Deep Politics Forum Kaput?

[Greg Parker]

The original message quoted by Bill was issued by the company that ran the forum. They just have a sense of humour. That has now been removed as well as the other pages on view such as book lists. It clearly has not been hacked or has suffered a denial of service. It would seem they have been unwilling to pay their bills. The problem for Deep Politics was that it did not get many page views. Unfortunately, it is very difficult for new forums to get established in search-engine rankings. As they found that forum debates was just a small group of people talking to each other they probably decided it was not worth the money or the intellectual effort involved. I was reading the other day that 95% of all blogs are abandoned within three months. People come to the conclusion that there are no point writing things if no one reads it.

John, you've ruined a great gumbo! Everything was being thrown into the pot, but you just had to go and add a dash too much sage...

ps

I came to the conclusion I quite like talking to myself... at least half the time I know where I'm coming from...

[Greg Parker]

I will hold off until I hear from the people involved.

Maybe you missed it, but Jack has already posted an email purportedly from Charles Drago stating that the forum was hacked, and that they'll be back.

I say "purportedly" because, you know, who knows? On the other hand, I'm 99% certain the post under John's name really was by him - and John being John, I'm sure he had confidence in his facts prior to posting.

[William Kelly]

I will hold off until I hear from the people involved.

Maybe you missed it, but Jack has already posted an email purportedly from Charles Drago stating that the forum was hacked, and that they'll be back.

I say "purportedly" because, you know, who knows? On the other hand, I'm 99% certain the post under John's name really was by him - and John being John, I'm sure he had confidence in his facts prior to posting.

And I've heard from a DPF original member who says the forum wasn't hacked.

So which way is it?

I guess we'll find out.

BK

[Dawn Meredith]

The original message quoted by Bill was issued by the company that ran the forum. They just have a sense of humour. That has now been removed as well as the other pages on view such as book lists. It clearly has not been hacked or has suffered a denial of service. It would seem they have been unwilling to pay their bills. The problem for Deep Politics was that it did not get many page views. Unfortunately, it is very difficult for new forums to get established in search-engine rankings. As they found that forum debates was just a small group of people talking to each other they probably decided it was not worth the money or the intellectual effort involved. I was reading the other day that 95% of all blogs are abandoned within three months. People come to the conclusion that there are no point writing things if no one reads it.

Not paying the bills? Bull crap John. This is NOT what has occurred. We all know exactly what did and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it.

And we have been around for years now. We get lots of views.

Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

The original message quoted by Bill was issued by the company that ran the forum. They just have a sense of humour. That has now been removed as well as the other pages on view such as book lists. It clearly has not been hacked or has suffered a denial of service. It would seem they have been unwilling to pay their bills. The problem for Deep Politics was that it did not get many page views. Unfortunately, it is very difficult for new forums to get established in search-engine rankings. As they found that forum debates was just a small group of people talking to each other they probably decided it was not worth the money or the intellectual effort involved. I was reading the other day that 95% of all blogs are abandoned within three months. People come to the conclusion that there are no point writing things if no one reads it.

Not paying the bills? Bull crap John. This is NOT what has occurred. We all know exactly what did and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it.

And we have been around for years now. We get lots of views.

Dawn

To John Simkin

You wrote: "It clearly has not been hacked or has suffered a denial of service. It would seem they have been unwilling to pay their bills."

In fact, DPF was hacked. Your statement that the founders have been unwilling to pay their bills is a supposition on your part, and a wholly false one.

You wrote: "The problem for Deep Politics was that it did not get many page views."

Complete rubbish and factually wrong. The DPF equivalent of the "political conspiracies" section of the EF is vibrant and thriving, with over three hundred members and surfers viewing on a regular basis, and thousands of page views in many threads. Many members are specialist researchers and the range of debate and subjects discussed is far in excess of anything ever achieved by the EF. Indeed, by comparison, the EF "Political Conspiracies" section is a dead zone, with a hanful of viewers and a chronically poor standard of debate. This is a direct result of the bias and deceit of moderator Burton and the disruption tactics of the likes of "Colby". And your own gross negligence.

You wrote: "Unfortunately, it is very difficult for new forums to get established in search-engine rankings. As they found that forum debates was just a small group of people talking to each other they probably decided it was not worth the money or the intellectual effort involved."

