

muscatred

 

 

Click To View This Thread

25 Nov 2016 18:02:04
Big Al, a question if I may. Genarlow Wilson, a student in the USA, was sentenced to 11 years in jail and life on the sex offenders register because he received oral sex from a 15 year old girl when he was 17. Do you think this punishment was appropriate? I certainly don't.

If you don't either then you have some common ground with the authors of this bill, it was designed to protect consenting and committed youths from being charged with statutory rape.

Rightly, the population of Turkey pointed out that such a bill could be used to protect child molesters and promote the practice of taking child brides and so it was rejected. The intent of the author can be understood and the reactions of the Turkish people can be praised.

muscatred

 

 

Click To View This Thread

25 Nov 2016 17:22:26
I wasn't referring to 9/11 but to franky's question about the VIP thing.

As an aside, I watched that when you first posted it. I actually thought it was a really interesting exercise and well put together but what's fascinating is that his conclusions fly in the face of his own investigation. He's gone to all this effort and come to the conclusion that the footage of planes flying into the buildings is genuine but he still can't admit that planes flew into the buildings.

He tries to justify this by presenting some other evidence as fact when it isn't (simulations show that that airspeed was easily possible and soft materials not being able to damage harder materials is nonsense) . Sorry Ed, you'll have to find something a bit more convincing.

muscatred

{Ed033's Note - I'm not here to try to convince people of anything only to show them some stuff they may not be aware of and let them make their own mind up.


 

 

 

muscatred has no Banter Replies