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 

Jon Ronson 9/11 Truth hatchet job
Goto page Previous  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 News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
suspecta
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hear hear to Ian Neal - a veritable voice of sanity; Andrew Johnson too. Nobody's suggesting censorship - just a place where racism isn't tolerated and people like Jon Ronson can come and discuss without encountering a barrage of insults. If some people feel this is tantamount to censorship then so be it.

This is far too important to risk alienating the very sorts of people we should be looking to attract.

Incidentally the Ronson Guardian article was quite even-handed in its own way - I notice that he hinted at finding Richard Dawkins a bit extreme in his rationalism, another clue that he may have been more open-minded when he came here than some of us gave him credit for.

Suspecta
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mason-free party
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 765
Location: Staffordshire

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally i think Ronson is taking us all for mugs...he comes on here wanting to debate 911 like some novice who has just stumbled across 911 conspiracy theories yet has set foot in Bohemian grove with Alex Jones researching human fake? sacrifices...pull the other one Jon.
Your programme was made to make conspiracy theorists seem like nutters and now you want to lump 911 truthers into that catagory...Alex said either your lot or the BBC lot were like a giggling bunch of school kids when he went to be interviewed and walked out early because of their pathetic,ignorant attitude towards him.
You only have to find out who are behind the Ronson conspiracy programme to find out who is pulling his strings...come on Jon,who put you up to it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

suspecta wrote:
I think you have to much more careful in what you write.


I'm sorry. I really don't know how to raise these issues without really offending just about everyone, it seems.

13 months ago I knew nothing about 9/11 Truth. I realised quickly that here was a massive lie presented to the public as truth...and that the public believed this lie to be true. The consequences of our accepting this lie had been disastrous for humanity and, God forbid, still threatens to create a World War that could kill us all. Exposing this lie is a matter of some urgency.

I, and most 9/11 truthers, understand that Zionism is somehow deeply connected to 9/11. I have stated in a previous post what I think the nature of that connection is. However, the thing, more than anything else, that gives Zionism its power is the propaganda that has been shoved in our faces every day since about the mid-sixties regarding the 'Final Solution' and the Jewish Holocaust. We all stand humbled before this. We are slow to question the self-righteousness or paranoia of Israeli politicians. I don't know Jewish culture but I would guess that the 'Holocaust' and the precepts of Zionism are drilled into little Jewish heads with a terrifying intensity.
We know that Hitler persecuted the Jews but what if the story of industrialised extermination, the bit that makes that particular persecution 'different', is actually false.

There is strong evidence that much, at least, of the story is indeed false.

Is there not then a possibility that another huge and criminal lie has been sold to and bought by the public. I want to know the truth about this. I think it is vital for all our futures that this issue too is investigated calmly and diligently. The consequences for everybody of believing such a thing if it is a lie are just too serious. I think it is the weight of the Holocaust story on the mind of Jon Ronson that makes him see dangerous and rabid anti-semites at every turn. Secondly, it is likely that he experiences a visceral sense of existential peril at the though of critically engaging with the Zionist brainwashing he has been brougt up with. It is surely this that 'stops him going there' on the 9/11 issue. Having rejected us, it is natural that he should then justify and rationalise his behaviour by perceiving us as anti-semitic loonies.

I have been banned from the BBC website for raising this and other issues. I have also been banned from informationclearinghouse. I understand why moderators believe that allowing such posts will harm our campaign but this only goes to show how devastatingly successful the Zionist propaganda machine has been and continues to be.
We know the media will not print or transmit controversial 9/11 evidence. However, you surely cannot help but have noticed that they give us some aspect of 'The Holocaust Story' every single day of our lives on some channel or in some newspaper or other.

The mindlock is on. Co-operate with it if you must.

I do not believe I am anti-Jewish. Rather I think of Jews as friends whose side I am on, believe it or not.

I understand that raising these issues is offensive to most of them but surely to God someone somewhere has to do it.

The truth, which I do not claim to know, really really matters.

We will only find the truth by looking impartially at all the evidence and encouraging others to do the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mason-free party
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 765
Location: Staffordshire

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Its no coincidence that Ronsons programme 'Secret rulers of the world' appeared on TV shortly before 911....lets get the agenda of conspiracy nutters in place first before the big 911 event...lets ridicule the main players who will be the ones spouting out 911 truth when it happens and afterwards...well hard luck Jon,ya zionist leaders plan has back fired bigtime..

The ‘Son of God’ & the ‘Secret Rulers of the World’
Rixon Stewart

Ten years ago David Icke came out, so to speak, and declared himself the “Son of God” on a popular TV talk show. A decade later and he’s dropped the “Son of God” claim; now he’s speaking to packed audiences across the globe and telling them about the world’s secret rulers: about the Trilateral Commision, the Bilderbergers and the Illuminati. Names which you don’t normally hear in the main-stream media; ideas and research that Icke has largely taken from others and which his audiences are lapping up.

On Sunday May 6 2001 David Icke was the feature of an hour-long documentary on prime time British TV, entitled ‘The Secret Rulers of the World’. And from start to finish it was an object lesson in disinformation.

