Thread 2 of "Daily Kos purges "Tinfoilhatters" from DU'er "Geek Tragedy."

[KoKo]

Those of us with "Dial Up" are having a hard time following this so a new thread might make sense.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1915949&mesg_id=1915949



http://dailykos.com/story/2005/7/8/114856/8349

<snip>
Today I did something I've never done before (not even during the Fraudster mess), and wish I'd never had to do.

I made a mass banning of people perpetuating a series of bizarre, off-the-wall, unsupported and frankly embarassing conspiracy theories.

I have a high tolerance level for material I deem appropriate for this site, but one thing I REFUSE to allow is bullshit conspiracy theories. You know the ones -- Bush and Blair conspired to bomb London in order to take the heat off their respective political problems. I can't imagine what fucking world these people live in, but it sure ain't the Reality Based Community.

So I banned these people, and those that have been recommending diaries like it. And I will continue to do so until the purge is complete, and make no mistake -- this is a purge.

This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home. This isn't it.

Update: I've been reinstating some of the banned accounts as they email me. Some people wondered why there wasn't any warning. There have been warnings from others -- repeated pleadings for people to ground themselves in reality.

It's telling that I have NEVER done something like this before. Because this has been an extreme situation. This isn't about disagreeing with what people are saying. If that was the case, everyone would've been banned by now. The myth of the "echo chamber" is just that. A myth.

But as for warnings, well, this has been my warning. I wanted it clear that I was serious, and I think that has come through. I am reinstating those who ask to be reinstated. But the message has been sent.

[aquart]

1. Oh. Didn't think it was that unreal.

But, fine. Whatever.

[TheGoodCitizen]

8. Nor did I

:shrug:

[AX10]

2. If you disagree with KOS's actions, then I advise you boycott the site.

If you support him, then keep on visiting him.

[geek tragedy]

4. I completely agree. The Internet is a giant place--there are millions

of places to post.

[AX10]

21. I may consider boycotting Kos.

[TheGoodCitizen]

26. See post #23 on this thread...

[geek tragedy]

33. That's certainly your right. Every site has to define its own mission.

Not everyone is going to agree with Kos's mission. Nor do they have to.

[LittleClarkie]

86. I tried to suggest a system similar to what we have here

and then some of them dumped on DU, saying it was full of trolls and that there was too much censorship.

But gee, Skinner never had to have a purge.

[justinsb]

3. As I said

If anyone has any real information, or even strong theories about who conducted the bombings and why I believe there are some police officers in London who would LOVE to hear from you. As for me, I'm waiting for there to BE and official story, before I start to question the official story. Perhaps that makes me naive and gullible, but not even being in London, much less at the bomb sites I don't believe that I have any crucial information to add at this point, except to send my fondest thoughts and best wishes to those affected by these bombings and the ones happening every day in Iraq.

[geek tragedy]

5. Amen. I should add that no one knows what happened yet--it could

wind up being thugs from the BNP for all we know.

[TheGoodCitizen]

11. I do know something that HAS happened...

Whoever DID carry out the bombings used HIGH Explosives and the bombings were carried out with Military precision... it's gotta make some people wonder!

(edit: And the timing - DSM, Plame, etc, etc) (edit2: spelling)

[geek tragedy]

12. You have proof there was military permission for the bombings?

You'll be famous! When are you going to reveal the evidence?

[havocmom]

16. ^"Military persission" NOT permission

Ya might look closely before ya jump on somebody. OK, charge 'em for misspelling 'precision' but back off the smart alack stuff!

[TheGoodCitizen]

19. I just now caught that...

after I replied. Too funny!

(edit: THANKS for sticking up for the new guy...and I fixed my grammar mistake!):hi:

[havocmom]

24. Welcome aboard, TheGoodCitizen! It's the DU, what can I say?

Some days, everybody loves ya, some days they all hate ya. Some days they go both ways.

Just gotta let ya know, I'm the Typo Queen around here! I can spot them almost as fast as I can make them. ;)

[TheGoodCitizen]

27. Thanks for the warm welcome....

glad to be here! :)

[geek tragedy]

22. Actually, I didn't catch the typo. I thought it said "permission."

Two wrongs certainly don't make a right, though three lefts do.

[TheWatcher]

17. When are you going to prove the Official Mainstream Story of 9/11?

That you cling to like a badge of honor?

Now THAT would be a feat of feats.

[TheGoodCitizen]

18. Precision

- The state or quality of being precise; exactness. Of or characterized by accurate action: precision bombing.

Something I've learned from my US Army Daze... is that it's highly unlikely that you're average crew of thugs would be able to set off six explosions, using HIGH Explosives, almost simultaneously in different sections of a city.

[geek tragedy]

25. My bad. I misread your typo. By the way,

Welcome to DU!

[TheGoodCitizen]

31. Thanks for the welcome....

...It was an honest mistake! :pals:

Hey, maybe if I was a better speller? :shrug:

[geek tragedy]

34. Maybe if I wasn't such an asshole.

:toast:

[TheWatcher]

35. We finally agree on something.

[DBoon]

6. He's in a bind

He could allow these posts, many of which would likely be trolls, and then find them quoted as examples of what the hysterical left wing is about.

Or he can ban them and be accused of "censorship".

On the balance, I think he's doing the right thing. Like it or not, what people post on forums reflects on the forum itself and on its moderator.

I'd rather piss off the right wing with documented facts and solid logic than with pure speculation.

[Rob_G]

67. He's in a bind because....

He isn't banning in a way that is content-neutral. Trolling has come to be considered a technique, a way to slow down or shut down message boards through the sheer force of volume. Banning forms of trolling can therefore argued to be content-neutral.

