Deep Politics Forum Kaput?

[Michael Hogan]

Wow, what a lot of hostility and denial have emerged over this.

I was not here, but I guess there were a lot of hard feelings over the defection to DPF.

And now that they have a problem that is not easily solved, everyone is so eager to jump on them.

With Colby leading the way.

I wonder why.

Or am I just "droning on" Len?

They seem to be up and running. Good for them.

[Duane Daman]

Wow, what a lot of hostility and denial have emerged over this.

I was not here, but I guess there were a lot of hard feelings over the defection to DPF.

And now that they have a problem that is not easily solved, everyone is so eager to jump on them.

With Colby leading the way.

I wonder why.

Or am I just "droning on" Len?

They seem to be up and running. Good for them.

Not only are they up and running but my favorite thread is still intact.

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4948&page=22

Good for them is right!

[Paul Rigby]

One prominent member (and, I think, a founder?)...

A member, unquestionably, particularly according to my opponents - but "a founder"? Good Lord, no.

... has been busy churning out links on FB "proving" Assange is a CIA operation.

I am delighted to show-case the latest link, yet another very good piece that touches, inter alia, on the subject of the conformist dissident:

So what's Assange’s game?

According to him, keeping governments open by disseminating ‘public interest’ information through selected media outlets. Since beginning this piece, SCOOP has published an article by Michel Chossudovsky that makes many of the points I did about the media selected to edit the material, so I won’t repeat them – you can read them for yourself here.[6] However, I do make a couple of additional points:

1) In releasing the information to these ‘architects of media disinformation’ as Chossudovsky describes them, Assange is implicitly saying that we the public are too stupid, moronic, or ignorant to be able to assess and analyse the contents for ourselves, and/or

2) these ‘architects of media disinformation’ must be given the opportunity to put their spin on it because God forbid we might come to our own, possibly different, conclusions, and

3) this spin includes presenting the cables as if everything they contain is the truth, i.e. that what some US staffer said that a particular person in Iran or Turkey or Australia thinks/said/did is actually what that person thinks/said/did. (How many journalists have bothered to go to the supposed source, let alone subject, of any of these cables to verify the accuracy of the contents?)

Wikileaks: Play the Ball, not the Man – and Check Who’s Kicking it

by Julie Webb-Pullman, Global Research, 19 December 2010

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22467

The absurdity of any one truly dissident entrusting anything to The Guardian, that staunch defender of the Dulles and Zelikow Reports & serial betrayer of whistle-blowers, is...amusing.

The more interesting truth is that Assangleton is a fairly standard left-gatekeeper; and the entire nonsense, on both sides, CIA-scripted. Think of it as a kind of parapolitical soap-opera, albeit one with real-life potential patsy, and you won't go far wrong.

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.

You're confusing the DPF with some kind of weird cult movement - ASIO, or some similar repository of totalitarian group-think, Greg. But a nice example of the old peer-pressure thingamy. Does it still work Down Under, I wonder?

[Dean Hagerman]

1963 Coup d'Etat, aka JFK assassination."

So now your new slang "1963 Coup d'Etat" is now also known as the JFK assassination?

LMFAO!

You cant just say the JFK assassination like every other researcher on the planet can you?

At least your adding an AKA now

[Greg Parker]

One prominent member (and, I think, a founder?)...

A member, unquestionably, particularly according to my opponents

I'm sure some consider you a member in good standing, Paul

- but "a founder"? Good Lord, no.

Well, I knew it was someone with a bit of ken... just wasn't sure if you were it...

... has been busy churning out links on FB "proving" Assange is a CIA operation.

I am delighted to show-case the latest link, yet another very good piece that touches, inter alia, on the subject of the conformist dissident:

Ya. Thanks. Globalresearch and Webster Tarpley are your man sources for this. 'Nuff said.

So what's Assange's game?

According to him, keeping governments open by disseminating 'public interest' information through selected media outlets. Since beginning this piece, SCOOP has published an article by Michel Chossudovsky that makes many of the points I did about the media selected to edit the material, so I won't repeat them – you can read them for yourself here.[6] However, I do make a couple of additional points:

1) In releasing the information to these 'architects of media disinformation' as Chossudovsky describes them, Assange is implicitly saying that we the public are too stupid, moronic, or ignorant to be able to assess and analyse the contents for ourselves, and/or

2) these 'architects of media disinformation' must be given the opportunity to put their spin on it because God forbid we might come to our own, possibly different, conclusions, and

3) this spin includes presenting the cables as if everything they contain is the truth, i.e. that what some US staffer said that a particular person in Iran or Turkey or Australia thinks/said/did is actually what that person thinks/said/did. (How many journalists have bothered to go to the supposed source, let alone subject, of any of these cables to verify the accuracy of the contents?)

