Edit; web site link removed

I've never been banned from a board before. I try to be respective of a board's rules and members, even when I disagree with some of their views. I've disagreed with some members here, and I don't really think they can say I'm beligerant or a troublemaker.

I went to that board because it's an interesting subject to me, and I like to debate it and read other people's views on it. I came in respectfully, and remained that way throughout the duration of my stay (all of 2 days). If they haven't erased any of my posts, take a look at the "Skeptics Forum" and see for yourself (I posted under the same username as here).

These guys are paranoia personified. While browsing the site, I noticed a lot of official story people were persecuted for their beliefs - if they voiced an opposing opinion or didn't completely agree with everything Dylan Avery (the creator of Loose Change) said, they were chastised. Personal pictures of these posters were displayed, as well as their IP addresses (Avery himself posted the IP address of a poster who questioned him as a first response to his post).

If I entered that site and was starting to believe the conspiracy theory behind 9/11, I'd leave it thinking otherwise. I'd think the people running the site had embraced exactly what they profess to hate - power mongering and corruption. There's even a Free Speech Zone (named "Skeptics Forum") in which those with opposing viewpoints are allowed to post. I stayed in that forum for the most part and still got banned, presumably because of my beliefs.

I guess all that to say that the makers of Loose Change obviously only care about you if you believe them. If not, you're treated as trash. If you question the movie at all, be expected to not last long. This is the exact same mentality behind Free Speech Zones. Supporters are welcome - they can post anywhere and be seen by the masses. Dissenters are relugated to a small area and are banished if they start to get too vocal.

CTers - these are the people you wish to be aligned with?

By the way, be sure to check out Loose Change, revision 3 - in theaters soon!

Gee, look at that, he's looking to make money from this thing after all.

Good. Now you know exactly how us "conspiracy theorists" feel when we are bashed and ridiculed and stomped down in all the MAJOR media networks. Why should some little pro- conspiracy site have to play by the rules if CNN, Fox, and George Bush dont. I just dont see how you could be truly upset at a website for using the same tactics that the government uses against these people. I say more power to them.

Such a winner's attitude.

Well, I AM a winner.

It's like all you guys use the same brain.

Present one situation, get a retort rife with generalities that have nothing to do with the original topic. Do they teach a class on this somewhere?

Sorry, but its not a good idea to discuss how other forum sites are run or operated, those type of threads can lead to 'board wars', that's something we're hoping to avoid. I'll leave this open so comments can be made in general about what people may encounter at other discussion boards, but don't make references to specific sites, that's a sure way to get this thread closed.

MM

Sorry. I didn't think that was a problem.

My fault.

It isn't a big deal, we just don't want to cause problems between forums. You didn't know; no need to be sorry.

Oh you mean like you just did with that post?

You were complaining about a forum "abusing" your free speech and dissenting opinion rights, to which I replied "good", a little taste of what we are subjected to on a much larger scale and not only in some little internet forum. Deal with it.

Gosh, I'm sorry. I never realized what a martyr you were.

Nice picture. Talk about using the same brain. I guess its the "If we're not with you, then we are with the terrorists" mentality, eh?

Again, what the H*LL are you talking about, dude??
And what does it have to do with the thread topic??

Wow. Great point. You win the discussion with that one.

I was recently banned in another forum in a bizarre display of weirdness. There was an off-topic political forum and as I was browsing it, I came upon a thread where every single poster was running another one through the ringer because he had asked an honest question about a political issue in order to learn more about it. People were openly saying that he thought all Jews were criminals and should be exterminated when not only did he not say that, but he said the complete opposite and stressed it as much several times. Even moderators were doing this (they were the ones who made the initial and many continuing accusations).

I ended up defending him because I didn't think it was right to do that to anyone, especially since he was innocent of what they were saying (as any idiot who can read would be able to tell). They then turned on me, attacking my credibility because I was a new member and insisted I had just joined to post in that forum though I had made many posts in the on-topic forum (never did get my questions answered).

I spent a lot of posts laying out (through lots of quotes) exactly what he said and then what they said about what he said. Any idiot could see they were out of line and very, very wrong. I used no obscenities and did not insult the other posters (despite how badly I wanted to). In short, I did not break any forum rules.