By contrast, what Kos is doing is banning specific people with a certain kind of intellectual orientation--- people who want to talk about their intuition rather than what they can demonstrably prove. Yep, it's his forum and he can do what he wants. But he is opening himself up to charges of censorship because that's what he's doing. Not all censorship is state-sponsored. Ever heard the phrase "network censors"?

You can tell people they can't talk about cooking on a message board about cars; you can tell conservatives they can't post on a liberal board; and you can ban the "tinfoil hat" crowd too. But those of use who can reason and can see issues in degrees will be able to wonder, how many more unacceptable viewpoints is he going to crop from his mighty famous viewscreen? And, does this mean that a little bit of fame is swelling his head to the point he feels he can proudly announce his edicts with impunity?

He'll bitch and moan about feminists pooh-pooh-ing commercials featuring women in bikinis wrestling around and throwing pies, and cry "free speech!" but he wants to regulate the bandwidth of acceptable thought on his own board. The right is going to hand him his ass, and he will deserve it.

[TheGoodCitizen]

76. Well put Rob_G

I've seen a lot of control freaks in my day, probably more than most, even had a taste of it (power) myself when I was in the military and once again when working as an Officer at a State Prison (I'll leave the list at that because they're the two biggies where I could have caused the most harm to others and/or myself by trippin on power)...

I feel I passed the tests with flying colors. As a Senior staff member at the prison, the ones that were drunk with power were always the ones that were forced (by the inmates) to quit the job or they were stabbed in the jugular with a shank (again, by the inmates). :applause:

[geek tragedy]

96. It's HIS board. He owns it. He is ultimately responsible for what gets

posted there.

If he doesn't like people making reckless and unsupported charges, and thinks they reflect poorly on him, then he should make it clear that such practices are not allowed.

A site is defined by its rules--what can and can't be said. If he wants to do reality-based blogging instead of "I just know in my heart that . . . ." nonsense, that's what he should do.

[TheGoodCitizen]

7. As an individual, how can one just tune out any other thoughs...

...that differ from what the Corporate Media spews??? Anyone please!

I really dislike when people use terms like "conspiracy theory" and "tinfoil hat". How can one look at something objectively after someone's said something like that?


"So I banned these people, and those that have been recommending diaries like it."

WTF? IF PEOPLE ARE RECOMMENDING THESE "DIARIES" THEN APPARENTLY THERE'S AN AUDIENCE THAT FEELS LIKE SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED, INVESTIGATED, RESEARCHED... is me wrong?

One thing I've learned from my service to this country (by serving in the Army) was... things ARE NOT WHAT THEY SEEM. If you don't believe our government, or another, would never harm it's own people or carry out secret spooky missions for the greater good, you had better go back to playing video games and playing with G.I. Joes!

[theoldgeezer]

85. Why are you trying to "turn off thoughts"?

The idea would be to examine evidence as you can find it.

There has NEVER, for instance, been any actual evidence of ANY complicity by the government, in 9-11. Incompetence, perhaps.

So the question is, why would someone continue to insist it?

So, thinking... creative, but enlightened by guiding it with what you know... Is good.

[loudsue]

90. "There has NEVER"?????? You're simply mistaken there.

There have been REEEMS of evidence of government complicity in 9/11.

You're going to have to steer clear of the mainstream media...they'll get you every time!

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

www.fromthewilderness.com

:kick::kick::kick:

[Emerson]

9. You know it seems to me

that progressive blogs are getting more coverage. Even in the MSM. Progressive blogs were responsible for bringing to light the Gannon story.

The right does not control progressive blogs. Think they would like to? Damn right.

If I was a right winger that wanted to shut up the progressive blogs I would do it by posing as a "moderate democrat" that thought the "tin foil" was giving us a "bad image".

I would be very VERY suspicious of those who want to start banning (shutting up) posters on progressive blogs and support this action.

Right now it may be the ultra "tin foil" getting banned, but how long until it moves to anyone who doesn't repeat the MSM message?

[Pepperbelly]

10. Remember Rather?

I don't know that I'd pop the champagn corks just yet.

[geek tragedy]

13. Tin foil DOES give us a bad image.

If you think for a moment that the people who suggest that the 911 planes had missile pods, were holograms, or didn't actually hit the Pentagon don't appear to be psychotic loons to the average person . . .

[Emerson]

20. Oh what's that you say geek tragedy?

There's a fake journalist in the WH press room? What BS!

Hey mods, let's ban this guy talking about a fake journalist in the WH press room. It's tin foil. I'm a moderate democrat and trust me this is making us look bad.

I suggest you delete his post and ban him before anyone sees this "fake journalist" tin foil.

----------

I hope this gets the message across to anyone reading this post how this could go down.

[geek tragedy]

29. There was solid evidence for that.

Even if I don't agree with the conclusions, I can respect thoughtful and well-documented attempts to propose an alternative narrative. Skepticism is always warranted when it comes to Bush's proclamations.

However, if you go in our 911 forums, you'll see that a lot of what goes on there is just crazy, mendacious bullshit.

[Emerson]

40. You obviously don't know the story behind it

It was *first* *theorized* that there was a "journalist" that was a plant in the WH press room on the blogs.

Eventually some decided to look in to that theory. Look what they found, and look what happened afterwards.

If no one had a theory there was a plant in the press room no one would have bothered to look in to it.

[geek tragedy]

44. The proper thing to do with a theory or hunch is to investigate it.

If there's something there, there's something there.

[Emerson]

47. Look geek

I've read many of your posts and I see the agenda you are pushing. Just so you know I doubt DU will bite.

"The proper thing to do is investigate" Exactly. Of course you support banning people simply for making the suggestion. Before you can have an investigation you must first have the suggestion of something to investigate.

If the blogs were playing by your rules the first posts suggesting a plant in the WH (before any investigation had been done) would have been deleted as tin foil and the posters banned. There would have been no investigation.

