View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Prole Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject: Re: It make any sense to me |
|
|
TonyGosling wrote: | Yes Chris and Prole,
People who aren't actually part of the official UK 911 Truth Campaign seem to relish our infighting.
Anyone sensible would have tried to sort it out in private first, then if it was not resolved taken it into the public realms.
It doesn't help the matter having people like Karlos banging his head against a brick wall though trying, embarassingly, to prove the impossible.
That in the context of a meeting about the 7/7 attacks the use of the two letters J7 isn't important. What a fool.
Of course it's right, sensible, understandable for Brigit, Ant and Beverley at the J7 campaign to want to defend their campaign's reputation from Nick who inexplicably argues that there was not a single gassing of a single concentration camp inmate by the Nazis.
A contention that he has not so far, and I would imagine cannot ever possibly prove.
chrisc wrote: | TonyGosling wrote: | I just wish J7 had expressed their concern in private rather than in public. It didn't make any sense to me. |
It makes sense to me -- would any of the people who contacted Nafeez Ahmed to alert him to that fact that he was being set up have been copied into any private communication about this absurd situation?
I'm really glad the J7 people went public about this and kicked up a fuss, they deserve our thanks |
|
You failed to answer my very straightforward question:
Why should our concerns over a public leaflet be expressed in private? _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cromwell Validated Poster
Joined: 27 May 2008 Posts: 25 Location: Bartertown
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
jd wrote: | There is no obfuscation, I would confute that observation.
Making correct use of what a writer deems to be the most appropriate word or words is an integral aspect of stating one's case, albeit in this case I used the wrong form of hebetude in the first instance as quoted by yourself.
Hebetudinousness of cognition struck me as apt and appropriate.
Words offer the means to expression and clarification - if we use them wisely and defend their meaning. |
I find this thread very discombobulating. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blackcat Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 2376
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | I find this thread very discombobulating. |
Its the sesquipedalians! _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Danny Validated Poster
Joined: 03 Dec 2007 Posts: 130
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ian neal wrote: | Why should I or anyone esle be fearful of jews? |
The word should could be taken the wrong way. No-one should.
Ian, you have practically confessed that you are fearful of those who smear others with the term "anti-semite", and you discourage any mention of crimes perpetrated by counterfeit-Jews which "could be taken (TWISTED) to mean one hates Jews" by these people.
Instead of defending those targeted by the Zionist controllers of the mainstream media, you and others fearful of the counterfeit-Jews "distance"/"dissasociate" yourselves from their victims in order to seek the good opinion of these liars. To the point that you insinuate anti-semitism where there is none, as evidenced by your insidious * question to Karlos: "do you?" (hate Jews).
* operating or proceeding in an inconspicuous or seemingly harmless way but actually with grave effect.
Did you realize how insidious a question that was? You started off by saying "it could be taken", and ended with asking him a question which would only be asked by somebody who WAS "taking it" (that way).
When you finally achieve the cleansing of the counterfeit-Jewish/Zionist question from your own campaign, the Spinners will then twist something else (anything at all), and why should anybody then stick up for you, when you didn't for them? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Danny Validated Poster
Joined: 03 Dec 2007 Posts: 130
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ian neal wrote: | Danny wrote: | ian neal wrote: | karlos wrote: | What does MuadDib's religious views have to do with 7/7? |
MD's view that he is the messiah and his promotion of jewish conspiracy theories undermine his credibility as a 7/7 researcher, not that he has much in the first place IMO. |
His "religious views" (Muad'Dib might say "the truth I'm well acquainted with") are right on the money, and He is the one and only real threat to the evil reign of the NWO (to call them something) people, because of who He is, and because He will bring them down, practically overnight, as soon as He is recognized as King by the British people.
The only undermining of credibility that takes place is in the eyes of those who are deceived by the Liar, and not well enough acquainted with long-standing prophecy (fulfilled in exact and minute detail with only a little remainder to go). Nor with Muad'Dib's true character, because they suffer from inverted vision.
People have been programmed to knee-jerk react to anyone claiming to be the Messiah, when the very reason for all the false ones that preceeded Him is because of the hide a tree in a forest principle which the Enemy deploys. If they were a little bit wise, they would understand this, and take His claim seriously enough to study the matter seriously. What do people expect to get out of studying a matter UNseriously, who treat it as contemptuous from the beginning?
Make no mistake, in the eyes of others, it is those more concerned with the good opinion of men than with the good opinion of The Almighty, who are the ones with little or no credibility.
