Jan, Kathy Steve and others ‘on the fence’ concerning 9/11, I am curious as to what points concerning 9/11 you have doubts about. I suggest the following: each of you mention your top (up to five) doubts, hopefully you will look over the existent threads to avoid rehash. The partisans of each side can give you their take.

I just voted and the results did not reflect my vote.

About what Id expect from someone so low as to post together quotes and unstated assumptions ( in the j'accusers head) to imply things dealing with violence about another member.

Sleaze. Period

There is no way Len - or even the mods - can rig this. I highly doubt it would even be possible for John or Andy to do so.

Try voting again. If you can't, then you vote was either recorded, you hit 'submit vote' without making any selections, or there is something wrong with your browser.

Nathaniel should have been able to figure out that I have no control over the foru's software. His attack is typical of the "9/11CT" mindset; something goes wrong -"it must be a conspiracy". Disappointing (but not at all surprising) that he would make an accusation before ascertaining the facts. But that's what 'truthers' do in general.

The odd thing though is at this point it says there were 5 votes but only 4 are registered Perhaps Andy or John could set it so that he could vote again.

I attempted to vote. I got a message that I had not registered a vote
by selecting one or more radio buttons, when I obviously HAD. Apparently
the poll is rigged to reject votes of a certain point of view.

I tried three times. Same result.

Jack

I don't know what the problem with the poll could be for Jack or Nathaniel. This poll worked normally for me, when I tried moments ago. I was the 7th participant. I suggest you try again, or try another computer from another location. I don't have the means nor the skills to investigate why this may not work for some members.

Antti

I voted [said 8th vote] and results, I believe don't reflect correctly my vote and the views I'm sure I know of some others who've voted. But so what. Just another LC-911 trick. I'm sure he'll claim that the 'vote' will 'prove' the facts of the matter. Let's vote on history and truth....especially with this very poorly constructed 'poll' that won't even tell us who on this Forum [who vote] believes what.....for all that is worth. Endless bag 'o tricks has Len.

I recommend, as always, not to vote.

Taking part in polls, like elections, is simply playing the game of another's choosing...

Yours cynically

David

I voted for 2, 4 and 2. I will explain why later today. Steve.

Len, I have purposely ceased commenting on 911 for two reasons, one, I was in danger of being branded a "left gatekeeper" and I don't have Chomsky's intellectual breadth or depth, and two, What was intially a tragedy for thousands of innocent Americans, and laterly hunderds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's, is in danger of becoming a mere parlour game. But, here's my two pence worth.

First, lets seperate out the diasterous Iraqi, and Afgan wars, definately a conspiracy, aided and abetted by Blair and his "Dodgy"(read outright lies ) dossiers, and false claims about Iraqi strike capablity.
THIS, should people choose to see it, is the real conspiracy.

Second, America was warned by at least ten other intel services of what was coming, Putin even tried to speak directly to Bush only days before 911, so any claims of being taken by surprise are, by extention, lies. The Neo cons simply had to sit back, relax (you can always blame incompitence) and wait. It would also be interesting to know how deeply penetrated Al quada were, particularly by the CIA, their old paymasters in Afganistan.

When I posted my poll selections I got the following response from the forum remote viewing software

"Your vote for Jeb Bush is being processed"

I demand a recount.

In one place let it happen has 1/10 votes; in another let it happen has 50%. Flawed poll and anyway a poll shows [if well structured] what we [who care to 'vote'] think - not what happened. At university I spend much time on the construction of questionaires [polls] and this one lacks what is called internal consistancy. I think Len constructed it this way under MIHOP protocol.

No Peter in one it got 1 vote in the other it got 2. I have no control if someone was inconsistant. Your belief that the "results...don't reflect correctly [your] vote" are probally due to similar confusion.




This is what is was meant to reflect



Odd that someone who can't even interpret simple poll results correctlly claims to construct polls. The 1st question was to determine members' views the 2nd and 3rd were to messure how sure they were.

I started a test poll here on a forum that has been inactive for years.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...=12799&st=0

It seems that Nathaniel clicked the "See Poll Results (null vote)" option. I imagine Jack didn't make a selection in one or more of the 3 questions, the software only lets you vote if your make a selection for all 3.

If any of the supposed problems are due to the software rather that Jack, Peter and Nathniel's errors I obviously have no control over that. This didn't stop them from making completely unfounded accusations.

