Welcome
Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

"Eeeeeuuuuuuu, these guys make my skin crawl"

tinfoil by association

Re: I liked the old site better

Unread postby socrates » Tue Jun 03, 2008 5:45 pm

I edited out some curse words and fixed the typos.

What you shouldn't have done is yet again state in public what was said in an email. Et in Arcadia Ego did that to me at Gastronamus Cafe. I went after him in the private section. I had finally figured out that he was a Deborah/Foot Soldier clone. They are the debunkers in chemmie clothes. Then Arcadia Ego ripped me in public. That's not fair. Please stop doing that. Or start threads in the admin. section.




[quote="may41970"]Yeah, I liked the old "All aircraft" site better. Without all the neat sections and their pictures.


Lophofo said it looks good. If you have suggestions for replacements, that's cool. I agree with you about the old day look. It was simple with no ads. The peace picture is from a Jimmy Carter affiliated website, a center for peace or something. Dr. Evil is funny. I thought of the second chemtrail forum because Cpellat's paper that Don Harkins butchered wasn't even really on chemtrails. It was about other **** to show that the US govt. can rationalize doing a lot of devious things regardless of consequences to human life. The top chemtrail icon is a duplicate, a new one could go there. I think the sections make sense. But anyone with suggestions is free to offer them in the It Happens section.




I liked it better when me and socrates banned posters we didn't trust; didn't feel right about. We followed our intuition. Maybe right, maybe wrong. But at least we were being true to ourselves.

Now, it seems this place is trying to be "fair to all" whatever that means. No problem to let people come in and post about Bilderburg and other freaking nonsense.




Yeah, in the old days, Lucid Dreamer, Isard, and Xerox would be gone. I pm'ed you that I was unhappy with the Bilderberg thing. I'm not sure why you are making assumptions about "this place."




In the interest of being "fair," socrates has opened his doors to people to post nutty stuff. He has made this site look like every other site because...because the pressure to cave in and try to fit in with whatever is "normal" on the internet is pretty strong.


I responded on that Bilderberg thread. I'm gonna move it away from the news section. I can't ban him for that one, imho.




I did a google search on chemtrails today, and I visted links down to to several hundred. Most, if not all, are filled with kooky ****.


Check out my new thread in the top section. There's a photo of a plane spewing out a small chemtrail. It looks like a hoax, but I downloaded a pdf from some Indian dude into weather modification. People are playing God with the weather all across the globe. That's a real picture. It shows that chemtrails isn't some crazy idea, just like most of the rest of the top section.



What's up with the "Dr. Evil" section?


It's pretty obvious that forum could emerge into a science/chemtrails section. If you're offended by the Dr. Evil icon, please give me some suggestions. There are gonna be icons there anyway, might as well make them look good.

I liked it better when people like sluggo and isard weren't allowed here.


Sluggo is too busy to come back. I think you should lay off of Isard and give him a chance. You're living in a glass house. You posted a lot on conspiracy theories at WRH Unofficial. You posting on Margie Shoedinger {sp?} or "faked moon landings" was just as bad as any Bilderberg post.




Now soc tells me I don't add up. I've been through this too many times and I'm used to it. And I don't blame him.


I had questions for you in private. Now you are dragging them into public. That's not playing fair.

You made a recent post at Debate Both Sides linking to a thread you started at Chemtrail Central in their new public forum. You didn't explain that I had started a thread there also. Mine has been locked and put into the administration section. One of the reasons I decided to stop posting there was because of your thread. You wrote in the extra word guest. That was foolish. Just like when you signed off of a post once with my signature line of "chemtrails are real, chemtrail forums are not."

I feel it is obvious we are two separate people. But for you to make such mistakes has made me wonder about your true intentions. I can somewhat accept your explanation for typing in guest like I did, that it felt like the word anonymous for the situation. But to not link to my thread at DBS was some kind of red flag. Not telling me that they had moved my posts at CTC was a red flag. Your outbursts at this forum are a red flag.



People like Carole and Unknown News and Bradblog. They are good people, perhaps, but they don't understand what's going on here in the world of forums.


