[Imc-uk-features] Unhidden: Conspiraloons, Ravers and Peace Activists

[guidoreports at riseup.net]

Couldnt care less how many lists you are subscribed to Danny. I could
happily describe your 'writing' as paranoid and call you a wanker to your
face. With regard to your mental state, many people have drawn some
unfortunate conclusions about you. I however, am not one of them. I am not
a shrink nor do I pretend to be.


> Guido,
>
> Medical conditions are best diagnosed face to face, by medical staff.  It
> is hardly paranoid for me to say remove me from the list if you want to
> insult me, since you had just called me a paranoid wanker, hardly a term
> of endearment.  I wasn't sure you knew I was reading that and thought it
> would be underhand not to let you know I was.
>
> I was trying humourously to show I could shrug that insult off but that I
> fully understand if I'm removed from the list for this discussion.
>
> Now if you've got a sense of humour you'd have to acknowledge your "This
> will NEVER happen while I am still breathing" is very similar to Charlton
> Hestons "From my cold, dead hands" gun rant.    If not, I'd politely
> suggest you aren't the best person to judge my mental state.
>
> cheers,
> Danny
>
>
> guidoreports at riseup.net wrote: "BTW feel free to remove this email address
> from the list so you can
> insult me without having to justify it."
>
> What did I say about a certain person being paranoid?
>
> Actually Danny you are just not that important. My complaint was about
> moderation not you. You are just one of the many irritating individuals
> who sees IMC UK as their personal conspiracy forum.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Thats the same Danny, by the way, who tries to publish
>> moderators personal email addresses and recently publically described
>> Chris and ftp as a pair of 'fucking morons'.
>> Apologies to Chris and ftp if I called them 'fucking morons'.  I don't
>> recall doing that but it is quite possible I did in anger.  I've never
>> met
>> either of them but have a lot of respect for their IM stuff, especially
>> ftp's radio interview with Joe Black which I have been distributing on
>> CD.
>>  As for publishing moderators personal email addresses, I don't have any
>> to publish and wouldn't if I did.  Not every post under the name Danny
>> is
>> mine btw even if some of them pretend to be.
>>
>> I'd get angry a helluva lot less if the collective didn't disappear and
>> reappear articles in an inconsistent manner.
>>
>> As for my article being a vehicle to attack my critics, I have never
>> before been criticised by Citpecs, criticised them, or interacted with
>> them in anyway before this.  I do think it was worth commenting that the
>> first ammendment wasn't intended to protect US state depts
>> propagandising
>> lies, and also that Nimmo was wrong to describe wikipedia as a
>> front-organistation.  I see that as balanced rather than paranoid but if
>> that offends anyone then feel free to edit the article to remove it.  As
>> for being paranoid, I can prove my family and I were taken into police
>> questioning for an anonymous post on IM I was alleged to have made - can
>> any of you say that ?
>>
>> I am not a 911er but think it is newsworthy that Fisk is prepared to
>> state
>> his doubts publicly.  It isn't the first Fisk article to be referenced
>> or
>> quoted here but it is the first to draw such flak.  I'd agree that it
>> would be better if quoted in full though, I doubt either Fisk or the
>> Independent would complain, but the link is there if people are curious.
>> Nobody would seriously believe Fisk posted that here himself,
>>
>> A couple of years ago I used to attack the amount of pointless 911 stuff
>> posted here, it used to dominate the wire as they generally never posted
>> under existing threads.  That is far from the case now. They are posting
>> responsibly about actions  and demos and  whether you agree with them or
>> not, they are activists as much as anyone else.
>>
>> BTW feel free to remove this email address from the list so you can
>> insult
>> me without having to justify it.
>>
>>
>> guidoreports at riseup.net wrote: Personally I think it should be rehidden.
>> It is non-news.
>>
>> I also cant help noticing that someone has put Fisk's article up having
>> censored all the bits they dont like (like first few paragraphs which
>> take
>> the piss out of the conpiracy theorists). This has been promoted as an
>> addition. Did Fisk put this up himself?? Of course not. Do our editorial
>> guidlines allow individuals to impersonate real people? Surely that
>> breaks
>> the 'misleading rule'?
>>
>> Danny's paranoid rant is nothing more than a vehicle used to have a go
>> at
>> his critics. Thats the same Danny, by the way, who tries to publish
>> moderators personal email addresses and recently publically described
>> Chris and ftp as a pair of 'fucking morons'. So why encourage this
>> wanker?
>> Why defend certain peoples right to bombarde a newswire with non news??
>>
>> Chris it is my opinion that you are willfully abusing your position as
>> an
>> IMC moderator to push your own political agenda. That agenda being the
>> promotion of your all important conspiracy theories; and moving IMC UK
>> in
>> a direction where it becomes a mouthpiece for them. This will NEVER
>> happen
>> while I am still breathing.
>>
>> G.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I have unhidden this article:
>>>
>>> - Conspiraloons, Ravers and Peace Activists
>>>   Danny
>>>   https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/379676.html
>>>
>>> Ben hid it with this reason:
>>>
>>>   ben - hidden, inaccurate, non news rant
>>>   "The proof it isn't is that wikipedia has always
>>>   published the IP's of contributors in the hope that
>>>   somebody would one day expose the changes made by the
>>>   CIA and other nefarious organisations and
>>>   corporations." - crap
>>>
>>> I think it's an interesting article, I didn't know that
>>> Robert Fisk had come out for 9/11 truth:
>>>
>>>   What about the third tower – the so-called World Trade
>>>   Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) –
>>>   which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at
>>>   5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to
>>>   the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American
>>>   National Institute of Standards and Technology was
>>>   instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of
>>>   all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC
>>>   7. Two prominent American professors of mechanical
>>>   engineering – very definitely not in the "raver"
>>>   bracket – are now legally challenging the terms of
>>>   reference of this final report on the grounds that it
>>>   could be "fraudulent or deceptive"
>>>
>>>   http://news.independent.co.uk/fisk/article2893860.ece
>>>
>>> The article also talks about the uncovering of various
>>> agencies, government and corporate bodies who have been
>>> caught red handed editing things on wikipedia via the new
>>> wikiscanner tool:
>>>
>>>   http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/
>>>
>>> And goes on to say that it is "wrong to describe wikipedia
>>> as an intelligence front", rather "it is a battlefront in
>>> the war between information and disinformation". I think
>>> this is essentially correct thought I'd phrase it
>>> differently, I'd say that the Wikipedia, like Indmedia are
>>> part of the terrain that the information war is being
>>> fought across.
>>>
>>> The quote that Ben cites as being "crap" doesn't actually
>>> make sense to me, "The proof it isn't is", but the
>>> sentance before this and the one after are the ones I have
>>> quoted from above and these do make sense and are not crap.
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> --
>>> Aktivix -- Free Software for a Free World
>>>
>>> --
>>> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
>>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>>
>>
>> --
>> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>  Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now.
>> --
>> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>
>
> --
> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>  For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this
> month.
> --
> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features