The program itself portrayed Icke in a sympathetic light; as a genuine, personable but deeply misunderstood figure and, most importantly, not once during its entire sixty minutes did it refer to his views on Christianity. Even more significant was the fact that Icke was ‘set up’ to be hit with custard pies at a book signing in Toronto at the programs end. This was done with the full knowledge of the shows presenter Jon Ronsson, who divulged not a word of it to Icke, presumably to enhance its effect. Which prompts one to ask: what else did Ronsson omit to mention for the sake of effect?

By the look of things a whole lot more. For example Team Satan, the alleged crop circle-makers, host a web site that until recently featured recruitment adverts for no less than MI5, MI6, GCHQ and the Security Intelligence Services. Now however those adverts have been replaced by a link promoting Jon Ronson, his web site and the book that accompanied ‘The Secret Rulers of the World.’ And while the TV series itself was no great revelation the episode devoted to David Icke was a real eye opener, not because it said anything new, but rather because of what it omitted to say.




Recruitment advert for GCHQ on Team Satan's website


As mentioned Icke has built up a sizable audience presenting material that is largely based on other people’s research. Much of which is quite credible, it’s just that things get a little dubious when Icke starts adding his own ideas. However ‘The Secret Rulers of the World’ specifically looked at Icke’s contention that we are ruled by a mutant race of shape shifting Reptiods. In itself the idea is ridiculous enough but Ronson muddied the waters still further by continually asking: “Was this a coded reference to Jews?”

Of course the answer is no, but it certainly caught Ronson’s attention. So much so that you’d almost think that he was trying to obscure the other ideas Icke presents by continually focusing on the Reptiod’s and their alleged anti-Semitic symbolism. For the duration of the entire program he persisted on this one idea as if everything else Icke said was too ludicrous to consider.

But then in the words of Dave Starbuck, yet another who’s given Icke research material and seen him use it without any acknowledgement, Icke is simply a “presenter.” That’s what the former sports reporter used to do and that’s what he does today, except that instead of presenting sports reports David Icke now presents other people’s conspiracy research. And instead of examining that, Ronson spent nearly an hour looking at Icke’s allegedly “anti-Semitic Reptiods.”

Stranger still was the fact that the most powerful episode in the whole series simply disappeared without trace. The program in question was devoted to microwaves and their potential as a weapon and tool of oppression. In it scientist Tim Rifat showed how a microwave oven could be cut in two and how a horn antennae could then be placed on the wave guide, turning it into weapon with an effective distance of hundreds of feet and how at close range it could literally fry human flesh. The Billion dollar question, Tim asked was: how do we know that the authorities are not already using this as a weapon?




The advert for Ronson's website that replaced the recruitment advert for GCHQ.


Maybe Channel 4 thought the program was too hot to handle for judging from what we’ve been told it could have had serious repercussions. So perhaps they decided not to screen it, assuming that they even saw it, for throughout the filming Ronson kept asking Tim: “How do you know that I’m not working for the other side?”

Which simply underlines the contention that Jon Ronson is as bent as a nine pound note. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mason-free party
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 765
Location: Staffordshire

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

more proof that Ronson and his 'circle maker' chums are in with higher dark forces....

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=149
And there you have it Baron if you're looking in...blasted circle makers exposed!

"By the look of things a whole lot more. For example Team Satan, the alleged crop circle-makers, host a web site that until recently featured recruitment adverts for no less than MI5, MI6, GCHQ and the Security Intelligence Services. Now however those adverts have been replaced by a link promoting Jon Ronson, his web site and the book that accompanied ‘The Secret Rulers of the World.’ And while the TV series itself was no great revelation the episode devoted to David Icke was a real eye opener, not because it said anything new, but rather because of what it omitted to say. "
_________________
NO more Disinformation - NO more Deceit - NO more Greed - NO more Corruption
NO more MASONIC GOVERNMENT bs!
LONG LIVE TRUTH & FREEDOM!
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/pro-freedom.co.uk/part_6.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


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

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having read through his thread, I have to come down on the side of Ian and Suspecta.

While other ideas expressed have some validity - particularly the PNAC US Right Wing/Israeli Right Wing link, expressing these without the utmost care will be used as an easy excuse to brand us with the anti-semitic label which is patently absurd, but is how these things work.

I appreciate some may also take a 'damn the torpedoes' approach, but we have to do two things ourselves:
present our campaign in the real world in such a way as we do not make it easy to dismiss by side stepping the main issues,
and
realise that none of us are perfect either and just as prone to our own brand of prejudices and shortcut thinking modes.

In the words of a famous man, "be the change you wish to see in the world"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

debate over ronsons standard of journalism is besides the point.

the fact is a popular and well known journalist/writer came to this forum to engage in debate and the majority of people on here blatantly attacked him.
Perhaps he's never going to consider the evidence, but i would have liked to have held a rational discussion with him first to find out.

what a wasted opportunity. completely senseless.

Quote:
There will be a new more interventionist approach to moderation on the forum until hopefully everyone is familiar with where the boundaries lie and respects them. The ultimate test of posts will increasingly be: 'is it in the interests of the campaign'

good

_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 8:51 pm    Post subject: Re: The road to censorship... Reply with quote

flamesong wrote:
But to threaten anbody who makes off topic posts in such a headmaster like way truly sounds like Tony Blair dressing down his cabinet! What shall we expect next, pagers?


