Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 12:40 pm Post subject: Final, Final Warning
Hi Ian:
I'd be happy to provide you with a list of people you should ban. They're rude, impolite, and contribute nothing to this forum. Would you like me to post that list here?
Ian wrote:
"I have tried to explain why this forum insists on politeness and respect and will not endorse any one theory as best I can. Yet you seem determined to push me to ban you. Please don't. Final, final warning."
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 12:44 pm Post subject: Re: Final, Final Warning
Fred wrote:
Hi Ian:
I'd be happy to provide you with a list of people you should ban. They're rude, impolite, and contribute nothing to this forum. Would you like me to post that list here?
Ian wrote:
"I have tried to explain why this forum insists on politeness and respect and will not endorse any one theory as best I can. Yet you seem determined to push me to ban you. Please don't. Final, final warning."
Ian seems to be under some spell. He does'nt seem to recognise who is an agent and who is not. He seems completely non plussed that these 'folk' are destroying the foundations of this board. I hold him completely responsible for this.
No, I would prefer if sent me any list by PM along with links that best illustrate their rudeness.
SE
You are right, I have no way to know who is or is not agent. I assume there may be some but that doesn't help in identifying them. Would you care to tell me who are agents supported by some evidence (again by PM) or give me some criteria to help identify them?
Rarely a minute goes by after I post something new here before a mindless wolfpack of cloned accounts with the same spelling mistakes descends and scrolls the original topic off the page.
Their three main tactics are:
(1.) To lower the signal-to-noise ratio here through non-value-added posts, such as AndyB's "have you read the Little Boy Who Cried Wolf"
(2.) To waste time by asking questions that could be answered by performing a simple google search. An example would be asking multiple questions about Sycamores and how fast they grow.
(3.) To harrass and ridicule new ideas thus making the forum inhospitable to those who are advancing the collective knowledge of the community here.
You really shouldn't tolerate such behaviour, Ian, but it's your forum to moderate as you please and not a public service.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 1:39 pm Post subject:
Fred wrote:
OK, Ian, I sent you a list of names.
Rarely a minute goes by after I post something new here before a mindless wolfpack of cloned accounts with the same spelling mistakes descends and scrolls the original topic off the page.
Their three main tactics are:
(1.) To lower the signal-to-noise ratio here through non-value-added posts, such as AndyB's "have you read the Little Boy Who Cried Wolf"
(2.) To waste time by asking questions that could be answered by performing a simple google search. An example would be asking multiple questions about Sycamores and how fast they grow.
(3.) To harrass and ridicule new ideas thus making the forum inhospitable to those who are advancing the collective knowledge of the community here.
You really shouldn't tolerate such behaviour, Ian, but it's your forum to moderate as you please and not a public service.
Fred, It's really, really, really simple.
If you don't want your videos and ideas subjected to criticism, go to your "researchers" site.
You're a hero there.
If you want to venture into the outside world where you're not a hero but merely some anonymous dude touting dodgy videos, then it comes with the territory.
One way and another, everyone here subscribes to the notion that 911 was an inside job. Try and imagine how your 'theories' and lo-res videos will stand up wherever there is hostility to even that basic idea.
Whinging to the ever-patient moderators here isn't going to help you there, is it?
The answer is to grow up and try harder to make a coherent case that transcends the critics' points wherever they are, not to seek protection from them. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Rarely a minute goes by after I post something new here before a mindless wolfpack of cloned accounts with the same spelling mistakes descends and scrolls the original topic off the page.
Their three main tactics are:
(1.) To lower the signal-to-noise ratio here through non-value-added posts, such as AndyB's "have you read the Little Boy Who Cried Wolf"
(2.) To waste time by asking questions that could be answered by performing a simple google search. An example would be asking multiple questions about Sycamores and how fast they grow.
(3.) To harrass and ridicule new ideas thus making the forum inhospitable to those who are advancing the collective knowledge of the community here.
You really shouldn't tolerate such behaviour, Ian, but it's your forum to moderate as you please and not a public service.
ok if we are not allowed to ask questions in this section because your so scared of them or carnt answer them, surely we are within our rights to question them in critics corner, maybe that is the only solution left.
i think 9/11 was an inside job and support an investigastion fully, but obviously i dont support every piece of rubbish uttered therefore im a critic?
maybe it would solve it at least people carnt complain that some one is asking a few questions or providing information that totally proves some of this stuff wrong.
If you don't want your videos and ideas subjected to criticism, go to your "researchers" site.
You're a hero there.
Again, this is precisely the sort of language and post Fred is talking about. The inference you make, Chek is, that this board prefers posts like yours rather than his - and he should not post here.
This is just unfriendliness and debunkery, and does not discuss any specific points of evidence.
As you will see from the response from Rich Garcia at Kirtland Air Force Base
it contains less debunkery to a supposedly way out idea than contained in posts of similar ilk to yours.