One could say that you are a fake trying to get everyone to be full of doubts. They could perhaps think you are a divider/conqueror type. It's not very nice to Carole, Brad, or Unknown News to question their goodness. They have different mindsets.

Do you think because they don't see the patterns we do, that they are completely oblivious to our observations? They know about trolls. They just haven't studied the science of them like we did. 8)




Let's fight the impossible fight and try to keep this place clean, even if we f*** up somethimes. Let's avoid what we surmise to be kooky. Period.

Let "All Aircraft" be the only real chemtrail message board.


That's the plan.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

On Second Thought

Unread postby socrates » Tue Jun 03, 2008 6:00 pm

I'm just looking at Isard's "9/11 is an inside job" post on the Cpellat story, and may41970's anger is making more sense. I am curious why Isard is pumping a lot of "conspiracy chatter" into the equation here. I'm not trying to run anyone off, but there's got to be a way to protect the forum without censorship.

Those top two sections do need to be protected. Here is Isard's post I just deleted:

screenshot #1
screenshot #2
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: On Second Thought

Unread postby Isard » Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:55 am

socrates wrote:I'm just looking at Isard's "9/11 is an inside job" post on the Cpellat story, and may41970's anger is making more sense. I am curious why Isard is pumping a lot of "conspiracy chatter" into the equation here. I'm not trying to run anyone off, but there's got to be a way to protect the forum without censorship.


It was not my intention to write about "conspiracies".
It is OK that you have deleted the post if you consider it damaged the image of the forum. Obviously you, have more "common sense" (or experience on debunkers) to understand the effects of writing about such topics.

Let me anyway say that 9/11 was an inside job (do you honestly have any doubts?)

Also, I find the film I mentioned is very well documented and centered.
Just compare it with the AJones one (which is, as everything he does, just "big noise" with no sense at all).

But I agree completely that the forum must focus on weather modification, and be as tinfoil free as possible.

I won't post on such conspiracy topics anymore.

Thanks for not banning me.

isard
User avatar
Isard
truth warrior
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Uruguay

Unread postby socrates » Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:25 pm

Thanks Isard for understanding what we are trying to accomplish.

The American Free Press is a rag. I am not positive about the 9/11, but I am fairly sure there are disinformation agents all over the internet spreading "the Joos did it" and other such nonsense. I didn't use the link to get into 9/11. It was just to show exactly who these people are who messed with Cpellatt's paper.

If you haven't read the WRH forum thread, you might want to. We got attacked by the same kind of nutjobs. Those same people created fake socrates and may41970s. They astroturfed crazy **** that's documented on that thread. They scrubbed and deleted, but we were able to screenshot the most important evidence of their crazy scam.

They were trying to make it seem that I personally was Mossad or a disinfo agent or whatever they were trying to do. It's a long, convoluted story yet is one that we have preserved from going down the memory hole.

We are not a conspiracy forum. Thanks for respecting that. We expect the best sources to be used unless one is doing an expose.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby Isard » Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:48 am

[quote="socrates"]Thanks Isard for understanding what we are trying to accomplish.


I certainly do, and share the same objectives.


If you haven't read the WRH forum thread, you might want to. We got attacked by the same kind of nutjobs. Those same people created fake socrates and may41970s. They astroturfed crazy **** that's documented on that thread. They scrubbed and deleted, but we were able to screenshot the most important evidence of their crazy scam.


Where can I read that forum thread? (in fact I do not know what "WRH" means, suppose it's an old forum?) :?

We are not a conspiracy forum. Thanks for respecting that. We expect the best sources to be used unless one is doing an expose.


Aboslutely agree and understand. Let's focus on weather mod.

isard
User avatar
Isard
truth warrior
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Uruguay

Unread postby socrates » Thu Jun 05, 2008 2:23 pm

Isard wrote:
Where can I read that forum thread? (in fact I do not know what "WRH" means, suppose it's an old forum?) :?



What Really Happened is a website run by Michael Rivero. There was a disgusting place called the WRH "Unofficial" Forum. Rivero tried to act dumb about it, but he prominently linked to it and the "Unofficial" forum archived his letters from readers.