In a world of lies, truth is stranger than fiction. |
You see unlike you all I have to base MD credibility on is his film and his website, neither of which impress me very much. Perhaps if MD was more open as to his true identity and credientials, perhaps even making himself open to public questioning and scrutiny we would all be better placed to assess his claims and his credibility.
Unfortunately for you someone using a pseudonym and proclaiming themselves to be the messiah via the web is not going to convince many British people to proclaim MD King IMO. |
No, it is that you are not asking the right questions, which only He can answer. This is how you get to know Him. You do not know Him, because you seek not the Truth. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ian neal Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005 Posts: 3140 Location: UK
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Danny wrote: | No, it is that you are not asking the right questions, which only He can answer. This is how you get to know Him. You do not know Him, because you seek not the Truth. |
Don't presume to know what I know and what I don't know or even presume to know me. You don't. Oh and don't lie and misrepresent my views. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alwun Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 282 Location: london
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: well |
|
|
It looks like, that the defence and representation of J7 are in able hands. Good to see.
cheers Al |
|
Back to top |
|
|
karlos Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 2516 Location: london
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
What has been done? _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Prole Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:43 pm Post subject: Re: It make any sense to me |
|
|
TonyGosling wrote: | Prole wrote: |
You failed to answer my very straightforward question:
Why should our concerns over a public leaflet be expressed in private? |
To stop fruitless squabbling |
I note that jd has been banned and his last two posts deleted. Is there any valid reason for this? _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 Posts: 4529
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:52 pm Post subject: Re: It make any sense to me |
|
|
Prole wrote: | I note that jd has been banned and his last two posts deleted. Is there any valid reason for this? |
How do you know that jd has been banned Prole? _________________ The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Prole Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:09 pm Post subject: Re: It make any sense to me |
|
|
Mark Gobell wrote: | Prole wrote: | I note that jd has been banned and his last two posts deleted. Is there any valid reason for this? |
How do you know that jd has been banned Prole? |
It says banned under his name, so I guess that means jd has been banned. _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 Posts: 4529
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks.
Have you ever thought of taking a break Prole? _________________ The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Prole Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mark Gobell wrote: | Thanks.
Have you ever thought of taking a break Prole? |
What from, asking questions? _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 Posts: 4529
|
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, no,
That wasn't what I had in mind. _________________ The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alwun Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 282 Location: london
|
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:42 am Post subject: good question |
|
|
I would also like to know why jd has been banned. I can't see any reason contained within the actual text as such. No anti-anyisms, no violence or attacks on anyone or anything except perhaps an attack on obfuscation, funny enough. So, please mods, why the ban??
cheers Al.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ian neal Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005 Posts: 3140 Location: UK
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Prole Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: Re: good question |
|
|
alwun wrote: | I would also like to know why jd has been banned. I can't see any reason contained within the actual text as such. No anti-anyisms, no violence or attacks on anyone or anything except perhaps an attack on obfuscation, funny enough. So, please mods, why the ban??
cheers Al.. |
Why the silence on this?
Gosling's signature: "The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chrisc Validated Poster
Joined: 31 Oct 2007 Posts: 154
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:52 pm Post subject: Re: good question |
|
|
Prole wrote: | alwun wrote: | I would also like to know why jd has been banned. I can't see any reason contained within the actual text as such. No anti-anyisms, no violence or attacks on anyone or anything except perhaps an attack on obfuscation, funny enough. So, please mods, why the ban?? |
Why the silence on this? |
This really sucks, things like this just add to the reasons for me thinking "why am I spending any time on this site..."... _________________ http://truthaction.org/
http://truthmove.org/
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/topics/terror/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ian neal Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005 Posts: 3140 Location: UK
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
An explanation is in order |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alwun Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 282 Location: london
|
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:59 am Post subject: quite so Ian |
|
|
Hello...
An explanation would be a start. All this waffle about truth and justice and so on...here we have a ban for no good reason other than, I'm afraid, that it would appear to be a cack-handed ploy to stifle dissent and a voice of reason. Not what I expect or hope for here.
cheers Al.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
gareth Suspended
Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 398
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
chrisc Validated Poster
Joined: 31 Oct 2007 Posts: 154
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
astro3 Suspended
Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 274 Location: North West London
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First of all, let me apologise to everyone for probably the dumbest thing I've done for a long, long time, viz give an interview with the Standard - copied the next day to a whole load of other papers. I'll quite appreciate if anyone doesn't want anything more to do with me after that. I was astounded by the sheer, outright mendacity displayed by Rob Mendick on almost every point. I reproduce below a reply which I posted on Indymedia.