I'm certainly not saying just 9/11 (check further guidance in about us), but there are some things that are off topic and I give the example of shapeshifting lizardry.

I don't rule out at a later date broadening the on topic range of topics and I'm happy to join off topic discussions at illusionsforum. In fact I see your poll Alf, so let's see what opinion is and then discuss further, although I will always have a problem with holocaust revision being discussed here.

Alf, you know a lot of the history of this network and website. You know that the key people behind it are not naturally inclined to censor anyone and 'we' are certainly not a limited hang-out operation. The lack of moderation and bans to date is testimony of that.

If anything we are the antithesis of Tony Blair's spin obcessed control freakery. Do you imagine the (New) Labour Party would have an open forum where supporters have open say in this manner? I don't think so.

They have 'big conversations' which are anything but.


Last edited by ian neal on Sat Nov 04, 2006 8:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Abandoned Ego
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 8:56 pm    Post subject: Re: New JonRonson hit piece Reply with quote

I really am at a loss exactly where to start with this piece. But with respect suspecta, for you to suggest that this piece is balanced, is in my opinion bending credibility to the very limits.

Let us start at the very beggining shall we ?

Quote:
'We rationalists are the oppressed minority'


You "Rationalists" ? Great start Jon. What on earth is even remotely rational about your belief of the Official Conspiracy theory ? Need I really go on to list any of 100 reasons why the official conspiracy theory cannot even be remotely considered rationalistic. But of course the title gets better.

Quote:
"We rationalists are the Oppressed minority" ?


Is that so Jon ? I mean really ? As you manage to get your oppressed rationalist minority views out in the mainstream , was your piece somehow sneaked in amidst a deluge of editorials that question your "rational" viewpoint ?
Where are these editorials? Where is the MSM coverage of the (seeming majority) that oppose your views ? I suppose if I am to believe this title, then they must have all been on holiday for the last five years. Or perhaps you have, if you seriously considered this to be a reasonable comment. A holiday to another planet perhaps ?

Jon Ronson
Saturday November 4, 2006
The Guardian


Quote:
I've been getting a lot of emails from people who believe 9/11 was an inside job. They say shadowy forces behind the Bush administration brought down the Twin Towers with controlled explosions. I log on to the British 9/11 Truth Campaign forum to see why they believe what they do. I introduce myself. Within minutes, posters are warning other posters not to trust me.


OK so Jon, how about looking at that evidence first ? Was that youre intention in "logging on" here. You strongly seem to imply in your piece that it was. Did you see WKJO ?


Quote:
"Ronson's strings are being pulled," somebody writes. "You can bet there is a Zionist agenda somewhere in what he does." Another poster adds that my Zionist overlords and I don't only control the media, we also control "the money supply" and "everything else as well". And it was us "Zionists" who orchestrated 9/11.


So let me see now, at this point we're talking about Zionism, a political movement, whose main fanbase incidentally, if actually concealed just below the face of it, is not even remotely Jewish.

Quote:
I tell them to stop being anti-semitic.
"I don't see any references to Judaism in this thread, Jon," comes the instant reply. "So what is your rationale for making this comment?"


Well Jon ? Youre an educated man. And at this point I might also include in my reply a few posters on here. I am hopefully addressing people who should fully understand what Zionism in its modern day form entails. We should know full well who has been supporting the merciless Sadism of Israel in the middle East, in order to boost weapons sales, sow division amidst humanity in general, and keep us all paying for wars which nobody in their right mind ( except perhaps "rationalists") would endorse.


Is the US a jewish state ? How about the UK, or even its "leader" Tony Blair, who fiddled whilst the Lebanon was phosphorus bombed ? How about the US who has supported the ongoing butchery by the state of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza, by vetoing more resolutions against the state of Israel than you could shake a stick at ?

Now, speaking for myself at least, I dont consider the main advocates and supporters of modern day Zionism to be Jewish. I see Corporate America and the City of London to be its main supporters. Not for the sake of Zionism per se you understand, but in order to further their own greedy ends, and in order for its own elite to retain control.


Quote:
"Hahaha, bless your soul, Jon," someone adds. "Playing the old religion card, huh? Don't try that one here, mate. It's cheap, pathetic and disgusting."


A quote from myself I believe. Hey Jon, theres a inbuilt mechanism in those of us who believe we have a soul. Its called integrity.

Having taken the part of my quote which serves your purpose completely out of context, in order to back up your already, and to my mind (at this point of your membership), baseless Antisemitism claims, what am I to make of that ?

Perhaps I can answer my own question. As someone who having reached page 67 of Dorkins book and come to the conclusion that there is no God, then you doubtless dont believe you have a soul either.

Hell, at least we might seem to agree on one thing. Furthermore, judging by your unscrupulous ommission of explaining the context of my quote, we even appear to have some proof !

Quote:
I feel battered by the relentlessness of their insults. "I'm not going back there again. Horrible, patronising, codeword-using anti-semitic *," I eventually think. "They're so irrational. They sit behind their computers all day, pontificating away, getting their 'facts' from YouTube. They probably all look like Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons."


