Why is ANYONE turning their back on 9/11 & What Happened

John White · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 6:19 am Post subject:

An interesting discussion...tricky buisness considering holocaust information...I always feel its the truthseekers equivalent of child porn..at least in terms of peoples reactions to it

I've found it to be an area where one must have one's senses at full alert and be as aware as possible...whilst I do consider it credible that some evidance supporting the holocaust has been exagerated, one must be cautious not to take some evidance revealing that weakness to be proof that no programme of extermination ever happened...clearly it calls for any serious researcher to be extra vigilant not to jump from one polarised POV to another

As an example, I listened to an Irving lecture a little while ago and he was discussing Himmler's diary, which he found on microfilm in Soviet archives...i noted that he took the diary as meaning what was written in one instance and then NOT meaning what was written the next...but then objectivity is a historians greatest challenge...I also observe that the more heat Irving drew the more extreme his views became...understandable: after all he wasnt paranoid: "they" were out to get him! unbalancing all the same

One day, I am sure, a much closer version of the truth will come out...provided theres any of us still around by then!

Anyway, I have to say I cant see much sense in over discussing the holocaust here...in terms of opposition to the campaign, its a bit like playing Russian roulette with a fully loaded revolver...

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:37 am Post subject:

Ian,

Yes, I agree:

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:38 am Post subject:

John,

Welcome to the board - good comments.

numeral · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:09 am Post subject: Gilad Atzmon interview

It is worth looking at this to inform ourselves should the issue come up again - as no doubt it will.

http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/12/gilad-atzmon-interviewed-by -manuel.html

Even though he agrees with Milan Rai about July 7th!

I have been living in the UK for over 10 years. I do raise my two kids here in bombarded London. And in spite of all that, I am fully aware that it is Mr. Blair who consciously turns my kids, myself and the entire British society into hostages of his poor, not to say criminal, decision making. I must tell you that the majority of British people and that includes the PM’s wife, realised immediately after the July 7th bombing that it was Blair’s doomed policies that brought those bloody bombs upon us. What I am trying to say is that people are capable of differentiating between the personal pain and the reason which led to them being attacked.

xmasdale · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:41 am Post subject: offering our enemies a weapon

The point I'm trying to make is that any discussion of holocaust revision will elicit posts which will be deliberately used by those who wish to discredit us. Since this forum is not about the holocaust we have no obligation to host such posts, particularly since there are plenty of people out to twist our words and misrepresent our policies for their own ends. In carrying on discussing holocaust revision we are handing an extremely powerful weapon to our enemies.

That is why I think the whole of this thread should be removed and we should henceforth shut up about this topic.

Noel

flamesong

flamesong · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:20 pm Post subject:

flamesong · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:23 pm Post subject:

My attention was drawn to this thread by an e-mail which asked if we should be discussing the wisdom of discussing the denial of the holocaust and I asked myself how such an issue could have arisen. It appears that the only defence offered to a criticism of the ill-reputed 'pod theory' was to attack the poster's own reputation:

Ally · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:31 pm Post subject:

flamesong · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:01 pm Post subject:

newsmedianews · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:38 pm Post subject: moving to the right track

It is a little difficult to see how the issue of the holocaust came up in this particular post. It is a somewhat incoherent connection and with no disrespect to those commenting on the holocaust issues, I would be grateful to all posters to remain on the track of the actual posting and keep responses relevant to the issues of 9/11.

Regards
Keith Harris
newsmedianews.com

flamesong · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:51 pm Post subject: Re: moving to the right track

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:00 pm Post subject:

General point about labelling and "spin".

Should we call ourselves "9/11 Deniers" or "9/11 Revisionists"? Let's decide soon please.

It's the LABELLING which is the most powerful PSYCHOLOGICAL weapon. It is DEFEATED by focusing on FACTS, presenting ARGUMENTS and encouraging QUESTIONS to be asked and ANSWERS to be given, with as few accusations and insults as possible.

