Andrew is doing a great job and should remain as a valued moderator of this forum.
48%
[ 14 ]
Andrew has helped to discredit this site and should step down as a moderator.
37%
[ 11 ]
Undecided
13%
[ 4 ]
Total Votes : 29
Author
Message
Patrick Brown 9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006 Posts: 1201
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:36 am Post subject: Vote of no confidence in Andrew Johnston
I may get slapped down for this although if provocative posts such as the Steven Jones challenge can be posted I see no reason why I can't post this.
Basically I'm asking members here to vote for or against keeping Andrew Johnston as a moderator. I have nothing personally against Andrew but I do feel that one of the reasons this site has lost credibility is because one of it's moderators is seen as a no-planner. Andrew is also seen to propagate the Beam Weapon dis-info. _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
F u c k off with this bs. Andrew Johnson has got his head screwed on a lot tighter than you. Start thinking for yourself. What are you so bothered about anyway, I thought you had your own website? Go back there and stop stirring the *.
But before you go, here is a little lesson for you and all you other plane hugging mugsters.
Your retort only shows your inability to communicate and probably also to understand which is I'm sure why the No Brains theory appeals to you. I wonder if Andrew will hug you or disown you? Are you in the BNP by any chance? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:00 am Post subject:
TCF, we've gone through all this ad naseum. Watching it over and oevr again will not change our minds. You seem quite clearly unable to think for yourself if you buy this on the flimsy evidence you posted. Come up with something that can't be debunked and I'd be happy to accept it, until then I'm highly suspicious of people who push this theory based on the same evidence I've seen. _________________ "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King
Moderating this forum must be a nightmare and while i dont agree with AJ on NPT or beams i respect the hard work hes put in here.
Patrick you are dividing this place more than you realise and its unnecessary and irritating.
As for credibility issues - NPT was top of most forums here until recently so if it sunk to ludicrousness it happened quite a while back, maybe just around the 5th anniversary, if you believe it has. 3 or 4 posters pushing NPT for months day in day out and refusing to look at debunkings whilst having their youtube videos demolished by all and sundry did their cause no favours and im sure new members could see that. Not everyone is gullible after having their reality blown apart.
Andrews beliefs made no impact on any of that.
We all know that in reality Beam Weapons and the NPT are still being pushed here so please don't talk complete and utter rubbish. As I said on another thread the only thing wrong with this forum is the moderation.
There will always be a difference of opinion but if the majority of the members here think Beam Weapons and the NPT are balls why are we tolerating a moderator that is seen to propagate such ludicrous theory's which have no foundation in fact i.e. No evidence? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Last edited by Patrick Brown on Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:17 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:19 am Post subject:
TC, you are Ally and i claim my £5 _________________ "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King
Never mind guessing who I am not, you need to study that last North Tower clip and just admit to yourself that there is no plane in that footage.
You are all walking blindfolded into a concentration camp. The 9/11 Truth Movement has hit a brick wall and I am pointing my finger at everyone of you lot.
Yeah I thought it was Ally as well beacause of the polite attitude! _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Joined: 07 Jul 2006 Posts: 595 Location: Australia
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:44 am Post subject:
I think Andrew Johnson should be sent to the moon to investigate the moonlandings. Also up there would give him the ability to look at chemtrails from another vantage point.
Seriously now he's a divisive p*&^%. This site would be better without him. Having a moderator calling others shills is absurd.
Last edited by IronSnot on Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:45 am; edited 1 time in total
There will always be a difference of opinion but if the majority of the members here think Beam Weapons and the NPT are balls why are we tolerating a moderator that is seen to propagate such ludicrous theory's?
Indeed, and my recent poll on the subject indicated ~10:1 against NoBrainTheory/OrbitalBeanWeapon ... _________________ Make love, not money.
Indeed, and my recent poll on the subject indicated ~10:1 against NoBrainTheory/OrbitalBeanWeapon ...
Have you got a link to the poll Thermate? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:56 pm Post subject: Is Johnston a no-planner?
Patrick Brown wrote:
I may get slapped down for this although if provocative posts such as the Steven Jones challenge can be posted I see no reason why I can't post this.
Basically I'm asking members here to vote for or against keeping Andrew Johnston as a moderator. I have nothing personally against Andrew but I do feel that one of the reasons this site has lost credibility is because one of it's moderators is seen as a no-planner. Andrew is also seen to propagate the Beam Weapon dis-info.
One for critics corner, I think, Andrew. I see you have been accused of being Johnston and not making plans : that could apply to a lot of us.