Now, I am going to be bold and state that, if you are working to an agenda, rather than just being in basic denial of the evidence, you won't have a lot of time left now - perhaps 1 year or so. Pretty much everything is hanging out now and exposed and if there is someone setting your agenda for you in posting here, they will soon have no way to convincingly suppress the information any longer. If indeed, you are working to an agenda, then you could provide us with valuable insights into whatever organisation you are working for by becoming a whistle-blower. This may encourage others (and I think there are some) to also "come out" and then we can proceed on a more reasonable footing to unveil the other secrets which will then transform our existence.
However, you may be just a poster in very deep denial. In either case, your arguments have little or no substance, so you might as well give up now - what I said above still applies. _________________ Andrew
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:28 pm Post subject:
[quote="Andrew Johnson"]
chek wrote:
If you don't want your videos and ideas subjected to criticism, go to your "researchers" site.
You're a hero there.
Andrew Johnson wrote:
[Again, this is precisely the sort of language and post Fred is talking about. The inference you make, Chek is, that this board prefers posts like yours rather than his - and he should not post here.
With all respect Andrew, you might have inferred that, but I wasn't even implying it.
Andrew Johnson wrote:
This is just unfriendliness and debunkery, and does not discuss any specific points of evidence.
You're not too familiar with Fred's (and the other "researchers") posting styles, are you Andrew?
Andrew Johnson wrote:
As you will see from the response from Rich Garcia at Kirtland Air Force Base
it contains less debunkery to a supposedly way out idea than contained in posts of similar ilk to yours.
Now, I am going to be bold and state that, if you are working to an agenda, rather than just being in basic denial of the evidence, you won't have a lot of time left now - perhaps 1 year or so. Pretty much everything is hanging out now and exposed and if there is someone setting your agenda for you in posting here, they will soon have no way to convincingly suppress the information any longer. If indeed, you are working to an agenda, then you could provide us with valuable insights into whatever organisation you are working for by becoming a whistle-blower. This may encourage others (and I think there are some) to also "come out" and then we can proceed on a more reasonable footing to unveil the other secrets which will then transform our existence.
However, you may be just a poster in very deep denial. In either case, your arguments have little or no substance, so you might as well give up now - what I said above still applies.
Thanks for the opinion Andrew.
The direction of your criticism is duly noted.
My 'agenda', should I have one other than wanting to see the September criminal network brought to justice, is to oppose snake-oil salesmen and general unevidenced quackery, as I trust we all do.
In turn, I'd respond that the theories that are promoted by you and your "researchers" at present also show little substance, but if and when you can present a more convincing case, I look forward to it.
Meanwhile, continue to mollycoddle your 'base'.
I'm sure they appreciate any crumbs of support. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us.
Last edited by chek on Thu May 10, 2007 2:42 pm; edited 2 times in total
In turn, I'd respond that the theories that are promoted by you and your "researchers" at present also show little substance, but if and when you can present a more convincing case, I look forward to it.
Meanwhile, continue to mollycoddle your 'base'.
I'm sure they appreciate any crumbs of support.
Mollycoddle - hmm an interesting choice of word, my friend.
Have you considered expressing your views to Rich Garcia? His FAX number is listed on that other post.
Again, I don't think Snake Oil can dustify steel - so you have yet again resorted to debunkery and a vocabulary of ridicule rather than debating points of evidence. The posts of Thermate, Fallious and a few others can all be characterised in a similar manner.
If Fred is a hero on that other board, do you know of anyone on this board who regards you as a hero? _________________ Andrew
Chek, By the way I don't really have a "base", just an e-mail list. These people all seem to be interested in discussing evidence. Some of them do get quite heated, but in almost all cases, it's over points of evidence, rather than just ridicule on its own. _________________ Andrew
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject:
Andrew Johnson wrote:
chek wrote:
In turn, I'd respond that the theories that are promoted by you and your "researchers" at present also show little substance, but if and when you can present a more convincing case, I look forward to it.
Meanwhile, continue to mollycoddle your 'base'.
I'm sure they appreciate any crumbs of support.
Mollycoddle - hmm an interesting choice of word, my friend.
Have you considered expressing your views to Rich Garcia? His FAX number is listed on that other post.
Again, I don't think Snake Oil can dustify steel - so you have yet again resorted to debunkery and a vocabulary of ridicule rather than debating points of evidence. The posts of Thermate, Fallious and a few others can all be characterised in a similar manner.
If Fred is a hero on that other board, do you know of anyone on this board who regards you as a hero?
As far as I recall Andrew, the steel wasn't dustified, at least according to the USGS samples and the sample provided by a near neighbour of the Towers to Steve Jones. Spheroids of previously molten iron were however found in it. Isn't that interesting? Maybe not.
