Vote of no confidence in Andrew Johnston

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:36 am

I may get slapped down for this although if provocative posts such as the Steven Jones challenge can be posted I see no reason why I can't post this.

Basically I'm asking members here to vote for or against keeping Andrew Johnston as a moderator. I have nothing personally against Andrew but I do feel that one of the reasons this site has lost credibility is because one of it's moderators is seen as a no-planner. Andrew is also seen to propagate the Beam Weapon dis-info.

thought criminal · Post by **thought criminal** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:48 am

F u c k off with this bs. Andrew Johnson has got his head screwed on a lot tighter than you. Start thinking for yourself. What are you so bothered about anyway, I thought you had your own website? Go back there and stop stirring the *.

But before you go, here is a little lesson for you and all you other plane hugging mugsters.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VbDLbVb ... ed&search=[/youtube]

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:59 am

Your retort only shows your inability to communicate and probably also to understand which is I'm sure why the No Brains theory appeals to you. I wonder if Andrew will hug you or disown you? Are you in the BNP by any chance?

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:00 am

TCF, we've gone through all this ad naseum. Watching it over and oevr again will not change our minds. You seem quite clearly unable to think for yourself if you buy this on the flimsy evidence you posted. Come up with something that can't be debunked and I'd be happy to accept it, until then I'm highly suspicious of people who push this theory based on the same evidence I've seen.

scar · Post by **scar** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am

Moderating this forum must be a nightmare and while i dont agree with AJ on NPT or beams i respect the hard work hes put in here.
Patrick you are dividing this place more than you realise and its unnecessary and irritating.
As for credibility issues - NPT was top of most forums here until recently so if it sunk to ludicrousness it happened quite a while back, maybe just around the 5th anniversary, if you believe it has. 3 or 4 posters pushing NPT for months day in day out and refusing to look at debunkings whilst having their youtube videos demolished by all and sundry did their cause no favours and im sure new members could see that. Not everyone is gullible after having their reality blown apart.
Andrews beliefs made no impact on any of that.

thought criminal · Post by **thought criminal** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:08 am

It's you plane clinging lemmings that are the PROBLEM.
You are f u c king it up for everybody else.

WATCH CAREFULLY.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmg2WXKb ... ed&search=[/youtube]

thought criminal · Post by **thought criminal** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:14 am

Patrick Brown wrote:Are you in the BNP by any chance?

No, but I might consider joining if I find out you are black.

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:15 am

We all know that in reality Beam Weapons and the NPT are still being pushed here so please don't talk complete and utter rubbish. As I said on another thread the only thing wrong with this forum is the moderation.

There will always be a difference of opinion but if the majority of the members here think Beam Weapons and the NPT are balls why are we tolerating a moderator that is seen to propagate such ludicrous theory's which have no foundation in fact i.e. No evidence?

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:16 am

thought criminal wrote:
Patrick Brown wrote:Are you in the BNP by any chance?
No, but I might consider joining if I find out you are black.

So is that a joke?

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:19 am

TC, you are Ally and i claim my £5

thought criminal · Post by **thought criminal** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:27 am

andyb wrote:TC, you are Ally and i claim my £5

Never mind guessing who I am not, you need to study that last North Tower clip and just admit to yourself that there is no plane in that footage.

You are all walking blindfolded into a concentration camp. The 9/11 Truth Movement has hit a brick wall and I am pointing my finger at everyone of you lot.

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:31 am

Yeah I thought it was Ally as well beacause of the polite attitude!

thought criminal · Post by **thought criminal** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:37 am

Please just release me from this psychic pain and start thinking. Just that. That is all I ask. THINK.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C74ZXW2N ... ed&search=[/youtube]

IronSnot · Post by **IronSnot** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:44 am

I think Andrew Johnson should be sent to the moon to investigate the moonlandings. Also up there would give him the ability to look at chemtrails from another vantage point.

Seriously now he's a divisive p*&^%. This site would be better without him. Having a moderator calling others shills is absurd.

scar · Post by **scar** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:44 am

This could release you from this psychic pain TC:
http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html

Many of us have examined these clips before have you examined the above article?

Thermate · Post by **Thermate** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 1:57 pm

Patrick Brown wrote:There will always be a difference of opinion but if the majority of the members here think Beam Weapons and the NPT are balls why are we tolerating a moderator that is seen to propagate such ludicrous theory's?

Indeed, and my recent poll on the subject indicated ~10:1 against NoBrainTheory/OrbitalBeanWeapon ...

Skeptic · Post by **Skeptic** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:07 pm

Would it not be better to leave the moderation as is, but remove any association wahtsoever between the site and the campaign?

gypsum · Post by **gypsum** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:20 pm

thought criminal wrote:
Patrick Brown wrote:Are you in the BNP by any chance?
No, but I might consider joining if I find out you are black.

Disgusting post. If tele was banned for sarcasm then I cant see why posts like those of thought criminal can be allowed.

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:35 pm

Thermate wrote:Indeed, and my recent poll on the subject indicated ~10:1 against NoBrainTheory/OrbitalBeanWeapon ...

Have you got a link to the poll Thermate?

HERA · Post by **HERA** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:56 pm

Patrick Brown wrote:I may get slapped down for this although if provocative posts such as the Steven Jones challenge can be posted I see no reason why I can't post this.

Basically I'm asking members here to vote for or against keeping Andrew Johnston as a moderator. I have nothing personally against Andrew but I do feel that one of the reasons this site has lost credibility is because one of it's moderators is seen as a no-planner. Andrew is also seen to propagate the Beam Weapon dis-info.

