Deep Politics Forum Kaput?

[Pamela Brown]

Hi Bill.

This looks like the work of hackers.

The following appears to be a parody of Monty Python's - Dead Parrot Sketch

Deep Politics Forum has passed on. It is no more. It has ceased to be. Expired and gone to meet it's maker. It is a stiff. Bereft of life, it rests in peace, pushing up daisies. It's system processes are now history. It's off the twig. It's kicked the bucket, shuffled off it's mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible! THIS IS AN EX FORUM!!

It is indeed a parody of the DP sketch. One can only hope the site can be resurrected.

[David G. Healy]

...

The DPF was started specifilly to exclude Evan and me as well as a few others. Having their ideas challenged was unacceptable to them. ...

ROTFLMFAO ! ! ! ! len, Len LEN you make for a poor imitation of Redd Foxx... you should be ashamed!

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

John,

Where do you come up with this nonsense? I immediately contacted

three key members of the forum, all of whom confirmed that the forum

had been hacked and suffered serious damage. It is being reconstructed.

Web sites are not especially expensive, where your remarks appear to be

unfounded, exaggerated, and grossly unfair. It bothers me you posted this.

Jim

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.

Edited December 19, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Duke Lane]

... 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.

Why not? I do it all the time. But then, everyone knows I just like to listen to myself talk (read myself write?)....

[Anthony Thorne]

I visit and participate in a lot of cult movie forums and blogs, and in some areas it feels like nearly every poster and participant has their own personal blog (all linked on each site via the usual long list of blogs on the side of their main page). All seem to do it out of a sense of personal enthusiasm, none seem too bothered by visitors or a lack of them. (This doesn't dispute John's main point but I'm just noting that there are frequent exceptions). There should be more blogs and forums devoted to Deep Politics and political conspiracy research, not less, and I'd be quite happy if the various regulars on the DP forum - and here, to boot - started their own blogs whilst simultaneously posting continual thoughts on the respective forums noted (like this one and the DP forum). I hope the DP forum returns and continues for a long while.

[William Kelly]

John,

Where do you come up with this nonsense? I immediately contacted

three key members of the forum, all of whom confirmed that the forum

had been hacked and suffered serious damage. It is being reconstructed.

Web sites are not especially expensive, where your remarks appear to be

unfounded, exaggerated, and grossly unfair. It bothers me you posted this.

Jim

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 Simkin was wrong in suggesting that the DPF was taken down by its server for lack of payment.

And Prof. Fetzer and the three key members of the forum are wrong in suggesting that the forum was hacked by outsiders.

As with the JFK assassination, if it was not an attack on the man from without, it was a an attack from within, but it can't be both.

From what I understand, there is internal dissent among those who started the forum, and an apparent takeover by those who were not

in total control was thwartd by those who had been paying for it.

If indeed the idea the forum was hacked is a cover story to keep the internal dissent from being exposed, then they apparently are more

concerned with outside perceptions of what is going on rather than getting the forum up and running again.

I recently posted a number of items there, including Peter Dale Scott's Dallas COPA 2010 talk, and there was little response, even

thought PDS apparently inspired the selection of the name for the forum. There was more - lots more discussion at McAdams forum,

where four different theads were started to attack and discuss PDS's address, and Peter even joined the discussion and corrected

one aspect of his talk and corrected some of the misrepresentions made.

It seems that keeping out those who disagree with you only results in agreement and silence.

BK

Edited December 19, 2010 by William Kelly

[Dawn Meredith]

DPF was created by -- with one tragic exception -- founders who contribute to, and act as, custodians of the work of researchers from around the world. The destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal acts committed by one of our own define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking; they amount to attacks on history of the sort commonly identified with the darkest of deep political forces.

As previously stated:

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation -- born of petty jealousies and/or the intent to destroy a source of truth, integrity, and courageously held convictions -- 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.

PLEASE MAKE CAREFUL NOTE: The undersigned, all founding members who contribute to the running costs of DPF, and will continue to do so, are the ONLY individuals authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum:

Charles Drago, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan, Jan Klimkowski, Dawn Meredith

[Jack White]

DPF was created by -- with one tragic exception -- founders who contribute to, and act as, custodians of the work of researchers from around the world. The destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal acts committed by one of our own define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking; they amount to attacks on history of the sort commonly identified with the darkest of deep political forces.

As previously stated:

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation -- born of petty jealousies and/or the intent to destroy a source of truth, integrity, and courageously held convictions -- 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.

PLEASE MAKE CAREFUL NOTE: The undersigned, all founding members who contribute to the running costs of DPF, and will continue to do so, are the ONLY individuals authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum:

Charles Drago, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan, Jan Klimkowski, Dawn Meredith

So please identify the "one tragic exception" who hacked the forum. And why. I am baffled. Thanks.