Perhaps you'd also be prepared to comment on Jenkin's calculations for the amount of energy needed to diassociate the molecules in whatever arbitrary figure you've chosen for the tonnage of steel that was 'dustified'?
Oh silly me - there I go using the Los Alamos Mafia's figures.
By the way have you seen the movie 'Why We Fight'? It shows even grannies and dinner ladies are part of the military-industrial machine that is the USA today.
Andrew, the concept of 'heroes' are for the character challenged.
I would neither expect to be nor would want to be viewed as one.
But Fred's certainly a hero - or maybe 'celebrity' is a better word - to some who have enthusiastically promoted his 'work' from the "researchers" community. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
regardless of if people like it or not, those with evidence have a right to post it, those who dont understand it or see that the ev idence is wrong have a right to post their evidence/questions to.
its obviously coursing problems and EVERYONE is resulting to sarcasm accusations and ridicule from both sides of the arguement, myself included once ive been subject to a few myself.
saying people are agents for disagreeing or not seeing the evidence is ludicrous, the same goes for people who present what they believe to be evidence.
if that is the logic we are working with then everyone can be classed as agents, as we all disagree on certain evidence that has been put into the pot since 9/11 happened.
we all dont see the evidence for certain things.
the only thing that is damaging the movement is the accusations, people who work hard or do their best to do what they can all attacking each other because of a differant belief on one or two pieces of evidence.
maybe my suggestion above is the only solution, questioning or putting forward evidence to prove a claim wrong should be done in critics corner as its obvious if anyone does it here it causes stupid argeuments and comments to fly around.
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:57 pm Post subject:
andrew,
Stefan has continually tried to talk about the 'evidence' presented and it is Fred who responds with insults. He also spams the same clips on numerous threads. It seems to be a common trait amongst theses 'researchers'.
Dustify????????? Where is the proof that steel turned to dust and 'dustify' is not a word and is harmful to the campaign.
I still don't get how you move from DEWs exist therefore WTC was destroyed by DEWs? Can you please explain?
cheers
Andy _________________ "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
Can you explain the causal mechanism behind this? Why are you asking this question on this thread, when it has been asked and answered many times over on other threads?
Have you read the Air Force Response?
Re: I still don't get how you move from DEWs exist therefore WTC was destroyed by DEWs? Can you please explain?
Well, read through Judy's evidence, and if you don't get it after that, I don't think you ever will, so I won't be able to explain it any better, sorry.
Why is "dustify" harmful to the campaign?
Who is "the campaign"? Me? You? Stefan?
Perhaps you need to re-think your definition of the "campaign".... _________________ Andrew
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 3:30 pm Post subject:
So do you discount that the spire could fall and the 'dustification' is merely remants from the collapse?
You say it has been answered before but I've yet to see the above poitn be discounted. I've had a look at Judy Wood's paper and I personally don't think it stands up to any scrutiny. Why did she not want Stephen Jones to get her paper peer reviewed? Unfortunately as we have no way of knowing that these weapons exist to perform the job required then the entire paper is based upon speculation, almost like the 9/11 commission report.
Any made up words are harmful to the campaign in my opinion.
Perhaps you need to rethink what is useful for the campaign to achieve it's goals or be comprehensively debunked using the starw man tactics along with speculative theorising. Why not let us all agree that the towers did not collapse due to the plane(or whatever) crashes and fire alone. This is common ground for all of us and very strong information to campaign with. Enter TV-fakery, holograms and DEW and we get divisive and help the people who did this get away with it. the longer this goes on the less chance we'll find out what really happened and get our investigation. _________________ "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
I don't think Andrew Johnson needs to rethink what you consider harmful to the movement AndyB. I'm not aware of special "clinging dust" that releases itself only after a demolished building collapses due to pre-planted thermite explosives. Can you post some links please to this "clinging dust remnant" from a controlled demolition so we can see what you're talking about?
It's high time you post something useful, AndyB, instead of speculating on how the work people are actually doing might be harming the movement because you're too busy criticising people to do any work of your own.
Show me the clinging "controlled demolition" dust. Please post at least 20 pictures and videos of this phenomenon from recent controlled demolitions so we can see what you're talking about. Since your theory is that it's a controlled demolition, I'm sure this "spire" phenomenon happens all the time. Since we don't need new words for it this clinging dust must be very ordinary and I'm sure you won't have trouble finding good examples of it.
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 3:56 pm Post subject:
Fred,
209 postsin 2 weeks, that's good going!! So you aren't awrae of dust settling on things but are aware of DEW's that could be used to bring down the towers without being spotted? Do you also say that CNN created the whole of NY with CGI? _________________ "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
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 4:00 pm Post subject:
static??
Also, where did I say thermite or nanothermate were used? _________________ "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
So do you discount that the spire could fall and the 'dustification' is merely remants from the collapse?
