You hypocrite. Dr J is more a man than you will ever be!editor said:
Claim of responsibility 'contains errors'
- Thread starter Jazzz
- Start date
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Hate to break this to you, but this is the internet, gender is irrelevant. Post again when you've calmed down and worked out what the fuck you're going on about.Raisin D'etre said:
Hey! Bob! You again! I was here before Urban was a glint in your eye. Now shurrup! 
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Raisin D'etre said:Hey! Bob! You again! I was here before Urban was a glint in your eye. Now shurrup!
editor said:
Ah, sweet ironic justice!
We will talk again, but not yet. Not yet.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Didn't you have a policeman who posted on here who admitted to taking drugs or proposed backing off on policing some forms of drugs? Wasn't he gay (if he wasn't i can expect a visit from the flying squad now), remember something on the news about it years back.
I really don't know, before i made it to U75.
I really don't know, before i made it to U75.
Brian Paddick - he came here of his own free will though, nobody asked him to. In fact it took a while before the community believed that the Brixton police commander was the genuine article. And he certainly didn't admit to taking drugs.Bob_the_lost said:
http://www.urban75.org/paddick/
editor
hiraethified
Yes. There was ONE gay policeman posting here, Brian Paddick, but I've no idea how I managed to become "intrinsically connected with gay policemen" nor why I was "quite happy to milk the media attention" that supposedly "follows" gay policemen".Bob_the_lost said:
And I've definitely no idea how or why all my "success in life is due to gay policemen".
Maybe she thinks I run an "urban75 camp copper's club" or an "urban75 Gay Dating service" or something?
Most baffling.
editor said:
I'll get my coat ...
Mrs Magpie
On a bit of break...
Never mind DB.....
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
editor said:
I do have to say that with the experience I've had in jointly running a bulletin board that I do have some sympathy with this position. It can be very stressful dealing with trolls and complete idiots, and getting nothing from a great many posters, but personal abuse and people questioning all of your decisons
Raisin d'etre is all right though. I don't agree with any of her views but she's an OK person, really.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
Jesus Christ, Jazzz, you're so full of shit - do you wear a nappy?
I notice your "source" has a lot of books to sell on his website.
All of them 9/11 conspiranoid shit.
What the fuck would he know about London bombs, the blood hasn't even dried and he - and you - are spreading bollocks rumours already.
Fuck off prick.
I notice your "source" has a lot of books to sell on his website.
All of them 9/11 conspiranoid shit.
What the fuck would he know about London bombs, the blood hasn't even dried and he - and you - are spreading bollocks rumours already.
Fuck off prick.
Ed has been itching to ban me for a long time so I am surprised that I get banned for a mere 48 hours. It's given me the impetus to think about the control mechanisms ed applies to this forum. As I said earlier, there is a conflict of interest when you have one individual owning, moderating and posting.
Ed seems to need to have total control over the ideas that are expressed here on topics which question the status quo. At times it seems urban represents Hobbes view in which this little world erupts into a war in which each are fighting all and Ed as the "Leviathan" steps in to impose order, like some dictator. There is no real dialogue and there can not be anything real in the dialogue if people who question the status quo are dismissed as conspiraloons.
Ed seems to think that it is OK to dominate everyone on the forum, he asserts his control by picking off those who are not following the mainstream media and thinking for themselves, this sends a clear message to others that they should conform, not rock the boat or they will risk being ridiculed in the same way - as conspiraloons.
The mechanism is control through conformity and where in this does truth exist? If people are scared to express their thoughts, opinions, doubts, emotions and so on because they do not conform to ed and by extension, as he controls this space so completely, the group who are required to exhibit slavish acceptance to how the corporately controlled media present events such as 911 and the recent terror attacks in London - even though any intelligent person could find a dozen or more ignored anomalies.
Ed sits on top of the heirarchy he has established and threatens anybody who questions these events firstly by labelling. This should be a place for learning and thinking. Why is it necessary to close down certain avenues of thought? How does it serve this community? There are many on these boards who are creative and have much knowledge and we all need to hear what they say. But how is that possible when boring mind games are played about who is on top and who is irrelevant according to ed
Such an environment creates an atmosphere where individuals suck up to to the authoritarian figure. Relationships become unequal and Ed imagines his position to be superior (author of book on web-design and owner of web site) somehow he thinks he is the top dog around here and everybody else is nothing, despite the fact that urban survives not on his contributions but on those like me who post here. Ed seems to imply that one must be rich, strong, aggressive before dialogue can occur.
