Why is Gareth banned?

[Zeal]

[TonyGosling]

This site is not here for your entertainment Gareth Newnham. You're an amateur film maker yourself.
If you have anything constructive to add here you'll be welcomed back. But this is deliberate rubbish.
Your email address is now banned too.

[Stefan]

Why exactly is Gareth banned?

I doubt there is anyone doing as much for 9/11 truth in the UK at the moment as Gareth and yet he banned from the UK forum?

Kind of a bit of a joke Tony...

[TonyGosling]

No, he's banned from one of the UK forums and has a wide internet presence of his own.

Hardly a joke to shill-post that amateur films on the internet detract from the 9/11 Truth campaign is it? A post designed to misdirect and disrupt. What about Loose Change and just about everything WAC has ever done?

Have a look at Gareth's last posts here

Just before being banned Gareth was suspended for advising people not to post on this site in his signature - he was taking the mickey.

Then banned for shilling under the handle 'Sundance'. At some point last year, probably when he started cutting and pasting 'Arabesque' posts in to attack Kevin Barratt.

He's put his childish inability to let sleeping dogs lie on display on this public forum and using pseudonyms. And the sort of BS peddled as comment above is called shilling which is banned.

As I said before if he changes his mind and decides he wants to use this site to contribute to the 9/11 and 7/7 Truth movement discussions he'd be welcome but almost all he has done so far since the suspension is persue his vendetta.

I'm not stupid, can see what he's up to, and am simply not having it.

It would be nice if he could 'let it lie' but I'm not holding my breath. He can go have his fun on TruthAction.org or elsewhere.

But in a weird way I'm flattered that he keeps coming back. I suppose he must see something of value here.

[Stefan]

Yeah I get it Tony.

Attacking Kevin Barratt - banned.

Denying the holocaust - championed.

[andyb]

here here.

Not sure why you feel some sort of pride that Gareth has come back to post here. I don't see why he bothers because there's hardly anyone reading since you took over.

Tony, are you really saying that it is better to have lots of badly produced videos of the same talk than one really slick one that can be posted everywhere? Can you please confrim that this is your view and if so why?

[peloloco]

hahaha I can't believe Sir Gareth, one of the hardest working and most effective 911 activists in this country is banned. Who did he upset so badly?

He is out on the street every week walking the walk.

Quite funny really.

[TonyGosling]

No Stefan you don't get it do you?

Gareth Newnham has simply been caught shilling - for a second time.

Who is he to assume someone's going to make a badly produced film?
He's attacking exactly what you, he and your friends are doing. Making amateur films. Some good, some bad. Some of your stuff is bad, as is some of mine, but it's better than the two dimensional line pushed by the MSM.

Barrett and Tarpley were not criticised they were attacked by Gareth.
They are both 9/11 Truthers & if people have a flagrant go at them they'll be suspended whoever they are.
As was this forum on his signature.
What Gareth fails to do when he turns up here is treat 9/11 Truthers, whether prospective filmmmakers or people like Tarpley or Barrett with respect.
Fine to respectfully disagree but not fine to attack - and he doesn't appear to get the difference.

Denying the holocaust is banned here,
Would you like to explain where it's ... erum ... as you say .. condoned?

Sounds to me like you're losing sight of the basic principle of plurality of approaches to 9/11 Truth and rather bitter that your mate's been rumbled.

I mean get a life guys and if you have anything to contribute to the movement feel free to post it here.

Nice of you to come along and defend your mate but....
He's advocating censorship - and you've clearly lost the ability for self-critical thinking!

[andyb]

Tony, are you seriously saying that anyone who champions 9/11 truth is untouchable?

Gareth simply pointed out Tarpley's behaviour with regards to the Kennebunk Report. Cytnhia McKinney was in town at the time this all emerged and she told us in no uncertain terms that she did not sign that document. Tarpley then started attacking the likes of Cindy Sheehan who also said she didn't sign it. This caused a big rift between 9/11 truth and anti-war movements in the US, just when relationships were strengthening. This is not me attacking Tarpley but pointing to a few known facts.

I'm not sure what he's supposed to have said about Kevin Barrett but he too has shown some rather worrying behaviour. At the end of the day Gareth and a lot of others spend enormous amounts of time trying to expose what happened on 9/11 and this isn't helped by things like the Kennebunk Report, giving Judy woods airtime, etc. At best it is awful strategic thinking and disrespectful to those that died on the day and since in wars. At worst it is intentional. Who knows, certainly not me.

Regarding the filming of DRG, are you trying to say that lots of bad copies of a talk are better than 1 good copy?

[Stefan]

Hold on - you ban him for saying something you disagree with - and HE'S advocating censorship?

[chek]

With regard to Tarpley, while I was initially impressed by his apparent grasp of the subject, particularly speaking at the LA Citizen's jury in 2006, it was obvious some sabotaging of a potentially beneficial link with the anti-war movement had taken place at Kennebunkport.

But there was an element of 'he said, she said' to the affair that made drawing a firm conclusion difficult from second hand reports.

However, in the latest Alex Jones doom piece, there's WGT merrily claiming that AGW/climate change is due to solar activity (it isn't - there's been no synchronisation between TSI and Earth surface temps for 60 years) and that other planets are warming throughout the solar system (which is a partial truth and not for the implied but never spelled out reason).

This isn't just any old nonsense - this is shaped and sponsored, talking points nonsense. To see Tarpley railing against 'the globalists' while parroting Big Oil obstructionist profit-protecting propaganda (are the Energy Corporations not arch-globalists?) illustrates poor scholarship and/or another agenda.

There's no wiggle room on these points.
He's plain wrong on facts that are easily checked out.
But like most demagogues, he knows most people take words at face value. Once a Larouchie....

[andyb]

[TonyGosling]

[scubadiver]

[TonyGosling]

Gareth Newnham has been caught shilling, posting deliberately to disrupt.
Several times now.

If he had posted respectful and reasoned criticism of the 9/11 Truth campaigners he so dislikes he would still be here.

It's nice to see all his mates weighing in on his behalf but he, personally, has blown it.

[xmasdale]

[TonyGosling]

If Gareth want's to post here he can do so.
Nothing stopping him coming up with yet another pseudonym.
He's been given two second chances and each time decided to write deliberately disruptive posts.
You can read them for yourself as I said above.
Just like the one at the top of this thread.

Interesting that Gareth, even now, choses not to contribute.
And that his friends insist on moaning in unrelated topics.
And dising this site to all who will listen to them.
Rather than dealing with the shill in their midst.

[Stefan]

[TonyGosling]

Oh... er... you're so oblique.

See above

To be fair he has been being childish, unloading baggage and being contrary for contrarineses sake but he's not doing that here.

He can post anytime he feels like growing up.