Why is this site advertising for Bush & Clinton?

Stephen · Post by **Stephen** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:08 pm

Why is this site advertising for Bush & Clinton ?????

Just seen this as a pop up.
http://bushclintonkatrinafund.org/?goog

What is going on!!!!!!!

You have sold out to THE NEW WORLD ORDER

Post by **TonyGosling** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 6:10 pm

stephen,
Would you like to volunteer to pay for the hosting of this site?
Got any other ideas?

Leiff · Post by **Leiff** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:06 pm

I think you can control the type of ads in your adsense account.

Stephen · Post by **Stephen** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 8:16 pm

Leiff wrote:I think you can control the type of ads in your adsense account.

Yes Leiff I agree.

ian neal · Post by **ian neal** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 8:38 pm

well when I get time I will try and figure out how. In the meantime don't click on bush and clinton ads or alternatively click on it happy in the knowledge that the new world order will end up paying.

Andrew Johnson · Post by **Andrew Johnson** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:13 pm

www.streamline.net

That's the host I use from http://www.checktheevidence.com/

I have about 10 GB of audios and videos. It costs me £35 or so per year - with no additional fees.

I have no ads on my website and will gladly spend this much per year to give information away free of bias and google ads.

Perhaps we should ask who recommended the current webhost and why suddenly ads are required.

Stephen · Post by **Stephen** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:13 am

This trully is sick avertising for New World Order Scum. Tony you ask me why do I swear on my thread. Eerrr well I would of thought that Father Bush and Clinton were the worst two people you could avertise when all's there intrested in is making money from the Katrina False Flage Attack, considering that this forum is ment to be for Freedom and not support Evil Leaders, this really is the lowerst of the low it's sick to honerst and the people who run this website should ashamed of themselfs.

Even if this is a mistake, (and what BIG wospie this is!) You should made sure what the adds were before had.

What the hell is going on here?

Post by **TonyGosling** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:29 am

I'm entirely happy that income from these ads will not affect editorial policy - which is for truth, justice and freedom.
9/11 Press For Truth ad I see above me is not a problem.

If Shell or Blackwater ads. started coming on I would be concerned. Maybe at this early stage we should be thinking about an ethical advertising policy?

John White · Post by **John White** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 8:29 am

Andrew Johnson wrote:www.streamline.net

That's the host I use from http://www.checktheevidence.com/

I have about 10 GB of audios and videos. It costs me £35 or so per year - with no additional fees.

I have no ads on my website and will gladly spend this much per year to give information away free of bias and google ads.

Perhaps we should ask who recommended the current webhost and why suddenly ads are required.

LOL! Well it wasnt Tony, so bad luck Andrew

Nothing wrong with ads, lots of forums have them, and a solution to the fees coming out of (basically) Ians back back pocket has to be found

Though I'm wondering: should we have uniforms?

Military Men Wanted
Women Who Love Men In Uniform Are Looking For You. Add Your Profile!
www.MilitaryLoveLinks.com

Mick Meaney · Post by **Mick Meaney** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:21 am

Stephen wrote:This trully is sick avertising for New World Order Scum.

We can ban any URL from placing ads here but we don't know where they are coming from until they are displayed on the site first. I personally don't have the time to look at each ad on each page to find ones that annoys me. If you don't like the ads don't click on them but it's very unfair to expect one person to pay for a high traffic web site which eats through bandwidth.

landless peasant · Post by **landless peasant** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 11:05 am

Install no script for firefox and you won't see them http://noscript.net/
Personal I have hosted sites very cheaply, how must does hosting this site cost?

ian neal · Post by **ian neal** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:47 pm

Currently ISP costing £67/month (ouch) with united hosting

http://www.unitedhosting.co.uk/hosting.php

Leiff · Post by **Leiff** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:12 pm

United Hosting is a poor choice for this site as it is a high quality low bandwidth host - I must say that I have been impressed with the lightning fast page serving from them though. IMO you are better off going down market a bit (perhaps AJ's choice or Dataflame or similar) and saving some money - United Hosting allows you to move with no minimum term as well. You could still have some adds and make some cash!

Mick Meaney · Post by **Mick Meaney** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:55 pm

Leiff wrote:IMO you are better off going down market a bit

Really wish we could but there's a fair bit to consider like the amount of sql connections the server allows at once, most shared hosting servers will cram sites together and the performance is only suitable for low traffic sites that don't need the same kind of response time that we do.

This site uses more and more resources every month and chances are we would be kicked off a standard hosting package or forced to pay £400 for our own server.

There's also an ethical side to things, we can't host in the states (which would be cheaper) but the American government would have access to your details.

The site has come along way since 2004/2005 and hopefully by bringing in some cash from the ads, Ian can keep the site online and plan for wherever it needs to be in the next few years.

gruts · Post by **gruts** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:12 pm

Mick Meaney wrote:£400 for our own server.

that's not exactly a fortune. why not set up a paypal account and ask for donations from forum members? if all the active members of the site donated a tenner it would be sorted in no time....