Well fair enough Jon. Get it off your chest. I actually look more like Homer, myself. I also notice at this point, that we are now talking about "talking in Code". If Im relying on you to decipher the code, I dont like it already. But about the discrepancies in the 9/11 story jon ?

Quote:
I pause, stare out of the window, and clean my glasses. "They're indicative of a whole New Irrationality sweeping the land," I think. "Yes, that's it. This is a cultural shift I'm identifying. Nowadays everyone's either a conspiracy theorist or a believer in mysticism or the paranormal or a religious zealot. What's happened to the enlightenment? Where is our voice? Nowadays, we rationalists are the oppressed minority."


Thats a fib Jon surely ? Your voice Jon is mirrored in Practically EVERY corridor of importance. The official conspiracy theory is THE official truth. Thats why its called official. How about our voice Jon ? Where is the voice of the non oppressed minorities such as the 9/11 truth movement ?
It aint in the guardian, or the times, or the telegraph, or the mail etc. It aint on the BBC, or C4 or blablabla.

And YOU claim to represent the voice of the rational oppressed minority, with your official nonsense about how steel reinforced buildings CAN collapse at freefall speed ?

Funny guy IMO.



Quote:
I'm serious. And I know how to do it. I determine that, from this moment forth, whenever I meet someone with irrational beliefs, I'll patiently take the time to sit them down and point out to them why the things they believe are nutty and stupid.


Well Jon, why havent you sat down with one of our Nutty people ( Andrew johnson ) and pointed this out ?

I finally find it somewhat strange that Jon, when concluding this piece ( accompanied of course the sneakily- dropped clustering of the term Antisemite with 9/11 conspiracy theorist) should finish by pouring scorn on people of faith.

I have to say that I dont like the "organised" form of this faith myself. So perhaps we actually agree there too.

But I must ask the question, as to which is more trustworthy ?A belief in an intelligent force who managed to turn the inanimate into the animate ( call it God if you will), or a pile of serial liars such as Bush, Blair and co ?

It appears, according to the "Rationalists" such as Mr Ronson, that suggestions of an intelligent force behind the true miracle (by any standards) of creation is a ridiculous myth.

On the other hand according to Mr Ronsons "Rationale", the clearly mathematically impossible miracle of Passports in Rubble, 19 hijackers named almost instantly, towers dropping at laws-of-physics-defying speed, untraced put options, uncaught Anthrax criminals, War games, Air force Stand down, et cetera ad infinitum, is actually a rational narrative of fact !

Thanks for your rational analysis Jon, but no thanks. And BTW, get a lottery ticket. By your rationale, you cant lose.

By your reckoning, not only is the genuine miracle of creation an accident, but you then do the double by stating that the mathematically impossible miracle of the official version of 9/11, brought to you courtesy of serial liars such a Bushco is a fact !

And for those of you prepared to give this guy the benefit of the doubt, how can a "rationally intelligent sane mind" such as Ronson, ignore the mathematically defineable impossibility/miracle that is clearly HIS version of 9/11 ?



And finally, on the Antisemitism thing. I have been watching for the past few weeks the Channel 4 series "Hitlers holocaust"

Might I suggest that any holocaust deniers ( Holohoax as one such person described it) NOT do a Jon Ronson, and ignore those parts of the argument that dont fit with their perception of things.

Listening to the archived speeches by Hitler, and his bunch of esoterically following demonic madmen, I dont need to understand German to know that these people were clearly derranged. "JUDEN,JUDEN, JUDEN" this that and everything.

Some of the soldiers who partook of this Holocaust actually spoke English, and you should perhaps have heard their testimony too.

If you dont think these people were deranged and whipped up into almost occultish fervour, you should have heard the Speech of Hitler, where having already marched into Poland and Czechoslovakia, this cretin was still suggesting that if war broke out it would all be the fault of the Juden !!!

And please remember that it was principally courtesy of Both the Vatican and Anglo American finance, along with a sprinkling of Jews themselves, who actually financed Hitler to power, and then profitted from his exploitation of the death camp workers themselves.

Indeed the Hitler speech Kinda reminded of Bush. But given of course that his Grandfather was one of the people who profitted from Hitlers Genocidal escapades should that really surprise anyone ?


Last edited by Abandoned Ego on Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:57 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having read Them and seen some of Jon's programme I need little convincing that he has a hidden agenda. I just suggest that we (collectively) shot ourselves in the foot by straight away calling him a shill and bringing up zionism. If his intention was to do a 'hit job' on us, 'we' played straight in to his hands
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Abandoned Ego
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:24 pm    Post subject: OK Ian. Reply with quote

Quote:
If his intention was to do a 'hit job' on us, 'we' played straight in to his hands


OK Ian, thats fair enough.

But given the Odious and clearly cynical taking out of any context his use of my own quote, how should I interpret it, other than a hit piece ?

Youve seen the quote he used, and youve seen the context in which I placed the quote. Is his use of my quote a reasonable context within which to base my quote ?

As for my context.

It is a fact that the PTB have for millenia used the religion card to tax all of us through war, and to conquer lands of others.

Also, Surely as an intellectual, Mr Ronson should know full well, who the REAL forces behind modern day "Zionism", and the Sadistic wanton cruelty manifest in the policies of Israel truly are ?

Jews, they arent.