Keep up the good work. The evidence, as accepted by the intellectual
vistors to this forum, is one of no planes and of beam weapons used. Although we would not like the plane/thermites to be silenced : just the ones incapable of evidence-based, polite argument.
My apologies to Andrew but for someone who claims to be on the side of the people (and not the state) he tends to side with the most extreme and absurd views as promulgated by the likes of Alex Jones. I've a had a few private spats with Andrew and when he cannot answer my questions he just runs away.
ThoughtCriminal - I've just looked at your youTube posts and I'm really not convinced by them. I've thought about what you've posted though and my conclusion is your attitude is disgraceful, the language you use is disgusting, and you really should keep your opinions to yourself if you can't express them with a reasonable amount of respect for other people.
In general, the failure of people to stick to what we can agree on - and no-one here needs me to go over the enormous problems with the official version of events on 9/11 - and thereby seek what this forum advocates on its front page, viz. "a united call for further investigation", is the failure of the 9/11 truth movement as a whole.
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:49 pm Post subject: Re: Is Johnston a no-planner?
HERA wrote:
The evidence, as accepted by the intellectual vistors to this forum, is one of no planes and of beam weapons used. Although we would not like the plane/thermites to be silenced : just the ones incapable of evidence-based, polite argument.
"intellectual visitors"
You mean people that have been programed by the system eh? Just remember what you're aunty Flow said and don't believe everything you read. Unfortunately some people are so puffed up that they're beyond help. Come on just one more little chocky mint!
"evidence-based"
There is absolutely zero evidence for the NPT or the half-baked-bean-weapon. Of course you might just be trying to be witty. Keep trying as one day people might laugh with you instead of at you! Of course you might like to take up the “The beam weapon challenge!”: http://911evidencebase.16.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=50 _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:04 pm Post subject:
scar wrote:
Moderating this forum must be a nightmare and while i dont agree with AJ on NPT or beams i respect the hard work hes put in here.
Patrick you are dividing this place more than you realise and its unnecessary and irritating.
As for credibility issues - NPT was top of most forums here until recently so if it sunk to ludicrousness it happened quite a while back, maybe just around the 5th anniversary, if you believe it has. 3 or 4 posters pushing NPT for months day in day out and refusing to look at debunkings whilst having their youtube videos demolished by all and sundry did their cause no favours and im sure new members could see that. Not everyone is gullible after having their reality blown apart.
Andrews beliefs made no impact on any of that.
Good post Scar: good advice to PB as well, though I don't see why members shouldnt vote on their satisfaction level with the mods if they wish _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:17 pm Post subject: boeing boeing
I have for some time been having doubts as to whether two big, high, concrete buildings with mighty steel cores should readily disperse in a cloud of micron particle dust leaving just a few shards of steel behind on the ground, or not.
The twin towers did just that.
The official explanation advises us that this anomalous pulverisation was triggered by the fires occasioned in turn by the aeroplanes which disappeared into the buildings, and after a time - exploded in flames.
I don't believe this at all.
There are some 33 only extant lengths of footage of the two impacts - not hundreds or thousands - and only three are fully credited, as far as I know.
None of them fully set my suspicions at rest as to whether the planes are real or not. And there are a couple that are highly suspicious, the 1st impact via Naudet Bros being a prime example.
It is not my place, of course, to insist that anyone must share my views. But surely neither is it useful to slag each other off.
I'm certainly not about to vote a mod out of office.
The only problem with sitting on the fence is that if you do it long enough you may become confused as to what's right or wrong. Equally you might get confused as to what's real (reality) and what's an illusion (a fantasy). The word for this state of mind is ambivalence.
So do you know your left from your right and your thermite from your baked beans? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
The only problem with sitting on the fence is that if you do it long enough you may become confused as to what's right or wrong. Equally you might get confused as to what's real (reality) and what's an illusion (a fantasy). The word for this state of mind is ambivalence.
So do you know your left from your right and your thermite from your baked beans?
Alternatively picking a side where the jury is still out could be said to be unwise, especially if you push it as absolute truth and even more so if you use it to ridicule... In such a case, sitting on the fence might be better known as wisdom. _________________ Positive...energy...activates...constant...elevation. (Gravediggaz)
Alternatively picking a side where the jury is still out could be said to be unwise, especially if you push it as absolute truth and even more so if you use it to ridicule... In such a case, sitting on the fence might be better known as wisdom.
I'm not saying Jones is 100% correct but I am most definitely saying NPT and half-baked-bean-weapons are 100% bull and probably disinformation.
So tell me more about this wisdom stuff. Does it have anything to do with not walking on the cracks? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