Of course I have a feeling you are fully aware of that.

[geek tragedy]

50. Again, I never suggested that DU ban people for discussing

Conspiracy Theories. I support the continued existence of the 911 forum just for that purpose.

However, as an activist site trying to win elections and reform the Democratic party it was 100% the right move for Kos to cut down on the nonsense.

[TheGoodCitizen]

53. You say...

"However, as an activist site trying to win elections and reform the Democratic party...."

If KOS is trying to win elections and reform the Democratic Party, then he need to stop taking steps backwards and give progressives a voice... this is why some progressives I personally know have stopped supporting Dem's.

(edit: Mainstream moderate submisive Dem's don't stand a chance in '06 or '08)

[geek tragedy]

64. It's all a matter of choosing which fights to fight.

Social Security, universal health care, and ending our presence in Iraq are much worthier causes and themes than MIHOP.

[TheGoodCitizen]

66. I respectfully disagree....

[Andromeda]

112. Disagree with your parenthetical statement.

If a Democrat wins in 2008 he/she will NOT be an off the beaten path type of individual. More than likely the person will be a moderate, because, you see, lefies do not win presidential elections. They have always gotten the pants beat off of them (think McGovern).

The nominee will be mainstream because most of the American people are middle-of-the-road voters. Bush pretended to be mainstream and that's how he got (choke) elected.

As a matter of fact, most people just simply don't pay any attention to politics.

Don't know what you mean about submissive but I assume you are describing a DINO, a popular euphemism here on DU, which hasn't caught on nationwide.

[TheGoodCitizen]

113. I really meant:

"Mainstream moderate submisive Dem's don't stand a chance in '06 or '08" OF GETTING MY VOTE!

[Rob_G]

72. Or 100% wrong...

... for giving the right a trump card to claim that the left wants to censor the media.

[Rob_G]

73. There isn't...

...just one conclusion to be drawn from the orientation toward pragmatic-Democratic-election-winning-above-all. I think Kos risks much more credibility doing this "purge" (*great* term) as he would risk just by ignoring the conspiracy theorists altogether, occassionally posting disclaimers disavowing them.

[geek tragedy]

77. The problem was that they were essentially recommending each

other's diaries so that stuff wound up getting on the front page.

Anyhow, it's his site, and if he feels they reflect poorly on his site, that's what he should do.

[geek tragedy]

75. Uh, no. There's no way to spin Kos deciding who posts on his website

to be an endorsement of governmental censorship. None.

[Rob_G]

79. Straw-Man.

Not all right-wing censorship is government censorship. I said that.

If you want to define censorship as state-sponsored censorship, then we're arguing about two different terms and never the twain shall meet. But I think CNN and MSNBC and the major network news divisions having nothing but center-to-right views with very, very few left views is a form of censorship. Not state-sponsored censorship, but censorship in the sense of an "in-house censor," as television networks have always had.

If Kos is going to argue the mainstream media needs more progressive voices--- like his--- then he has lost a good degree of credibility in making that claim. The answer from the right will be, piss-off. You regulate content on your board, and we'll regulate content on our networks.

Unless you think that the laissez-faire, he-who-has-the-gold-makes-the-rules corporate-media ideological imbalance we have now is a good thing, because, after all, it's their networks and they can do what they want.

[geek tragedy]

81. Every single news outlet has the absolute right to control 100% of its own

content.

Kos has no obligation of any kind to let people he regards as unhinged loonies push their views on his site.

Just like DU doesn't let rightwing Republicans post.

[Rob_G]

84. The difference is in degrees.

And your inability to see that is something I find very ironic, in that it puts you in good company with the tinfoil hats.

DU is an ideologically based board which doesn't let conservatives post. Daily Kos is a Whatever-Kos-Wants-based board, and he's changing the rules of his game on a whim, while posing as a progressive, DU-like message board. But it's not, because he's arbitrarily deciding to ban people for breaking a rule that heretofore had not been established.

DU, by contrast, established the no-conservative rule going in.

It would have been better for Kos to announce that there was a new rule--- no more tinfoil hats--- and then give people a chance to observe the new rule before being banned. Instead, he made an autocratic announcement and banned people.

But even if he had done it the first way, there is still a difference between a broad demarcation on traditional ideological lines in our bi-partisan culture, which is what this board does, and prescribing what modes of thought are acceptable in reaching conclusions even within the milieu of the left. And if you can't see that distinction, well, then...

...may I proudly present a tinfoil hat of your very own.

[geek tragedy]

95. As others have said, it's his site--he is the king there. What he says

goes. He probably would have been better advised to send an official warning, but c'est la vie.

As far as modes of thought go, Kos quite simply was sick of people making reckless statements with no factual support.

The same kind of mentality that maintains that "Blair did the London bombing" without any kind of evidence is the same kind of mentality that leads people to think that Saddam was somehow involved in 911.

Critical thinking skills should be directed against arguments from all sides.

[Rob_G]

71. How can people do that...

...if every liberal message board, concerned about "image," bans them?

Plausibility determines the degrees of craziness to a theory. Sometimes people will theorize without evidence, but the question becomes: is it plausible?

Some "conspiracy theories" are completely nutty because they're so completely implausible. Some are worth considering if they have some plausible basis in some kind of intellectually defensible rationale, like previous patterns of behavior. But somebody first has to ask the question. When we shout down and ridicule people for being willing to part company with orthodox opinion, we're exhibiting the same groupthink we criticize in the Bush-loving red states.

I care more about truth than image. 99% of what the conspiracy theorists say is bunk. If it really is bunk, it's obvious bunk. But somewhere in that 1% you might get somebody to ask the far-fetched question, "you don't think the president could have possibly authorized those bungled burglaries into Democratic National Headquarters, do you?"

