What's up with the multiple assaults on Truthout and Raw Story?

[linazelle]

Why all the hateration?

You really have to wonder about the motives behind the incessant posts calling out Lala RawRaw and Jason Leopold.

I think you people need to take a chill pill or two.

[eleny]

1. .

:popcorn:

[linazelle]

86. BINGO! DISCREDIT LEOPOLD & RUIN TRUTHOUT AND PITT

THAT'S the motive. (See posts 79 and 83)

I'm glad I posted this thread.

The TRUTH was bound to come OUT.

[Kagemusha]

2. Fortunately, this is really easy to explain.

Leftists don't want this story to blow up, totally drag down Truthout, and largely drag down the reputations of Raw Story, DU, Atrios, Kos, FDL, etc, with it.

Notwithstanding that Drudge is already flushing the reputations of all of the above in saying the story's false, false, false and Drudge has Paula and Monica on his side and the left has nothing so who's credible nya nya.

So there you have it.

[aquart]

3. You sound like you're hoping it's false.

Oh, well.

[linazelle]

5. "nya nya"???? "...the left has nothing..."??? Surely you jest. nt

[Jane Austin]

6. Don't you think that was meant in Drudge's voice?

The writer wasn't speaking for himself there, but doing a sendup or a quote from Drudge.

[Kagemusha]

8. I'm making fun of what Drudge said on his radio show.

Sheesh...!

I want a Rove frog march as much as anyone here. I'm just pointing out Drudge is gonna drag Leopold through the mud no matter WHAT the truth is, so there's not much point in piling onto him, is there? DU's gonna be "tainted" no matter how much people on this board beat Leopold into the dirt.

[linazelle]

11. Sorry. I don't follow anything Drudge does--I'm SO out of that loop.

Thanks for explaining.

[Kagemusha]

17. Normally I am too but another post mentioned that..

All's forgiven. :) Hoping for the best re: Rove, and I think he's toast, it's just a timing issue.

[WilliamPitt]

102. LOL

So you're trying to help???

With friends like these...

[Kagemusha]

106. I'm illustrating the utter irrelevance of getting worked up over this.

"Oh nooo DU will be ruined." Bleh. Please. They're gonna trash any leftist at all associated with the internet anyway, is my point. And apparently some people missed it but Drudge already has been, with the latest version being this past evening.

But god Will, I hope you didn't get on the wrong bandwagon this time. I really do. But I'm a results guy. I'm not trying to "help" and be feel-good, no. It's irrelevant to whether Rove goes down or not. It's even irrelevant to whether Leopold goes down or not, though I wish no evil upon him.

But the question was simple. Why do DU'ers jump to discredit the man? Because they're afraid of going down with his ship. I hope that doesn't happen, but tearing him up now isn't gonna help later.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. I dunno. Seems the sensible...

thing to do when someone breaks a big scoop is to wait it out and get confirmation. It's not like it's the kind of thing we HAVE to know RIGHT NOW. It's true or it's not true, or there's some truth to it. We'll find out. What's the hurry?

Lessee, now... there's maybe a few fifth columnists and moles trying to stir things up.

There's maybe a few professional swiftboaters out there slashing their way through the truth trying to destroy the messenger.

And there's a few assholes who just don't know when to shut up.

Any other reasons?

There must be good ones, or it wouldn't be happening.

[lovuian]

7. I definitely agree that there is a group which tries to undermine

the legitimacy of the writer... their tactic is to attack the link and the source

I hate to say this but heres the reality
Duer's thinking that the NYT Washington Post CNN ABC are legit links well Sorry I look at Leopold in better standing than they are...

We have had almost 9-10 years of Murdoch news jammed down our throats and its USELESS LIES

So my answer is IGNORE them who hate

[Media_Lies_Daily]

9. IMHO, this all goes back to 1992 when Clinton won his first term....

...some could point back as far as 1988 when Poppy Bush won by smearing Dukakis at every turn.

[upi402]

13. "On Bended Knee" (book) tells of the Reagan press

How Reagan gave the Whitehouse press corps and TV media its 'daily bread' -and how they gulped it down on their way to the bank.
How they went to hi-so Washington balls and were taken in as powerful Washington players.