They decided that I was actually this other poster in disguise, even though that was impossible and they had enough evidence of that. I was in the process of sending a message to the moderator that made the accusation when I was banned. Less than 24 hours after I joined.

Since you can't even read the forum without an account, I don't know what happened, but a friend of mine who had an account said after I was banned, the other posters congratulated themselves on how they got rid of a "dangerous terrorist sympathizer" and it turned into a mutual admiration society.

Those posters were just secure in their own opinion and when someone else came along with a simple question that they didn't like, it didn't take them long to become hostile. People in large groups tend to do that, especially if they're feeding off each other.

It's too bad really. I was interested because another friend of mine frequented that forum and I was really interested in joining for discussion. I was actually enjoying many discussions in the on-topic forums and was looking forward to upgrading my forum account. I guess they didn't want my money

So, the moral of the story is it doesn't matter if some place claims to be a "free speech zone." The minute a minority opinion or even a question the majority doesn't like comes up, it's a free-for-all bloodbath.

I know of the forum the OP mentioned. I posted there some and was accused by a moderator of disappearing when I didn't post to a thread for 6 whole hours. Apparently I wasn't allowed to go to work or have a life outside that forum.

I must say though that many on that forum are not bad. However, the one moderator whose name I won't mention though had a short fuse. I saw him arbitrarily ban many others for minor things that he just didn't like. I don't post there much anymore.

On any board, you are a victim of mods - who are either the board's creators or their friends - and this is for better or for worse.

Some boards only want folks that think like them... others (like this one) allow some REALLY contentious issues to be argued loudly and support (or actually DON'T support) both sides.

I've seen some pretty sad boards. Those close down rather soon. If everyone at the table agrees, there are lots of people that don't need to be there...

I agree, Conspiracy Theorist should not be rediculed. But anyone who say something that is rediculous have to face the consequence of being rediculed.

The theories should only be ridiclued if they are truly ridiculous and have no supporting evidence whatsoever, like say, Lilly's "the moon does not exist" theory.

The theories put forth by 9/11 truthers have evidence, and the official story has gaping holes in it. An official story put out by a government that , as their own documents show, have drafted plans to stage terror attacks on their own population and blame it on other countries. Yet the media acts as if the government can do no wrong.

Well, like I said you say something rediculous then you will be rediculed most probably.
Tell me something, how legit and credible are all these supporting evidence that is out there? It is not much of an evidence if it can't change or influence the out come, right?
The media does not dominate like they use to before because of the internet and improved communicating system.

The moon doesn't exist? Then where do we get all that delicious cheese? And where does El Jaguar del Queso live?

Cheese comes from milk, and he lives in California.



Well its legit enough to start opening peoples eyes to the truth. More and more people, as indicated by polls, believe that at the least the government allowed the attacks to take place.
Remember those polls taken by CNN that showed 90= percent beleived there was a cover-up of what happened on 9/11?

Give yourself a break Stephen. Whenever someone is unable to come up with a sound argument to oppose an excellent point, they defer to ridicule and insults. It's been an overly used ploy on these boards by those who don't have answers to questions put before them. Just look at the genius posts by Craven as a perfect example. There is no moon thread as another. Lilly can attempt to explain away what she did with that thread all she wants. We all know it was another tactic used by those who cannot add anything of substance, thus they fall into the old trappings of ridicule and name calling.

As for banishment and suspension. Well, I can speak on the second and await the third with glorious anticipation!

What do this 90% have that made them believe it?
90% is pretty strong I agree but how come nothing happened after 90% are convinced?
Don't tell me they were helpless, CNN alone could have made a noise about it.

No, I admitted exactly what I was doing on that thread. I've never tried to "explain away" anything I've written. Here's exactly what I said:



link to original post

BTW, I've reported my own thread. I stand behind and take responsibility for what I've written. I did not "name call" anyone in that thread. In fact, I was the only one who was called names in that thread.

