FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Site censorship?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:45 am    Post subject: Site censorship? Reply with quote

Fred at 911researchers.com wanted to join in a particular debate on this site but says that he is not allowed to register. Is he being censored? Can any mods answer the question as to whether people are vetted, and rejected if their views are already known to not tally with 'the party line'?

I hope that is not the case and that the issue with Fred is just some sort of admin problem which can be quickly solved, but I think this needs to be cleared up. Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Angel - now passed away


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not aware of that. No censorship on the grounds a user being linked to 9/11 researchers or any other 9/11 group. Fred would be welcome. Suggest he contacts Andrew Johnson or JHR re log on problems
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Before going to too much trouble though, it might be worth letting 'Fred' know we get quite enough No Planes spam already, thanks
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.

It's them or us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WhoKilledBambi?
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 36

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fred gets 911 youtube vid of the year from me. ACe work dude.


Link
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

He made that?

LOL!

Looking forward to this wunderkind turning up in Controversies

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cynic
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 7:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Site censorship? Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
Fred at 911researchers.com wanted to join in a particular debate on this site but says that he is not allowed to register. Is he being censored? Can any mods answer the question as to whether people are vetted, and rejected if their views are already known to not tally with 'the party line'?

I hope that is not the case and that the issue with Fred is just some sort of admin problem which can be quickly solved, but I think this needs to be cleared up. Thanks.


Lmao, I signed up on 911researchers.com and gave fred my opinion.. and * siegel, got banned within 20 mins Laughing

Site censorship back at ya Wink

_________________
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/referendumonwar/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 10:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Site censorship? Reply with quote

cynic wrote:
MadgeB wrote:
Fred at 911researchers.com wanted to join in a particular debate on this site but says that he is not allowed to register. Is he being censored? Can any mods answer the question as to whether people are vetted, and rejected if their views are already known to not tally with 'the party line'?

I hope that is not the case and that the issue with Fred is just some sort of admin problem which can be quickly solved, but I think this needs to be cleared up. Thanks.


Lmao, I signed up on 911researchers.com and gave fred my opinion.. and * siegel, got banned within 20 mins Laughing

Site censorship back at ya Wink


Word. Why am I not suprised?

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Witchfinder General
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 134

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:38 am    Post subject: Army psy ops at CNN Reply with quote

Army psy ops at CNN

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17437
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

WhoKilledBambi? wrote:
Fred gets 911 youtube vid of the year from me. ACe work dude.

So, it was all a ruse to get another trashy NPT YouTube video in the 'General' section. What a surprise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:53 am    Post subject: Vetting Reply with quote

People often get banned on all sorts of sites for being offensive, and I don't object to that (how wonderful it is without Patrick Brown) - the difference here is that the person in question couldn't actually get to make a post in the first place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:02 am    Post subject: Re: Vetting Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
People often get banned on all sorts of sites for being offensive, and I don't object to that (how wonderful it is without Patrick Brown) - the difference here is that the person in question couldn't actually get to make a post in the first place.

Being fairly well versed in phpBB and knowing of one or two other people who couldn't register without somebody holding their hand throughout the registration process, I think you are looking in the wrong direction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Angel - now passed away


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

madge, i've already said fred is not banned from registering because of his views. I don't know what the problem is. I suggest he contacts AJ who as one of the site admins may be able to advise him
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Vetting Reply with quote

All signs point to this guy being an indescribably dense tele tubby.



A fine and upstanding member of the NPT brotherhood, no doubt.

_________________
"Thought is faster than arrows, and truth is sharper than blades." - David Gemmell | RealityDown wiki


Last edited by Fallious on Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Vetting Reply with quote

Fallious wrote:
All signs point to this guy being an indescribably dense tele tubby.

A fine and upstanding member of the NPT brotherhood, no doubt.


perhaps witchfinder general could lend him the planes on 9/11 multiple ID?

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject: Re: Vetting Reply with quote

John White wrote:
perhaps witchfinder general could lend him the planes on 9/11 multiple ID?

Which in his/her fevered haste to spam s/he could not even spell correctly; plane son9/11.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I posted your initial response on the 911researchers site, thanks Ian. I then responded to a claim that banning would be the same as vetting.

I see Fallious is doing the usual job of resorting to insults when losing ground. Here's some of what he was failing to respond to in Witchfinder General's link above:

"Army 'psyops' at CNN
News giant employed military 'psychological operations' personnel
Posted: March 3, 2000 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Geoff Metcalf
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

CNN employed active duty U.S. Army psychological operations personnel last year, WorldNetDaily has confirmed through several sources at Fort Bragg and elsewhere.

Maj. Thomas Collins, U.S. Information Service has confirmed that "psyops" (psychological operations) personnel, soldiers and officers, have worked in the CNN headquarters in Atlanta. The lend/lease exercise was part of an Army program called "Training With Industry." According to Collins, the soldiers and officers, "... worked as regular employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production of news."