The thread in question can be found here:
allaircraftarenotinvolved.freeforums.org/the-wrh-messageboard

If you go to the last post on page eight, there is a saved thread that can only be read here. In it one can pretty much see how a nobody like me was victimized. I hadn't known anything about that forum. May41970 was a regular there as "Will Kane," the character from High Noon. Then he started the above thread after a poster named "Ender" exposed himself as an agent provocateur. Because we exposed that place, they were forced to delete and scub it. They came back for a time, but because I was able to take screenshots and expose their rubbish, the place finally closed up for good a few months back.

It's a long thread, even that last post on page 8 is a lot, but if one looks into this, they can understand a lot about the cybersmear attacks against this forum and myself. May41970 was also victimized, and I think he never recovered from it. I've advised him to get over it, yet he doesn't seem capable of putting it behind himself..

I am getting tired of his outbursts, although I understand them. It's unfortunate that he doesn't have the strength to be a hero and has instead let the dark side turn him into such a bitter presence.

That is one of our best threads and has more views than any other. Back in June, 2007, free forums went down for a bit and we lost three weeks, so the view hits are even greater than it appears.

Rivero and these others are no different than Harkins, Willis Carto, and all these other propagandists who spread divide and conquer hatred and disinformation.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:20 pm

(on edit: May41970 needed to be turned into a guest and get his *** booted off this board. His last attempts to cause division between myself, Isard, and Lophofo were the final straws. He had a chance to guest post, but all indications are that he has been a mole. I do think he is a fake and zero posts are wanted from such paid posers. The plan is to merge all the Taiwan threads into one. 9/5/08}

I have decided to deactivate may41970's access to his username. I am not going to turn him into a guest, because he has made a lot of posts and helped start this place.

I don't think he is a fake. I don't think he is a bad guy. But the outbursts have been too much. He also has been a bit too offensive to some of the other members.

I've tried to be patient. Yet he hasn't followed through with his word that he would make this his home and post more often. He also has consistently left me hanging on threads. In private he would lead me on quite often with the idea that he would be adding his two cents, but he rarely followed through. Often he would provide me with links and ideas in the emails without posting them. I simply don't have the time to check out his leads. He should have made posts instead of dumping such links and ideas on me. Since he does not have the ability to respond, I will leave it at that.

I am not saying people have to post a lot to keep their posting privileges. In short, this just isn't working out any longer with may41970.

Since the dates on his Taiwan photos are wrong, I am going to move two of the Taiwan chemtrail threads back to this section. I do think his story is for real. So, his original thread on this topic will remain in the top forum. I wish him well and hope he can realise that this is for the best.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby cpellatt » Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:23 am

Hello may41970, and everyone else involved in this discussion. I do completely understand what you are saying about the internet being a vacant place as far as real information goes. I've never used the internet very much for research. It really only pays if you're a member of a legit scientific or data based search engine. The free stuff that comes up with advertising loading first feels as legit to me as watching a tv show to get information provided by the advertisers.

And as Socrates alluded to, the search engines are full of s**t ( I'm taking artistic license here ) . I noticed the same thing he did-that different engines return completely different results. How could that be, if they are truly searching based on a statistical algorithm.

The internet is also a place where people can hide behind anonymity, false identities, and ulterior motives. I don't know if the issue is that I am too kind and therefore either trust people or don't want to offend them by ejecting them from a website or forum. In my specific case, it's more a question of preserving my energies for what I do well; research and artistic expression of unpleasant facts. For me, if this was my forum, I don't think I'd bother kicking people off unless they were causing division amongst the members. But then, I don't feel my task has ever been to expose imposters.

I see myself as swimming laps in the ocean and I have to stay focused on my task despite the distractions.

I also feel that, for me, the jury is out as to whether or not people who bring up Bilderburg or depopulation are bad for the movement. I just had this discussion with someone the other day. Let's take for instance, the issue of mind control. I don't want to get into a discussion about whether we think this exists, but let's say someone like me has been doing research for 15 years about secret, corrupt, or immoral government policies. Well, the CIA's MKULTRA program was a big deal where I'm from in Montreal because they were doing it at one of our psychiatric hospitals. It was a huge scandal and the Canadian and American Governments were successfully sued over it by the victims. I wasn't looking for proof that mind control exists. I just happen to live in a city where a real and not imagined government mind control program was proven to have taken place.