We have been without a 4th estate for a full generation, going on two.
It's frustrating arguing with DUers about DINOs and the TV news, but understandable.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

15. Good info...I'd forgotten about "Reagan's press". Thanks!

[pitohui]

20. are indictments handed down in secret now?

so that jason leopold is the only one who knows abt them?

i don't know but if that be the case and people can be indicted in secret instead of in public then we have way bigger problems than karl rove, don't we?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

10. There's a group of 5-10 posters who have made it very clear....

...that they don't like Leopold, Pitt, Truthout, and Raw Story. They seem to be willing to write anything to discredit stories that cast the NeoCons in a bad light.

[linazelle]

12. I've seen that. They've been at it diligently for two days.

You have to wonder why they're so hell bent on making them wrong. And when I say wonder, I mean wonder about their motives. Their over-the-top opposition is telling...as telling as the msm's silence heretofore.

[Catherine Vincent]

14. I also wonder why they don't ignore any Leopold threads.

Very telling.

[linazelle]

36. Absolutely. They're hounding them. n/t

[Harper_is_Bush]

42. Who are these people?

Who has made it clear that they don't like Leopold, Pitt, Truthout, and Raw Story?

And what "anything" have they been writing to discredit the Leopold story?

[linazelle]

61. Why is it so difficult for you to do a DU search? n/t

[Harper_is_Bush]

68. What should I search for?

It's your complaints that we're discussing. You tell me what to search for and I'll search.

[AuntPatsy]

16. I have complete faith in this story and like you I wonder at the

continued need to feel one has to rain all over it in the hopes it will just wash away like pretty much every news worthy story that should be being reported in our what many falsely believe to be a fair and balanced media..

I honestly find it laughable when I read people saying well I haven't heard it on any news network..

And your point? I believe the last seven years or so shoud alone make you realize you cannot count on the media to aid this country in doing the job many of us are not available to do and that is to actually investigate what needs investigation..

Oh sure the truth pops out every now and then, a sampling here and there and then quickly dissappears in favor of news that attempts to defend these criminals in office..

Frankly all we have are blogs to help us to sort out the truth from the fantasy world they would rather us abide in.

[pitohui]

18. people need to not publish unsubstantiated allegations

raw story has no credibility at all to my mind

as far as leopold, i hope he is correct, but it looks more doubtful w. every passing moment

i do tire of such things as "iran will be bombed on june 6, my secret source told me" -- well guess what a lot of times the secret source if it exists at all turns out to be screwing w. the naive blogger or poster

nothing useful comes of spreading rumors!

[linazelle]

28. "nothing useful comes of spreading rumors"

"Rumor does not always err; it sometimes even elects a man."
Author: Tacitus (Caius Cornelius Tacitus)
Source: Agricola (IX)


Your post is full of the very speculation that is characteristic of the rumors you claim to detest.

"...a lot of times the secret source if it exists at all turns out to be screwing w. the naive blogger or poster"

:eyes:

Can you provide some proof of this claim? Please?

[pitohui]

78. let me clarify this

i am not "speculating" that raw story is not credible

i am telling you flat-out that raw story is not credible, if you have been reading it over the year or so and you still take it any more seriously than capitol hill blue, then fine, everybody's got an opinion

and my opinion -- not my speculation, but my opinion -- is that anyone who stakes their credibility on raw story is standing on shaky ground indeed

karl rove will not be indicted by the super special secret police

if he is indicted, it will be public information

[linazelle]

80. You didn't answer my question...re: proof. n/t

[pitohui]

94. i need proof to have an opinion?

my proof is the entire public publishing record of rawstory

and further proof is the entire archive of lalaraw's posts here on DU

as it is not my job nor is it allowed under the terms and conditions to criticize other posters i will say no more but anyone who can honestly read through that work and tell me straight-faced that this is a credible source of news as opposed to sheer entertainment needs to develop better critical thinking skills

let's leave it at that as i don't think we should be getting into personalities

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. If the story is false

There will be a shitstorm, and rightly so.

The 500+ DU celebration thread will become the laughingstock of the internets, and several prominent posters will be, er, majorly damaged goods.

That's the truth of it, if the story is false. If it's true, cheers. What a scoop! If it's false, ay yay yay. It's a big shit sandwich, fo' shizzle.