I'd rather have the free-wheeling debate and let the chips fall where they may. If a theory is grossly implausible, like the theory that the Holocaust never happened, then it will be obvious to most people and fail to take any hold in the mainstream.

As for concerns about image, do you think the right is immune to their own *cough*HilaryKilledVincentFoster*cough* tinfoil hat conspiracies? It's a wash, and not worth censoring people over on one of the more famous blogs the left has.

[geek tragedy]

93. Not every site can be all things to all people.

There are dozens of conspiracy sites with discussion forums on the Internet.

Kos has a mission--to drive the debate around politically important issues. The Conspiracy theories--especially those made with reckless regard for the truth--detract from that mission.

Reckless and wild accusations without evidentiary support should not expect to be welcomed. If we want that, we'll vote Republican.

[stickdog]

102. It's called DISINFORMATION, geek. It's PURPOSEFULLY meant to

discredit all perfectly sensible and fully logical lines of unconventional inquiry by associating it with a few lines of inquiry that are at worst completely disprovable and at best completely counterproductive.

But why did the WTC-7 building fall, geek? Why was NIST unable to recover A SINGLE SCRAP of metal from WTC-7 for their recently released metallurgical analysis?

Why wasn't Bush evacuated from that school? Why did he keep reading about a Pet Goat when Card supposedly told him "America is under attack"?

What was Rumsfeld doing in the 80+ minutes it took for him to arrive at his command post?

Why did General Myers have a cloudy memory the events of 9/11 when he testified to the Senate two days later? Why did he give two contradictory stories about when the military first got planes up in response to 9/11 during this same Senate hearing?

Why did NORAD's response timeline change several times, only to be completely rewritten by the 9/11 Commission?

What caused the seismic explosion signature in the vicinity of Shankstown at 10:06 EDT even though the 9/11 Commission swears that ALL other physical evidence proves that Flight 93 crashed at 10:03 EDT?

Why did Jeb Bush and federal agents seize records from Huffman Aviation - Florida flight school of Mohammed Atta, and other 9/11 hijackers - in the middle of the night following the attacks of September 11th and load them onto a C-130? And why did Jeb Bush know, hours after the attack, exactly where to look?

How can simply asking all these 100% legitimate questions possibly hurt anyone but BushCo -- who, at best, was criminally negligent on 9/11?

[rman]

104. There was no solid evidence for Watergate, Iran-contra

at the time when those were merely CT's.

Those conspiracies were pretty big, and although they were eventually exposed, that was not after those conspiracies had carried on for quite some time, doing quite a lot of damage. And even when exposed and investigated, nothing much came of it. Just look at Oliver North...

[Griffy]

106. Explain WTC7 then.. I dare you.. dont brush off people..

just because you havent taken the time to review the evidence and the conclusion being proposed to you is outside your idea of whats possible! Try to approach it with an open mind.. and ask yourself 1 quesiotn.. What happened to WTC7??? Thats the smoking 911 gun.. its the 1 thing they cant explain, so the dont.. its just ignored, like it never happened... but it did.. building 7 collapsed hours atfer the towers did.. and NOTHING hit it!!! I double dare you to explain WTC7! and if you wont do the research, stop naysaying those that took the time to review the facts...

I know the big lie if hard to swallow.. but if we are to defeat this cabal, we must open our minds and not treat them like us.. what we wouldnt do, they would, and did... like fix facts around a policy and send our troops into a war on lies for thier own neocon agenda (ala PNAC).

[brentspeak]

38. There is a difference between the Jeff Gannon thing

and the LIHOP/MIHOP CT; the former was never a "theory", it was observable fact, the latter is purely conjecture, with little or no basis in fact.

My view on this whole thing is this: If this site isn't going to censor posts, then it should be made clear to everyone who posts here -- carefully consider the value of what you're posting. There should be an "honor code" not to flippantly toss out CT's and expect other people to accept it as fact. Actually, I don't mind any CT post where the poster admitted it was a CT or added a tin-foil smilie.

[TheGoodCitizen]

self delete... dupe

[TheGoodCitizen]

42. What Would Rove Do?

WWRD?

[Griffy]

108. WTC7.. is not little or no fact.. you are mistaken..

Building 7 collapse is provable, I've seen the video, and its just as real as Gannon! What do you think happened to theat building?.. or do you just not take the time to review the FACTS 911truth pplare putting out?!.. now some have wild idea about what led to this and why.. but that the conjuctur part.. the brainstorming to try to figure out what we can with what we got! and we got video of WTC7 collapsing hours later, after nothing hit it?! YOu either cant or wont address this issue, instead you will write off those that have information you deem to "unlikly" or "impossible". Like fabricating intel to go to war, or fixing an election or 3... or perhaps you think we were attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin.

Your view is fine for you, if you wish to deny the facts that your right, but I would ask that you not discredit those that are trying to expose the bushies as the criminals they are simply because you haven't taken the time to review the evidence.

[KoKo]

70. Yes...but there's "TinFoil" and there's "Trash TinFoil." What was Kos's

distinction between the two? We who were AGAINST IRAQ INVASION might have been called "Tinfoil" because we believed Ambassador Wilson and others who said that Iraq had NO WMD! We were vilified on the pages of WaPo/NYT's and in every other outlet at that time as being WRONG!

Yet...my recollection is that since "Selection 2000" those of us here on Democratic Underground" have been more Correct than Incorrect...

What does that say? And, when 9/11 is found to be either LIHOP/MIHOP then who will step up and say "YESSSSSSS" Paul Thompson's "9/11 TIMELINE" was corrects...and how many DU'ers have been called :Tinfoilhat: because they believed and even contributed to Paul's Timeline?

How many DU'ers labor down in the I/P Forum on DU fighting battles in that dungeon. Who will be proved CORRECT?

