Bruecke Note: The backstory is that I've been banned for the second time from Let's Roll Forums. Such an admission is somewhat embarrassing for me, because it implies unsavory activities on my part, like childish name-calling, flame wars, or other misconduct that would be reprehensible in any civil society.
The truth is quite the contrary, in that each time the forum administrator had to manufacture some lame excuse, because my evolution into supporting 9/11 DEW (and Dr. Wood's research) combined with my rhetorical skills evidently made me a dangerous debate opponent. A bit slow on the uptake, getting the gate closed on my fingers twice through my unwarranted banishment finally expose Mr. Jayhan's gate keeper role. However, it does fit a long running disinformation campaign to smear Dr. Wood and her research.
I could use a little assistance from the readership of the Vatic Project to rattle the gates of this 9/11 gate keeper. If he wants to be a gatekeeper, let him play one... with ya' all!
Step 1 is to register yourself under some avatar on Let's Roll Forums. [Pick your own handle, but if you are at a loss, you could use "DupedUsefulI_#", where the # is some integer and would imply a sockpuppet from me and might make your tenure short.]
Step 2 (doesn't have to be done immediately) is to jump into the threads where 9/11 gatekeeping is active, like this Dr. Wood thread that has now banned me twice, and make your displeasure known.
An alternative or additional task would be an off-list email to Phil Jayhan to petition my return ("DupedUsefulI") to the forums. Mr. Jayhan has already so much as said that he won't read my emails. (I bet he did, but he knows that any email from him opens the door for me to respond.)
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Phil Jayhan <phillipjayhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Jayhan,
I did not go sneaking around the forum behind your back. The 60 or so subscriptions that I signed up for are in full view of the site administrator: you.
I also did not attempt to obtain proprietary FOIA records. I went no deeper than the forums that anyone can get to. Refer again to the 60 that I subscribed to and monitored (on a weekly basis).
However, this manufactured claim of yours bears closer scrutiny. Freedom Of Information Access (FOIA) are public and not proprietary, as you so claim. Sure, LRF might have gone to the legwork to kick them off, but if you can get them, anyone subsequently can. Plus, the reason you want them is to then publish the data and analysis thereof on your website. So, WTF? Had I been searching for them, they were still a non-issue in the great scheme of things.
Your statement "we aren't giving anything to you" is most revealing. What? So little do you value the "truth" collected on LRF that you're not going to publish it to the world?
You know, Simon Shack said it best in his little chat with you:
Yep. Your first banishment of me for calling you "Mr. Jayhan": most childish.
What was the reason this second time around? Not the manufactured reason but the real reason. That I called you on your manufactured griefs with other branches of 9/11 research? Or that you don't have the intelligence or rhetorical skills to take down directed energy weapons and Dr. Judy Wood's work? Better suffer the embarrassment of a lame excuse for banishment than endure defeats in the debates, eh?
Bottom line, Mr. Jayhan, you seem to exhibit very little respect for 9/11 Truth.
Am I wrong? Prove me wrong.
Re-enable my DupedUsefulI avatar. Or if that is really too hot for you to handle, then at least respect the truth and let me have & manage my subscription, but ban my postings.
Come on, Mr. Jayhan. Prove you aren't a gatekeeper. Let me back in.
Sincerely,
Duped? Useful? I.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
The truth is quite the contrary, in that each time the forum administrator had to manufacture some lame excuse, because my evolution into supporting 9/11 DEW (and Dr. Wood's research) combined with my rhetorical skills evidently made me a dangerous debate opponent. A bit slow on the uptake, getting the gate closed on my fingers twice through my unwarranted banishment finally expose Mr. Jayhan's gate keeper role. However, it does fit a long running disinformation campaign to smear Dr. Wood and her research.
I could use a little assistance from the readership of the Vatic Project to rattle the gates of this 9/11 gate keeper. If he wants to be a gatekeeper, let him play one... with ya' all!