I don't mention the government program on my web site, other than a link to some information about this program. And I'm careful to stick to the subject when I'm discussing chemtrails.

Let's take another example. Let's say I believed 911 was an inside job based on research I had been doing for a decade or two before it ever happened. Does that mean I can't be of use to the legit chemtrail community? Or does it mean that if I want to be taken seriously about chemtrails, I have to shut up about other serious research I've done?

Here's the dilemma: The government is actually involved in many programs and operations that people call "conspiracy theories". They are as guilty as hell of many of the accusations about them. So I think it's unfair to say to people that have researched these issues that you have to believe that chemtrails is the only secret program wreaking havoc on the population that the government has been involved in. I just don't think that's realistic.

Granted, when I wanted some legit information on the internet about aerosol spraying, I personally disregarded sites that went off to loopy-land and tied in alien abductions to chemtrails.

And on the subject of "conspiracy theories"; that is THE stupidest, most ignorant, misused, and overused expression in the world. It's on par with calling someone a terrorist. You only do it to defer attention away from yourself and onto them. It has been my experience 100% of the time that people who use the expression "conspiracy theory" are ignorant, non-researchers who want to look like they know something. That's when I tell them that the oneness is on them to prove that they are not spraying, and not on me to prove that they are spraying.

So now maybe we've established that there may be other issues that the government is involved in that they are trying to keep from the public. That means it's up to the moderator to decide which issues to allow and not allow, and that is a form of censorship because it's based on a personal and not standardized judgement.

In conclusion, I would like to say that you brought up many legitimate points. I can't argue them, but I also feel that if the people running the forum have a pure purpose in exposing chemtrails, no matter what they do, the spooks will try to discredit them anyway. So, as I stated before, maybe the standard needs to be based on the disruption factor of the forum.

Thanks for caring about it, and I respect that you can honestly and candidly say that Socrates may never trust you by virtue of your introduction to each other via the anonymous internet. I feel very much like it's hard to trust anyone behind the facade of computer technology, but we have to move forward in this endeavor, so maybe the key is to handle it in a manner that best preserves your energies. Because we don't stand a chance against the spin machine no matter how pure we are about. So wading through people's posts regarding conspiratorial topics is very much like stepping on or over twigs, branches and debris when hiking through a forest. It may slow you momentarily, but you just dispassionately step over them and continue on your way.

Lastly, I don't know if I am at all right about this. I only know the way I see it.

truly,
carole
cpellatt
 

Unread postby socrates » Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:57 pm

cpellatt wrote:I've never used the internet very much for research. It really only pays if you're a member of a legit scientific or data based search engine. The free stuff that comes up with advertising loading first feels as legit to me as watching a tv show to get information provided by the advertisers.



May41970 is no longer a member here. It just wasn't working out.

The going theory is that there are astroturfers over every nook and cranny perverting freedom of association. The famous phrase for this is "raising the noise to signal ratio."


And as Socrates alluded to, the search engines are full of s**t ( I'm taking artistic license here ) . I noticed the same thing he did-that different engines return completely different results. How could that be, if they are truly searching based on a statistical algorithm.



Google seems either rigged or gamed. Yahoo, from what I've seen, has been very fair to this place.




For me, if this was my forum, I don't think I'd bother kicking people off unless they were causing division amongst the members. But then, I don't feel my task has ever been to expose imposters.


I'm trying to be like BradBlog.

Two Rules:
*** Don't be mean to other members.
*** Do not knowingly pass disinformation.


I see myself as swimming laps in the ocean and I have to stay focused on my task despite the distractions.