Two legs good, four legs bad?
Ed asks us to trust authorities, experts (and those he deems worthy) or our contributions are meaningless because its fact-free conspiralooning. Support the official view or else you will be cast into isolation, banned permanently or temporarily. It's just another control mechanism. Posting freely thus becomes a privelege that is handed out to those who suck up.
Conspiraloons are the scape-goats on which all the ills of the world are blamed. Everyone is driven crazy by their conspiralooning but all they are doing is showing openly the sickness that exists on this site, and that sickness is to do with accepting the status quo views on the world, and at this time, when the world is so sick with top-down control systems that are causing wars, global warming, terrorism, poverty and so on.
Yet, at this time we are asked to play mind-games which are nothing more than win-lose games going nowhere. Beating the other at mind-games becomes the be-all and end-all.
In the terror attack ed wants everyone to ignore the anomalies and look at the incident without having access to the whole story. This of course narrows viewpoints, and in this discussion ed's view will triumph because those who try to bring other information to the forum are branded conspiraloons, while the suckers-up sucker up. By eliminating these other view points, only one view point remains - the ed's!
If you love truth then you must surely want to go beyond your own individual understanding. Bohm states "We are not trying win in a dialogue. We all win if we are doing it right."
Bohm says that the first criteria for discussion is to suspend assumptions and keep our options open, in order to discover the reality that lies beyond them. It is not possible to have a dialogue with someone who imagines they have power over us or who we imagine to be superior. Nor can we do this with others if we have elevated ourselves to a position of superiority.
Bohm says "Can those in authority really 'level' with those in subordinate positions?
We need to be equal. Not that we all think the same thoughts but let us maintain respect for those who express their views here, no matter how uncomfortable.
Ed seems to need to have total control over the ideas that are expressed here on topics which question the status quo. At times it seems urban represents Hobbes view in which this little world erupts into a war in which each are fighting all and Ed as the "Leviathan" steps in to impose order, like some dictator. There is no real dialogue and there can not be anything real in the dialogue if people who question the status quo are dismissed as conspiraloons.
Ed seems to think that it is OK to dominate everyone on the forum, he asserts his control by picking off those who are not following the mainstream media and thinking for themselves, this sends a clear message to others that they should conform, not rock the boat or they will risk being ridiculed in the same way - as conspiraloons.
The mechanism is control through conformity and where in this does truth exist? If people are scared to express their thoughts, opinions, doubts, emotions and so on because they do not conform to ed and by extension, as he controls this space so completely, the group who are required to exhibit slavish acceptance to how the corporately controlled media present events such as 911 and the recent terror attacks in London - even though any intelligent person could find a dozen or more ignored anomalies.
Ed sits on top of the heirarchy he has established and threatens anybody who questions these events firstly by labelling. This should be a place for learning and thinking. Why is it necessary to close down certain avenues of thought? How does it serve this community? There are many on these boards who are creative and have much knowledge and we all need to hear what they say. But how is that possible when boring mind games are played about who is on top and who is irrelevant according to ed
Such an environment creates an atmosphere where individuals suck up to to the authoritarian figure. Relationships become unequal and Ed imagines his position to be superior (author of book on web-design and owner of web site) somehow he thinks he is the top dog around here and everybody else is nothing, despite the fact that urban survives not on his contributions but on those like me who post here. Ed seems to imply that one must be rich, strong, aggressive before dialogue can occur.
Two legs good, four legs bad?
Ed asks us to trust authorities, experts (and those he deems worthy) or our contributions are meaningless because its fact-free conspiralooning. Support the official view or else you will be cast into isolation, banned permanently or temporarily. It's just another control mechanism. Posting freely thus becomes a privelege that is handed out to those who suck up.
Conspiraloons are the scape-goats on which all the ills of the world are blamed. Everyone is driven crazy by their conspiralooning but all they are doing is showing openly the sickness that exists on this site, and that sickness is to do with accepting the status quo views on the world, and at this time, when the world is so sick with top-down control systems that are causing wars, global warming, terrorism, poverty and so on.
