Flyermay wrote:

thoreau wrote:
Thanks for that thoreau.
We just gotta hope that if we make any "dodgy" comments on the forum, then the members/mods will NOT make the "wrong" decisions (in the eyes of the NWO "law" enforcers).

But yeah I like the sound of how this forum is run. I outta really read the forum rules sometime

I never read forum rules...

Is that bad?

I'm extremely well behaved anyway

Space Bandit wrote:

Steevo wrote:
Steevo - can I ask you something? Why the hell were you banned??

You had like a billion posts, never seemed to do anything against any rules and then suddenly you were gone. I always wondered but of course it was verboten to speak of such things.

feather wrote:
Sean can make any rule he likes any time he likes to ban anyone he likes; no matter how ridiculous it is, like watching other forums to see what you say about them.

But don't tell them that an elected government has passed a law to monitor hatred on the internet... oh, no; that's pure fascism!!!! How can anyone monitor the internet to prevent "free speech". Sean creating his own arbitrary "internet monitoring rules" for banning members is the right way to do it.

They're so full of shit, it's not even worth it pointing out something so obvious.

And by the way... I completely lost my internet connection for 5 minutes.

Sean, will you stop with your psychic attacks???

dogsmilk wrote:
Basically cos Daisy, and I_am and various other mods who shall remain nameless but they know who they are They have no power here! - Anyway they took an intense dislike to me (probably cos I asked too many awkward questions/statements ages back in support of "inactive" (banned) members after PMgate1) and a long time later they started UNJUSTIFIABLY deleting my posts and threads and giving me points etc. I questioned them and asked them why, but it was futile. They wouldnt let me post just basic stuff, kept picking fault with things I posted and closed threads, so obviously my days were numbered. Glad I'm outta that crap. I still like what Ickey is doing, just dont like that forum and the plonkers who run it.

Flyermay wrote:
The behavior and attitude displayed in this thread by some people is in direct opposition to anything I represent or find acceptable! If this is considered a good example of the way members here conduct themselves, and treat a forum that was clearly setup against the activity on display in this thread, it speaks volumes.

On the plus side it is a perfect example of the vulgarity certain people are capable of, and the rather perverse view they hold of themselves, their pack and their collective attitudes.

I wonder how people would feel if they opened their doors to people to share and shortly after gaining entry they busy themselves smeared shit all over the walls and treading it into the carpets.

I'm no fan of Sean or the things he has done in the past but some of the activity in this thread is a disgrace! There are also far more decent people over at DIF than the false impression in this thread suggests. That is the beauty of this extreme stance it fucks over everyone at the same time.

I can't stand moderation or censorship and this thread is a good demonstration of why I feel it is negative to prevent people from expressing themselves. It's quite clear that both extremes are equally vile, twisted and irrational not that many will never manage to see what is so glaringly obvious to any discerning observer.

A member here passed a comment about there being no need for money and that the world should be fine if people just scratched each others backs. Well the team that set this site up did that and other people were also kind enough to contribute money which they could probably have put to good use for themselves. I can't speak for all those people or the rest of the team - but I will say that I feel thoroughly disappointed that my efforts have not been met with the same spirit as they were given.