I keep waking up in the morning asking myself, how could I have done anything as dumb as that? Maybe just say, I'm credulous and trusting.
Second, I and Belinda brewed up the idea of a meeting on the 25th, for the nearest we could get to to the 3rd anniversary of July 7th. She invited me, and I said I would really like to discuss recent developments in the topic. Then next thing I knew an adjusted program had Nafeez billed as the only named speaker - on a quite general theme - and 'J7 researchers' also included, with a tacit understanding that I would be one of these. A fatal endeavour! Weren't nothing to do with me. Bridget has not stopped moaning since, how come I'm trying to pretend to be a 'J/7 researcher'? Well maybe its about time she came out and told us how her little clique of J7 is defined and how anyone gets to be a member? At no time did I propose or wish to share a platform with Nafeez. (He'd protest at me being a H-D, while I might object to his acceptance of Islamic guilt, both for 9/11 and for 7/7.)
I do agree about not having me on any 9/11 'truth' platform - sounds like Groucho Marx saying he wouldn't like to belong to any club that would have him as a member.
You guys had better hope that Nafeez turns up, after all this griping!
I hope there won't be any undue hate and rage if I just quietly turn up in the audience on 25th. So, no speaker will be holding forth about the tremendous developments in the July 7 story, from the Kingston trial, at any public meeting on the 3rd anniversary. Period. You lot want to have a 'the Muslims-did-it' speaker' - one whom Rachel and Milan Rai are quite happy to share a platform with.
...................................................................... ....................
Evening Standard Libel – no Right of Reply
Character-Assassination by Mendacious Mendick
Standard article, 10th June: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23493173-details/77+was +an+MI5+plot%2C+Holocaust+denier+claims+in+BBC+film/article.do
Rob Mendick of the Evening Standard phoned me up and assured me that there were unpleasant things being said about me on the web and that he wanted to set the record straight. Was it true I was being paid by the BBC for working with them on the July 7 story? No way, I explained, I had paid my own expenses - except for one train fare out to Luton, eight pounds or so, which they had bought. So his article of 10th June starts ‘BBC paid expenses..’ followed by ‘The BBC has paid an undisclosed sum in expenses to Dr K…’ No, Mr Mendick, they did not pay my expenses to Leeds.
Had I pestered any victim families? Surely not, I explained, that was just a web-calumny launched against me by Rachel North, and reiterated by the Observer in its hit-piece of May 4th. I referred him to my thread about this, ‘Have I pestered victim-families?’ http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=14912
So his article began, ‘…who has pestered families bereaved by the 7/7 bombings, claiming the attacks were an intelligence agency plot’ – as if I had phoned them and told them some weird theory about the cause of death!
I’ve never come across such mendacity as that displayed by Rob Mendick. His article continued with the whopper, ‘He has admitted he phoned the father of one victim to tell him how he believed the man’s daughter’s body has been planted at the site of the Tavistock Square bus bombings.’ Again, see above thread for what really happened. I had explained to Mendick that I phoned the father, to ascertain the time of the last phone call he had received from his daughter before she was blown up in the 09.47 blast at Tavistock Square (if indeed she was) – after first asking his permission as to whether I might question him on this matter. The father confirmed what he had already said to an international newspaper on 11th July, viz that that last call had been at 09.45 that morning (of July 7 at King’s Cross). However, the purpose of this article was character-assassination. What monster would phone up someone they did not know, and claim to them their daughter’s body had been moved into the place where it was later discovered? The article repeated this untruth, beneath a picture of the exploded 30 bus.
He added that the victim’s family were upset by the thread I had posted, concerning this mystery death: should Mendick not have added what I clearly told him, viz that as soon as I received this complaint I deleted the thread? You can see it deleted here:
www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=12423&highlight=myriam+hyman
Somehow, I don’t reckon that such ethical issues are of great concern to Mr Mendick.
On a less terrible matter, Mendick fabricated the story that ‘Dr K took flowers to the parents of Aldgate bomber Shehzad Tanweer but they refused to see him.’ Mendick knows what actually happened, because I told him, but he decided that a lie made better copy. The title of this Standard article attributed to me the view that ‘7/7 was an MI5 plot…’ If the BBC go ahead with their program, you won’t hear me expressing that view.