Yet, at this time we are asked to play mind-games which are nothing more than win-lose games going nowhere. Beating the other at mind-games becomes the be-all and end-all.
In the terror attack ed wants everyone to ignore the anomalies and look at the incident without having access to the whole story. This of course narrows viewpoints, and in this discussion ed's view will triumph because those who try to bring other information to the forum are branded conspiraloons, while the suckers-up sucker up. By eliminating these other view points, only one view point remains - the ed's!
If you love truth then you must surely want to go beyond your own individual understanding. Bohm states "We are not trying win in a dialogue. We all win if we are doing it right."
Bohm says that the first criteria for discussion is to suspend assumptions and keep our options open, in order to discover the reality that lies beyond them. It is not possible to have a dialogue with someone who imagines they have power over us or who we imagine to be superior. Nor can we do this with others if we have elevated ourselves to a position of superiority.
Bohm says "Can those in authority really 'level' with those in subordinate positions?
We need to be equal. Not that we all think the same thoughts but let us maintain respect for those who express their views here, no matter how uncomfortable.
editor
hiraethified
And what's this long personal attack got to do with world politics/current affairs?Raisin D'etre said:
In case you've forgotten you were banned for posting up a stream of increasingly random and increasingly weird shit, claiming that I owed my success to unspecified "gay policemen" and other such gibberish.
That's provably another lie.Raisin D'etre said:
Sure makes you wonder why the massively growing list of daily visitors and new registrations here manage to put up with it, doesn't it?Raisin D'etre said:
If you don't like it here, go elsewhere.
It's that simple.
Raisin, DrJ, et all: here's a couple of conspiracy forums where I'm sure you can waffle away about your pet theories without fear that someone will dare to challenge you.
http://www. clubconspiracy.com/modules/newbb/
http://www. abovetopsecret.com/forum/
(links broken - just delete the space)
http://www. clubconspiracy.com/modules/newbb/
http://www. abovetopsecret.com/forum/
(links broken - just delete the space)
editor
hiraethified
Funny thing is, I can't think of a single other high profile, 'mainstream' bulletin board that has been willing to put up with these never-ending constantly regurgitated "theories" about the "anomalies" of 9/11.
How many conspiracy-tastic posts have we had on every supposed possible anomaly that DrJ et al have dredged up from barking fruitloop sites all over the web?
Fucking THOUSANDS is the answer, if not tens of thousands.
But enough is enough.
Go play on those sites that Loki posted up and spare me the earache and weirdo lies.
How many conspiracy-tastic posts have we had on every supposed possible anomaly that DrJ et al have dredged up from barking fruitloop sites all over the web?
Fucking THOUSANDS is the answer, if not tens of thousands.
But enough is enough.
Go play on those sites that Loki posted up and spare me the earache and weirdo lies.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
Theories that rely on websites run by David Icke or other wankers should not be given the attention some here are adamant they should.
Unfortunately it's the "cry wolf" syndrome - and there has yet to be one conspiracy theory with anything approaching certified truth and proven fact I've seen on these boards.
The "Huntley Is Innocent" bollocks backed up by Joe Vialls was the last straw for me.
And it was proven to be lies, and I don't really trust the motives of Jazzz, Bigfish, et al...
If anything - they're the psyops spooks... deliberately spreading misinformation and inaccurate speculation... to cloud the truth...
Unfortunately it's the "cry wolf" syndrome - and there has yet to be one conspiracy theory with anything approaching certified truth and proven fact I've seen on these boards.
The "Huntley Is Innocent" bollocks backed up by Joe Vialls was the last straw for me.
And it was proven to be lies, and I don't really trust the motives of Jazzz, Bigfish, et al...
If anything - they're the psyops spooks... deliberately spreading misinformation and inaccurate speculation... to cloud the truth...
You don't understand why certain things are against the forum rules? Do you think there should not be any kind of rules or limits on what people can and can't post here?Raisin D'etre said:
As I understand it you weren't temp banned for going on about conspiracy theories it was because of comments you made about a moderator.