Lets not derail the topic by getting into a long winded arguement about who did what to whom. As to the name calling, sarcastic and belittling comments being made in threads, both sides are equally as guilty, and the nonsense is put to a stop as quickly as possible, given the size of the forum and the fact that over 1200 posts are logged daily. Back on topic now, and lets try to keep the discussion civilized.

MM

Parody as a way of making a point. Okay Lilly, it's cool...Chill...No need to become defensive. I personally took that thread as a form of ridicule...If I have taken it the wrong way I apologize...But I must say, it sure did seem to be a place others used to mock the Hoax camp people. Or so I was told as I refused to view it!

I guess I should have looked at it but it really, and honesty, it felt like mockery and an insult to my intelligence!

By the way...If you click on the link in my signature you can see videos with SOUND proof that NASA faked the whole thing...

There, how about that for shameless self-promotion!

S3th .... Awesome new avvy bro !!

Wish I had seen it first !!

Don't let the nasa nasties get to you man .... You know what they say ... "Don't get mad , get even " !!

nasa faked the moon landings ? ... I didn't know that .

Man, I just have so much difficulty understanding why these people can't see the obvious fakery of the whole deal. The minimizations to space travel through and beyond the radiation belts. It's almost like their whole worlds would collapse if they even consider the fact for a second that they were buffaloed. I can understand with MID and his greatest accomplishment ever in his entire life being proven a fake. So I understand why he holds on. But the other guys. And Lilly...she's British for petes sake. You'd think she'd open up a bit and see this as proof that us Americans are not the nice honest people we portray ourselvs as all the time. But no, she's like a puppy. I mean look at her sig! She quotes MID like he is some sort of Kahlil Gibran with his imflammatory quote. And she wonders why I made that highly offensive remark I refuse to repeat! Cause I love her! I do. She is really sweet.

She probably is a great gal too. The three and a half years I spent in England I had my share of lovely birds. I would often pop down to the pub, suck down a pint, pull a bird, and off to have a bonking good time. I love British women. So down to earth and honest about their plans for you! Not so many head games as the majority of American women are apt to play if you let them. So, I guess I am having a difficult time understanding her admiration for a guy who uses such ugly tactics in trying to keep the truth from the people here at the UM!

Oh, thanks for the compliment bro. I like your new avatar too...It was what prompted my new one!

Cheers!

I just can't believe that Cindy would actually go out with Derek. I mean it's as if she has no concept of respectability! And Leanne too, with her boker boyfriend. You'd think she'd get a clue with all the times he dumped her for some loose cheerleader, but noooo, she insists she doesn't want to be alone. And seriously, what is up with Brandon's hair? Doesn't he realize that 50's retro isn't retro anymore? I just can't believe people would act this way.

Gossip is as gossip does.

Seriously, it's nice that you two want to chat about the mental shortcomings of other posters, but it might be a better idea to do it in private PMs rather than in a thread that, the last time I checked was about "Other discussion forums" and not "let's branch out the moon hoax idea to every other thread we can." Because in all honestly, it sounds like you two are sharing locker room gossip and that's more suited to PMs where you can giggle and chatter all you want about how blind we all are.

I know, I know, someone's going to say "but blah blah they do it to us blah blah martyred oppressed blah blah." Here's an idea: eye for an eye might be catchy but it just leads to constant retaliation. Take the moral high ground.

Um.... what? I thought this thread was about the sob story of a skeptic who finally found out what its like to be ridiculed, was bashed, and retorts by bashing theorists? This is all too confusing...

You're telling me!

Agreed, and for the second time in as many posts, could we avoid bringing up Moon hoaxes for once and stick to the topic please.

I guess I should reply to this, since you're referencing me, the sob story spewing skeptic (25 points for alliteration).

What you don't know about me is I was a believer in the 9/11 CT. Look around on this very forum for evidence. I stood shoulder to shoulder with "truthers", arguing for the cause. So, yeah, I do know what it feels like to be ridiculed.