Spectre · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:08 pm Post subject:

Poseidon · Minor Poster Joined: 28 Mar 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Earth

The fact that historical revisionism and "al Qaeda" terror attacks are intrinsically linked to an underlying global power structure may be discerned by a consideration of currently taboo areas for discussion or investigation. The obvious two are (i) The theory that some group other than suicidal Muslims orchestrated 9/11, 7/7, Bali / Amman / Sharm al-Sheikh / Madrid bombings, etc, for political and business purposes. (ii) The theory that the number of Holocaust victims was deliberately inflated, and victims of a typhus epidemic were said to be victims of an extermination policy, for political and business purposes. Although both theories are prevalent on the internet, the mainstream media will not touch them and any editor who did so would probably be committing journalistic or even physical suicide. Sceptics of the official acount of terror attacks and the Holocaust are routinely accused of defaming the memories of the dead. However, the real motive for attacking sceptics may have nothing to do with protecting the dead and the innocent, but everything to do with securing an immunity for organized criminals who are very much alive and kicking, and laughing all the way to the bank.

My view is that (i) and (ii) may be combined into a Grand Unified Theory of Imminent Dictatorship (GUTID). A long article I authored and posted on my website is now also hosted - with the addition of some 49 pictures showing many of the villains and some of the victims - at another site known as The Gnostic Liberation Front. The site describes itself as a Conspiracy Research-Digest For Heretics And The Politically Incorrect. It is recommended for researchers as it contains a very exhaustive selection of conspiracy theories. The site owner Holger Haffke shares many of my views, as may be seen on this page where he responds to charges of "anti-Semitism". The interested reader may judge whether or not charges of "racism" are justified.

I suspect that the real power brokers may be limited to a clan or mafia of about half a dozen dynastic families such as the Rothschilds, Montefiores, and Bronfmans. The PTB have demonstrated that their strategy includes hiding behind the Jewish people with cries of "anti-Semitism", whilst they are only too happy to sacrifice tens or hundreds of thousands of ordinary Jews when it suits their agenda. One way of identifying the true seat of power is to consider who is beyond criticism. It is not Bush or Blair, but the State of Israel and zionism.The phenomenon that we encounter, of people being blinkered by the mainstream media and afraid to challenge the official version of events, was brilliantly summed up by Sylvia Stolz, the chief defence lawyer for Ernst Zundel in the statement included here, which contains gems such as, "World Jewry knows from experience that almost everyone can be made to believe almost anything if it can be suggested to them that most people believe it. Through the power of suggestion combined with Jewish control of world media the 'Holocaust' has indeed become the suggested belief of almost everyone [...] Criminal law serves the cause of justice through atonement for crime by punishment, while inquisition serves the enforcement of a particular belief through destruction of heretics [...] Inquisition is the purest atrocity, since it destroys freedom of belief." It is easy to see why Stolz was physically carried out of the courtroom, and told that in future she would have to submit motions in writing rather than address the court.

However, it has to be admitted that in the short-term, there are tactical disadvantages from bringing the Holocaust into 9/11 debates. I think the information should be made available for the curious researcher, but we should try to limit the quantity of such postings. At most, our opponents can only argue that 9/11 sceptics are a broad church of whom a minority
support historical revisionism with regard to the Holocaust (correcting the false account of 9/11 peddled by the criminals is itself revisionism applied to relatively recent events). On the other hand, our opponents include people who support the bombing and dumping of nuclear waste on Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, etc, along with the torture and human rights abuses of people solely on account of their race or religion. Surely a powerful elite that mass murders 100,000+ civilians and condemns many more to cancers and leukaemias for generations to come are a bigger skeleton in the closet than a few sceptics of an official account of the events of some 62 years ago?

An error on my post on page 1 of this thread has now been corrected. I was wrong about George Orwell / Eric Blair being Jewish; the origin of this myth appears to be a Japanese site. I thought I had additional corroboration but must have confused him with someone else. Sorry about that.

Poseidon · Minor Poster Joined: 28 Mar 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Earth

Scambusters sounds good. I think Rectifiers or Correctors are less misleading than Revisionists or Deniers. The problem with Revisionist is that it almost seems to accept that the official account is true and revisionists are proposing an Orwellian revision after the fact.

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:56 pm Post subject:

Poseidon,

Please can you delete earlier contentious posts or edit to highight the inaccurate points

That would be great - thanks.