"When asked if the introduction of military personnel into a civilian news organization was standard operating procedure, one source said, "That question is above my pay grade ... but I hope so. It's what we do."

"The CNN military personnel were members of the Airmobile Fourth Psychological Operations Group, stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. One of the main tasks of this group of almost 1200 soldiers and officers is to spread 'selected information.' Critics say that means dissemination of propaganda."

No doubt they managed a few TV-fakery rehearsals while they were at it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so Madge B:

are you conceeding that there is no censorship on this site?

YES or NO?

(censorship on 9/11 researchers already being conceeded as a fact and a moot point)

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John White - There is obviously a distinction between (a) banning people for offensive posts, and (b) vetting or not allowing people to post in the first place. (a) is obviously not unheard-of both on this site and elsewhere, but I won't know about (b) until Fred either starts posting here or reports back on what the problem is. As I said, I hope it was just a glitch.

BTW I’m sure you’ll be glad to know that ‘the indescribably dense’ Fred (as the unoriginal spacewaster Fallious calls him) has also done some original research on military PsyOps. See Manipulation of the Media by the Military: Constructing a Fantasy World for the Viewer. http://www.911researchers.com/node/12

Here are a few quotes from research commissioned by the Pentagon and British Ministry of Defence before 9/11:
- “The issue is whether the Western media, most obviously that of the United States, can be manipulated in order to bring about a military deployment; and if so, how this can be done.” Manipulating The Media - Stephen Badsey, British Ministry of Defence.
- “Film or video messages are markedly effective (and preferred to less vivid media) in teaching factual knowledge, are accepted as accurate, and are not perceived as propaganda. Emotional (fear-inducing) appeals are persuasive when they are truly frightful, suggest effective actions to reduce the fear-arousing threat, and the recipients believe that they are able to perform the suggested action.”
- “US forces must be capable of responding to media demands for instantaneous information, and of using the rapid transmission of data to its advantage. This magnifies the importance of tending to image considerations. . . . But it also suggests the need for greater information dominance and for some thought about how modern, real-time news reporting can be used to US advantage in future military operations.
People like pictures, and the believability of video makes pictures more convincing than words: moving pictures "seem utterly real”… People tend to believe what they see on video as positive proof.” Winning CNN Wars, Parameters, Autumn 1994."

Fred's is pioneering research, illuminating what really happened on 9/11. I'm sorry some people here would rather that remained hidden.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xmasdale
Angel - now passed away
Angel - now passed away


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1959
Location: South London

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
John White - There is obviously a distinction between (a) banning people for offensive posts, and (b) vetting or not allowing people to post in the first place. (a) is obviously not unheard-of both on this site and elsewhere, but I won't know about (b) until Fred either starts posting here or reports back on what the problem is. As I said, I hope it was just a glitch.



I have never heard of anyone being vetted for this site and I've been in this movement since it started in the UK. I am quite sure it doesn't happen and there must be some glitch preventing Fred from registering.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So in the year 2007, after everything that's happened, 'Fred' has discovered that the corporate media is directed, manipulated and controlled - sometimes directly by government agencies.

Amazing and informative, if rather old not to mention tired news.

99.999999% of people already know TV is fake.
The way that it's faked is by being selective with what is shown - not by CGI.

I'd have thought that after the tree debacle, 'Fred' might have learned that objective analysis isn't his strongest suit.

_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.

It's them or us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadgeB, none of this is new.

Everybody knows about Aldous Huxley's book, 'Brave New World', published in 1932 but few are aware of the book he wrote twenty-six years later in 1958, Brave New World Revisited in which he evaluated the predictions the novel made.

I have read it several times and each time it chills me. There is nothing which you quoted here as recent research which was not already germinating in the mind of a writer of fiction 75 years ago and endorsed by the same mind as a philosopher 49 years ago:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Brave-World-Revisited-Aldous-Huxley/dp/0099458 233

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World#Brave_New_World_Revisited

But from what I can see, the mythical Fred and his cronies, such as yourself, are actually trying to exploit the techniques you mentioned in an effort to brainwash people into swallowing your ludicrous theories.

This whole censorship deal is just a mind game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Duuuh, chek - You obviously didn't quite grasp the fact that the whole point of the research commissioned by the military was to look at how best to win support for war - focusing on the manipulation of images, especially video, in real-time, using TV news, as that is believed by the population in general.

Stating that, "The way that it's faked is by being selective with what is shown - not by CGI" does not amount to a rebuttal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:53 pm    Post subject: Brave new world Reply with quote

OK, so I guess the conclusion is that the US military employs all these people for Psychological Operations, puts them into CNN newsrooms in the year before 9/11, teaches them how to manipulate TV news videos to win support for the so-called War on Terror, and then decides - oh no, wait - Aldous Huxley wrote about that a long time ago, so let's not bother.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Brave new world Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
OK, so I guess the conclusion is that the US military employs all these people for Psychological Operations, puts them into CNN newsrooms in the year before 9/11, teaches them how to manipulate TV news videos to win support for the so-called War on Terror, and then decides - oh no, wait - Aldous Huxley wrote about that a long time ago, so let's not bother.