If he wants to use the Zionism thing as code, then why not explain to is listeners at this point what exactly Zionism really is - namely a front for Big money and old vested interests ?

Probably because it wouldnt be in his best interests to bite the hands that
feed him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andrew Johnson
Mighty Poster
Mighty Poster


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1919
Location: Derbyshire

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:
If his intention was to do a 'hit job' on us, 'we' played straight in to his hands


I think Ian, that must have been either his intention or that he is very sensitive to being called names. As I said, there were 2 key things missing from his article:

1) 9/11 Evidence (e.g. WTC 7) can be described in about 12 words or so.
2) Other posts such as my own and other less adversarial ones.

OK, so the editor could've changed Jon's article. Perhaps we can ask him about this on his forum?

Like I said, however we may or may not have treated Jon collectively, he could've written a different article. Indeed, let's think even more clearly:

THERE WAS NO NEED EVEN TO MENTION THE EXISTENCE OF A UK CAMPAIGN FORUM HE COULD'VE WRITTEN AN ARTICLE ABOUT ST911.ORG OR DRG OR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WTC or thousands of other facts

He chose not to - why?

Is anyone getting the idea of the extent media control and corruption, or am I just being an idiot again?

_________________
Andrew

Ask the Tough Questions, Folks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
paul wright
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Andrew Johnson wrote:
ian neal wrote:
If his intention was to do a 'hit job' on us, 'we' played straight in to his hands



THERE WAS NO NEED EVEN TO MENTION THE EXISTENCE OF A UK CAMPAIGN FORUM HE COULD'VE WRITTEN AN ARTICLE ABOUT ST911.ORG OR DRG OR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WTC or thousands of other facts

He chose not to - why?

Yet he did and however much he tried to trash us any Guardian reader who hadn't yet connected might just try to seek us out if they've a ha'penth of brain cells to rub together
Any publicity is good publicity- Ronson's halfway ok tho an annoying little twat
Why have any problems beyond that?

_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
andyb
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1025
Location: SW London

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One can look at this under the old 'there's no such thing as bad publicity' or as a 'hit piece'. The campaign has now been read about by thousands of Guardian readers but not in the best light. I think those who actually come here and see the original thread will see it wasn't everyone who was attacking. To those who call him a shill, I would like to see your examples of other mainstream journalists bringing up these issues.

For the sake of the campaign as a whole please, do not write anything to him in a derogatry manner as this will only harm the cause as the next article will appear about people abusing him even further and those who did will moan and say he deserved it. If you don't agree with someone that is no reason to abuse them, spend your energy elsewhere!

_________________
"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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mason-free party
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 765
Location: Staffordshire

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

andyb wrote:
One can look at this under the old 'there's no such thing as bad publicity' or as a 'hit piece'. The campaign has now been read about by thousands of Guardian readers but not in the best light. I think those who actually come here and see the original thread will see it wasn't everyone who was attacking. To those who call him a shill, I would like to see your examples of other mainstream journalists bringing up these issues.

For the sake of the campaign as a whole please, do not write anything to him in a derogatry manner as this will only harm the cause as the next article will appear about people abusing him even further and those who did will moan and say he deserved it. If you don't agree with someone that is no reason to abuse them, spend your energy elsewhere!


I think there was a woman Guardian journalist who wrote a bad article a few months back about 911...i think her email box got hammered the day after and she had to take early leave to recover from the onslaught...pity they didn't learn their lesson

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1739254,00.html

He's a right Charlie

Mr Sheen is the latest celebrity to confuse fact and fiction

Marina Hyde...maybe she put Jon boy up to it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jomper
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 99

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ally wrote:
I wasn't trying to isolate you by saying the 0.2 percent but merely reflecting jon focusing on one person's opinions when there are 1140 members.


But few of those members have made as many posts as you have Ally, so their opinions and activities to get the truth out aren't really worth much to you are they?

Recognise that a general belligerence and suspicion of everyone's motives frequently moves the movement backwards.

Irrespective of Ronson's agenda, if he'd been shown a little more respect on this forum you would've protected it from his ridicule in the national press.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mason-free party wrote:
I think there was a woman Guardian journalist who wrote a bad article a few months back about 911...i think her email box got hammered the day after and she had to take early leave to recover from the onslaught...pity they didn't learn their lesson


Hi MFP

Do you know which journalist? I had some brief conversations with Audrey Gillan prior to an article she wrote on the DRG event. I was pleased with the article and felt it very fair. I hope it wasn't her.

The other thing to say is that we need to win over journalists. So if the emails they reveceived (and obviously I've no idea what they received or who wrote them) led her to suffer and take early leave (retirement?) that is a bad thing not a good thing, no?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jomper wrote:
Ally wrote:
I wasn't trying to isolate you by saying the 0.2 percent but merely reflecting jon focusing on one person's opinions when there are 1140 members.


But few of those members have made as many posts as you have Ally, so their opinions and activities to get the truth out aren't really worth much to you are they?

Recognise that a general belligerence and suspicion of everyone's motives frequently moves the movement backwards.

Irrespective of Ronson's agenda, if he'd been shown a little more respect on this forum you would've protected it from his ridicule in the national press.


Very well said jomper.