Step 1 is to register yourself under some avatar on Let's Roll Forums. [Pick your own handle, but if you are at a loss, you could use "DupedUsefulI_#", where the # is some integer and would imply a sockpuppet from me and might make your tenure short.]
Step 2 (doesn't have to be done immediately) is to jump into the threads where 9/11 gatekeeping is active, like this Dr. Wood thread that has now banned me twice, and make your displeasure known.
An alternative or additional task would be an off-list email to Phil Jayhan to petition my return ("DupedUsefulI") to the forums. Mr. Jayhan has already so much as said that he won't read my emails. (I bet he did, but he knows that any email from him opens the door for me to respond.)
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Phil Jayhan <phillipjayhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'll make this simple. You went sneaking around the forum behind my back and attempted to obtain proprietary FOIA records which we have obtained as a group for yourself. This is a no no. And you know that as well. Get your own fucking FOIA records. We aren't giving anything to you.
Please do not write back. I am tired of your emails and won't even bother reading them.
cheers-
phil :wink:
Dear Mr. Jayhan,
I did not go sneaking around the forum behind your back. The 60 or so subscriptions that I signed up for are in full view of the site administrator: you.
I also did not attempt to obtain proprietary FOIA records. I went no deeper than the forums that anyone can get to. Refer again to the 60 that I subscribed to and monitored (on a weekly basis).
However, this manufactured claim of yours bears closer scrutiny. Freedom Of Information Access (FOIA) are public and not proprietary, as you so claim. Sure, LRF might have gone to the legwork to kick them off, but if you can get them, anyone subsequently can. Plus, the reason you want them is to then publish the data and analysis thereof on your website. So, WTF? Had I been searching for them, they were still a non-issue in the great scheme of things.
Your statement "we aren't giving anything to you" is most revealing. What? So little do you value the "truth" collected on LRF that you're not going to publish it to the world?
You know, Simon Shack said it best in his little chat with you:
You are losing ground, mate - and you know it. Too many good guys have joined your forum - and you don't know how to get rid of them. ... You are all-too-transparently linked to the Great 9/11 Gatekeeping Community. Your childish attitude is a clear give-away of this fact.
Yep. Your first banishment of me for calling you "Mr. Jayhan": most childish.
What was the reason this second time around? Not the manufactured reason but the real reason. That I called you on your manufactured griefs with other branches of 9/11 research? Or that you don't have the intelligence or rhetorical skills to take down directed energy weapons and Dr. Judy Wood's work? Better suffer the embarrassment of a lame excuse for banishment than endure defeats in the debates, eh?
Bottom line, Mr. Jayhan, you seem to exhibit very little respect for 9/11 Truth.
Am I wrong? Prove me wrong.
Re-enable my DupedUsefulI avatar. Or if that is really too hot for you to handle, then at least respect the truth and let me have & manage my subscription, but ban my postings.
Come on, Mr. Jayhan. Prove you aren't a gatekeeper. Let me back in.
Sincerely,
Duped? Useful? I.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
3 comments:
There are science gatekeepers absolutely everywhere online.
I've been a member of several Christian forums and there is always at least one or two hugely qualified members of 'scientism' who's job is to squash any and all debate that exposes the New World Order and/or evidence of a creator God.
They are usually supported by a team of useful idiots who may or may not know what they are doing.
I had my very own gatekeeper join my forum. Heres the discussion:
http://christian-wilderness.forumvi.com/t146-occultic-gatekeepers-on-science-section-of-christian-forums
Great blog by the way.
I was banned from LRF for telling Phil that he needed to take anger management classes. He banned me for that. Then I added an ip masker to my browser, and opened a new account on LRF. Then I gave him a piece of my mind, which he actually posted. This time though, they just disabled my login. I was in the military. I know how info control works. Phil Jayhan is a gatekeeper for some alphabet government organization. I won't speculate which one.
Unknown, just a thought, you were in the military and you are an expert on how info control works, Good, then you will be invaluable when we have to take these cretins on down the road.
Post a Comment