:shrug:

[stickdog]

101. And the RW nuts screaming about every false, idiotic or overblown Clinton

conspiracy du jour discredited the Republican cause to the point where they now control all branches of the federal government. Right?

[TheGoodCitizen]

14. BINGO....

....when does it end?

What'll be banned next that's considered to be out of the mainstream accepted thought prosess... maybe saying that the 2004 election was "fixed", what if people were being banned for saying something like that??

[TheWatcher]

15. If people like GT have their way, it will be

[TheGoodCitizen]

23. I don't know how to feel about KOS after this...

Not sure if I'll mess with the forums anymore, maybe but I'm leaning to NOT!

I definitely WILL NOT verbally recommend his site, as the people I correspond with want to get the the bottom of REAL issues... and I WILL NOT give him any more of my money, that's a given!

[AX10]

28. That's how I feel. I guess I'm done with KOS.

What defines a conspirancy? The election was stolen? We have proof of it. It's very strong mathmatical evidence.

[TheGoodCitizen]

41. I can define it... just can't figure out why it ALWAYS.....

...brings up negative thoughts.


con·spir·a·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-spîr-s)

n. pl. con·spir·a·cies

1) An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

2) A group of conspirators.

3) Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.

4) A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

[AX10]

43. I believe in colusion more so.

But still, it's a vote of no confidence from me for Kos. I wonder if he's another Bev Harris??

[geek tragedy]

45. Except that Kos RAISED money and worked for progressive candidates and w

Bev Harris only helped herself. The comparison is not appropriate.

[Emerson]

49. Harris had others thinking

she had been helping others before it was discovered she helped her self.

I followed the Harris story. If you read the old posts at DU you'll see the first people to suggest Harris was a scam were pounced on by the majority. Posts were deleted, and some were banned as disruptors. This was the case at other sites as well. What's the result? Harris got away with who knows how much money before any investigation could be done. Why? Because those who had a "theory" she was a fraud were silenced simply for suggesting the "theory".

[geek tragedy]

51. People who accuse Kos of being another Bev Harris

are indulging in EXACTLY the kind of logic-free thinking that I've been denouncing. Idiotic, uninformed, emotion-driven drivel.

Accusing someone of being a fraud because he doesn't want CT'ers on his website? That's ideologically-driven defamation and not something that people who are after the truth do.

[Emerson]

52. Your spin is worthy of FOX news

Please point out where I compared Kos to Harris?

To my knowledge I have never mentioned both of them at the same time in a post.

"Accusing someone of being a fraud because he doesn't want CT'ers on his website?"

Nice spin. :-) Again, I'd like to see where I accused Kos of being another Bev Harris.

My post on Harris was simply to demonstrate what happens when you silence those with a theory.

Your spin is simply another way to silence discourse on the issue of banning progressives on progressive sites by changing the subject. I hope you realize how transparent this is. I will not go for that bait. You must think me a fool.

[geek tragedy]

54. Someone else suggested that Kos was another Bev Harris.

I was responding to that person when you jumped into the conversation.

[Emerson]

55. You have over 1000 posts

I assume you understand how the DU forums work after all those posts, and thus know you were responding to one of mine?

[geek tragedy]

58. Yes. I was criticizing the comparison, and you intervened to disagree

with me.

[Emerson]

60. I intervened

to point out that Harris was greatly assisted by silencing those who questioned whether or not she was legit.

No where did I say Kos was a fraud as you suggested in your response to me. Your response to me was unwarranted, and should have gone to the poster who made that suggestion.

[TheWatcher]

61. Um GT, you are exhibiting more reach here than Mr. Fantastic

His post was a completely separate idea from what you were responding to, so how could he be disagreeing with what you said.

You must be getting dizzy at this point from so much spinning.

[geek tragedy]

62. And my point was perfectly clear: Idiotic, baseless accusations SHOULD

be shouted down.

[Griffy]

110. I guess you decide whats idiotic and baseless.. you dont understand..

the idea of brainstorming... all idea are good... the group will work to seperate the truth from this and assemble a working thoery. Then that theory is tested... so far noone can tell me how WTC7 collapsed! Can you?

[havocmom]

63. Damn, Emerson, you are good! I gotta put you on my list of must-read

ass kickers!
:popcorn: and :toast:

[TheWatcher]

68. I concur wholeheartedly

Welcome to DU Emerson.

You definitely make a wonderful addition.

School is definitely in session. :)

:popcorn:

[TheWatcher]

56. Is that why the "Response To" shows that you were responding to Emerson?

The fun just never stops. :)

:popcorn:

[TheGoodCitizen]

57. Just becuase KOS is starting to make a little more money...

...than he use to is NO reason for him to water down his website to conform to what the media want's to hear.

This is not a time to lay down, I though WE were ALL going to take a stand!

[geek tragedy]

59. Kos has never believed the 911/MIHOP conspiracy theories.

He thinks they derail his site's mission, which focuses on more mainstream issues.

[thegreatwildebeest]

89. And 911/MIHOP is radical?

Ranting and raving about nutty conspiracy theories doesn't turn you into a dyed in the wool radical. Some of us actually earned that label by actually saying and doing things that are not just merely going on and on about purported evidence to "blow up" the truth of 9/11, but actually confronting the powers that be militantly and agressively. If you're a Democrat, and you're a MIHOP, you're not radical. Some of us actually ARE (anarchist and proud) and don't need ridiculous conspiracy theories to try and wave as evidence.

[stickdog]

105. Kos may or may not be a fraud. But he's certainly a censor-happy control

freak bent on stamping out all discussion that dares to venture outside of his own personal boundaries of reality-based inquiry.

Why is it so important to both of y'all that we keep assuming that Muslim terra'ists bombed London until PROVEN otherwise? Why are both of you perfectly accepting of this particular conspiracy theory -- which is currently based on nothing other than "they are bad people so they must be guilty of all terrorism" illogic?