No, mate, I was commenting on Fred's alleged cutting edge research from which your earlier post implies he has unearthed these startling revelations.

FFS! You don't even need to read Huxley to figure out why corporations pay to advertise their products on the TeeVee.

You are merely trying to get more NPT shíte on the forum cloaked in gobsmackingly unoriginal er... what was the word you used... er... research.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
John White - There is obviously a distinction between (a) banning people for offensive posts, and (b) vetting or not allowing people to post in the first place. (a) is obviously not unheard-of both on this site and elsewhere, but I won't know about (b) until Fred either starts posting here or reports back on what the problem is. As I said, I hope it was just a glitch.

BTW I’m sure you’ll be glad to know that ‘the indescribably dense’ Fred (as the unoriginal spacewaster Fallious calls him) has also done some original research on military PsyOps. See Manipulation of the Media by the Military: Constructing a Fantasy World for the Viewer. http://www.911researchers.com/node/12

Here are a few quotes from research commissioned by the Pentagon and British Ministry of Defence before 9/11:
- “The issue is whether the Western media, most obviously that of the United States, can be manipulated in order to bring about a military deployment; and if so, how this can be done.” Manipulating The Media - Stephen Badsey, British Ministry of Defence.
- “Film or video messages are markedly effective (and preferred to less vivid media) in teaching factual knowledge, are accepted as accurate, and are not perceived as propaganda. Emotional (fear-inducing) appeals are persuasive when they are truly frightful, suggest effective actions to reduce the fear-arousing threat, and the recipients believe that they are able to perform the suggested action.”
- “US forces must be capable of responding to media demands for instantaneous information, and of using the rapid transmission of data to its advantage. This magnifies the importance of tending to image considerations. . . . But it also suggests the need for greater information dominance and for some thought about how modern, real-time news reporting can be used to US advantage in future military operations.
People like pictures, and the believability of video makes pictures more convincing than words: moving pictures "seem utterly real”… People tend to believe what they see on video as positive proof.” Winning CNN Wars, Parameters, Autumn 1994."

Fred's is pioneering research, illuminating what really happened on 9/11. I'm sorry some people here would rather that remained hidden.


Looks like "fred" has you right round his finger. I'm certainly not overly moved that he can lift text out of a military article and bask in reflected glory...

At this point, its clear that Fred is either unable to work out how to activate his own account, or simply lying: which makes you either a gullable dupe, or a willing stooge

Beleive it or not, there is a collective experiance here that the 9/11 researchers crowd would do well to listen too, if they can get out from under the bulk of that obvious fraud Fetzer

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:22 pm    Post subject: Ah that reflected glory Reply with quote

Well it’s really quite simple, isn’t it? If you’re a bit upset about Fred ‘basking in reflected glory’, all you have to do (as was said on the other thread debating this) is produce some video footage that has the same buildings in the same alignment as in the CNN footage. That would be the end of the argument.

In the meanwhile, we have plenty of new footage and some images from the day (http://www.911researchers.com/node/428) showing that the CNN shot is impossible - added to the stationary black smoke, added to the fact that the ghostplane goes into the building intact, added to the delayed fireball, added to the nose-out shots, added to the long shot that shows the explosion and no plane, side-by-side with the same long shot showing the cut-out plane silhouette in place, added to no plane debris, added to no black box, added to no air crash investigation, added to the military embedded in CNN and looking at real-time manipulation of TV news broadcast because people believe it uncritically as ‘fact’ - the list goes on. All in all, no credible evidence whatsoever of a plane hitting the building and plenty of evidence to show TV-fakery.

Flamesong waffling about TV adverts doesn’t come anywhere near close to dealing with the issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your a believer.

'Nuff said

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Ah that reflected glory Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
A long list of wishful nonsense.

Your team of researchers cannot even multiply 5 x 2 or determine whether trees would be taller or shorter five years later (see the thread to which you just referred).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John, you do sound uncannily like someone supporting the official 9/11 story arguing with a sceptic. "Oh, you conspiracy theorists are all the same, you just want to believe your little plots and there’s no reasoning with you. Never mind the evidence - there’s really nothing to see here. Move along please."

I suggest that watching this short vid will allow people to make up their own mind whether flamesong's statement bears any relation to the truth, amongst other things. (The link didn't seem to come out properly last time.) http://www.911researchers.com/node/428
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadgeB wrote:
I suggest that watching this short vid will allow people to make up their own mind whether flamesong's statement bears any relation to the truth, amongst other things. (The link didn't seem to come out properly last time.) http://www.911researchers.com/node/428

What? Are you suggesting that I am lying about your NPT mate's mathematical incompetence and horticultural ignorance?

5 x 2 = 12! Lookie here:

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=8442&start=60#66547
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
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


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group