SO LEN ADMITS THE POLL IS RIGGED. Two of the categories HAD NO ANSWERS which I agreed with,
One category had only ONE answer I agreed with. So I voted in just ONE category! So my vote was
not counted.

To be valid, each category should have a NONE OF THE ABOVE response.

So much for honesty.

Jack

Me too, Stephen, except in my case it is self preservation, pure and simple. I am not going to come over here and get blasted. I get my fair share on the other forum, which is why I have learned alot of time that to be protective "I keep my visions to myself."(Fleetwood Mac, Rumours)

I am not really happy to come home, and find myself being dragged through the mud.


The Immoderate Moderator.

Completely Unfounded Accusations?

Len, since when are we so formal that we use our full names around here?

No Jack because I have no control over the software. I doubt even Andy does, if you are unhappy with this ‘rule’ I suggest you get in touch with the people at Invision rather than make baseless accusations against other member’s of this forum. But then again you have a track record for such behavior and even got put on moderation for it.

Even if I had such control if wouldn’t amount to “fixing” the poll because I had no way of anticipating some members would not want to answer all the questions nor predicting what their views would be.

Ever heard of the concept of choosing the answer which best reflects your view? Which questions “HAD NO ANSWERS which [you] agreed with,”?



You could be right but it didn’t occur to me the options seemed to wide enough to reflect all views.



So much for not being a …

Yes Nate (is that what you want me to call you?) unfounded.

You accused me of:

Misquoting you
Fixing the poll and
“mpl[ing] things dealing with violence about another member”

All untrue, all unfounded all without basis in fact

Best. Post. Ever!

The poll is not rigged by Len. This has been explained.

I will consider any further accusations of "rigging" as being a personal attack on Len, prohibited under the rules, okay?

If you think the poll and / or the results are a crock, then that's fine. Say so, if you like. Do NOT accuse Len or anyone else of rigging the poll.

I had a number of problems with the poll.

first of all it required that I show ID
Next it stated that it was out of ballots
Next try it stated I was on the "no Vote List"
When I tried it the fourth time it was closed
Is this poll located in Florida?

Len admits HE WROTE THE POLL QUESTIONS. I accuse Len of "writing the poll questions". Is that prohibited?
He admits he did not offer choices for persons who found ALL REPLIES unacceptable. All right?
If anyone wanted to vote, they were forced to choose unacceptable answers by Len's choice of questions. True?
What would you call that? I know what I call it.

Jack

If you are unhappy with the choices, that's fine. No problem. Just don't accuse Len of rigging the poll.

"If anyone wanted to vote, they were forced to choose unacceptable answers by Len's choice of questions. True?" No, not true. You'd not choose answer. The fact that the forum software would appear (and I am not sure of this - John, can you confirm?) to have a problem with answering some questions and not others is a forum problem. Len has nothing to do with it.

Len admits WRITING the poll. The forum software did not write the poll with inadequate choices. Len did.

Jack

"Inadequate" is NOT rigging. If none of the choices were sufficient for you, then don't answer. It's your choice. If you made a wrong choice, then tough luck. If you think the poll is a crock, then say so (as I think we can take your vitriol as expressing). A reminder - do not accuse Len of rigging the poll, as he has done no such thing.

Jack you still haven’t said which questions you couldn’t answer and why none of the options were acceptable to you. If you give a reasonable answer I’ll acknowledge the poll was badly set up.

Bumped for new members and old ones who never got around to voting. Careful do NOT click on the "See Poll Results (null vote)" button if you want to vote.

you've gotta be kidding, right? The Len and Evan Show? How quaint...

Whats the matter guard dawg? Choker collar cuting off the blood to your brain again?

Well, Evan.......you threaten to call those who cite the rigged nature of Len's poll [it, IMO, was constructed to skew things as he preferred ,and offered those who oppose the official version few real options] an 'attack' on Len; but I'll bet you don't do a thing with Craig's ad hom at David. Bias? IMO Craig should have long ago been put on moderation [or removed for the same exact reasons as/if Slattery was removed]...before your time Evan, but some of us remember...have long memories and accurate ones....on the Forum, and [more importantly] on history and its patterns.

Exactly who the "f" do you think you are Lemkin? ALL Healy posts are ad homs and you have no problem with that? Oh thats right, he has that same slavish devotion to a warped world view as you. Quite the hyprocrite you are Lemkin! And a MOD to boot! Did you forget your nasty "nazi" remarks?