[Rob_G]

74. I agree.

I'm deeply suspicious of any attempt to establish orthodoxy of thought in a group context.

...Aren't most of you?

[TheGoodCitizen]

78. With the current political climate...

....it's sicking!

[thegreatwildebeest]

91. How about saying...

...it doesn't matter? Now THERES a radical idea. That the whole shebang-a-bang is a ruse anyways. Two parties to choose from? Both older, rich, white guys? Both pro-trade agreements, both pro-war, both pro-drug policy, etc etc? If Bush did steal the election, what difference does it make?

[AX10]

30. That's how I feel.

[rman]

109. In addition,

i'd have some of my buddies post crackpot CTs in those forums, along the lines of the neocons being aliens, the tsunami being cause by the Bushies, the Princes Diana case having something to do with a 4th higher astral plane (i didn't make that one up), etc, etc.

[Tinoire]

120. Bingo Bingo Bingo!

Welcome to DU Emerson :toast:

BINGO

Don't want any nasty facts coming to light as people examine and discuss "back-street" news! Lord only knows what gems may be uncovered there... PNAC, no-WMDs in Iraq, assassinations, MSM complicity and now it's the shilling for the war against Iran because Iran, gasp, is on the "verge of having the atomic bomb.

Bingo. Got to shut up those bloggers and reinforce the corporate-controlled MSM's slipping control.

[opihimoimoi]

32. Re this CT thingy: makes us lose track of WHY they did it.Not WHO did it

Coulda been Tim, Francis, Shirley, Ahab, Ben, ....ad infinity....

Find out WHY and we begin to solve Prevention through PEACE...

If Peace is IMPOSSIBLE, then we die.....

If Peace is POSSIBLE, we have a go at Party and FUN Forever....

Come, we go Luau, fuck War....

[TheGoodCitizen]

37. Luau..... YUMMY

I could go for some Hawai'ian poo-poo's right about now!

[opihimoimoi]

39. sending lau laus and poi, ribs and kalua pig, sashimi wasabi too.

[TheGoodCitizen]

46. Sashimi.... Ribs..... Poi..... Yummy!

Aloha! :hi:

[rman]

103. In CT as in any criminal investigation, motive is quite important

One of the first questions asked when constructing any decent CT is: "who benefits?"

(even though most CT-ers are merely amateur 'investigators')

[stickdog]

107. Means, motive and opportunity make state sponsored mil/intel cells

one of the primary suspects for anyone who is intellectually honest, logically rigorous and versed in Western military history.

[mzteris]

36. I thought it "telling"

that he's doing this right after the big article saying how many times they get mentioned by the MSM and used as a source by "everyone" - including Repubs, they added proudly.

Makes the move a bit suspect, don't you think? Delusions of grandeur and all that?

[TheGoodCitizen]

48. NO press is bad press....

Like Dean said to John Stewart... every time the Republitards try to smear him/us (Dean/Dems), people send in $500,000 without ever being asked to do so.

(edit:Maybe they'll learn something... or they may be watching the MSM about the KOS site and think "I'm not the only one that feels that way")

[Geek_Girl]

65. It's Kos is site he could do what he wants

But DailyKos is more like a monarchy lots of rules and order dictated by Kos.

This is why I prefer DU all different kinds opinions and points of view, chaos sometimes and arguing. But It just feels more democratic and very American.

:patriot:

[TheGoodCitizen]

69. Has anyone been over to KOS this evening....

wondering if the members that were not silenced and removed from the so called progressive blog... well, wondering if many over there are upset and dissenting?

Just curious! I'm not going back so let me know what you know...

[Rob_G]

82. And I also wonder...

... if there ARE people dissenting, will they get banned too, for questioning the king?

[pox americana]

80. Follow the money

You won't have to go far.

[TheGoodCitizen]

Delete... (I dont see why it keeps double posting on me)

[TheGoodCitizen]

83. Tell that to the 9/11 commission......

[rumpel]

87. I also do not think it is so far fetched. look at the article today in the

LATimes.

After Flagging Support, a Second Wind for Bush
By Doyle McManus, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — The bombs exploded in London, but the repercussions are still rippling across Washington.

A surge in public concern about terrorism means a probable boost in support for President Bush and the war in Iraq.

Renewed fear of terrorist sleeper cells will probably spur increased support for tough law enforcement measures such as the Patriot Act, which is up for renewal. And there's new enthusiasm in Congress for increased spending on domestic security, especially mass transit — an area in which legislators were cutting budgets three weeks ago.

There's no telling how long the wave of concern will last. If the London attack gives way to months of calm, the increased fear — and any gain in popularity for Bush — may well be short-lived. But for the moment, Washington is back in 9/11 mode.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-assess10jul10,1,7964642.story?coll=la-headlines-world

Who benefitted most from the attack?

How come there are three terrorist organizations coming forward claiming responsibility?

[thegreatwildebeest]

88. The better question to ask...

The better question to ask, is if the conspiracys are true, what in the hell exactly are people going to do? If everything is run by a tiny cabal of elite super men, than what are you going to do? Sue them? try to get them arrested using the very system you say they control? I don't quite follow the tinfoil hat people, because they sugges tthat everything is "manipulated" and "owned" (except for them of course) and then suggest methods (criminal investigations, media exposure) that would be obviously pre-empted by any supposed elite cabal of guys smoking cigars in hazy rooms. I'm not following the logic. The whole thing, regardless of its validity, seems to be rather pointless.

[loudsue]

92. As Greg Palast said a few years ago: "Conspiracy Theories" are

what they call 'em six months before they're "the news".

:kick::kick::kick:

[Neshanic]

94. "This is a reality-based community"...really? That's comforting.

Thank God in Heaven that he knows truth when he sees it.