[Catherine Vincent]

22. I know what you're doing.

Reverse psychology right? You are adamantly stating that Karl Rove will not be indicted, that way when he is, the celebration is even more joyous. And IF he isn't, then you've already psyched yourself up for it.

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. Er, no

I've made a prediction based on my reading of the situation. I put it out there.

I think RawStory is a joke. I like Will Pitt (though I'm sure he doesn't like me, supposing he ever bothered to consider humble little me), but this Leopold character is a grifter, and I think he's tanking the hell out of a lot of folks with this nonsense.

[WilliamPitt]

104. It's actually simpler than that

This douchebag doesn't want to change his sig line, thanks to a bet he made. Thats the depth of dedication there.

[AuntPatsy]

24. I don't agree. I think it's been proven time and time again that

what was once a joke concering tin foil conspiracy theorists gone amuk has turned out to be ninety nine percent truth and yet still, only a whisper is heard from the talking heads concering such conspiracy's that involve far too many big wigs in washington having and or having had very clear criminal dealings...

It's pretty obvious now what is going on, especially with the new to some but not all of us here that this government has been doing thier utmost best to spy on it's own citizens and have declared any and all who attempt to speak the truth to be the targets of slander and outright threatening actions to ensure they remain quiet..

It would surely explain how easy it is to drown out any and all Democratic messages to the people.

[alcibiades_mystery]

26. I'm gonna need a translator for all that

:shrug:

[linazelle]

32. I understood it. Would you like me to translate it?

[alcibiades_mystery]

35. Please do

n/t

[linazelle]

33. Why is it such a "big shit sandwich" if it's false? What's with the

no-room-for-error stance? Get a grip.

[alcibiades_mystery]

37. You're joking right?

How much error do you think you want on a story like this?

It's a binary operation: Rove was either indicted, or he was not. If he was not, you shouldn't be in the business of saying he was when you're a news provider. Error? Yeah. It would be a big fucking error indeed. Credibility-destroying error, you ask me.

[linazelle]

45. Good thing I didn't ask you. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

51. Actually, you did ask me

See post 33.

:eyes:

[Harper_is_Bush]

38. If you don't see that

you don't really understand how the concept of credibility manifests itself in the media and the internet.

[linazelle]

48. It would be a big error. But it's all still speculation--either way.

At this point, I see you and others building a straw man--a HUGH!?!! one--so that you can knock it down but good if the story turns out to be wrong.

Chill out.

[alcibiades_mystery]

50. Your tactics here are despicable

Come out and make the accusation, and cut this cowardly bullshit. "HUGH!?!!!" Everyone gets your fucking implication, and it is the mark of a true coward, and nothing but.

[Harper_is_Bush]

52. Speaking of straw man.....

you just made one.

alcibiades_mystery correctly pointed out that there will be a "big shit storm" if the story is wrong, and that is absolutely correct.

You called that a "no room for error stance" and told him to get a grip.

In doing so, you clearly demonstrate that you don't understand the seriousness of the situation. If it is false, it will be huge. No need for anyone to build it up to be so.

I suggest you take your own advice and "chill out". It is you and a few others here who are creating an atmosphere of hostility because you cannot tolerate seeing others engage in critical thinking over this story.

[linazelle]

54. You two are funny. Why don't you go start your own anti-Leopold thread

????

[Harper_is_Bush]

56. And don't forget to pick the towel up off the floor.

Right? ;)

[alcibiades_mystery]

59. Whoever finished the toothpaste, remember to pick up a new tube!

:rofl:

And whoever ate the Doritos last night owes me a new bag!

[Harper_is_Bush]

101. LOL!

Now be nice!

EDIT: ARE YOU SAYING LEOPOLD - AND BY ASSOCIATION WILL PITT - ATE YOUR DORRITOS? WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO DESTROY THEM? IS THIS HUGH!!!?

[alcibiades_mystery]

60. We're too busy defending ourselves against your spurious and

cowardly attacks on this one.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. These passive-aggressive "I wonder about the motives..." threads

are the DU equivalent of a roommate who leaves little notes around the apartment, reminding people to "clean up" something or other. If you have a fucking charge to make, alert the moderators. All this "Harumph, I wonder about the motives..." is piddling and cowardly.