John - you seem to be describing the EF "Political Conspiracies" section.

DPF will soon be resurrected, and will continue to expose the nefarious activities of deep political forces.

We know our friends and we know our enemies.

The founders of the Deep Politics Forum

[Len Colby]

I know from personal experience that Drago is dishonest. He once insisted that I edit a post where I had quoted him in the Political Conspiracies forum and then when I did he claimed in a post here (the JFK forum) that I had done so to “cover [my] tracks” omitting that I had done so pursuant to his demand. So I don’t believe a word he says. My guess based on Bill telling us a member told him something else is going on, Dawn’s cryptic post and the fact that the same message is still up is that the forum was dissolved due to a disagreement among the administrators and Drago simply lied rather than admit that. Given the immaturity and paranoia of the founders it is not hard to imagine some minor dispute leading to such an ignoble end.

Even if it was the victims of hackers I see no reason to assume it was due to the `forces of darkness’ hackers attack sites including mainstream ones all the time. Even if they were targeted I find it hard to feel any sympathy it was formed specifically to exclude people with differing views and Drago especially made no secret of his contempt of the speech rights of those who begged to differ with his world view. Other than humor value I never saw anything of value posted there.

DiEugenio was is the basis for your belief that they were mirroring Wikileaks? I doubt they had the bandwidth.

.

[Guest]

DPF will soon be resurrected, and will continue to expose the nefarious activities of deep political forces.

We know our friends and we know our enemies.

The founders of the Deep Politics Forum

I am looking forward enormously to the latest, and I presume yet smaller, incarnation of 'The Peoples' Front of Judea'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE

[Jack White]

The hackers' ire was likely aroused by the fact that the DPF founders created a forum where personal attacks are not

allowed and that known provocateurs are denied membership. This allowed for more pure research without

interference from paid agents of certain entities, as is allowed in other discussion forums.

DPF was created directly because this forum DOES allow disruptive provocateurs to create hostility, disinformation

and personal attacks.

When the Della Rosa forum was hacked like this on three different occasions, Rich had the technical expertise

to trace the culprits to a European city where a person lived who had been banned from his forum. I am making

no presumptions in the current hacking, but I would not be surprised to learn that was the case here.

Jack

PS. The message I posted from Charles Drago WAS from Charles Drago. He is honest and honorable to a fault.

[Dawn Meredith]

I know from personal experience that Drago is dishonest. He once insisted that I edit a post where I had quoted him in the Political Conspiracies forum and then when I did he claimed in a post here (the JFK forum) that I had done so to “cover [my] tracks” omitting that I had done so pursuant to his demand. So I don’t believe a word he says. My guess based on Bill telling us a member told him something else is going on, Dawn’s cryptic post and the fact that the same message is still up is that the forum was dissolved due to a disagreement among the administrators and Drago simply lied rather than admit that. Given the immaturity and paranoia of the founders it is not hard to imagine some minor dispute leading to such an ignoble end.

Even if it was the victims of hackers I see no reason to assume it was due to the `forces of darkness’ hackers attack sites including mainstream ones all the time. Even if they were targeted I find it hard to feel any sympathy it was formed specifically to exclude people with differing views and Drago especially made no secret of his contempt of the speech rights of those who begged to differ with his world view. Other than humor value I never saw anything of value posted there.

DiEugenio was is the basis for your belief that they were mirroring Wikileaks? I doubt they had the bandwidth.

.

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation, it hosts a full Wikileaks mirror and is proud to do so. The costs involved in running the DPF and its Wikileaks mirror, are entirely borne by the forum's founders - although donations are always welcome - but membership is and will always remain free. As a point of principal we are an advertising-free forum and will always remain so.

We will not be making any further statements on the EF about the hacking we have suffered.

Dawn

Thanks to those interested in truth.

[Len Colby]

I know from personal experience that Drago is dishonest. He once insisted that I edit a post where I had quoted him in the Political Conspiracies forum and then when I did he claimed in a post here (the JFK forum) that I had done so to "cover [my] tracks" omitting that I had done so pursuant to his demand. So I don't believe a word he says. My guess based on Bill telling us a member told him something else is going on, Dawn's cryptic post and the fact that the same message is still up is that the forum was dissolved due to a disagreement among the administrators and Drago simply lied rather than admit that. Given the immaturity and paranoia of the founders it is not hard to imagine some minor dispute leading to such an ignoble end.

Even if it was the victims of hackers I see no reason to assume it was due to the `forces of darkness' hackers attack sites including mainstream ones all the time. Even if they were targeted I find it hard to feel any sympathy it was formed specifically to exclude people with differing views and Drago especially made no secret of his contempt of the speech rights of those who begged to differ with his world view. Other than humor value I never saw anything of value posted there.

DiEugenio was is the basis for your belief that they were mirroring Wikileaks? I doubt they had the bandwidth.

.

<deleted by moderator>. And there is NO "end". Sorry to ruin your fairytale. We were hacked and we will be back. Pure and simple.

I simply don't believe you for a number of reasons

1) Only hours ago you wrote: "We all know exactly what did and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it." Why wouldn't you be "at liberty to discuss" the forum being hacked

2) Bill who I trust, even if we rarely agree, said a member told him otherwise

3) You wrote "We will not be making any further statements on the EF about the hacking we have suffered". Why be so close lipped if you were being straight.

4) The site's registration was updated today, I imagine you'll tell us that was a coincidence.

http://whois.domaint...liticsforum.com

Charles Drago is one of the most honest people I know. So libel him all you want in these pages when it is you who no one could ever trust.

What I said about Drago would only be libel if it were not true, unfortunately it is. He asked me to alter one of my posts then then claimed I did so to "cover his [my] tracks" i.e. he lied. If think you can cite any examples of me knowingly posting false or misleading info on this, or any other forum, go ahead.

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech.

You forum's strange 1984ish version of free speech is based on excluding people whose world view is fundamentally different from yours.

Jack wrote:

The hackers' ire was likely aroused by the fact that the DPF founders created a forum where personal attacks are not

allowed and that known provocateurs are denied membership. This allowed for more pure research without

interference from paid agents of certain entities, as is allowed in other discussion forums.

DPF was created directly because this forum DOES allow disruptive provocateurs to create hostility, disinformation and personal attacks

.

You crack me up Jack, this forum's worst offenders were Lemkin and others who joined the DPF weren't much better.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Evan Burton

[Len Colby]

LC: I find it hard to feel any sympathy [since] it was formed specifically to exclude people with differing views and Drago especially made no secret of his contempt of the speech rights of those who begged to differ with his world view.

You mean because the likes of John McAdams and David von Pein are not welcome, somehow this is depriving members of "differing views"?

Well, I guess if someone still wants to write about the earth being the center of the universe, maybe someone would be interested. I would not be.

I guess Colby would be. Or since, in a bizarre twist, Von Pein was let back on, he is.

Word to the wise refrain from commenting when you don't know what you are talking about. The DPF was started specifilly to exclude Evan and me as well as a few others. Having their ideas challenged was unacceptable to them. This had little to do with the assassination and rather concerned issues like 9/11.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

I almost never read a Len Colby post. So he really doesn't bother me. I just ignore him.

As for John McAdams - who is not a member here, correct?

I think McAdams is blinded by his right wing ideology and he can not see the truth about the JFK assassination. I think he is a combination of stupid and dishonest.

Stupid I can handle. But dishonest - like the lying and gutter tactics of S.V. Anderson - I have a huge problem with.

And Wikipedia - may it rot and burn in hell. And McAdams runs the JFK disinfo content on both Wikipedia and his own wretched disinfo site.

Here is Robert Morrow's urgent appeal for Wikipedia "Do not give money and may it rot and burn in hell for its lies on the 1963 Coup d'Etat, aka JFK assassination."

Here is the John McAdams/ Wiki disinfo site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination

Check out on the right hand side "Belligerent: Lee Harvey Oswald" That really sticks in the throat doesn't it?

[Len Colby]

9/11 was discussed here Mr. Colby?

Only as an offshoot. And I have also done that. In disagreement with people like White and Fetzer. So what is the big deal?

DPF was started specifically because of all the noise and dissonance here. I know this since I know some of the people who left to form it.

And when DPF bans people like John McAdams for life, that is anything but reproachable. It is commendable.

I mean, DVP has contributed a lot of really interesting information since he has been here right? Remember that special account at the post office which the USPS was keeping for REA express? So that when Oswald picked up his handgun there (which he did not) they could relay the money to their competitor. Happens all the time right? The post office leaves a Federal Express ticket in my post office box. I go to the window, pay the post office. Later the Federal Express guy comes by and picks up the money for his company. But no receipt is included, and neither is any Oswald signature or initials to prove the transaction happened.

The above is the kind of hare-brained, cockamamie, LHO did it goofiness that DVP has brought here.

Maybe you like reading or arguing this utter nonsense.

Its the kind of malarkey that 47 years later, DPF does not want any part of.

I really have no idea what you are droning on about, besides the JFK Assassination Forum there are dozens of other subforums on the EF. One of those is the Political Conspiracies Forum but you know that of course because you posted there over 30 times. One of the main topics there when the DPF crew departed was 9/11. You weren’t around here back then and based on your misinformed remarks you didn’t lurk back then nor did you read over the old posts. So why pretended you know what you are talking about when you don’t? Very few if any of the fights that led them to start their own forum had anything to do with the assassination. It had nothing to do with DVP or JMcA or LN v. CT it was about Evan and me, 9/11, the Stealth Bomber, Mengle and other issues on the PCF.

I have no idea what you are babbling about with FedEx, but am resonablly sure it has nothing to do with the matter at hand

[Greg Parker]

I will hold off until I hear from the people involved.

Maybe you missed it, but Jack has already posted an email purportedly from Charles Drago stating that the forum was hacked, and that they'll be back.

I say "purportedly" because, you know, who knows? On the other hand, I'm 99% certain the post under John's name really was by him - and John being John, I'm sure he had confidence in his facts prior to posting.

Greg:

Maybe you missed it, but Simkin then went on after and said that such was not the case and that it was not hacked or suffering a DOS attack. The reason they went down was they did not pay their bills. Which clearly implied that either Jack posted a false e mail or Drago was being less than honest.

You then jumped on to praise John for throwing water on these nefarious rationales for what happened. Which strongly suggested you bought this.

What I was saying is that the email Jack posted could have been from anyone with the expertise. On the other hand, it's beyond any doubt that what John posted was indeed by him - and given the choice between an email of unproven provenance and the words of John, whom I regard as honest and careful with his words, I had to go with John. Of course, with this case, and associated matters, everything is pending further info. That should go without saying.

As far as "buying" goes - two previous versions of my website were attacked by hackers. Neither attack showed any sense of humor, and neither site could be brought back from the dead (and no - I have no reason to believe I was targeted for any reason other than the vulnerability of the sites).

This "attack" showed humor, still allowed views of some pages, and is apparently not bad enough to stop the site being resurrected. None of this falls within my experience of such attacks as shown above.

I said that we should all wait until we get a second source and get it privately.

Which surely indicates you had some doubts about the Drago email, as well - or that you missed it - which would explain why, when we already had two sources - John and CD, you were still calling for a second.

Well we have. And I got an e mail from one of the founders who is not Drago.

Concerning Wiki Leaks, one of the founders told me they were going to mirror the site.

That, I would have some doubt about. One prominent member (and, I think, a founder?), has been busy churning out links on FB "proving" Assange is a CIA operation. I would be very surprised if he is the only DPF member who feels that way. It is perhaps possible that they are split on the subject. But if so, and they go ahead with what you claim, the People's Front of Judea prophecy of Andy will become a reality - and a fitiing one given the DPA (Dead Parrot "Attack"!)

And band width would not have been a factor. First, because Assange has not released even one tenth of his documents yet. Second, you would be surprised how cheap it is to buy simple storage space online. Many people insinuate it is not in order to raise funds. But in fact, if you shop around, it is not expensive. So they could have just set up a link to it.

This should be an interesting detective story.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

"The original message quoted by Bill was issued by the company that ran the forum." That sounds like a pretty definitive statement. If John was speaking without any personal knowledge, I'd ask him to clarify...

But if he does have personal knowledge (through someone at the host company, for example) then what do we make of the claims by DPF administrators regarding being hacked?

Some say the "attack" on General Walker was an inside job used as "proof" he was "on to something", and as a means of gaining publicity and sympathy and to give added resolve to his supporters. Some say any real attack on Walker would have meant that Walker would have been dead and buried.

We don't need any more from DPF. Their explanation is clear. We need to hear what (if anything) John's sources were.