This is an important issue for all to consider when understanding the (limited) value of public forums. Just because someone posts here a lot does not mean they represent what is largely a loose network of individuals.

That by posting in a certain style (belligerent and constantly suspicious) some posters I feel sure will have been put off the forum and any curious members of the public put off even looking at the issue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:
mason-free party wrote:
I think there was a woman Guardian journalist who wrote a bad article a few months back about 911...i think her email box got hammered the day after and she had to take early leave to recover from the onslaught...pity they didn't learn their lesson


Hi MFP

Do you know which journalist? I had some brief conversations with Audrey Gillan prior to an article she wrote on the DRG event. I was pleased with the article and felt it very fair. I hope it wasn't her.

The other thing to say is that we need to win over journalists. So if the emails they reveceived (and obviously I've no idea what they received or who wrote them) led her to suffer and take early leave (retirement?) that is a bad thing not a good thing, no?


was is Marina Hyde? she wrote that charlie sheen hit piece that basically dismissed any evidence and called us all nutters.

_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Stefan
Banned
Banned


Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chek wrote:
Having read through his thread, I have to come down on the side of Ian and Suspecta.

While other ideas expressed have some validity - particularly the PNAC US Right Wing/Israeli Right Wing link, expressing these without the utmost care will be used as an easy excuse to brand us with the anti-semitic label which is patently absurd, but is how these things work.

I appreciate some may also take a 'damn the torpedoes' approach, but we have to do two things ourselves:
present our campaign in the real world in such a way as we do not make it easy to dismiss by side stepping the main issues,
and
realise that none of us are perfect either and just as prone to our own brand of prejudices and shortcut thinking modes.

In the words of a famous man, "be the change you wish to see in the world"


I agree completely with Chek.

It is, I have noticed, a key tactic of Deniers, to try and move the conversation to hypothetical grounds, you can try to discuss hard empirical evidence, things which can be proven and which disprove a gravitational collapse, and they will not answer you, instead they will deflect with-

"WHY would someone do this?"

"WHO did this?"

"HOW did they do this without anyone noticing?"

Invititing you to speculate and make pronouncements which you cannot prove to be true. After that, any attempts to get back to the evidence will be futile all you'll get is "I'm sorry but I wont look at the web links provided to me by someone who beleives in a [insert zionist/pnac/cia etc here] conspiracy- I suppose you think aliens stole the election too do you?".

My advice is to avoid like the plauge allowing the conversation to get into speculative theories, especially concerning motive, perpertrators or how this was pulled off. Stick to the irrefutable proof that is was, and as Steven Jones said- "let the chips fall where they may".

Equally unuseful are theories which may have merit but sound too outlandish- one thing at a time. When the world at large is far from convinced of any kind of explosive plot going on, starting up with "No Planes" theories, and "Fusion Bombs" and so on, do not help- it just gives more ammunition to those who want to smear without refuting- which is basicly the entire Denier movement.

Chek, don't get me wrong, I am very grateful for you passing on those No Planes videos, and there is a compelling case there, but I just feel that it weakens the "movement" (if such a fractuous collection of opinions can be called such) to go into such territory.

Insulting those who are on the other side doesn't help either- as is evidenced by this guy's hit piece- you gave him all the ammunition he needed to fill and article without actually dealing with the logical arguments- to write us all off as angry paranoid outsiders.

Stick to what is provable, keep your tone calm and respectful, don't let your self get drawn into speculation, and you WILL prove our point- because the truth is on your side.

Rant Over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
suspecta
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:51 pm    Post subject: Re: New JonRonson hit piece Reply with quote

Abandoned Ego wrote:
I really am at a loss exactly where to start with this piece. But with respect suspecta, for you to suggest that this piece is balanced, is in my opinion bending credibility to the very limits.


If you'd read my post properly you'd have seen that I was referring to Jon Ronson's remarks about Richard Dawkins. Dawkins apparently thinks vicars are as loony as anyone else with a belief system and Jon Ronson alludes to Dawkins' ideas as being a bit extreme. In other words, not all rationalists are as rational as they think, because obviously vicars aren't generally seen as being loony-type figures.

It was a subtle dig at uber-rationalism in other words, which made his article a little more balanced than some here have given it credit for.

Suspecta
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 5878
Location: East London

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

'Que Bono?'(hope I got that right, my latin is non-existant; I've even forgotten the altar-boy responses from my childhood). The only ones rubbing their hands with glee when Holocaust Deniers (or 'Questioners') get loose on our forum are Zionists, Neo-Cons, Masons and anyone with malice aforethought against the 911 Truth movement. I personally regard them as contemptible. I also agree with suspecta re 'Jon-Boy'; I immediately decoded it as 'Jew-Boy' and would be very hard to convince that it was not meant like that. I think I can speak for Jon that he would have interpreted it thus also. That Israel has committed, and continues to commit terrible crimes I would be the first to accept. I recently demonstrated opposite the Israeli Embassy, with a placard accusing Israel of War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and Crimes Against Peace in Gaza and Lebanon; sad to say I didn't recognise any other 911 Truthers there. A few of their other crimes include training the Sri Lankan forces in 'interogation techniques', supplying Sabre jets and Galil assault rifles to Indonesia to use in their subjugation of East Timor, and when Carter stopped US arms sales to Guatemala because of their appalling human rights abuses(but continued to supply counter-insurgency aircraft which were used to devastating effect in E. Timor), Israel stepped in and built a machine-gun factory in Guatemala. I'm sure the 'Deniers' would find a warm welcome in the BNP, but even they would keep them a million miles away from their forum. They are not welcome here. 'Free Speechers' should read the not-so-small print on rules for posting on this forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
brian
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find the notion that had J Ronson been treated with respect we would not have been given the treatment by him fanciful.