Andrew

Ally · Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:57 am Post subject:

[quote="Flamesong"]As broad as this movement says it would like to be, I for one do not want to share a raft with them.[quote="Ally"]

flamesong · Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:19 pm Post subject:

Is that so?

If you are going to quote me, you might have the sincerity to quote in context:

xmasdale · Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:17 pm Post subject: mud sticks

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:10 pm Post subject:

Noel,

I agree with you about a disclaimer - I don't think a disclaimer will help much at all. It may, however, be a way of lessening the chance of legal action being made (i.e. comments made are the responsibility of the poster, not the board or movement).

Mud is everywhere - all over this board already. Some of the campaigners think this thread should be deleted, but I would argue with you about "most".

I have already suggested to you the fairest way to resolve this matter - but perhaps this is too much work for someone?

What we do is not easy - and what we are fighting for is fundamental freedom of expression and association and being able to question EVERYONE's beliefs about EVERYTHING. This is why this battle is so hard.

Providing we each state our own view of what is being discussed (where it matters to us), then I don't see the problems that you do.

Yes, I see your argument quite clearly, but what you suggest involves a censorship of one sort or another - which is exactly what we are fighting against. So as I said, the only fair way, I feel, to resolve this dichotomy is what I already suggested to you - even if it is an effort. People own their comments and views, not you or me.

If you wish to be a forum moderator, it's absolutely fine by me! Just ask JR to add you!

xmasdale

Ally · Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:54 am Post subject:

Ally

[quote="xmasdale"][
Don't encourage him is my advice. His posts are off topic offensive to many and will be used to discredit our movement. In my opinion it is high time this thread was removed from our forum.

Noel[/quote

makes perfect sense nineeleven. - but wot the * is Flame's empty accusations? bring it on........silly fart

ianrcrane · Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: Civility

Whatever views one may hold ...and whether I agree with them or not, I will defend the right to be able to express that view...can we please endeavour to retain an appropriate degree of civility?

Personal insults, in lieu of objective discussion, might be the norm on certain other forums but I would hope that we are to sustain a greater degree of objective debate on www.nineeleven.com

If however you do wish to vent your spleen, I would invite you to conside the cyberspace equivalent of, "Alright mate, outside then," and go start a thread over on Urban 75; where you will probably feel quite at home!

Thank you,

Ian R. Crane

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:57 am Post subject:

Ian,

I have to agree with you!

flamesong · Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:10 am Post subject:

Justin · Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:14 am Post subject:

Well said Ian, insulting language gets us nowhere IMHO. We will all have disagreements with others within the 9/11 Truth movement at some point in our long journey to expose what really happened on that fateful day. To use offensive and aggressive words belittles our efforts and effectiveness. Ally, if Helen Boaden from the BBC comes onto our site today and looks at your last post, would she be impressed? Sorry, my friend, please try and moderate your contributions, however strongly you may feel about them. Best of all, use humour - if you want to win an argument and verbally trounce your opponent, give us a laugh! Not always possible, but worth a try.

Belinda · Guest

(limping along behind as usual, so sorry if some of this has already been said!) I suggest that genuine truthseekers observe a strict code of not wasting our time and energy arguing with people who are

a) persistently RUDE or AGGRESSIVE
b) persistently determined to DEVIATE from the main issue which is 911, its historical context & ongoing consequences and how we can deal with it/them (there's plenty to be getting on with here!)
c) persistently OBTUSE, ie., they refuse to discuss any of the unanswered questions about 911 or related incidents whilst labelling us conspiracy loons or whatever

If people want to discuss the Holocaust, Diana, ETs or whatever there are other sites for these issues, we can't have our forum clogged up with extraneous material, whilst at the same time we fully recognise there could well be a common link/s between all the problems of the human race in 20-21st century. But 911 is what we have chosen to focus on here and hopefully shed light on what really happened on that day and why.

Inevitably, negatively-inclined people will pop up from time to time and attempt to disrupt and divert us from our main issue. I'd say let such people can have an airing like everyone else, they shouldn't be banned, I don't believe in censorship because the odd person might come along who is merely muddled or distressed (hence a bit aggressive to start with) rather than fundamentally negative and we should be ready to help such people; also, people might have genuinely relevant information or an original view but not be that terrific at putting these across; again, their aggression might denote frustration rather than ill-will.