Umm - yes I do discount this. There is a grid structure clearly seen. It must be either steel, concrete, or glass or wood, or a mixture of these things. How can it remain standing and then just "dustify" (I do like that word) without any visible explosive or other energy input? And remember, this does not "stand" (pun intended) as the sole evidence of dustification.
Quote:
Enter TV-fakery, holograms and DEW and we get divisive and help the people who did this get away with it. the longer this goes on the less chance we'll find out what really happened and get our investigation.
Oops - I never mentioned Holograms, why did you? You mentioning it when I did not surely "damages" the campaign thingy doesn't it?
I suggest you look into Steve Jones background more closely and read the evidence I presented here:
if you are interested. If not - fine you say what you want about the evidence and I will say what I want about that same evidence. OK? How's about that for a campaigning principle? _________________ Andrew
What brought down the towers? I thought you had some special knowledge about the demolition and the behaviour of the dust near the spire.
You demand 'special knowledge' to justify interpreting images that common sense suggests are indicative merely of clouds of dust dislodged from falling steel 'spires'? My, my.
Andrew,
I have to concur with Andy, if you actually take a plain look at the majority of threads Fred has started, he'll put forward a video, me or someone else will factually debate the points he is making, he wont deal with any of the points made, insult us and then start a new thread posting the same video, someone else will bring some valid points against the video, he'll insult them, then claim that nobody has managed to refute his video, then start claiming he is being oppressed, everyone not agreeing with him is an agent of evil, we're all the same person and so on and so forth.
He is not interested in debating any evidence, I really have tried; he's interested in people either saying he's right, or in attacking people who don't think he is.
You can see this for your self.
True, this has led to a general lack of respect for the man, and some frustrated or dismissive repsonses to him, and I'm not saying that's what buddha would do, but we're human beings, and if you look at his MO, that really is what he has brought on himself. _________________
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 12:27 am Post subject:
Stefan wrote:
Andrew,
I have to concur with Andy, if you actually take a plain look at the majority of threads Fred has started, he'll put forward a video, me or someone else will factually debate the points he is making, he wont deal with any of the points made, insult us and then start a new thread posting the same video, someone else will bring some valid points against the video, he'll insult them, then claim that nobody has managed to refute his video, then start claiming he is being oppressed, everyone not agreeing with him is an agent of evil, we're all the same person and so on and so forth.
He is not interested in debating any evidence, I really have tried; he's interested in people either saying he's right, or in attacking people who don't think he is.
You can see this for your self.
True, this has led to a general lack of respect for the man, and some frustrated or dismissive repsonses to him, and I'm not saying that's what buddha would do, but we're human beings, and if you look at his MO, that really is what he has brought on himself.
Appealing to AJ's better nature is probably a waste of time Stefan.
I don't know if you've noticed yet, but "researchers" only have respect for each other.
Viz. this exchange:
Fred wrote:
I think that's an excellent letter, Andrew, >snip<
Andrew Johnson wrote:
Thanks for your kind comments, Fred.
Excuse me, I think I'm gonna be sick.
OK, where was I. Oh yes...
The rest of us non-believers are either 'agents' (which AJ went into some detail to accuse me of earlier today in the 'Final final Warning' thread - isn't that against forum policy? Never mind), or else evidence free obstructionists and wreckers(!) defaming the efforts of good honest "researchers".
This place truly has gone mental. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
My threads tend to get hijacked by the wolfpack of cloned shills who ask pointless questions that they could have answered with a moment of their own research.
How fast do trees grow?
Where is Battery Park?
Have you read Mother Goose?
I won't waste my time on this group, so they respond by sabotaging the thread and turning it into an off-topic insult fest.
you are obviously a talented guy
i have looked at some of your videos and can honestly say you do know what you are doing
so please please think why this john white campaign?
you are on a revenge trip but the only winners are bush and blair
why dont you put this same energy into attacking the war criminal blair
by attacking your fellow truther you are doing MOSSAD's and M15's job for them
remember when GW Bush said "if you not with us you are with the terrorists"
please try and let bygones be bygones and put your huge talents towards attacking Blair and Bush and their apologists
i say this as a completely neutral bystander
and as a person who apreciates your talent _________________
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 8:22 am Post subject:
Quote:
so please please think why this john white campaign?
you are on a revenge trip but the only winners are bush and blair
I personally see it as the natural consequence of speaking truth to people with a dogma to defend: in that regard, its the same talking to No Plane Theorists as Armeggedon chasers or those waiting around for "AshtarCommand"
I'm still waiting for an actual response to the methodology and evidence I presented showing the battery park photo to be fake: right now, its an "elephant in the livingroom" as far as Fred's concerned. Fred can ignore it and pretend it didn't happen, but that "elephant" is rampaging and driving a massive hole through his entire thesis _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
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