[linazelle]

30. I don't KNOW the motives therefore there is nothing to alert the

mods about. However, by posting this thread--which you are free to ignore by the way--I am bringing attention to what I see as bullshit.

[alcibiades_mystery]

39. LOL

Ooooo-kaaaaay.

Still with the post-its, huh?

Disgusting, really.

[linazelle]

44. "Post-its"????

[Harper_is_Bush]

47. see post 21.

It's an apt analogy.

[demgrrrll]

23. I read that Leopold is going to out his source if the story turns out

to be false. Seems fair to me.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

29. It doesn't matter if he outs them, if it is false. He published a story

with his name on it, whose title says Rove was already indicted. If it turns out not to be true (and I sure hope it is) then the biggest credibility lost will be the man on the byline, and rightly so.

If it's true and he scooped the entire media by days or a week, then the credit is his and truthout's.

[linazelle]

34. "If"

.

[Harper_is_Bush]

66. By saying "if" it's true is Mayberry piling some hate on Leopold?

[demgrrrll]

96. We will have to agree to disagree. It is enormously important that

he follows through with this plan if needed. I would also like to note that of course I wrote IF because that was the context of the quote and the question that was apparently posed to Leopold. The question is hypothetical and has no direct link to whether or not the story is true. No hate involved.

[Gregorian]

27. The internet is the new media.

It's fast. And everyone has access.

That's why.

The good news is, we can all communicate. And in next to almost realtime. The bad news is, lies and errors make it onto the page. And there's no editor.

That's why.

These are big stories, and this game is deadly serious. We're hitting the keys as soldiers are dodging tracer bullets. We're fighting for our lives. There's a sense that when they attack Iran, world war three is going to begin. I might be full of it, but that's the way I see it. We can't afford to lose.

[linazelle]

41. What you say makes no sense.

"The internet IS the new media."

Check.

"We can communicate in real time."

Check.

"Lies and errors make it onto the page...

What page?

"These are big stories..."

Check.

Now this is where you lost me..."

"We're hitting the keys as soldiers are dodging tracer bullets."

:crazy:

"We're fighting for our lives."

:crazy:

"There's a sense that when they attack Iran, world war three is going to begin."

And all this has what to do with Rove...:crazy:

"I might be full of it...

Check.

[Gregorian]

53. I think you do understand.

Page means webpage.

We're focused on Rove and the administration to stop the guns.

[Triana]

31. Don't hate 'em. I love Will Pitt and Truthout...

...not too familar with Leopold or his reporting in the past so can't say much about him. I WANT LIKE HELL for their story to be proven correct. However, I think that a bit of healthy skepticism is definitely in order, sans any hatred.

We'll see what happens. Hopefully, Turdblossom will get flushed like any smelly turd ought to be. But if he isn't -- well, we have to start taking stuff from TO and Leopold with some salt then. That's not a personal thing. Just like them, we also want OUR sources to be reliable. Thus far, they have been and I hope they continue to be. I ain't gonna hate them if they're not. I'd be sad (for them and for losing what seemed to be a good news source) and my skepticism would simply continue.

[Harper_is_Bush]

40. Why do you characterize healthy debate and questioning

as "hate"?

[linazelle]

43. Because it is not healthy debate and questioning. n/t

[Harper_is_Bush]

46. Well, I haven't seen any "attacks".

You offer no specifics, just a drive-by smeer of un-named posters.

Tell me, how does this rate on your scale:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1189621

Is it healthy debate and questioning?

[linazelle]

49. I have seen thread after thread here from the moment that the

info came out, some even putting forth the National Review and Matt Drudge as proof that it's false. That is not healthy debate.

[Harper_is_Bush]

55. Who has put forward the NRO or Drudge as proof that it's false?

I'm calling you out.

Give me ONE example if you can. Just one.

[linazelle]

58. The threads are here--and they were posted today. If you want to

see them, do a search. Shouldn't be that difficult for you.

[Harper_is_Bush]

62. Thought so. You won't back up your accusation because you can't

If you were so outraged over seeing someone use an NRO article or Drudge as "proof" that the stories are false, surely you posted in the thread, no?
And then you should easily be able to find the threads by looking at your post history.