Re. conspiracy theories: It is very upsetting and completely out of order to try and deny that crimes have been committed, that people aren't responsible for the murders they have committed or to claim that various people (American military personnel, the US or UK government, the police etc etc) have murdered people. Maybe you think you can make statements like this because you are not naming individuals. maybe legally speaking you are right, but morally speaking do you think this is OK?
There is a big difference between proposing something - for which you have no evidence - as a possibility and in claiming it is definitely true. Maybe you don't see why there is a difference, but most people here just get fucking sick of people wh throw around the most serious accusations and claims about people and then refuse to back up what they have said with anything that resembles evidence.
If you don't understand why the person who has set up this forum doesn't like it I suggest you have another think about it rather than wallowing in self-pity and making up grand descriptions of how much you are being oppressed.
If you do understand why, yet disagree with the rules of these forums then why don't you go and debate these things somewhere where they are welcome, and where your line of argument is deemed acceptable? If you don't think that any worthwhile debate is possible here then why stay and post here? You might be right that this isn't the place for discussing cospiracy theories and making serious claims against people where you can't produce evidence. I think you would be doing yourself and other people a favour by doing this somewhere else - it is obviously not welcome here, so why keep banging on about it? You don't think its going to change if you simply complain enough? The evidence suggests that this is not going to happen (although its not up to me).
Raisin D'etre said:
Indeedy.
But there is a grammar of thinking that leads to learning - the acquisition of knowledge, which as you will recall can be defined as "true, justified belief".
Without that the best you get is noise - word salad - and the worst is deeply offensive.
And the definining feature of people who speculate about conspiracies is that they just don't get that there is such a grammar.
Raisin D'etre said:
"Lizard millenium sprat and buggery and they're all out to get me them dirty Xxxx eschatology parsnip."
editor
hiraethified
The problem is that if the woefully unresearched conspiraloon drivel posted here goes unchallenged, then urban75 would be guilty of propagating the fruitloop fantasies, and that's something I don't want to happen.
So I - and others - have to waste time undertaking the research that those making the wild claims were too lazy/too dishonest/too deluded to do.
DrJazzz's latest thread in the bin is a perfect example of the 'bonkers claim first/check the facts last' behaviour.
It's fucking tedious.
So I - and others - have to waste time undertaking the research that those making the wild claims were too lazy/too dishonest/too deluded to do.
DrJazzz's latest thread in the bin is a perfect example of the 'bonkers claim first/check the facts last' behaviour.
It's fucking tedious.
That was a good post raisin, with lots of prescient points in it.
It's not unique to urban though, it pretty much works like that in all spheres of british life where a power inequality occurs. Perhaps in many other countries too.
Free speech exists in britain for sure, but only within certain parameters. By defining underground media as a vehicle for voices to speak outside of these parameters, we can then know if we are reading mainstream media.
Urban p and p in my wee opinion is leaving one and becoming the other. But i stick around hoping it can get back to what it was a couple of years ago.
It's not unique to urban though, it pretty much works like that in all spheres of british life where a power inequality occurs. Perhaps in many other countries too.
Free speech exists in britain for sure, but only within certain parameters. By defining underground media as a vehicle for voices to speak outside of these parameters, we can then know if we are reading mainstream media.
Urban p and p in my wee opinion is leaving one and becoming the other. But i stick around hoping it can get back to what it was a couple of years ago.
editor
hiraethified
So you don't think you've been given AMPLE opportunities to openly discuss each and every fruitloop theory that enters your enlightened mind over the last four years?fela fan said:
The site has entertained more threads about fact-free bonkers theories than any other high traffic site I can think of, but I will NOT allow these boards to be used to continually propagate unresearched shite.
There's lots of conspiraloon sites who welcome uncritical, unresearched, fact-free claims. But get this in your head: urban75 isn't one of them.
editor said:
I wasn't even considering 'fruitloop theory' whatever that is.
But that was obvious from my post, so i'll not repeat myself, just read it again.
I'm interested in the phenomenon that raisin referred to, not repeating ad nauseum the ping pong arguments about fuck all. I no longer play your game mate. You certainly did a good job about keeping me quiet. I'm almost silent these days. It wears you down y'see, and after a while you go 'what the fuck is the point in getting caught up in this?' Plenty more enjoyable things to be doing where you're not attacked for saying the wrong thing.
Similar threads
