| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I don't think putting the apologists and supporters of the official theory in a separate area is a good idea. I think if they're genuine their opposition strengthens arguments and makes people work harder, which I think is a big plus for allowing them to stay.
And if they're shills they won't be stopped by this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dissenting voices is not the problem: after all SoG and CTS started threads, had debate, and it didnt disrupt the forum
the issue seems to me to be blatent thread hijacking with no regard to the subject matter. A bit of wandering is one thing, but weve seen something more than that
By having a dissenting voices section, we show that the campaign is not adverse to discussing ALL the evidance for all the perspectives, whilst keeping the focus of the site as being based around dicussion of the evidance for Inside Job
After all, if that doesnt suit some people they can always go and start a pro 911 commision forum if they felt strongly enough: if they dont feel strongly enough, its a defused issue anyway
This would then allow moderators to deal effectviely with disruptive posting without having to apply blanket bans on what may be deliberate disruption or may simply be obtuse human nature
Which is to say, no "shills" would not be stopped by this but we can then deal effectively with "shills"
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkan_Wolfshade
Minor Poster
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 31
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | Dissenting voices is not the problem: after all SoG and CTS started threads, had debate, and it didnt disrupt the forum
the issue seems to me to be blatent thread hijacking with no regard to the subject matter. A bit of wandering is one thing, but weve seen something more than that
By having a dissenting voices section, we show that the campaign is not adverse to discussing ALL the evidance for all the perspectives, whilst keeping the focus of the site as being based around dicussion of the evidance for Inside Job
After all, if that doesnt suit some people they can always go and start a pro 911 commision forum if they felt strongly enough: if they dont feel strongly enough, its a defused issue anyway
This would then allow moderators to deal effectviely with disruptive posting without having to apply blanket bans on what may be deliberate disruption or may simply be obtuse human nature
Which is to say, no "shills" would not be stopped by this but we can then deal effectively with "shills" |
You should clarify your statement JW. Don't you mean people you accuse of being gov't shills; as opposed to people like yourself, who appear to be Al Qaeda shills? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I dont call anyone shills mate: but I accept the reality that intellignece agency operatives do exist: thats why I used "inverted commas" see?
I believe it is counter productive to suspect a poster of being anything else than a poster, and its far more productive to focus on ethical and fair behaviour being encouraged and, where necessary, enforced by moderation
Generally the movement is undergoing a learning curve to avoid distractions whilst responding to genuine interested parties
It isnt easy, people are passionate, mass murder tends to do that, and theres a need for self control
In my opinion, this site balances things rather well: its not perfect, but its way above most others
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Arkan_Wolfshade wrote: | | John White wrote: | This would then allow moderators to deal effectviely with disruptive posting without having to apply blanket bans on what may be deliberate disruption or may simply be obtuse human nature
|
You should clarify your statement JW. Don't you mean people you accuse of being gov't shills; as opposed to people like yourself, who appear to be Al Qaeda shills? |
John,
With creeps like Arkan Wolfshade you are not talking about 'obtuse human nature' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh the Al Qaeda shills bit:
Is that how rational skeptics respond to percieved irrational comments? by making their own irrational comments?
I care about truth: its essential for justice: and without justice, there will be no peace
And mankind cannot afford Wars
Also on the topic of Al Qaeda, shall we discuss the paucity of evidance that they are anything else but the child of the CIA?
A new thread for that though, I believe
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jane
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 312
Location: Otley, West Yorks, England
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: The Data Base |
|
|
John White wrote:
| Quote: | Also on the topic of Al Qaeda, shall we discuss the paucity of evidence that they are anything else but the child of the CIA?
A new thread for that though, I believe |
Guide me to the new thread, please John!
In the meantime, just to say, Netto (well, I can’t quite afford to have my groceries sent up from Fortnum & Masons these days!) being shut by the time I went out shopping today - I had to go to the local garage shop to buy a few things - I remembered as I set off that the garage is owned by a Muslim family and that both myself and my neighbour are aware that the two brothers who work there support George Galloway, etc, and speak out against the invasion of Iraq and the attitude towards Muslims by the British Media - I ran back and grabbed a spare copy of "Loose Change 2" which I gave to one of the brothers who was delighted, asking how did I managed to realise what was really going on - had I read "The Koran"? I said I had read the Sura "The Catastrophe" and that was enough (!) and that I "realised" the truth about 9/11 on the very day it hapended when I saw the twin towers being demolished....
He kept saying, "You are doing good work, thank you!"
He also said, as I was about to leave the shop:
"You do know, there is no “Al Qaeda” don’t you?
"Yes, I know, it just means "the database" (of helpful thugs) I responded...”those who were once helpful to the CIA” – he nodded!
_________________
Romans 12:2 Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
http://www.wytruth.org.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll dig up some material and start one Jane, if no-one beats me to it
The point is, theres a much larger persepctive on this than contrasting "opinions" on engineering properties by "experts": unfortunately, intellectual prostitution is as old a profession as the other kind!
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkan_Wolfshade
Minor Poster
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 31
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | Oh the Al Qaeda shills bit:
Is that how rational skeptics respond to percieved irrational comments? by making their own irrational comments?