As a "New Wave CT", I do not fit in the mold of CT's in the classical sense. I seem to remember government tidbits here and there about testing gas flows in Grand Central without our heroic government telling anyone, testing people with drugs, giving African Americans diseases, and you know...little stuff. The kind of things that we know now, that if were speculated about at the time they happened, one would be called a nut.

But not to worry, we have a person who knows truth as it electronically passes before his eyes. Now I can sleep at night, knowing he tombstones people like a drunk freeper on the fourth of July.

We all saw the towers fall. Sorry, but I do not have any explanation, nor theory to put forth, but they both fell with surgical precision. Being in those building too many times to tell, I just thought it odd that they both fell so perfectly pancaked.

Sue me.

[thegreatwildebeest]

97. Hooray!

But not to worry, we have a person who knows truth as it electronically passes before his eyes. Now I can sleep at night, knowing he tombstones people like a drunk freeper on the fourth of July.

We all saw the towers fall. Sorry, but I do not have any explanation, nor theory to put forth, but they both fell with surgical precision. Being in those building too many times to tell, I just thought it odd that they both fell so perfectly pancaked.

So wait, Kos is wrong for calling something valid or not valid based off something he saw "electronically pass before his eyes", yet you have the expertise to wonder the oddity of them falling "So perfectly pancaked"? Did yous ee the events unfold in person, or on tv? Were you up close and personal with measurements and other details of the collapse?

I don't really care for either side of this debate, because whether they are bunk or not doesn't change anything. Like I mentioned in reply to another such thread, what are you going to do? Sue them in their own courts? Vote them out of office and put another pro-war, pro-corporation, etc president in? Hooray! No, I'll stick to my own activism thank you and strike at the pwoers at be every chance I get, but not sit around fetishizing about their past misdeeds. I don't need a conspiracy theory to prove 30,000 dead every day from stupid causes, or horrible trade agreements, or a number of other horrible things.

[Neshanic]

98. Who said I was an expert? I though people can wonder about things

Is that thought crime now?

It's his site and he can do whatever he wants, but that's part of the territory of having a site where people can muse and discuss things. Now he does not like the way it's going. I wonder if he was called a CT when he first started his site.

Strange that you think that things that come to light over time that our government has done in the past is irrelevant. You use the here and now as a guidepost. Tough gig that, in our very open and tough wrongdoing reporting MSM environment that we have now. It must make for very quick and easy decisions. Not knowing or caring what our government has done in the past is probably safer than possibly, just possibly, believing that they are capable of a fraction of the the things we even speculate about.

[thegreatwildebeest]

99. I love this kind of reply....

Is that thought crime now?

No. Calling people out on stuff is not "thought-policing", its called arguing. If you can't take people calling you bumpkis for something than you better get out of the kitchen.


Strange that you think that things that come to light over time that our government has done in the past is irrelevant. You use the here and now as a guidepost. Tough gig that, in our very open and tough wrongdoing reporting MSM environment that we have now. It must make for very quick and easy decisions. Not knowing or caring what our government has done in the past is probably safer than possibly, just possibly, believing that they are capable of a fraction of the the things we even speculate about.

I love this response. Time and time again whenever I've pointed out the ridiculousness of someones absurd conspiracy theorist rantings they come back with the one two punch of insulting me and saying that I like "buying into the safe" option, and telling me something that I already know, namely that the state, corporations, and other entities actively screw the pooch, and take as many people down as possible.

Look, as a person who has part of a political tendency that IS radical (anarchism) compared to the many democrats on this board, I know what police repression is like. I know what its like to have trumped up charges pushed on you. I know what its like to worry about electronic communications, phones, and other bits of security culture. Guess what? NO ONE is COINTELPRO-ing anyone on this board, save the people who may be involved in anti-war demonstration (and then again, not in any serious way). Why would they? They have much more to worry on their plate about people who actually DO stuff, as opposed to standing in one place and holding signs. They don't put up the huge security barriers at trade meetings because of non-violent protestors. It's because of anarchists who rocked Seattle in 1999.

This said, I don't really worry about state interference, or massive conspiracies, because hey, hey, hey, the stuff thats happening right now in the world is messed up enough. I could care less if they orchestrated 9/11, or orchestrated this latest series of bombings, or whatever gobbdlygook of the week. I refuse to play into their spectacle by fethishzing violence on TV, regardless of who did it, and sitting back theorizing about who did something thats already done and happened, rahter than trying to organize to end the whole damn thing. What issue is it of me if Islamic radicals did it or a state government? I oppose BOTH. Eitherway the target is brought down. Why worry about the details?

[Griffy]

111. you dont care if MIHOP? or dont believe, so its no problem..

you said..

"I love this response. Time and time again whenever I've pointed out the ridiculousness of someones absurd conspiracy theorist rantings.."

so please.. point out why WTC7 collapsed? show me how ridiculous it is to wonder if something more was going on... people conspire.. thats a fact.. and when others see a patern in the actions of a group of people, a theory may develop... like the neocons who kindly showed us there conspiracy plans in PNAC.

So.. if you cant explain WTC7, please dont bother repling, as I expect you cant... I dont need to hear how you dont care about this or that.. or that you know whats really happening..

[thegreatwildebeest]

122. Wow for an Illuminati...

...driven conspiracy organization like PNAC, they sure love maintaining an online presence with very clear reports on what their doing.

And no, I don't have any explanation for why WTC 7 collapsed. I wasn't in New York, haven't been to New York, haven't looked at ground zero, or investigated any of the surrounding buildings, talked with people who survived that day or were there, and generally have not witnessed first hand the actual incident. I can't really confirm one story or the other. What I DO know however, is again, regardless of who did it, I hate both Islamic hardliners and state government. So who cares if one did it and the other didn't? It doesn't change my work at all.