(on the other hand I have no problem with the ads - I find them very easy to ignore)

landless peasant · Post by **landless peasant** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 2:44 pm

£67/month is a nasty bill I hope the ad's help out with some of that.

Pikey · Post by **Pikey** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:41 pm

Well done Stephen for flagging this up, IMO its a move which will bring the UK 911 truth movement into disrepute within the Truthseeking community, it makes us look like hypocrits.

who recommended the current webhost and why suddenly ads are required

I think thats a fair question and being a truth website merits an honest and accountable response.

My supplementary questions:-

1. who awns this website now?

2. who controls and takes responsibility for the site?

3. if the site is owned by the UK 911 truth movement has committee approval been granted of this latest development.

Peace & truth

xmasdale · Post by **xmasdale** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:35 pm

Pikey wrote:

Who recommended the current webhost and why suddenly ads are required

Some means of raising cash is required so that Ian Neal does not have to pay £67 per month as he is currently doing out of his own pocket.

Pikey wrote: I think thats a fair question and being a truth website merits an honest and accountable response.

My supplementary questions:-

1. who awns this website now?

2. who controls and takes responsibility for the site?

I believe Simon Aronowitz, who originally set it up, still owns it; Ian Neal has ultimate responsibility for it under an agreement with Simon and Tony Gosling is currently administering it for a trial period.

I agree we need to find an ethical way of raising funds to pay for it. There is a donations button on the front page which can be used by subscribers to help, though a regular standing order or direct debit would be even more welcome.

Pikey wrote:
3. if the site is owned by the UK 911 truth movement has committee approval been granted of this latest development.

Peace & truth

The UK 9/11 Truth Movement has no committee. It consists merely of those who consider themselves to be part of that movement. However the British 9/11 Truth Campaign does have a committee and website: http://www.911truthcampaign.net/. The website we are using and discussing is not controlled by the British 9/11 Truth Campaign. All suggestions about this website should therefore be sent to Ian Neal. He has the power to decide what happens to this website, though he might be influenced by suggestions from the committee of the British 9/11 Truth Campaign.

Sorry to get pedantic about this, but if you want to effect changes, you need to know who takes the decisions.

Best

Noel

Mick Meaney · Post by **Mick Meaney** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:26 pm

Pikey wrote: IMO its a move which will bring the UK 911 truth movement into disrepute within the Truthseeking community, it makes us look like hypocrits.

So what's your solution? It's easy to tell people what they should and shouldn't be doing. Really, give us an alternative.

Btw, is Alex Jones a hypocrite, or other many other sites like Raw Story and Prorev because they runs Google ads? Was David Icke an hypocrite when he used them?

We could have intrusive pop-ups.. it is an option albeit one I'd be strongly against. How about adverts that play annoying music as soon as the page loads, would that be better? Or maybe you'd prefer those flash ads that block out half the content of the page and follow you when you scroll until you click them?

What we've got are simple text ads that sit quietly at the top of the page.. you can either:

1 Click them
2 Scroll down and forget about them
3 Or stare at them in a rage while you foam at the mouth

If you want a bit of background about how these ads came about here you go..

Ian asked me how much I thought we could make from running Google ads, I gave him a rough figure based on the traffic / earnings ratio of one of my sites. He then set up a Google adsense account and ta-da, the site will no longer be a financial burden.

ian neal · Post by **ian neal** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:01 pm

That just about covers it.

The other thing to bare in mind is that over time the nature of the forum is changing and reflecting the people who use it.

In the early days most of the users were known to me and it provided a warts and all space for UK campaigners to network. However in a totally understandable trend, many of the most well known and effective camapigners no longer use or rarely use this site and the traffic increasingly consists of users who I don't know.

Now there are some excellent, very knowledgeable posters here, but equally there are some not so excellent posters and to be frank with everyone, I'm nearing the end of my interest in running the forum. This is mostly because I have less and less interest in influencing other posters who I don't know from Adam and arguing the toss about highly dubious subjects such as holocaust revisionism, plus I have a job, 4 school age kids and other campaigning interests

And I recently spoke with Simon and he is of the same mind. But before I do step aside I want to ensure that who ever takes it over does so with the blessing of the majority users (especially amongst the known UK campaigners) and that it is on a sound technical and financial footing.

The introduction of adverts is an experiment to see if we can make the site self financing since I'm not aware of anyone else offering to pay the ISP costs

John White · Post by **John White** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 3:48 am

2 Scroll down and forget about them

That always works for me. But I do find Pikey's suggestion that we are "splitters" for daring to raise a small amount of needed funds in a un-obtrusive way very "peoples front of Judea"

My site, Malvern Messages, is on a free server: that means I dont have to pay a penny for it.

Hows that work? simple, free forum.org make money off the google bar instead, the better my forum is and the more it is viewed, the more they make

Is that better? I'd suggest not, which is why I shall be moving to a paid server soon and funding it by gaining control of the income for myself