Space Bandit wrote:
David Icke Forum Extends Mandate To Entire Internet

After months of legal wrangling, it was announced today that the David Icke Forum Targeted Area Recording Data Bill had passed successfully through parliment, heralding enforcement of the new DIFTARD Law. This legislation extends the right of the DIF to monitor all communications on the internet by utilising the Eschelon facility at Menwith Hill in an unprecendented agreement with the American National Security Agency. Speaking from inside a magic circle to protect him from psychic Zionists, Mt Sean Asl commented
"Membership of the David Icke forum now extends to to your entire life. And I simply will not abide anybody saying anything I disapprove of. Those are the rules. They are my rules and I am in charge." The Bill faltered after a controversial passage allowing all postal mai sent and recieved by DIF members to be opened and checked by DIF forum moderators to check for any signs of crimethink had to be dropped to allow the Bill to pass, though it is anticipated these will resubmitted in a new proposed amendment than also enables microphones to be placed in your house that may be randomly listened to at any time by Ex Sheep sitting outside your home in a van with a big rotating dish on top of it. These will monitor conversations for any anti-DIF comments. Claims recordings of you shagging may also be made proprty of DIFCorp were fervently denied.
"David Icke is committed to the principles of freedom of speech, the free exchange of ideas and people not abusing any position of authority. In the spirit of this, I must therefore ensure these values are protected by monitoring anything you say on the internet and eventually anywhere, ever by any medium in case I happen not to like it. And of course I will also prevent any manisfestation of hatred or prejudice. Unless it's about the Jews. You can say what you like about Jews. And if you don't like that, well soon we'll be able to cut off your broadband if you complain. At least that's what I'm hoping."

Steevo wrote:
So basically you were bullied for asking the wrong questions.

Cheers for that. It bemused me because I couldn't see any reason why it would have happened.

dogsmilk wrote:

Frog wrote:
I'm not sure if you are referring to me; but don't think I went out of the way telling what happened to be considered vulgar and vile. I just thought the ex-members would like to know the full story.

If it bothered you guys, just tell me and I'll stop... if you are referring to someone else; well, forget I ever asked.

dogsmilk wrote:
Yeah pretty much. Daisy bans people like me, but it's ok for idiots to post pro-nazi threads and other shit all over the place!

But like I keep saying, did me a favour really

Flyermay wrote:
It's not aimed at any one person in particular - people can wear which ever cap they like. Anyone reading the thread will draw their own conclusions and form their own opinions. Like I said I can't speak for others.

Frog wrote:
But did you mean, it's aimed at a group of people including me?

I don't even know what you are referring to exactly; and I'm really puzzled by what you mean by vulgar and vile. Don't even know if you're including me or not (I'm the OP and you said that in answer to my comment on moderation)...

What's going on?

Flyermay wrote: Flyermay wrote:
With freedom comes responsibility.

If you're not sure if you're associated with what I said maybe you should review your posts and see what impression you give.

The reason your post was quoted is because the content I bolded struck me.

The other point I was trying to make is that it matters not what cap you think you wear. Others people may not see you in the same cap.

Frog wrote:
I dont like Sean and I dont like the way that he has conducted himself, but I would not try to bring destruction upon him or the people of the Icke forum,, and the destruction of the wider group who have been labelled wrongly as "conspiracy theorists". I may not like those pro-nazi posters/posts (whom I reckon are possibily loud-mouthed infultators), but I personally would not use THEM AND THEIR POSTS as a means of destroying the reputaion of "conspiracy theorists" including David Icke and many good genuine people on here and on the Icke Forum.

I believe in Freedom of Speech (with individual responsibility)

Steevo wrote: Speaking for myself, as i've already said I think it's the toleration and integration of Nazi views that runs the risk of destroying the reputation (if there is such a thing) of conspiracy theorists. I've said before there needs to be clear blue water.

Frog wrote:
Well, what I'm not sure is if you in particular are referring to me or not with that post (individually or in group); people always get the most varied impressions on me; there's nothing I can do about that, so it doesn't really bother me. What's puzzling me is what exactly you found vulgar and vile from what I said... if you were referring to me with those terms -individually or in group-.

But I've been looking at my posts anyway:
- I told the story as it was
- I'm certainly not the first one who posts here about the DIF or Sean, nor I'll be the last.
- I reasoned what I believe and explain why I believe it, and even asked for different opinions.
- yes... I joked about Sean and the psychic attacks; but that is funny.
- and it's also true I was also told that about the moderation on this forum.

And no one complained or even disagreed for 15 pages.... So, I am really puzzled...

Am I being unreasonable for asking?