I also enjoy how you completely skip over the rest of my argument, reiterated above, dismissing it as you "Dont need to hear how you dont care about this or that"(wheres the apostrophes?). You dismiss it because you don't want to face the fact that it really doesn't matter who did it, and that voting Democrat isn't going to stop it, and that if everything is as conspiratorial as you say it is, that we'd all be killed out back by now.

[liberalfriend]

100. stated in the previous thread

I said this before but it warrants a repeat

KOS is defeating the democratic purpose! Even if these so called tinfoil hatters are trumping up worthless conspiracy theories, it is still wrong to kick them off the site. Though these people are probably wrong (and maybe even stupid) all KOS is doing is bankrupting the garden of free thought (thanks seth). You have to take the good with the bad like, "abortion should be illegal because it makes baby jesus cry", that's clearly bad speech. But we shouldn't have to censor it simply because we don't agree or even like it. KOS, buddy, you have made a critical error.

[damnthetorpedoes]

114. Good for Kos

He reacted to assertions that Bushco was behind the London bombings, made on no substantiated basis, that were destroying the credibility of HIS site as a forum for political discourse respected by moderates and progressives alike.

The next time somebody says it is "progressive" to put on a tinfoil hat, I'm gonna puke. We laughed at the loony right under Clinton for years, and the loonies on that side were one reason the general public didn't take the far right all that seriously and kept on supporting the Big Dog.

Ranting about MIHOP makes us look stupid. If there really was evidence, and believe me I've seen most of what the MIHOPers want to push, it would be different. Otherwise it's a bunch of people with no experience or knowledge relevant to the case offering ignorant opinions. You really think no architect, structural engineer, or demolition expert in the mainstream community would have come forward about WTC7 if it was so obvious that it couldn't have collapsed from known factors? Pshaw. Why is it that almost everyone who does come forward is marginal, or has a record of bullshitting?

If it's true, prove it, then bring the proof here. But the amount of speculation that goes by on these boards, most recently over a Bushco connection to the London bombing, is embarrassing and damaging to liberal credibility. We don't NEED conspiracy theories. The proven crimes are bad enough. Let's focus there.

[rman]

116. then he has over reacted

"He reacted to assertions that Bushco was behind the London bombings"

By purging all CTs.

[damnthetorpedoes]

117. He exercised discretion

The definition of a conspiracy theory is of course subjective. He didn't "pull all CTs." At the moment, his site is full of posters theorizing on the Rove/Plame conspiracy. He pulled all the unprovable bullshit about Bush and/or Blair being somehow "behind" the London bombings and/or 9/11. Those aren't just conspiracy theories. They are, in many case, disinformation campaigns started by the far right (see: Alex Jones) and spread maliciously among the more gullible elements of the far left IN AN EFFORT TO DISCREDIT PROGRESSIVES. This is blatantly obvious to almost anyone who knows a bit of political history. Kos did the right thing.

That said, the best way to deal with tinfoil hats on DU is to ignore their threads and laugh at them when you get the chance.

[rman]

121. Rove/Plame conspiracy is no longer conspiracy theory

Since it's not a CT, it's not a CT that did not get purged.

It was a CT once here on DU and elsewhere, that got ridiculed by the usual suspects

It's interesting that you call AJ "far right". He may be a conservative but with his ideas regarding corporate global rule he is on the same page as many of DU's most progressive liberals. I'm not a fan of him only because of his style of presentation and often somewhat sloppy sourcing.

I don't really need any advice from you about how to deal with CT's on DU.

I sure hope you get a lot a laughs out of ignoring me.

[welshTerrier2]

119. a couple of points ...

first, just to clarify, i am not a conspiracy theorist ... i am not a MIHOPPER or a LIHOPPER ... but i am someone who believes that 90% or more of what passes for "what is known" is probably not known at all ... i ALWAYS suspect the motives of those in power and I believe the MSM either does not have access to good information or is intentionally toeing the corporate line ... everything should be questioned; most specifically the motives of those with power ...

now, having said that, you seem to have made points that argue against your own conclusion ... you said "If there really was evidence, and believe me I've seen most of what the MIHOPers want to push, it would be different." isn't that the whole point of allowing discussions on this topic? you had an opportunity to assess the "evidence" being provided and you chose to dismiss it as not credible ... you would not have had the opportunity to make this judgment had those critical of the "mainstream findings" been suppressed ... isn't part of any good analysis trimming away information that does not hold up to evaluation ?

the muzzling of free speech you seem to be advocating seems to me to be very wrong ... is it possible that those who oppose progressive ideas might use various conspiracy theories to attack us? of course it is ... but that shouldn't be an excuse to stifle discussion ... when conspiracy theories are presented, both sides should, and do, have their say ...

there were many things wrong with the 9/11 Commission's report and the processes they used ... does this mean that MIHOP is true? no, not necessarily ... what it does mean is that there is a broad lack of credibility on "what we know" ... knowing that we have a flawed process communicated to the public by flawed institutions (government, press, etc) does not necessarily define what the truth really is ...

and finally, i did not find your argument about no structural engineers coming forward to dispute the evidence convincing ... how many structural engineers came forward to support the "mainstream line"?? do engineers have access to the blueprints and are they familiar with exactly what materials were used in the WTC and exactly how the buildings were constructed? probably not ...

so, my position is that a good, healthy skepticism is called for ... and i think we should be open to anyone who wants to try to make a case for what really happened ... if the information they present is illogical, we should be able to easily dismiss it ... and, if it remains unrefuted, perhaps it is truly the tip of an iceberg ... the bottom line is we should let the people have their say ...

[Just Me]

115. Wouldn't ya' know this involves the only DUer I have on ignore. n/t

[damnthetorpedoes]

118. Hmm. How would you know that?

eom