It was inevitable that his article should call me a ‘Holocaust Denier’ – after all everyone else is so why shouldn’t he? Readers were treated to the following crackpot explanation: I have written an article entitled ‘The Auschwitz gas chamber Illusion’ (which is true, see www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrillusion.html) ‘claiming it was like a holiday camp where inmates sunned themselves by an “elegant” swimming pool and listened to orchestras.’ What utter nonsense! A reference please? But, Mendacious Mendick isn’t troubled by such things. Nothing remotely resembling any such statement is contained in the article alluded to. Remember, he phoned me up about three times in a quite friendly manner before printing this. The bottom line is, that web-calumny and gossip can now just spill over into newspaper print, via the poison pen of Mr Mendick.
As regards the defamatory claim that I’ve been posting on a ‘far-right’ website, the CODOH web-master assured me he would not allow the expression of far-right opinions. I checked after this allegation was first made (by Rachel North).
Mr Mendick cannot bear to mention that I have a PhD in the history of astronomy – that could be rather relevant to the 7/7 research, because as a science historian my training involves the accessing of primary-source data and not relying upon gossip and hearsay. No, instead he claimed I have a PhD in astronomy, which further makes me seem a mere figure of fun because it has zero relevance to the subject.
The front page of the Standard blared: ‘BBC pays man who insulted victims of 7/7’ – that is a fiction, I never did. I requested they print an apology but they would not.
The next day this story reappeared in the Mail, Sun, Telegraph and Express. Only The Express reporter troubled to turn up and check the story. I urge these newspapers not to trust a story coming from Mr Mendick. Character-assassination has been accomplished, which I guess was the aim of the exercise. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chrisc Validated Poster
Joined: 31 Oct 2007 Posts: 154
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
astro3 Suspended
Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 274 Location: North West London
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another apology
Things have been stressful of late, but still does not excuse my having said anything resembling (to quote Tony G.): '[Nk] inexplicably argues that there was not a single gassing of a single concentration camp inmate by the Nazis. A contention that he has not so far, and I would imagine cannot ever possibly prove. ' Er, did I say that? I certainly never should have done. If perchance I did say anything to imply it, I’d like to unreservedly apologise and retract it. OK?
My position is expressed in the two articles I’ve got up on the topic
www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrillusion.html www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrnkwalls.html.
It is based on chemical analysis of the remaining gas-chamber walls, viz that: mass cyanide gassing cannot have taken place in the designated chambers at Auschwitz. You can have it happen at other places, or you can have carbon monoxide gassing, which is widely believed to have happened. The various other German WW2 labour-camps do not have remaining walls of what were once (believed to be) human gas-chambers, so the chemical testing cannot be done there. Weighty books keep being published about Auschwitz, and their authors agree concerning what are supposed to have been the human gas-chambers, and sufficient of their original walls still remain. I’m saying that the brick walls have a memory because any use of cyanide gas will make it soak into the walls and remain there, even sixty years later, because it’s a permanent complex formed. I’m saying that two different and independent chemical investigations have reached quite similar conclusions, those of Leuchter and Rudolf (1988 and 1991) which is why this stuff deserves to be taken seriously.
There is one further statement I made that applied to all the labour camps: no diagnosis of death by cyanide-poisoning is on record. This came from US army pathologist Charles Larsen who visited the camps at the end of the war for this specific purpose. Confirmation of this came last year with a letter from the archive manager of the Arolsen archives in North Germany. That has millions of documents concerning all the persons who lived and died in the German WW2 camps, and is the centre for all this information. He confirmed that they had not got a single record of death by that cause. So he confirmed what eminent US pathologist Larsen had found at the end of the war. Notice that this argument is not conclusive but only suggestive – you can still have mass cyanide gassing but with no-one recording the cause of death anywhere. I’m a little wary of these ‘they destroyed all the records’ arguments.
Hope this clarifies matters a bit.
…………………………………………………………… ………………………… |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sixy Validated Poster
Joined: 11 Sep 2006 Posts: 65
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TonyGosling wrote: |
Both are known 911 Truth campaigners.
And anyway - if someone seems to be pedantically trying to foment infighting rather than campaigning for exposure of the NWO they're more likely to be suspended. |
So because they are both known 911 Truth Campaigners, they don't have to abide the rules? Are there now different sets of rules for known campaigners and those who aren't?
Also, I'd like to point out that Pikey's posting pm's on the forum WAS "pedantically trying to foment infighting" (see the thread) and not "campaigning for exposure of the NWO".
I'm sorry Tony, but this doesn't seem right to me. _________________ www.rinf.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|