Nick Kollerstrom responds to BBC Conspiracy Files?

TorsteinViddal · Post by **TorsteinViddal** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:01 pm

Hi,

I'm reading «Terror on the Tube» at the moment, and I'm wondering whether Kollerstrom has made a public statement on the way BBC portrayed him in their 7/7 Conspiracy Files program?

Or, if not, if I can ask him myself through his email (not in the book).

TorsteinViddal · Post by **TorsteinViddal** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:57 am

For all our Scandinavian speakers out there, here's Nick Kollerstrom's statement about the BBC Conspiracy Files mockumentary on 7/7 - in Norwegian:

http://www.911truth.no/2009/09/nick-kol ... onbombene/

Post by **TonyGosling** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:45 pm

Such a shame that Nick has turned out to be a Nazi apologist
saying that concentration camp victims died of 'famine'
quoted on Blairwatch as saying that not a single Nazi prisoner was gassed
and now banned from here for hate posts
what an idiot

TorsteinViddal · Post by **TorsteinViddal** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:19 pm

You're the boss, Tony.

Any links to recent statements from Kollerstrom that can make your judgement more understandable to an outsider?

Post by **TonyGosling** » Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:06 am

A Nazi apologist forum post & personal attack (not against me) that had to be hidden

insidejob · Post by **insidejob** » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:02 am

We should not be having this debate on this forum. Any discussion of the Holocaust should be banned.

We should not have a position where we can attack Holocaust revisionism on this site but ban Holocaust revisionists.

To argue that all revisionism is Nazi is phony and unacceptable.

Ahmadinejad's view on the Holocaust is widespread in the Middle East.

It is standard to advance the idea that the Holocaust is a myth/to question the 6m figure/ to dispute the gassing idea.

Are we saying that they are all Nazis? Or that they should be banned from this site?

Banning fascists is one thing. Banning revisionism is another.

Disco_Destroyer · Post by **Disco_Destroyer** » Fri Mar 12, 2010 1:11 pm

Couldn't we have discussion of delicate subjects in a hidden forum?

Pugwash · Post by **Pugwash** » Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:50 pm

Tend to agree with InsideJob, although more for having no relevance to the stated aims of this site rather than putting forward unconventional views. While it is right for contributors to point out failures in logic and, in cases, the character flaws of those prepared to air their view, it must also be right that they be allowed to defend themselves.

Couldn't we have discussion of delicate subjects in a hidden forum?

Are you sure? 'delicate subjects'? UFO's, Lizard People, Chemitrails, HARRP,Religion, Free Energy, 911 & the London Bombing. The reason many feel the need for truth sites is that others have sought to hide knowledge from others in the assumption that the authority to which they give allegiance is paramount.

Disco_Destroyer · Post by **Disco_Destroyer** » Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:03 pm

Pugwash wrote:Tend to agree with InsideJob, although more for having no relevance to the stated aims of this site rather than putting forward unconventional views. While it is right for contributors to point out failures in logic and, in cases, the character flaws of those prepared to air their view, it must also be right that they be allowed to defend themselves.

Couldn't we have discussion of delicate subjects in a hidden forum?
Are you sure? 'delicate subjects'? UFO's, Lizard People, Chemitrails, HARRP,Religion, Free Energy, 911 & the London Bombing. The reason many feel the need for truth sites is that others have sought to hide knowledge from others in the assumption that the authority to which they give allegiance is paramount.

Yes the 'one' in question has much evidence even though it is a sticky talking point.
Religion should also be open to discussion imo it is a forum we could all learn from

Is Zionism and Masonic or Jesuit conspiracy also not 'delicate subject matter'?

Pugwash · Post by **Pugwash** » Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:23 pm

Is Zionism and Masonic or Jesuit conspiracy also not 'delicate subject matter'?

DD: Well yes, however all the subjects previously mentioned are 'delicate subjects' insofaras they are contriversal and as such have the potential to cause offence. My point is, sure ban a subject if not relivent to the stated aims of the site (isn't there an off-topic category for such posts) but advocating the use of hidden forums closes doors to explore alternative views leaving such members comfortable but cloistered in their own beliefs.
For myself, to paraphrase Marx, I wouldn't join any hidden forums that would have me as a member.

paul wright · Post by **paul wright** » Sun Mar 14, 2010 12:41 am

imo Kollerstrom has produced a pretty worthwhile account around 7/7
He really needed to keep that apart from his views about the Holocaust
He had to associate with that Lady Renouf. He was pleased with that

Disco_Destroyer · Post by **Disco_Destroyer** » Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:45 pm

Trouble is I see the pursuit of truth as paramount despite how hurtful it maybe. I do understand from a campaigning point of view that certain aspects or timing of certain truths maybe dodgy in the public spectrum.
However in short people shouldn't be able to pick and choose truthful learning just because it doesn't agree with what their global view/outlook is.

insidejob · Post by **insidejob** » Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:35 am

Nick has suffered for his desire for truth.

I'm not aware of any agreement within the movement that spokespeople would make no mention of Holocaust denial before Nick talked about it to the Standard. He didn't breach any rule or policy as far as I know. I don't think he should have taken the bait but I don't agree with his persecution by the truth movement or anyone else.

The justification for his persecution is the notion that he is a fascist or is a supporter of fascism. This is merely on the basis that fascists have been arguing Holocaust denial in some form or other. But really it is a bullying smear.

The real reason is that it is bad public relations to associate Holocaust denial with the truth movement. I have to concede that not only is this the case but also it is not a substantial argument concerning 911 or 7/7. Therefore, I would support a ban on Holocaust denial on this site but only if there is a ban on all Holocaust discussion, including attacks on Holocaust deniers or revisionists.

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom

Nick Kollerstrom responds to BBC Conspiracy Files?

Nick Kollerstrom responds to BBC Conspiracy Files?

Kollerstrom in Norwegian

We should not be having this debate

On Nick