I think its quite clear you simply can't take seeing your worldview cut to ribbons. Lemkin really has no use for freedom of speach IF it shows his beliefs to be...well lets just say...bulllcrap.

Evan, I'm waiting....

What exactly ARE you waiting for mr. hypocrite? Inquiring minds really want to know?

Your true stripes are showing loud and clear!


Added on Edit:

I just got this from the unmoderated moderator-hypocrite Lemkin:

"Craig, You hurled an angry ad hom at a fellow member who wasn't even commenting upon you or your posts. This is a warning. Next time it will be moderation."

Considering, YOU, Healy and White are very guilty of the same offence..in fact its the SOP ofd all of you. Has this "warning" been passed along to ALL of you? If not, WHY?

And if not I request Lemkin's status as moderator be pulled as he is unfit for the position by virtue of his hypocrisy.

You are a moderator, too. So moderate where you believe it is required, and then list the action taken on the pinned area at top of the page.

Yes, I am and I raised the warning level on Craig Lamson one level and sent him a warning for his ad hom attack at someone not even commenting on him or one of his post #31, I believe.

Interestingly, when I went to the moderator's actions thread it was locked, so I could add nothing. I imagine this is just an oversight soon to be corrected.

Peter, go into Mod options, select open thread, make you report, and re-lock the thread. I have opened it for you.

No, thats not THE truth at ALL ...again lemkin TELLS A FALSEHOOD.

lemkin wrote in a PM:

"Craig, You hurled an angry ad hom at a fellow member who wasn't even commenting upon you or your posts. This is a warning. Next time it will be moderation. "

Where in his email to me do you se anything about warning levels?

You see a direct threat instead.

In addition limkin has hurled his own angry ad homs in recent posts towrds Len Colby BASED ON DOCUMENTED FALSEHOODS. Where is his warning ? There is NO room for a moderator to be a hypocritre.

In addition David Healy hurled an angry ad hom in the post that started this whole lemkin powertrip. Where is lemkin's warning to David Healy and his threat.

In addition Jack WHite hurled an angry ad hom in a recent thread and instead of dealing with White instead lemkin ATTACKS the next poster who comments on Whites ad hom! Where is the warning for both White and lemkin?

Or is the unmoderated moderator-hypocrite lemkin on a very bised powertrip?

No, Craig it was the truth and I found how to post on the moderator's actions thread. I note that you and Len have started a jihad against my being a moderator. I'm not surprised. If I could survive eight years of W as co-President with Chaney, you can survive my being a moderator. Take a stress pill and calm down. I realize Obama and me must just make your year....life is tough, at times.... But you have your big SUV and Halliburton stock [as you once bragged to show how you were better than I in a post after I told how I'd lost all]. Others were unhappy with other moderators. Life is compromise and trying to get along the best we all can. One would hope posts here would mostly shed light and not just generate heat. Your 'Not that crap again' post to Jack's recent post is not what I'd call 'light'.... Mr lighting. It came not long after the one I raised your warning level for. We've all gotten hot under the collar at times, all made comments that were mistakes or we regret - myself included. Just cool it a bit would be my suggestion and request...and not the constant, full-on pit-bull angry stuff. Enlighten us.

No Peter, it was NOT THE TRUTH as your message to me CLEARLY shows. You are a PROVEN and SERIAL teller of untruths and simply NOT FIT to be a moderator. In your email you did NOT raise my warning level, YOU SIMPLY THREATENED TO PLACE ME ON MODERATIION!

Do I need to post YOUR EXACT WORDS for a third time?

And then we have you...in your last post..HURLING AN ANGRY AD HOM at me...

quoting lemkin:

"what I'd call 'light'.... Mr lighting."

It should be noted that the phrase mr lighting is an attempt to slam me and was coined by that other serial ad him hurler..Jack White...even tho lemkin got it wrong....

Hell the fact of the matter is your entire post to me is nothing but one big ad hom!

SO lemkin..where is your warning TO YOURSELF for hurling angry ad homs?

Or are you just a serial hypocrite as well?

self deleted

Your warning level was at 20% and now is at 30% - congratulations - I believe the highest on the block. IMO your acting like a little child, out of fear. Just a remiminder not to call someone a liar here.... maybe your 'guardian angel' can no longer save you as easily as before, Mr. politepost. Your and Len's jihad to have me removed as a moderator are noted - and expected. I'd say I present a good balance to one of the other moderators and intend/pledge not to let politics nor opinions, but the Forum rules to be my guidelines. Oh, by the way, I'm saving your recent temper-tantrum of posts and PM/reports about me, and if they continue long and apace will be passed on to the Administration for evaluation and action, as they see fit over your fits. Again, if you have anything to add on a subject - try that - rather than your endless, tiring, and often foul-mouthed, mad-dog-angry attacks. You also seem to lack an understanding of initiation of an attack and a response.....