Jack

[Len Colby]

DPF was created by -- with one tragic exception -- founders who contribute to, and act as, custodians of the work of researchers from around the world. The destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal acts committed by one of our own define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking; they amount to attacks on history of the sort commonly identified with the darkest of deep political forces.

As previously stated:

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation -- born of petty jealousies and/or the intent to destroy a source of truth, integrity, and courageously held convictions -- 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.

PLEASE MAKE CAREFUL NOTE: The undersigned, all founding members who contribute to the running costs of DPF, and will continue to do so, are the ONLY individuals authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum:

Charles Drago, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan, Jan Klimkowski, Dawn Meredith

Wow Dawn with your spinning skills you really should have gotten into PR or a branch of law where you would defend sleazy clients. Despite your attack on me my speculation based on very limited information was closer to the truth than Drago’s and your insider accounts. The DPF’s problems were as Bill was told and I assumed due to an internal dispute NOT an outsider attack. At least you finally decided after two days to own up to the truth, better later than never.

My inclination that Drago was not trustworthy was borne out; unfortunately there it is difficult to escape the same conclusion about you.

Your post only leaves two important questions unanswered who did the dirty deed and why. My guess it was Lemkin because he believes Wikileaks was a CIA front

DiEugenio wrote

“I really wish that you and Colby and JS would stop taking what I consider cheap shots at an unfortunate situation, and wait for the facts to emerge. Which I am sure they will in short time.”

I don’t think any of us took ‘cheap shots’ and John and I were repeatedly the victims of vicious attacks by the DPF’s founders. Additionally the forum’s leadership is largely responsible due to being less than straight forward about this, they claimed they were ‘hacked’ and denied it was due to an internal schism but have now acknowledged it was the latter not the former. The fact that Jack, a member, knew less about was going on than Bill shows their lack of transparency extends to their own membership

[Greg Parker]

John,

Where do you come up with this nonsense? I immediately contacted

three key members of the forum, all of whom confirmed that the forum

had been hacked and suffered serious damage. It is being reconstructed.

Web sites are not especially expensive, where your remarks appear to be

unfounded, exaggerated, and grossly unfair. It bothers me you posted this.

Jim

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 Simkin was wrong in suggesting that the DPF was taken down by its server for lack of payment.

And Prof. Fetzer and the three key members of the forum are wrong in suggesting that the forum was hacked by outsiders.

As with the JFK assassination, if it was not an attack on the man from without, it was a an attack from within, but it can't be both.

From what I understand, there is internal dissent among those who started the forum, and an apparent takeover by those who were not

in total control was thwartd by those who had been paying for it.

If indeed the idea the forum was hacked is a cover story to keep the internal dissent from being exposed, then they apparently are more

concerned with outside perceptions of what is going on rather than getting the forum up and running again.

I recently posted a number of items there, including Peter Dale Scott's Dallas COPA 2010 talk, and there was little response, even

thought PDS apparently inspired the selection of the name for the forum. There was more - lots more discussion at McAdams forum,

where four different theads were started to attack and discuss PDS's address, and Peter even joined the discussion and corrected

one aspect of his talk and corrected some of the misrepresentions made.

It seems that keeping out those who disagree with you only results in agreement and silence.

BK

Thanks Bill,

see post 36 where I suggested it was probably an inside job. You seem to have confirmed it. Those who were all to ready to believe this was done by an external entity only show their suspension of critical thinking in certain areas and situations - i.e. those areas and situations which, if skewed the right way, help "confirm" their world view.

On a positive note, I applaude the DPF for hosting a Wikileaks mirror.

[William Kelly]

BK: I recently posted a number of items there, including Peter Dale Scott's Dallas COPA 2010 talk, and there was little response, even

thought PDS apparently inspired the selection of the name for the forum. There was more - lots more discussion at McAdams forum,

where four different theads were started to attack and discuss PDS's address, and Peter even joined the discussion and corrected

one aspect of his talk and corrected some of the misrepresentions made.

What the heck does this mean Bill?

That since there was more of a reply to your post at McAdams' funny farm that its a better forum than DPF?

I mean Walt Brown used Peter's rubric also. How many times does Walt print Peter's stuff? Should we measure Walt's publication by that standard then?

I really wish that you and Colby and JS would stop taking what I consider cheap shots at an unfortunate situation, and wait for the facts to emerge. Which I am sure they will in short time.

I'm not taking any cheep shots at anybody.

And I am completely willing to let the facts emerge, as they will.

All I know is the DPF is down, they are falsely blaming it on WIicki attacks when it apparently is an internal fued.

And any attempt to say that it was hacked by outsiders is false.

Why bring in Walt Brown and Colby and others when there is no need to confuse the issue and the fact

that the forum was brought down by an insider, someone who was one of the original founders?

You are the one who is making the issue more confusing than it really is.

The bottom line is the DPF went down because of an internal fued among the those who started it, and

not by an attack because of the Wickii leaks or anything else.