Then I woke up to the utter insanity of the theory and changed my stance. I saw there were more questions that couldn't be answered from the "controlled demolition" side then from the official story side. After awhile, it just seemed ludicrous and didn't add up at all. I did some more digging and discovered that most, if not all, "truthers" have an agenda (a book, a movie, fame, whatever), and will go to enormous extents to further that agenda. Like the maker of Loose Change, for example. I think he's under a lot of pressure now, because he's starting to think he may be wrong. That all the holes in the story that he filled in with his own "facts" may not actually be true after all. And if his public ever were to find out about his lies, he could very well be ostracized. So now he's getting paranoid and he's grasping at straws to find anything that might corroborate his story. He's not approaching it scientifically at all. He has a theory, and he's trying to find evidence to support that theory. But it's just not happening, so he's panicking and making up his own "facts". He's probably not a bad guy, it's just he's completely over his head and never expected this kind of unilateral support to his theory. I think it may end badly for him. I don't see how he can get out off the jam he's now in. Of course all of that is my own opinion.

1. Please show me one structural engineer on earth who supports the controlled demolition theory.

2. The media jumps all over the government all the time. If you don't see that, you're blind. The mass media just doesn't cover the conspiracy theory because it has no merit.

Still waiting, Steve....

Let's not harass. And keep in mind what the original topic was.

1. I know there were two specifically, who happened to change their story pretty quick and the other was fired , their names escape me right now but I will look for them.
You might also want to read up on the Scholars for 9/11 Truth.


2.the medias "criticizms" of the government are an illusion pretty much. they know that people are just too aware that the government is very imperfect for them not to be criticized at all. However, most criticism of substance tends to be downplayed or very short lived, for example, the changing reasons we went into iraq, the prewar hysteria created by the administration, the downing street memo, hundreds of the families of victims on 9/11 sueing President bush, supreme court rulings which blatantly violate private property laws (if your yard would be a nice place for a Walmart, you can kiss it goodbye even if you own the property), border security (take our civil liberties but leave those borders WIDE open for hundreds of illegal undocumented people to come in every day), CNN polls taken which show 90 percent beleive there was a coverup of 9/11, the list goes on.

The administration should be getting slammed over and over again on a daily basis, but they get off the hook with their flimsy excuses that are never followed up on.
Most criticisms often tend to fall into the phony left-right paradigm and and saturated with so much "spin" you dont really know whats going on.

- You know of two specifically, but you can't remember any of the two.
- I have a theory, the ones who started this 9/11 conspiracy are actually the ones who is trying to cover up their butts for messing up our National Security that allowed this to happen. Hmmmm, who could that be?

You obviously don't live in NYC, or DC. In these places, we want, no, DEMAND answers. So give me one, if you will, me being a New Yorker.

Give you an answer? Did you ask a question?

Give me an answer to why the respnse on 9/11 was so slow. Go ahead, give me one smart a**

1. Excellent, I look forward to seeing who they are. Incidentally, they may've changed their story simply because after researching it further, they decided that their initial analysis was wrong, rather than being hunted down by the NWO.

2. I'm going to have to break this one down:



Define illusion - are you saying the criticism doesn't really exist?



Ah, so the media criticises the government just enough so as not to be obvious about the media/government collaboration.



Really?



I see these topics covered nearly every time I turn on CNN.



I'll give you that one. But perhaps the American press didn't cover it as much as the British press because it was a British memo. Either way, I'm pretty sure the American public overwhelmingly agrees that we went into Iraq on false pretenses.



I'm pretty sure these have been covered extensively.



You honestly think the media hardly covered the border security issue?



90%??? Care to back that up? Last I heard, only a third believed in a 9/11 coverup, and even that was vague. Only 16% believed the buildings were destroyed by CD.


Also, name one scholar in Scholars for 9/11 Truth that is a structural engineer.

Easy on the venom. I don't see any reason for you to get so angry.

This should answer your question:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...showtopic=75534

I just did some digging, and it was a "Showbiz Tonight" poll, taken when Charlie Sheen was on the program talking about the government coverup. There were roughly 45,000 votes total (but I'm still trying to find the final results).

This is hardly a scientific poll. Either way, I'm not sure what this has to do with the issue. Just because a lot of people believe it doesn't mean it's true.

Are you talking the government's response in helping fix things, the government's response into investigating it, or the people's response to what happened?