What a bunch of horsecrap. You have been proven THREE TIMES in the last few days of telling bald faced UNTRUTHS. OH wait, given the untruth you uttered about not reading Lens posts and them responding to one, that makes FOUR! Fact: Peter Lemkin, the unmoderated, hypocrite-moderator is a PROVEN SERIAL teller of UNTRUTHS! It's bad enough that you are biased and a hypocrite but you simply can't tell the truth! Not the qualities required in a moderator to be sure!

So now you hurl threats and ad homs as part of your new powertrip. What a shining example the serial untruth teller and hurler of ad homs, that include calling members nazi's, sets! Hypocrite is not a strong enough word!

BTW, perhaps you should bone up on the forum rules, you just told another UNTRUTH in regards to one of them.

I don't fear you Lemkin, not in the least. It is however plenty clear who YOU FEAR.

BTW, Please DO pass along my reports and posts to the admins...THATS THE WHOLE POINT IN MAKING THEM!

Again Lemkin makes a statement he can't back up.

From the forum rules:

(iii) Wherever possible, members should give references (books, documents, etc) concerning the comments that they make

Since he made this statemant I DEMAND he back it up with the post he referenced or issue a retraction.

He IS a moderator after all.

If he can't back his claim or issue the retraction he should be removed as a moderator.

It is my observation and opinion that your posts are often constructed, intentionally, to throw a thread into chaos and dissention and cast a bad light on the Forum. I'm quite sure you responded about your SUV and then your Halliburton stocks in the same thread long ago. I can't find it given the very poor search feature. If I do, I'll post. I'm sure others here will remember - if any do, kindly say so - wherein Craig will no doubt call them telling an untruth. I even think one of the Adminstrators commented in that thread about your crass brag and upside-down value system. This is all off topic. Why don't you start a thread on this.....I'll give you enough rope to hang yourself. Keep up on this thread endlessly off topic and we'll call it a day. Craig - guardian of truth and right and fairplay and the official version of the 'American' way? I think not. It was not me who gave you the other two warnings, was I? Maybe  you had best look in the mirror and examine your style - unless, that is, it is preplanned and for a purpose and exactly what you want it to 'acheive' here - dissension, chaos and a black-eye for the Forum, plus the derailing of threads. 

Typical Lemkin, the teller of untruths! I had no problem at all finding the passage in question and it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that LEMKIN is once again telling an untruth and engaging in his time tested pattern of nasty ad hom attacks. And once again we see Lemkin trying to evade his original claim but changing the situation....how very pathetic of you.

mr. untruth teller pot, meet mr kettle.

Of course he "can't find it". As usual it shows him to be a blatant teller of untruths! If it were one tim affair, no problem. However it is a sad fact that Lemkin is a SERIAL teller of untruths and not fit to be a moderator.

Talk about showing the forum in a bad light...exactly what does having a PROVEN and SERIAL teller of untruths as a moderator say about the very backbone of the forum? Not anything good thats for sure!

Shall I post it Lemkin? Inquiring minds want to know!

BTW Lemkin, the warnings are of little issue to me, the first two were taken on principal, something you seem to have little of...

Craig

Though I agree that Peter is prone to making vicious personal attacks and inaccurate claims (and in at least one case did so intentionally) I’m not sure what your point is, you have said on several occasions you own Halliburton stock and an SUV among other vehicles and rubbed Peter’s penury in his face.

My ownership of stock nor vehicles is not in question...

My point is that this is what Lemkin claims:

"But you have your big SUV and Halliburton stock [as you once bragged to show how you were better than I in a post after I told how I'd lost all]"

Note the part in bold. This is a TOTAL FABRICATION and as such is the worst kind of ad hom. It's yet ANOTHER EXAMPLE of LEMKIN telling untruths.

The exact exchange proves my point perfecty. Yet LEMKIN is unwilling to post the exchange. WHY? Because it shows him to be less than honest?

The search function works quite well and I'm guessing you to have found the exact thread. Am I correct or not?

Poll bumped for David and other "newbies".