And the attempt to portray it as a foreign attack on thier site, knowing who was responsible, is

reprehensible, and instead of trying to blame others for the forum going down, and trying to get it up

and running again, they attack others who want to know who is capable of taking down such forums

like DPF of which I was a member and posted faithfully.

Bill Kelly

Edited December 19, 2010 by William Kelly

[Len Colby]

DPF was created by -- with one tragic exception -- founders who contribute to, and act as, custodians of the work of researchers from around the world. The destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal acts committed by one of our own define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking; they amount to attacks on history of the sort commonly identified with the darkest of deep political forces.

As previously stated:

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation -- born of petty jealousies and/or the intent to destroy a source of truth, integrity, and courageously held convictions -- 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.

PLEASE MAKE CAREFUL NOTE: The undersigned, all founding members who contribute to the running costs of DPF, and will continue to do so, are the ONLY individuals authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum:

Charles Drago, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan, Jan Klimkowski, Dawn Meredith

So please identify the "one tragic exception" who hacked the forum. And why. I am baffled. Thanks.

Jack

Jack, if I recall correctly, there were six original founders. There are only five names listed here.

Thing is not all of us remember who the the Gang of Six were. The fact that Jack is in the darks shows how untransparent they are.

Edited December 19, 2010 by Len Colby

[David Butler]

DPF was created by -- with one tragic exception -- founders who contribute to, and act as, custodians of the work of researchers from around the world. The destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal acts committed by one of our own define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking; they amount to attacks on history of the sort commonly identified with the darkest of deep political forces.

As previously stated:

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation -- born of petty jealousies and/or the intent to destroy a source of truth, integrity, and courageously held convictions -- 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.

PLEASE MAKE CAREFUL NOTE: The undersigned, all founding members who contribute to the running costs of DPF, and will continue to do so, are the ONLY individuals authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum:

Charles Drago, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan, Jan Klimkowski, Dawn Meredith

So please identify the "one tragic exception" who hacked the forum. And why. I am baffled. Thanks.

Jack

Jack, if I recall correctly, there were six original founders. There are only five names listed here.

Thing is not all of us remember who the the Gang of Six were. The fact that Jack is in the darks shows how untransparent they are.

I seem to recall that the other one was called Myra Bronstein but I could be misremembering !

[Len Colby]

John,

Where do you come up with this nonsense? I immediately contacted

three key members of the forum, all of whom confirmed that the forum

had been hacked and suffered serious damage. It is being reconstructed.

Web sites are not especially expensive, where your remarks appear to be

unfounded, exaggerated, and grossly unfair. It bothers me you posted this.

Jim

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 Simkin was wrong in suggesting that the DPF was taken down by its server for lack of payment.

And Prof. Fetzer and the three key members of the forum are wrong in suggesting that the forum was hacked by outsiders.

As with the JFK assassination, if it was not an attack on the man from without, it was a an attack from within, but it can't be both.

From what I understand, there is internal dissent among those who started the forum, and an apparent takeover by those who were not

in total control was thwartd by those who had been paying for it.

If indeed the idea the forum was hacked is a cover story to keep the internal dissent from being exposed, then they apparently are more

concerned with outside perceptions of what is going on rather than getting the forum up and running again.

I recently posted a number of items there, including Peter Dale Scott's Dallas COPA 2010 talk, and there was little response, even

thought PDS apparently inspired the selection of the name for the forum. There was more - lots more discussion at McAdams forum,

where four different theads were started to attack and discuss PDS's address, and Peter even joined the discussion and corrected

one aspect of his talk and corrected some of the misrepresentions made.

It seems that keeping out those who disagree with you only results in agreement and silence.

BK

Thanks Bill,

see post 36 where I suggested it was probably an inside job. You seem to have confirmed it. Those who were all to ready to believe this was done by an external entity only show their suspension of critical thinking in certain areas and situations - i.e. those areas and situations which, if skewed the right way, help "confirm" their world view.

On a positive note, I applaude the DPF for hosting a Wikileaks mirror.

Greg see Dawn's last post the DPF's "Central Committee" has finally decided to come clean (well sorta)

[Len Colby]

Thing is not all of us remember who the the Gang of Six were. The fact that Jack is in the darks shows how untransparent they are.

The missing founder name from Dawn's list is Myra Bronstein.

I think you are right about that, she is still listed as the domain's owner, administrator, tech and bill payer and that was updated yesterday. So I assume if the forum comes back it will no longer be a top domain ( not at least as a .com one). Someone should contact her for her side of the story,Dawn and Drago have proven themselves not to be trustworthy on this issue. There is a phone #, e-mail and mail address for her on the link below, I doubt she'd respond to me though.

http://whois.domaintools.com/deeppoliticsforum.com

Edited December 19, 2010 by Len Colby