I also feel that, for me, the jury is out as to whether or not people who bring up Bilderburg or depopulation are bad for the movement. I just had this discussion with someone the other day. Let's take for instance, the issue of mind control. I don't want to get into a discussion about whether we think this exists, but let's say someone like me has been doing research for 15 years about secret, corrupt, or immoral government policies. Well, the CIA's MKULTRA program was a big deal where I'm from in Montreal because they were doing it at one of our psychiatric hospitals. It was a huge scandal and the Canadian and American Governments were successfully sued over it by the victims. I wasn't looking for proof that mind control exists. I just happen to live in a city where a real and not imagined government mind control program was proven to have taken place.

I don't mention the government program on my web site, other than a link to some information about this program. And I'm careful to stick to the subject when I'm discussing chemtrails.



This is how the disinfo tries to wear us down into catch 22's. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't cliches.

It was more than f&%*ed up what Don Harkins {with those ties to Willis Carto} did to your paper. But we got the word out.

There is no chemtrail movement on the internet. The #1 search engine result for chemtrails, Chemtrail Central, is 100% compromised. It is beyond ludicrous the amount of crazy spam that exists on this topic. Before we even met, I had seen how The Idaho Observer was a rubbish source. They had that big to do with an article mentioning Senator Harkins and that all these crazy chemicals including cancer were found. They've also in the past hawked for educate-yourself.org and their whackjob material. The rabbithole runs deep.

Let's take another example. Let's say I believed 911 was an inside job based on research I had been doing for a decade or two before it ever happened. Does that mean I can't be of use to the legit chemtrail community? Or does it mean that if I want to be taken seriously about chemtrails, I have to shut up about other serious research I've done?



For the 9/11, wasn't there some kind of put option movement? That implies inside knowledge.



It has been my experience 100% of the time that people who use the expression "conspiracy theory" are ignorant, non-researchers who want to look like they know something. That's when I tell them that the oneness is on them to prove that they are not spraying, and not on me to prove that they are spraying.



blackboxvoting.org/diebold-PRmachine.pdf

Rob Pelletier was proven to be a paid fake from Diebold working the Democratic Undergound. Forums do get gamed. The #1 forum, DailyKos, is run by a fake progressive, Markos Zuniga. He is pro-CIA and a big fan of Ronald Reagan.

Debunkers like Jay Reynolds are up to their neck with years of collusion with scripted debate. A concerted effort was made from the start to control how this topic would be portrayed on the internet, imho.

The onus is on the debunkers to show us commercial aircraft creating fake cloud cover. They can't. Anyone who has ever witnessed an onslaught of chemtrails can tell that the activities were deliberate.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby cpellatt » Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:43 am

Yes, I was thinking about the "Damned if you do, damned if you don't.", today. It seems the trap that chemmies get into is to disregard chemmies that research other government transgressions against the people. But that's what the dubunkers do as well. Kind of ironic that two completely different and opposing groups agree to ostracize someone because of their broad-based research.

Now, I do realize that there is also the "newbie" chemmie. We were once newbies. And for some people who have never researched anything about the wrong doings by their government, the revelation of a spray program opens their eyes so wide that their indoctrination starts tumbling like dominos. Then the next thing you know they are reading about mind control, illuminati, black helicopters, Roswell, concentration camps in the U.S., etc. And they believe everything they read at first. This happens for a few reasons; first of all, their matrix has been shattered. Once the safety bubble of, "your government would never do anything to harm you" is shattered, the reaction tends to be to believe every accusation against the government that anyone makes. Couple this with the total lack of experience researching. People that are new to chemtrails and new to research have no ability to disseminate information, no instinct to question sources of information, no linguistic filtering system, and no authoritative point of view.

So this person experiences an awakening due to the blatant nature of chemtrails and that makes them a target for disinfo. And Socrates, you did bring up a good point-in regards to the Idaho Observer fiasco. It's the age old question: Was there deliberate disinfo on their part or just blundering and amateurish work? That's a tough question and one that I don't trust myself to answer.

When I spoke to them on the phone, they seemed very sincere about what they were doing. We spoke for a good amount of time, twice. They were flustered by the fact that it's just the two of them that put the paper out, and they sounded genuinely busy and laborious. That impression sticks in my head when trying to discern their motives.
cpellatt
 

PreviousNext

Return to Chemtrails Are Not Kooky!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred