LOCKING THE PROTEST THREAD? I PROTEST!

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

So I went to add a post from Judyth to the thread discussing the removal of Peter Lemkin from his role as moderator and deleting all of his emails, which I consider to be an intellectual atrocity. And I found a new post by Len Colby WITH WHICH I AGREED in a calling for the restoration of his posts. I was therefore about to post a reply when I discovered that this thread has been locked (shut down)! And now John Simkin, whom I have admired in the past, is telling those who are expressing concern about the inequity of high-handed and arbitrary actions like this that IF THEY DON'T LIKE IT, THE CAN JOIN THE DEEP POLITICS FORUM? John, get a grip. This is not the way to go. If you make a mistake, face up to it like a man and do what you can to correct it. That, in this case, means (minimally) restoring Peter's posts and allowing him back as a member. Here is what Judyth has to say about this--and I think she is exactly right. If you are willing to deleter the posts of a former moderator because you have become disenchanted with him, what about us?

SAW THIS ON EDUCATION FORUM.

This is what kills the spirit.

It has happened to me.

Careful explanations -- vanished.

The toil of trying to reach others with one's viewpoint --gone with the touch of a button....:

Where are all of the posts of Peter Lemkin?

What in the world is going on?

I'm quite familiar with this soul-killer. They said I left the DellaRosa forum of my own free will. Yes, after they destroyed all my posts. I then came to the Education forum and discussed with John Simkin starting a JFK assassination research forum, and people chimed in...It had been on other people's minds as well.

John had a death in the family a bit ago.

People, there are supposed to be backup archives for Peter's posts. That's in case a server goes down, etc. Peter's posts should be in the forum's archives offline. If they are not there, then backups of everybody's hard work are also missing? If Peter's posts are not in the backup archive that should exist, then the actions taken mean that we will never know what posts are summarily removed without our knowledge.

I've been through that before, too. Good luck, folks, on keeping this an honest forum.

Judyth Vary Baker

Did he type some things that seemed callous, WHEN SEEN IN ISOLATION AND NOT IN THE CONTEXT OF THOSE WHO STUCK TO HIM LIKE ....? Well guess what happens when you are attacked for hours and hours and hours on end on every single thread that you start and every single post that you make.

It is a natural response of any living thing to develop callouses. Peter was in this situation-- as nobody else on this forum has ever been --not even close-- since I first discovered it in the Fall of 2005.

If one want's to argue that someone in this social sitution should be inelligeable as a moderator, well that is highly dabateable given the conformity that might result from such an exclusion of someone who was attacked for having minority views. But it is an absoultely insane and tyranical basis for exclusion when when one realizes that one of the other moderators was a primary nemesis.

As far as I am concerned, the legitimacy of this forum is in question.

Whether via Stalinist air brushing, British libel law or some liberal mixture of the two, thousands of hours of a man's thought is consigned to oblivion with the push of a button or two. Far worse, rumors are spread that seem completely unanswerable. This without a word of explanation.

Even a Supreme Court packed with Scalia clones would offer a press release. Is there no accountability here whatsoever

[Dean Hagerman]

Why is the topic that I started locked?

[Mark Knight]

I have had my disagreements with Peter Lemkin about disinfo agents and other matters of that ilk. I have never been contacted by a moderator, so I don't know from personal experience that Peter was or wasn't a good and conscientious moderator. And Len Colby and I have NEVER preciously been on the same page about ANYTHING, to my knowledge. But Len's last post on the previous thread regarding Peter Lemkin's status and the status of his posts is SPOT ON.

I have not trashed this forum on any other forums, and IMHO, some of the topics on the Deep Politics Forum are...well, a bit deep in the excrement for my tastes. I do agree that Peter crossed a line by trashing this forum on the other forum; but I think there is historical and contextual value in some of his posts that have been recently removed, and I think perhaps the removal ot these posts should be at least reconsidered.

Strictly MY opinion on the matter; void where prohibited, yadda, yadda, yadda....

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Peter Lemkin has authorized me to post the following on his behalf:

> Jim. I'm sick at heart. 6 years. 5350 posts. I calculate 10,000

> hours research and writing - maybe more. Some VERY important and

> unique stuff. Much of it lost in my own computer due to recent

> cyberattack. Post below already posted, but thanks. Simkin's

> pronouncement total bull and lies, damn lies and distortions of time

> - he has a magic time machine and has reactions happening BEFORE

> causative action! I just got word that 'the lady in question' other

> than realizing it was all a mistake told Simkin ONE year ago. They

> made me moderator about six months ago....I'll have much more to say

> soon...but I want to get it all in temporal order. They will look

> VERY bad. AS for legal threats, I didn't mention it [and even then

> said would NOT if they reversed the actions that I mention next]

> UNTIL they took down my defense thread and her meek admission of a

> 'mistake' AND without me doing anything - cut my membership; blocked

> my IP AND deleted ALL of my posts!...and left my name defamed and no

> apology; no explanation; no sorry; no nothing......Simkin loved my

> JFK stuff, but HATED my 911 stuff....only his 'approved' conspiracies

> are to be discussed. For Andy, there has been none since Caesar was

> assassinated - and that is maybe just heresay. I'm disgusted. Peter

>

>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>> (If my past efforts at attempting to broker peace deals on the

>>> internet are any indication, I will now expect to be shot by both

>>> sides. Fire at will.)

>>>

>>> Robert Charles-Dunne

>>>

>>> Robert, I for one will never shoot at you. I think you are about the

>>> best, if not THE best and most articulate voice of reason, political

>>> acumen. plus wise and artistic wordweaving we have [or I had] on

>>> this Forum. I stand accused of nothing except trying to defend

>>> myself from false charges. Long before this broke out publicly I

>>> sent both Administrators privately offers to prove the allegations

>>> false in some in camera setting [not on the Forum publicly], as I

>>> had and have more than enough proof to do so. From one came silence,

>>> from the other more vitriol. Please note that the charges when

>>> revealed to most [although several members secretly had been let in

>>> on them, as well as the women in question through a whispering

>>> campaign - the source of which I'll leave to the imagination of such

>>> clever people] accused me of having done untoward things to multiple

>>> women [there was an 's' applied twice]. Now we all know there was

>>> never even the one. So, though not guilty; though not presented the

>>> evidence; though not allowed to defend myself; and though I did try

>>> briefly - that has all be expunged - along with the half-baked

>>> limited-modified-hangout demi-semi-partial retraction [also gone].

>>> No full retraction, no apology, no re-instatement of my membership

>>> [no charges as to why it was removed]; lies that my IP was/is not

>>> blocked, when it is. I seem to remember from the Watergate era a

>>> phrase that went like this: What did they know [or invent], and when

>>> did they know it [or invent it]? Walker said he was taking some

>>> leave and has not left. He feigned resignation only to come back to

>>> vote against me. Vote on what and a vote taken just before the

>>> 'news' that the 'rumour' was false....great timing....one might even

>>> say a bit 'too good' to be true. So, the man who believes in no

>>> conspiracy since the assassination of Caesar apparently, it seems,

>>> was in some way involved in one - yet in a letter to the mods I was

>>> accused of a conspiracy to destroy the good name of Mr. Walker.

>>> Ironic, in the extreme. It started IMO as a political vendetta and

>>> grew and grew. My attempts to present evidence against vague charges

>>> or hear them or defend myself were denied, ignored or when attempted

>>> on my own removed. It never happened - or so they'd like you to

>>> believe. I'm a teacher at University, currently unemployed - imagine

>>> trying to get a job with these allegations over one's head, let

>>> alone a date. So many employers and potential dates 'google' names

>>> just to see what pops up. There were other epithets hurled at me in

>>> public and in private - thinking like a Nazi, unstable, insane

>>> [boilingly so], dangerous, and on and on and on. Found to be

>>> innocent, yet executed - without trial or due process. I belive

>>> commonly known as a lynching. It was all in the timing and the

>>> manipulation of the whispering campaign. Of what may I ask am I

>>> accused of to warrant removal from the Forum, ditto my IP blocked? I

>>> did not start any of this. I did not ever do anything wrong or break

>>> forum rules - yes I showed a private message as my only way to

>>> expose the ugly rumor and to defend myself as I saw the noose

>>> dangling on yonder tree with my neck's name on it. I thank all those

>>> who see some injustice in this. I feel personally offended and my

>>> reputation besmirched [a mild understatement]. Peter Lemkin, in

>>> banishment and my IP blocked.

Why is the topic that I started locked?

[Kathleen Collins]

Peter Lemkin has authorized me to post the following on his behalf:

> Jim. I'm sick at heart. 6 years. 5350 posts. I calculate 10,000

> hours research and writing - maybe more. Some VERY important and

> unique stuff. Much of it lost in my own computer due to recent

> cyberattack. Post below already posted, but thanks. Simkin's

> pronouncement total bull and lies, damn lies and distortions of time

> - he has a magic time machine and has reactions happening BEFORE

> causative action! I just got word that 'the lady in question' other

> than realizing it was all a mistake told Simkin ONE year ago. They

> made me moderator about six months ago....I'll have much more to say

> soon...but I want to get it all in temporal order. They will look

> VERY bad. AS for legal threats, I didn't mention it [and even then

> said would NOT if they reversed the actions that I mention next]

> UNTIL they took down my defense thread and her meek admission of a

> 'mistake' AND without me doing anything - cut my membership; blocked

> my IP AND deleted ALL of my posts!...and left my name defamed and no

> apology; no explanation; no sorry; no nothing......Simkin loved my

> JFK stuff, but HATED my 911 stuff....only his 'approved' conspiracies

> are to be discussed. For Andy, there has been none since Caesar was

> assassinated - and that is maybe just heresay. I'm disgusted. Peter

>

>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>> (If my past efforts at attempting to broker peace deals on the

>>> internet are any indication, I will now expect to be shot by both

>>> sides. Fire at will.)

>>>

>>> Robert Charles-Dunne

>>>

>>> Robert, I for one will never shoot at you. I think you are about the

>>> best, if not THE best and most articulate voice of reason, political

>>> acumen. plus wise and artistic wordweaving we have [or I had] on

>>> this Forum. I stand accused of nothing except trying to defend

>>> myself from false charges. Long before this broke out publicly I

>>> sent both Administrators privately offers to prove the allegations

>>> false in some in camera setting [not on the Forum publicly], as I

>>> had and have more than enough proof to do so. From one came silence,

>>> from the other more vitriol. Please note that the charges when

>>> revealed to most [although several members secretly had been let in

>>> on them, as well as the women in question through a whispering

>>> campaign - the source of which I'll leave to the imagination of such

>>> clever people] accused me of having done untoward things to multiple

>>> women [there was an 's' applied twice]. Now we all know there was

>>> never even the one. So, though not guilty; though not presented the

>>> evidence; though not allowed to defend myself; and though I did try

>>> briefly - that has all be expunged - along with the half-baked

>>> limited-modified-hangout demi-semi-partial retraction [also gone].

>>> No full retraction, no apology, no re-instatement of my membership

>>> [no charges as to why it was removed]; lies that my IP was/is not

>>> blocked, when it is. I seem to remember from the Watergate era a

>>> phrase that went like this: What did they know [or invent], and when

>>> did they know it [or invent it]? Walker said he was taking some

>>> leave and has not left. He feigned resignation only to come back to

>>> vote against me. Vote on what and a vote taken just before the

>>> 'news' that the 'rumour' was false....great timing....one might even

>>> say a bit 'too good' to be true. So, the man who believes in no

>>> conspiracy since the assassination of Caesar apparently, it seems,

>>> was in some way involved in one - yet in a letter to the mods I was

>>> accused of a conspiracy to destroy the good name of Mr. Walker.

>>> Ironic, in the extreme. It started IMO as a political vendetta and

>>> grew and grew. My attempts to present evidence against vague charges

>>> or hear them or defend myself were denied, ignored or when attempted

>>> on my own removed. It never happened - or so they'd like you to

>>> believe. I'm a teacher at University, currently unemployed - imagine

>>> trying to get a job with these allegations over one's head, let

>>> alone a date. So many employers and potential dates 'google' names

>>> just to see what pops up. There were other epithets hurled at me in

>>> public and in private - thinking like a Nazi, unstable, insane

>>> [boilingly so], dangerous, and on and on and on. Found to be

>>> innocent, yet executed - without trial or due process. I belive

>>> commonly known as a lynching. It was all in the timing and the

>>> manipulation of the whispering campaign. Of what may I ask am I

>>> accused of to warrant removal from the Forum, ditto my IP blocked? I

>>> did not start any of this. I did not ever do anything wrong or break

>>> forum rules - yes I showed a private message as my only way to

>>> expose the ugly rumor and to defend myself as I saw the noose

>>> dangling on yonder tree with my neck's name on it. I thank all those

>>> who see some injustice in this. I feel personally offended and my

>>> reputation besmirched [a mild understatement]. Peter Lemkin, in

>>> banishment and my IP blocked.

Why is the topic that I started locked?

Please allow Peter Lemkin to come back to this forum. He is a very intense man and is very concerned about USA. I think he may even be threatened or under attack in other areas of his life. I don't know what happened here recently -- a sexual abuse issue? Let him give his side. Please. He added a lot to this forum. The extent of his work speaks for itself -- although it's all been removed.

I also think Evan Burton is a great guy and not a prejudiced moderator, fair to others even if he disagrees with them. Evan is no "toady" to anyone. He disagrees with Peter yet votes for him to be a moderator, etc.

I haven't had access to a computer for a few days and I don't know what happened and am trying to put it together.

Anyone can be accused of something. Investigate this woman's claim, but allow Peter to stay a member. How do we know what any member does in his/her private life? Peter is going through a very rough time. Please help him.

Kathy C

[Kathleen Collins]

I formally protest the removal of Peter Lemkin. The research community has lost a great man: Rich DellaRosa, someone with ethics. Now Peter is gone from here. A really bad week for those who remember President Kennedy. Think it over, moderators.

Kathy C

[Joel D. Gruhn]

I formally protest the removal of Peter Lemkin. The research community has lost a great man: Rich DellaRosa, someone with ethics. Now Peter is gone from here. A really bad week for those who remember President Kennedy. Think it over, moderators.

Kathy C

not to mention Tosh Plumlee... add a score more, who in frustration will simply decide that they have better things to do. We had a valuable and unique place here to share ideas.

[Dean Hagerman]

Why is the topic that I started locked?

?

[Bernice Moore]

I formally protest the removal of Peter Lemkin. The research community has lost a great man: Rich DellaRosa, someone with ethics. Now Peter is gone from here. A really bad week for those who remember President Kennedy. Think it over, moderators.

Kathy C

not to mention Tosh Plumlee... add a score more, who in frustration will simply decide that they have better things to do. We had a valuable and unique place here to share ideas.

AGREED JOEL, AND MENTIONING TOSH, AND NOW PERHAPS HE HAS GONE AS HE DID STATE...HE WAS..I HAVE BEEN RECALLING ALL THE INFORMATION SHARED BETWEEN TOSH AND PETER, THAT HAD BEEN POSTED LIKE IN CONVERSATION, WITH EACH OTHER,THAT ONLY THEY SHARED, PLUS HIS KNOWLEDGE OF TOM WILSON'S IMPORTANT WORK AND HIS KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONTACT WITH TOM'S FAMILY, PLUS HIS INFORMATION POSTED RE WECHT MARRS SHAW, as well as others....ALL GONE DELIBERATELY DELETED WHY ??????! WHOMEVER DID SO DELETED HISTORY, THAT WE STRIVE SO HARD FOR, AND IS ALSO SO DIFFICULT TO COME BY...AND THAT UNLESS SAVED AND RETURNED TO THE FORUM IS LOST FOREVER, WHO DELETES HISTORY...??? NOW AS ANDY had posted in PETER'S long thread, the woman, and that was SINGLE not plural as ANDY had once posted BY MISTAKE, had sent him AN EMAIL THAT IT WAS ALL A MISUNDERSTANDING..NO EMAIL SEXUAL HARASSMENT EVER TOOK PLACE..NONE.EVER!!!!!!!!!!.....ANDY DID POST THAT INFORMATION BUT IT ALSO IS GONE NOW, SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT POINT IS MADE VERY CLEAR SHE HAS TAKEN BACK ANY ACCUSATION SHE MADE AS A MISTAKE, AND SEEING THAT ANDY HAS CHOSEN NOT TO REPOST THAT INFO AS YET, I CHOOSE TO MAKE SURE IT HAS BEEN IN THIS THREAD....thanks b

Edited March 13, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Bernice Moore]

PETER HAS SEEN THE THREAD AND HAS ASKED THAT THIS NOTE BE POSTED...THANKS...

''Unlike JSs inuendo, I never asked for my posts to be taken down, and have privately asked for them to be reinstated - not so much for me; but for history and the truth we all strive to achieve. It is like what was done in the USSR when someone had fallen from political 'grace' they'd be airbrushed out of the old photos. Don't airbrush/censor history of this forum and the history of JFK and many other important issues on which I posted....PLEASE! Peter Lemkin.

[Dean Hagerman]

The fact that the sexual harrasment claims NEVER happened and yet Peter is still not reinstated makes no sense at all

This woman lied, I say that her name be made public so she has to defend her lies, just like Peter had to defend her false claims

I am very upset at how Peter has been treated and have offered him my help in whatever way he may need it

What happened to Peter was WRONG

[Len Colby]

The fact that the sexual harrasment claims NEVER happened and yet Peter is still not reinstated makes no sense at all

This woman lied, I say that her name be made public so she has to defend her lies, just like Peter had to defend her false claims

I am very upset at how Peter has been treated and have offered him my help in whatever way he may need it

What happened to Peter was WRONG

Except that the sexual harassment charge was neither the principle nor the precipitating cause of any of the sanctions he suffered. The incident happened about over year ago. Peter repeatedly abused members whose views differed from his something that was wrong for anyone to do but unacceptable from a moderator. When advised he might be relieved of his duties he sent abusive PM's to the administrators and other moderators. Once he was suspended as a moderator made all sorts of derogatory comments about the EF on the DPF and sent even more abusive PMs to the admins./mods. and threatened legal action against this forum. John already explained this. If it weren't for Peter and Jack only John, Andy, Peter, the woman and I would have known about this and even I wasn't sure it was Peter.

I suspect she retracted because Peter was threatening legal action against the forum (and she could surmise she could be a target) and/or because he revealed her identity to members of the DPF.

[Len Colby]

Changed to normal text for legibility:

Now as Len had posted in Peter's long thread, the woman, and that was single not plural as Len had once posted by mistake, had sent him an email that it was all a misunderstanding..no email sexual harassment ever took place..none.ever!!!!!!!!!!.....Len did post that information but it also is gone now, so I wanted to make sure that point is made very clear she has taken back any accusation she made as a mistake, and seeing that Len has chosen not to repost that info as yet, I choose to make sure it has been in this thread....thanks b

B. you’re confusing me with Andy Walker. He told Peter in a PM (or e-mail) that multiple women complained about him. Peter who repeatedly insisted that private communications should not be posted without the author’s permission hypocritically post that PM on the DPF. Maggida and/or Jack repeated that info here. It was also Andy who received the retraction from the woman and posted it here. Peter also claimed to have received such a retraction. I think the retraction was made under duress (see above)

While I agree his posts should be restored and his IP unblocked Peter should either remain banned or be allowed back under moderation. I lean towards the former but admit I’m biased.

[Bernice Moore]

Changed to normal text for legibility:

Now as Len had posted in Peter's long thread, the woman, and that was single not plural as Len had once posted by mistake, had sent him an email that it was all a misunderstanding..no email sexual harassment ever took place..none.ever!!!!!!!!!!.....Len did post that information but it also is gone now, so I wanted to make sure that point is made very clear she has taken back any accusation she made as a mistake, and seeing that Len has chosen not to repost that info as yet, I choose to make sure it has been in this thread....thanks b

B. you’re confusing me with Andy Walker. He told Peter in a PM (or e-mail) that multiple women complained about him. Peter who repeatedly insisted that private communications should not be posted without the author’s permission hypocritically post that PM on the DPF. Maggida and/or Jack repeated that info here. It was also Andy who received the retraction from the woman and posted it here. Peter also claimed to have received such a retraction. I think the retraction was made under duress (see above)

While I agree his posts should be restored and his IP unblocked Peter should either remain banned or be allowed back under moderation. I lean towards the former but admit I’m biased.

thank you len for the clarification, yes i was in error, as you say not you, then Andy...i shall go and make the corrections...b

CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE....

Edited March 13, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Len Colby]

Thanks for making the correction. I was wrong about when the 'incident' took place, it happened last summer or perhaps fall.