The man is a blatant fraud and could, no doubt would, have used snippets from various threads to portray us in the light that suited his quite obvious agenda.

Well said kbo234 and abandoned ego, dont let the small minded and apologists shut you up. The "great masters of lies" are old hands at the game but the playing field is getting much more even these days.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

outsider wrote:
'Que Bono?'(hope I got that right, my latin is non-existant; I've even forgotten the altar-boy responses from my childhood). The only ones rubbing their hands with glee when Holocaust Deniers (or 'Questioners') get loose on our forum are Zionists, Neo-Cons, Masons and anyone with malice aforethought against the 911 Truth movement. I personally regard them as contemptible.


This is pretty offensive too Outsider. The accusation that people who raise legitimate and very relevant questions are damaging the 9/11 movement is hard to take. Your use of the word contemptible signifies that you believe we are causing this damage deliberately. I will not be making such posts again because I accept the judgement of the moderators but, nevertheless, I am fighting back some anger because of your comments.

Hang on though, I was an altar boy too. The opening lines of the Mass come to mind.

Priest: Introibo ad altare Dei.
(I will go to the altar of God)

Server: Ad Deum qui laetificat juventutem meum.
(To God who is the joy of my youth)

How beautiful and profound is that. There. I feel better already. You are not such a bad chap after all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
suspecta
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

brian wrote:
I find the notion that had J Ronson been treated with respect we would not have been given the treatment by him fanciful.

The man is a blatant fraud and could, no doubt would, have used snippets from various threads to portray us in the light that suited his quite obvious agenda.

Well said kbo234 and abandoned ego, dont let the small minded and apologists shut you up. The "great masters of lies" are old hands at the game but the playing field is getting much more even these days.


OK, if nobody had attacked him, insulted him or called him a Zionist * or whatever else he got called, he may still have written a gently mocking article. There'd be one difference though - Guardian readers may have logged on out of curiousity, checked out the relevant thread and found a reasonable debate rather than a load of insane raving. Some of them may have decided to linger and read more.

As it stands most people reading that article won't even bother looking for the site but will just write us off as a bunch of loonies.

So was attacking him such a great idea? I don't really think so.

This is a public forum for alerting the general public to 9-11 truth so we should always bear this in mind when we debate. If we don't then we only end up doing the cause more harm than good.

Suspecta
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
brian
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

suspecta, on what basis do you make the assumption that Ronson would have written a "gently mocking article" that would have led to Guardian readers ....? What insane raving do you refer to?

I repeat - the man is a blatant fraud with an obvious agenda and I for one see no good reason to pretend otherwise.

Here below is an example from my local press letters page of what we are witnessing here.

The first letter -

Cardinal is naive to blame Muslims for 9/11


Sir,—I am afraid Cardinal Keith O’Brien (October 23) jumps to a potentially disastrous rush to judgment on 9/11.

Despite popular belief, we still do not know who was behind that atrocity so it is wrong to be demanding an apology from Muslims.

We know that suspicious stock exchange deals, as yet uninvestigated, were taking place in the run-up to 9/11.

We know that untold billions of gold bullion went missing from a basement in the World Trade Center.

We know that Israeli agents were spotted dancing for joy as they trained their binoculars on the Twin Towers. We know only two groups of people who were allowed to leave the USA that day. The Bin Laden family and a group of Israeli secret agents.

These are not rumours. They are checkable facts.

We know that Bush and company were just waiting for an excuse to activate their long-laid plans to invade Iraq.

Cardinal O’Brien says we shouldn’t have to live in fear of attack from Muslims.

Muslim countries are being bombed, invaded and occupied by forces whose leaders, Bush and Blair, declare themselves Christians. Who is living in fear of attack from whom?

I think it’s time Cardinal O’Brien and his ilk used their undoubted intellects to work out what’s really going on.

It’s not rocket science— unless you’re making massive profits from providing the rockets to kill all these





The response -

Pushing their own agendas


Sir,—The Courier should be advised that in printing Colin Cameron’s letter of October 25 they have given publicity to every insane conspiracy theory going and have contributed to the pernicious anti-semitism that is now developing in this country.

Given that we now have video of bin Laden meeting with the hijackers it is absurd to suggest that anyone but a small group of Muslim fundamentalists were responsible for 9/11.

Furthermore, the so-called “checkable facts” Mr Cameron presents are nothing more than half-truths or downright lies concocted by those with a visceral hatred of the US and Israel and who seek to lay all the world’s ills on their shoulders.

No, we shouldn’t blame Muslims as a group for 9/11, but Mr Cameron seems to think that it is right to blame the Jewish people and The Courier seems to feel it is alright to give him publicity for what are outlandish delusions and falsehoods.

What is next, a letter on Holocaust Memorial day proffering so-called “evidence” that it never took place?

