From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2007-08-24 02:20:49
www.911researchers.c… Some 9/11 Truthers seem to think they are not censoring the truth by “steering people away” from “controversial issues”. Just the other day, I posted the highly significant story of Prof Reynolds Qui Tam case on our “friendly” UK Forum, in the “News” section. In a familiar pattern which has been followed by 2 of the moderators on the forum, I find my post moved from the “News” section to the “9/11 Controversies” Section. No permission was sought, nor was notification given. Instead, this moderator stated the following: www.nineeleven.co.uk… TonyGosling wrote:Moved to 9/11 Truth controversiesIf Andrew is successful on this thread or elsewhere in convincing this forum as a whole of the no plane theory we can move it back to news I was therefore given to respond: OK TOny, It’s down to me to “convince people is it”? I’m some kind of “authority” am I? Why is my opinion any more persuasive than that of an Attorney and former Professor of Economics? Why doesn’t scholarly research such as this count for more. www.acebaker.com/9-1… But sorry, it’s obviously down to me to dictate what the evidence tells us and what the laws of physics are. Thanks for elevating me to this almost “godlike position”, but it is hugely inapprorpriate, misrepresentative and therefore serves no purpose The physical evidence does not support planes hitting the towers (evidence referenced above was planted), but let’s just forget that inconvenience and focus on unity etc… far more important than consistent laws of science. But this also got me thinking: how many forum members do I have to “convince” before Tony allows my News post back in the “News”. How shall we count/score this? Will Tony say “right, you’ve got up to 65% now – that’s enough – I’ll move it back for you!” Would Tony or me have to instigate a vote? Yes, that’s it! Vote for Truth! Vote for Newtonian Mechanics! Vote for relative hardness of materials! Vote for kerosene exploding on plane impact (and NOT following a delay) You don’t think this is a form of “soft censorship” regarding registered legal actions in Texas/Connecticut by prominent individuals, just cos a moderator doesn’t like the idea of them? Perhaps Tony moderates on the Loose Change forum too!?! So anyway, come on folks, I hope you’ll sign up for 9-11 UK and join the “vote for truth”. Ain’t it sweet that lil’ ol’ Andy J’s view is worth more to Tony G than that of Prof Reynolds and Jerry Leaphart!! So remember, “Vote for Truth”! Grrrrrrrrrrrrreat!!