One for critics corner, I think, Andrew. I see you have been accused of being Johnston and not making plans : that could apply to a lot of us.
Keep up the good work. The evidence, as accepted by the intellectual
vistors to this forum, is one of no planes and of beam weapons used. Although we would not like the plane/thermites to be silenced : just the ones incapable of evidence-based, polite argument.

James C · Post by **James C** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:36 pm

I'm with you on this Patrick.

My apologies to Andrew but for someone who claims to be on the side of the people (and not the state) he tends to side with the most extreme and absurd views as promulgated by the likes of Alex Jones. I've a had a few private spats with Andrew and when he cannot answer my questions he just runs away.

jomper · Post by **jomper** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:49 pm

ThoughtCriminal - I've just looked at your youTube posts and I'm really not convinced by them. I've thought about what you've posted though and my conclusion is your attitude is disgraceful, the language you use is disgusting, and you really should keep your opinions to yourself if you can't express them with a reasonable amount of respect for other people.

In general, the failure of people to stick to what we can agree on - and no-one here needs me to go over the enormous problems with the official version of events on 9/11 - and thereby seek what this forum advocates on its front page, viz. "a united call for further investigation", is the failure of the 9/11 truth movement as a whole.

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:49 pm

HERA wrote:The evidence, as accepted by the intellectual vistors to this forum, is one of no planes and of beam weapons used. Although we would not like the plane/thermites to be silenced : just the ones incapable of evidence-based, polite argument.

"intellectual visitors"
You mean people that have been programed by the system eh? Just remember what you're aunty Flow said and don't believe everything you read. Unfortunately some people are so puffed up that they're beyond help. Come on just one more little chocky mint!

"evidence-based"
There is absolutely zero evidence for the NPT or the half-baked-bean-weapon. Of course you might just be trying to be witty. Keep trying as one day people might laugh with you instead of at you! Of course you might like to take up the “The beam weapon challenge!”: http://911evidencebase.16.forumer.com/v ... c.php?t=50

John White · Post by **John White** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:00 pm

HERA wrote:The evidence, as accepted by the intellectual
vistors to this forum, is one of no planes and of beam weapons used.

I can only consider this statement willful self-delusion

John White · Post by **John White** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:04 pm

scar wrote:Moderating this forum must be a nightmare and while i dont agree with AJ on NPT or beams i respect the hard work hes put in here.
Patrick you are dividing this place more than you realise and its unnecessary and irritating.
As for credibility issues - NPT was top of most forums here until recently so if it sunk to ludicrousness it happened quite a while back, maybe just around the 5th anniversary, if you believe it has. 3 or 4 posters pushing NPT for months day in day out and refusing to look at debunkings whilst having their youtube videos demolished by all and sundry did their cause no favours and im sure new members could see that. Not everyone is gullible after having their reality blown apart.
Andrews beliefs made no impact on any of that.

Good post Scar: good advice to PB as well, though I don't see why members shouldnt vote on their satisfaction level with the mods if they wish

John White · Post by **John White** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:07 pm

gypsum wrote:
thought criminal wrote:
Patrick Brown wrote:Are you in the BNP by any chance?
No, but I might consider joining if I find out you are black.

Disgusting post. If tele was banned for sarcasm then I cant see why posts like those of thought criminal can be allowed.

Poor humour, certainly: though to me, both PB and TC are equally out of order.

alwun · Post by **alwun** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:17 pm

I have for some time been having doubts as to whether two big, high, concrete buildings with mighty steel cores should readily disperse in a cloud of micron particle dust leaving just a few shards of steel behind on the ground, or not.
The twin towers did just that.
The official explanation advises us that this anomalous pulverisation was triggered by the fires occasioned in turn by the aeroplanes which disappeared into the buildings, and after a time - exploded in flames.
I don't believe this at all.
There are some 33 only extant lengths of footage of the two impacts - not hundreds or thousands - and only three are fully credited, as far as I know.
None of them fully set my suspicions at rest as to whether the planes are real or not. And there are a couple that are highly suspicious, the 1st impact via Naudet Bros being a prime example.
It is not my place, of course, to insist that anyone must share my views. But surely neither is it useful to slag each other off.

I'm certainly not about to vote a mod out of office.

cheers Al

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:29 pm

The only problem with sitting on the fence is that if you do it long enough you may become confused as to what's right or wrong. Equally you might get confused as to what's real (reality) and what's an illusion (a fantasy). The word for this state of mind is ambivalence.

So do you know your left from your right and your thermite from your baked beans?

scar · Post by **scar** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:48 pm

Patrick Brown wrote:The only problem with sitting on the fence is that if you do it long enough you may become confused as to what's right or wrong. Equally you might get confused as to what's real (reality) and what's an illusion (a fantasy). The word for this state of mind is ambivalence.

So do you know your left from your right and your thermite from your baked beans?

Alternatively picking a side where the jury is still out could be said to be unwise, especially if you push it as absolute truth and even more so if you use it to ridicule... In such a case, sitting on the fence might be better known as wisdom.

Patrick Brown · Post by **Patrick Brown** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:21 pm

scar wrote:Alternatively picking a side where the jury is still out could be said to be unwise, especially if you push it as absolute truth and even more so if you use it to ridicule... In such a case, sitting on the fence might be better known as wisdom.

I'm not saying Jones is 100% correct but I am most definitely saying NPT and half-baked-bean-weapons are 100% bull and probably disinformation.

So tell me more about this wisdom stuff. Does it have anything to do with not walking on the cracks?

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

Vote of no confidence in Andrew Johnston

Should Andrew Johnston remain a moderator?

Vote of no confidence in Andrew Johnston

Fairs fair

Is Johnston a no-planner?

Re: Is Johnston a no-planner?

boeing boeing