The irrationality that saw the ascendancy of Wahabi style Islam and the subjugation of the true classical Islamic culture is now rearing its head in our own back yard.

There is a simple explanation to what happened on 9/11, some may feel the need to make it more complicated to justify their twisted world view and racism, but we should recognise that their motives in doing so are not to find the truth, but to push their own political agendas and prejudices.
---

Not even an attempt to address the validity of the claims but the same old tiresome cry of anti semitism and the favourite linking of holocaust denial.

They protesteth too much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
suspecta
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

brian wrote:
suspecta, on what basis do you make the assumption that Ronson would have written a "gently mocking article" that would have led to Guardian readers ....? What insane raving do you refer to?


Because most articles I've read by Ronson gently mock his subject, whether it's born-again Christians or any other religious nuts. It's what he's good at. He also gently mocks himself in most of his Saturday Guardian pieces. He's picked an angle and he's sticking to it - it's generally what journalists do. It's also how he made his name and what he's famous for.

What insane ravings? This, almost as soon as Ronson appeared:

Quote:
Ronson's strings are being pulled by the 'berg' mafia[Lundberg] so you can bet there is a zionist agenda somewhere in what he does like most of the zionist television bs we have to suffer.


and then this:

Quote:
Hahaha, bless your soul Jon.

Playing the old religion card huh ?

Dont try that one here mate. Its cheap, pathetic and disgusting. Its actually a typical Bilderburg ( for Bilderburgs read Freemasonic gathering ) tactic.


Hardly likely to keeo him on board, was it? People raved and it was insane. Insane ravings. We just shouldn't have given him any grist for his mill.

Suspecta
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Abandoned Ego
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Hahaha, bless your soul Jon.

Playing the old religion card huh ?

Dont try that one here mate. Its cheap, pathetic and disgusting. Its actually a typical Bilderburg ( for Bilderburgs read Freemasonic gathering ) tactic.


Hardly likely to keeo him on board, was it? People raved and it was insane. Insane ravings. We just shouldn't have given him any grist for his mill.

Suspecta[/quote]

OK suspecta. Now heres what you do. Look at my quote and tell where theres any inference whatsoever of Antisemitism ?

I use "The religion card" to imply that this is precisely how the likes of the bilderburgers play the whole goddamn game, and particularly the game we are currently engaged in. Furthermore might you explain to me how opposition to the modern day Zionism as displayed by the fascist and RACIST state of Israel with the entire backing of the UK and the US, is anything close to antisemitism in your view ?

And this is imortant, because at that point in the discussion, the conversation was strictly about Zionism. no one had even mentioned Religion, but of course that didnt stop Jon yelling the customary "Antisemitism" accusation did it now ?

Then finally, take what good old Jon took of my quote, and the context in which he used it, and then try telling me, how the hell that is anything other than a selective editing fraud ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andrew Johnson
Mighty Poster
Mighty Poster


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1919
Location: Derbyshire

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think again, we can "short circuit" some of this dicsussion by saying he didn't really need to look at or use any of our remarks, just the 9/11 evidence. It stands on its own - the science wins out. That's as simple as I can put it (as has Prof David Ray Griffin etc etc).

So Mark Kermode, Jon Ronson, Marina Hyde and also Audrey Gillan (all Guardian writers) can be put in exactly the same category - Gravity Deniers. It won't be the last time I use this phrase, I don't think....

_________________
Andrew

Ask the Tough Questions, Folks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
brian
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 'War Against Terror' is a War against the People:



Youssef Aschkar Interviewed By Silvia Cattori



Al-Jazeerah, November 3, 2006



In this interview recorded by Swiss journalist Silvia Cattori in November 2005 - more than six months before the war launched against Lebanon by Israeli army in summer 2006 – Youssef Aschkar was warning that the destabilization of Lebanon, Syria and Iran was under way, and that Lebanon was the country most threatened and most vulnerable to the Israeli menace.--



--What is taking place in Syria and Lebanon is closely linked to what is going on in Iraq. There are two strategies at work in Iraq. There is the official American strategy, which is perhaps an imperial strategy for the domination and control of natural resources. And there is another strategy, which is the strategy of the gang of monsters who are called “neoconservatives”, who dictate their plans to the Pentagon and to the State Department. This “gang” (Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas J. Feith, among others) have their own plan; they are the ones who have advocated destroying not only the state of Iraq, but the whole of Iraqi society. The entire network that the neocons control circumvents the generals of the Pentagon, and circumvents American military command. It has infiltrated itself into all the high offices of the United States, and has infiltrated itself also into society, into the American media, and into religious organizations. It is a state within a state.---

--Silvia Cattori: An investigation on what, exactly?



Youssef Aschkar: On the neocons who rule the Pentagon and are the cause of so many humanitarian disasters! On what really happened on September 11, 2001! On who is really running the war in Iraq! Is it Mr. Bush, or is it these monsters at the Pentagon who use mercenaries to carry out secret operations in the Middle East? --

-- The new masters are of a different kind: they are connected to the monstrous team of the neocons, who act in all four corners of the globe by means of their networks and their mercenaries. The economic sphere is in full submission to their project --

Full interview below -

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
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 News All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 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 can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group