Oh no, you want ME to search for threads that support YOUR outrageous and divisive accusations.

alcibiades_mystery has you pegged.

[Spazito]

57. I agree, it has been 'enlightening' to say the least

Posting a caution on a thread is one thing, what I see happening seems to be quite different. It is not unlike those posts that drove liveoaktx away, sadly.

[Harper_is_Bush]

64. Maybe people just resent being told

they're not allowed to question the details of a huge story which has thus far only appeared on one source.

Or if not being told "they're not allowed", then being told they have nefarious motives or don't like Leopold or want the story to be false.

Seeing a lot of that too, huh?

[Spazito]

69. Questioning is one thing, constant haranguing about it quite another

as evidenced in this thread alone, let alone the other ones regarding the Truthout article and it's author, imo.

[linazelle]

71. Exactly. Look at the posts by two people here who shall remain

nameless. Seems like they have more than an axe to grind regarding this issue. Again, I wonder why.

[Harper_is_Bush]

88. Oh, we're probably FReepers!

Do ya think?

:eyes:

[linazelle]

90. Are you?

[Harper_is_Bush]

97. I think

it's a shame that someone thinking of themselves as a progressive as you obviously do would have such a narrow and controlling nature.

When you find even a single thread "putting forth the National Review and Matt Drudge as proof" that the Leopold story is false, you PM me.

Hell, even if you find one that could be classified as a hateful "assault", as you said, send it along.

Otherwise your motivation here will be clear.

[Spazito]

91. It is interesting, to be sure. Agendas are often as varied as the

posters that have them, imo. I find it fascinating in a macabre way, lol.

[Harper_is_Bush]

72. The author is to blame for this thread.

Nobody else. You referred to "what I see happening", yet you cannot describe it beyond the "haranguing" in this thread.

[Spazito]

76. Hmmm, haranguing as a descriptor for what I see happening works

well for me, if you have problem with that descriptor so be it.

[Harper_is_Bush]

85. I have no problem with it. That is what this thread

and others like it are doing, to be sure.

Cowardly haranguing and accusations of unseen motivations.

The author has made broad statements about supposed threads that are attacking/hateful...and yet can provide a link to not a single one.

I could start speculating that this thread and the multiple others like it are being started by a group of people who wish to disrupt DU for some strange reason. It's very strange....see what I mean? Why would they want to stifle debate at DU with an atmosphere of fear? It's almost like an choreographed attempt to sow seeds of disruption here.

Yes, I could speculate in that way....that would be a similar kind of despicable smearing that this thread represents.

[Spazito]

95. Ahhhhh, interesting, especially given the canofun thread

I remember. I am sure it, too, couldn't have been haranguing that drove liveoaktx away, nah, no way. There was no intent to stifle the popularity of the canofun site ergo stifle discussion on DU about the great clips provided there. Did you find canofun valuable? I sure did!

Re "atmosphere of fear", all I can do is LOL at that. If you find the OP a fearful one, my goodness, you must avoid many threads here.

[Harper_is_Bush]

99. You missed the point

"atmosphere of fear" was part of my parody of what this threads author is saying.

:eyes:

I don't find this OP fearful. I find the hinted at accusations cowardly and despicable.

Oh well, some people aren't happy unless they're tossing shit in a paranoid fashion I guess.

[Spazito]

100. I hope you don't mind but ROFL at the 'tossing shit in a paranoid

fashion bit', it smacks of "do as I say, not as I do" admonition.

[Harper_is_Bush]

103. No, go right ahead.

Roll on the floor all you like.

[Spazito]

105. Thanks, you have given me plenty of reasons to do so!

It is always nice to end a Sunday night with having had cause to laugh out loud while exercising one's fingers by typing.

[Harper_is_Bush]

107. Yep, you're done.

Goodnight!

[Balbus]

63. I don't see any hate - just questioning.

This guy has stuck his neck out. If the story turns out to be true, this gentleman deserves all the pre-accolades and post accolades following the verification of his claim. If the story turns out to be false, he's fucked himself of ever being a credible journalist, and deservedly so.

No hate, just facts.

[linazelle]

65. OMG. You people are out in full force aren't you. What are you

so afraid of?