I care about truth: its essential for justice: and without justice, there will be no peace
And mankind cannot afford Wars
Also on the topic of Al Qaeda, shall we discuss the paucity of evidance that they are anything else but the child of the CIA?
A new thread for that though, I believe |
Given the comments directed at myself, Gravy, etc since we began posting here you have the gaul to question a post I make that applies the same process to you as has been applied to me? I've seen nothing but derogatory comments directed at anyone that hasn't come to the same conclusions as you (you in the general sense of the nineeleven.co.uk board). If you care about the truth then work with your critics to correct and/or bolster your claims. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What you choose to see is through the filter of your own conciousness and your responsibility Arkhan_Wolfshade
Quote me my derogatory comments, for example
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DeFecToR wrote: |
The problem i would have with that definition is that for someone to be fully versed in the subject of 911 and still believe the government line, they would have to be the absolute embodyment of cognitive dissonance. There would have to be so much information that that person would have to either ignore or completely misunderstand that they could hardly be called an authority on the subject. Granted, there are many people who seem to be experts who support the government line, but those people have often been shown to be entirely biased for one reason or another, stretching facts to fit their opinion whilst completely disregarding others.
Like Brian says, if the above catagory of person exists, roll him out.
|
After having patiently read through the varios posts here aswell as some of the so called 911 debunking sites i feel confident that my above comments were pretty much accurate. I've found that the majority of '911 truthers' are on a genuine search for truth and are willing to accept that certain areas of the arguement are less powerful as others (though there are many who are clinging to opinions regardless of evidence). I have not found this to be a general rule as far as debunkers go. It would seem that whenever a subject is brought up that debunkers cannot fully explain they either pass it off as irrelevent or ignore it completely. Previous posts in this topic as well as the 911 debunking sites show this quite well.
Dont forget, the case for government complicity is a 'culmative arguement', and as such weaker elements of the arguement do not show the arguement to be false. Any arguement of this nature must include ALL the facts bar none for it to be concidered correct. The debunkers case for Bin Laden to be the sole architect of the 911 attacks falls way short of this, having instead to rely only on fragments of the details surrounding 911 in order to support their case.
Over the past few days i've been flooded by recollections of details that the debunkers fail to answer. I'm preparing some of them at the moment and will post for discussion soon.
_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DeFecToR wrote: | | DeFecToR wrote: |
The problem i would have with that definition is that for someone to be fully versed in the subject of 911 and still believe the government line, they would have to be the absolute embodyment of cognitive dissonance. There would have to be so much information that that person would have to either ignore or completely misunderstand that they could hardly be called an authority on the subject. Granted, there are many people who seem to be experts who support the government line, but those people have often been shown to be entirely biased for one reason or another, stretching facts to fit their opinion whilst completely disregarding others.
Like Brian says, if the above catagory of person exists, roll him out.
|
After having patiently read through the varios posts here aswell as some of the so called 911 debunking sites i feel confident that my above comments were pretty much accurate. I've found that the majority of '911 truthers' are on a genuine search for truth and are willing to accept that certain areas of the arguement are less powerful as others (though there are many who are clinging to opinions regardless of evidence). I have not found this to be a general rule as far as debunkers go. It would seem that whenever a subject is brought up that debunkers cannot fully explain they either pass it off as irrelevent or ignore it completely. Previous posts in this topic as well as the 911 debunking sites show this quite well.
Dont forget, the case for government complicity is a 'culmative arguement', and as such weaker elements of the arguement do not show the arguement to be false. Any arguement of this nature must include ALL the facts bar none for it to be concidered correct. The debunkers case for Bin Laden to be the sole architect of the 911 attacks falls way short of this, having instead to rely only on fragments of the details surrounding 911 in order to support their case.
Over the past few days i've been flooded by recollections of details that the debunkers fail to answer. I'm preparing some of them at the moment and will post for discussion soon. |
I am very interested in this list of details. If you list them in a new thread, please post a link here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | | the issue seems to me to be blatent thread hijacking with no regard to the subject matter. A bit of wandering is one thing, but weve seen something more than that |
I fail to see how a discussion centered around accusations of shillery threadjacked this thread, considering the OP:
| Quote: | | Is Jon Ronson a shill? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
You need to widen your perspective and realise that we have been having a conversation about the forum
I could see your tunnel focus as significant, if I had a mind to
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=2748
What about here?
Thanks
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're right, it's quite distracting to have every post be answered by references to my zionist sponsors, etc. In the future, I'll try to avoid responding when people such as Ally, kbo234, and Black Cat threadjack like that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
'ello Chipmunk. Ow's the wife? You're not telling lil' white lies again are you?
Bad, bad, bad boy.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| IronSnot wrote: | 'ello Chipmunk. Ow's the wife? You're not telling lil' white lies again are you?
Bad, bad, bad boy.
|
That's not a threat is it? Should I call my wife and make sure she's okay???  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
chip - Helene are you ok?
Helene - ya, ich bin gut. Mein freund Iron ist hier. Er liebe Pattaya.
chip - who?
Helene - Iron, mein freund, dumpkopf.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dry kleaner
Minor Poster
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 86
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Just saw this was an old thread. Doh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