We have to exercise our collective judgment in this regard but I think with practice we should pretty quickly be able to spot the real troublemakers who persistently cloud the issue and drain the energy of the group; we will sense their presence by their effect on us. Rather than isolating or banning them though could we perhaps flag them up in some way, ie. with a red T for Troublemaker or N for Negative or Nuisance?!! is it technically possible Jim to attach such a flag to certain people's profiles?/or their posts?

Of course any such mark-up would be a communal editorial decision, not taken by the moderator

BUT i believe if all genuine 911 truthseekers stick to our own code and practice SELF-CENSORSHIP about what we put up and with whom/what topics we engage with on the forum we may not even need to flag up the Ts or Ns, they will soon find they are met either by SILENCE or have only other Ts or Ns to talk to!! and they will very soon get bored and go away.

A propos, in the long-term we may need a 3rd website:
911 TRUTH MOVEMENT (mainly for newcomers, to help them learn and assimilate the facts)
911 TRUTH CAMPAIGN (to help people take action)
911 TRUTH TRANSFORMATION (to assist with the spiritual mobilisation required to cleanse the world & human society of the infestation symbolised by 911 and explore ways of putting in new systems to help prevent its further replication and generally move civilisation forward)

Belinda

ian neal · Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:40 pm Post subject:

Just to reiterate what Ian and Belinda are saying: civility at all times please.

The common principle (that unites all major religions and most non religious people) of treating others as we would wish to be treated should be our guide.

I'm currently looking at how other forums discussing controversial topics manage/moderate their forums to see what we can learn.

One possible model is www.illusionsforum.com , where disruptive posters / threads are not deleted but moved to their 'anger management section'.

I also like their posting guidelines that I post below

"Hello friends

Here at Illusions we have a dream: a dream of creating a space where people can feel confident to really share their knowledge and experaince from life without feeling shouted down or made to look a fool, where we can tolerate the differences of others because others tolerate the differences of us

And where people completely new to all the vast areas of knowledge covered by the forum, but more importantly covered by the lives of the forum members, can find the very best information and links to put the whole picture together very quickly and have the foundations for their own lives of discovery

"Build it and the people will come" is some of the oldest wisdom in our world: so if you can, help us do just that, and bring the information and inspiration that matters to you most to the forum, preferably well linked and referenced to its sources

And then invite whoever you feel would benefit from being able to access the same

We will find we have even more reason to talk and share with each other

Love to all,

John"

and

"You'll find a healthy dose of tolerance on display here. I believe in total freedom for adults, but, with freedom, I believe, comes responsibility and, ideally, a modicum of common sense. With that in mind, there are at least a few basic rules.

If you set out attempting to deliberately push people's buttons (offend) you're going to find your posts relegated to the ANGER MANAGEMENT section. Once they're there, I don't really care what you do with them.

Multiple id's: carved down to one identity if found to be used unfairly to weight pov/arguments in one particular direction.

That aside, the only real rules come from the forum provider:

Quote:
Pornography and sex-related merchandising is prohibited on all ForumForFree servers. This includes sites that may infer sexual content, or links to adult content elsewhere. ForumForFree will be the sole arbiter in determining violations of this provision.

Also prohibited are sites that promote any illegal activity or present content that may be damaging to ForumForFree servers or any other server on the internet. Links to such materials are also prohibited.

Examples of unacceptable content or links:

Pirated software
Hacker programs or archives
Warez sites
Illegal MP3's
Child Pornography
Hardcore Pornography

ForumForFree has the right to cancel any of it’s services without notice. "

The existence of illusions and other similar forums (eg RINF, Flamesong (were it to continue) and Above top secret) looking at what some would consider to be the 'bigger picture' also presents the opportunity to suggest that this forum should solely focus on 9/11 and directly related material (the wider 'war on terror' and its consequences) and push material related to the 'bigger picture' towards these forums.

One last thing. Does anyone know what has happened to the DavidIcke forum and if it has become detached from David icke, where is it in cyber space?

Just suggestions, to be discussed further

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3