You point to Jason Leopold, from the web, as someone whose credibility as a journalist will be ruined if this story is wrong while the people who are real journalists bypass and overlook the truth on a daily basis. And yet, not a peep from you who would have Leopold's head on a platter when that happens.

[Balbus]

67. So if the story turns out to be not-true,

You'd still think of Jason Leopold as a credible journalist?

Yes or no question, not a hard one.

[linazelle]

70. Not a "yes or no" issue. The issue is, you are holding him to

a standard you don't hold mainstream journalists to.

As I said before, this is a straw man.

We have big story and you want to build Leopold up for a big fall.

In my opinion, at least he is reporting which is more than I can say for the mainstream, country club "journalists."

[Balbus]

74. Oh, it's definitely a yes or no issue..

Because it's a standard that ALL journalists are held to. So enough dancing around the question. Don't be scared to answer it, I'm genuinely curious how your thought process is working.

Yes or no...

[linazelle]

77. I've answered a complex question with a complex answer.

Black and white thinking is not my forte. I'll leave it to you.

[Balbus]

84. Well, it does take a lot of courage to stick your neck out on an issue

and make a decision. It's a lot easier to see which way the tide flows and then decide - I understand. Jason Leopold, on the other hand, has that courage. And that is an admirable quality.

I'm just a questioning person by nature. The 'sheep-think' mentality does not come easy to me, so excuse me if it seems I was harrassing. I apologize.

[Harper_is_Bush]

79. Absolute bullshit.

If a mainstream journalist came out with a story like this and it was false, they would suffer the same destroyed credibility that Leopold would.

No difference.

And just because MSM has not performed as well as we'd have liked them to doesn't mean Leopold shouldn't be held accountable for his work.

Simple fact is his credibility (and that of truthout) WILL be pretty much gone if this doesn't materialize.

I don't have to defend myself to you, especially since you've already made spurious accusations against myself and others here, but I'll say that I don't dislike Leopold. I don't even know him and don't recall his past work. It has nothing to do with my feelings about him, his organization, or my desire to see the story materialize.

You need to wake up.

[linazelle]

83. Aha! You just 'splained the REAL reason behind this attempt to

discredit Truthout.

Not ONLY will Leopold be discredited but so will TRUTHOUT...and so, by association, will WILLIAM PITT!

This IS HUGH!!?!!

'Nuff said.

[Harper_is_Bush]

92. "attempt to discredit truthout"

Is that how your brain is processing this?

I'm just pissed off at you for waving your broad-brush smear around the room.

But now I'm curious, how have I attempted to discredit truthout (or Leopold or, by association, WP?

I suppose you'll tell me to use the DU search like when I asked for a single example of all these threads you claim are attacking Leopold and truthout, huh?

'nuff said.

[Harper_is_Bush]

82. Good question. It is a yes/no question...and the refusal of your

attacker to answer is very telling.

The answer is of course "no".

[Spazito]

73. LOL, the call has gone out for sure!

Hang in there, they are practicing their skating that fine line while trying to push you over it. Try and find it amusing which, in a way, it surely is.

[Balbus]

75. You're free to answer the question also.

Or do you have your tap shoes on?

[Spazito]

81. Do you think Rather was a credible journalist even after the

'swift-boating' that occurred? And, yes, to answer the question, I would think Jason a credible journalist if some of the details of his article were not right on point but the substance, that being Rove is indicted, is correct.

Oh, and I don't wear tap shoes, never found the need for them.

[Balbus]

87. From that point on, no, he lost credibility in my opinion.

And I stopped watching CBS news altogether. When I watch something to get information, I don't want to have to worry if I'm being played again. Just my opinion.

[linazelle]

89. LOL. Black and white thinking if I ever saw it.

Throw out forty years of truth for one planted story.

[Balbus]

93. True or not-true.... Doesn't get any more black and white than that.

:shrug:

[Spazito]

98. Ahhh, very telling!

I appreciate your opinion as it belongs to you as does my opinion belong to me and both are equally of value or equally without value.

Curiosity begs me to ask: What media source do you find to be credible? I only ask in that if you found the need to stop watching CBS due to the Rather issue, it must have been difficult for you to find a source that would meet your high standards and I would very much like to know if you have found a suitable replacement?

Edited to correct typo.

[Moderator]

108. locking

please read this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1181478&mesg_id=1181478