Wikileaks: Play the Ball, not the Man – and Check Who's Kicking it

by Julie Webb-Pullman, Global Research, 19 December 2010

http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=22467

The absurdity of any one truly dissident entrusting anything to The Guardian, that staunch defender of the Dulles and Zelikow Reports & serial betrayer of whistle-blowers, is...amusing.

The more interesting truth is that Assangleton is a fairly standard left-gatekeeper; and the entire nonsense, on both sides, CIA-scripted. Think of it as a kind of parapolitical soap-opera, albeit one with real-life potential patsy, and you won't go far wrong.

How can he be a left gate-keeper while not at least pretending to be on the Left? He did attend some meetings on the Left pre Wikileaks, but gave up on them because of what he regarded as "fuzzy thinking". Since then, he has regarded himself as being in the right of the Libertarian movement. Funny place to be left gate-keeping from.

"It's not correct to put me in any one philosophical or economic camp, because I've learned from many. But one is American libertarianism, market libertarianism."

http://blogs.forbes....lian-assange/5/

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.

You're confusing the DPF with some kind of weird cult movement - ASIO, or some similar repository of totalitarian group-think, Greg.

Not really. Merely speculating that your position on Wikileaks was at odds with the other founders. But since you are not in fact a founder, it's not relevant where you stand on the subject. Presumably you would not get booted as a member (in good standing!) for being a contrarian.

But a nice example of the old peer-pressure thingamy. Does it still work Down Under, I wonder?

As a teenager, I was listening to Dylan, Cohen, Springsteen and Donovan when all my mates were banging their heads to Deep Purple, Black Sabath, AC/DC and Iron Butterfly. Go figure...

Edited December 20, 2010 by Greg Parker

[Len Colby]

Wow, what a lot of hostility and denial have emerged over this.

I was not here, but I guess there were a lot of hard feelings over the defection to DPF.

And now that they have a problem that is not easily solved, everyone is so eager to jump on them.

With Colby leading the way.

I wonder why.

Or am I just "droning on" Len?

Since my reply to Jim and his response were deleted I’ll try a kindler gentler version.

Jim despite your insinuation I had a “deep political” motive for me being critical of the DPF it was personal; I was repeatedly attacked by its founders. Being told to moderate their attacks was one of their principle motives for leaving. Additionally like Bill I was offended by Dawn and Drago’s less than honest comments about what transpired. I am unsure what you meant about “denial” was that a euphemistic reference to their ‘explanations’?

[Len Colby]

Wow, what a lot of hostility and denial have emerged over this.

I was not here, but I guess there were a lot of hard feelings over the defection to DPF.

And now that they have a problem that is not easily solved, everyone is so eager to jump on them.

With Colby leading the way.

I wonder why.

Or am I just "droning on" Len?

They seem to be up and running. Good for them.

The DPF it seems is no longer a ‘they’ and is now just a she. The following announcement appears on all subforums:

Welcome back to DPF

________________________________________

DPF is back with one major difference, I no longer have moderators to address issues of incivility on the forum. (The former moderators and I have been addressing issues of incivility between us. )

Because of this I ask that each member watch for problems on the forum, and notify me via the "Report Post" link. The "Report Post" link is an exclamation mark in a red triangle at the top right of every post. I will do my best to respond promptly to reported posts.

I expect that to be the only difference in how the forum is run. I apologize for the absence of DPF the past few days. And I welcome those who return.

Myra Bronstein, DPF Admin

__________________

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/announcement.php?f=4

So she is not any better than Dawn and Drago at being straightforward about this. I doubt even the rest of the DPF’s members will ever find out what happened exactly.

I wonder what the ‘Gang of Five’ will do now. There options are:

1. Keep posting at the DPF as if nothing happened despite saying that the forum’s owner and sole administrator acts were "destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal...[and] 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" and was NOT authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum"

2. Start a new forum

3. Join a new forum en masse

Interestingly no posts have been made since the forum ‘came back’

Edited December 20, 2010 by Len Colby

[Jack White]

Wow, what a lot of hostility and denial have emerged over this.

I was not here, but I guess there were a lot of hard feelings over the defection to DPF.

And now that they have a problem that is not easily solved, everyone is so eager to jump on them.

With Colby leading the way.

I wonder why.

Or am I just "droning on" Len?

They seem to be up and running. Good for them.

The DPF it seems is no longer a ‘they’ and is now just a she. The following announcement appears on all subforums:

Welcome back to DPF

________________________________________

DPF is back with one major difference, I no longer have moderators to address issues of incivility on the forum. (The former moderators and I have been addressing issues of incivility between us. )

Because of this I ask that each member watch for problems on the forum, and notify me via the "Report Post" link. The "Report Post" link is an exclamation mark in a red triangle at the top right of every post. I will do my best to respond promptly to reported posts.

I expect that to be the only difference in how the forum is run. I apologize for the absence of DPF the past few days. And I welcome those who return.

Myra Bronstein, DPF Admin

__________________

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/announcement.php?f=4

So she is not any better than Dawn and Drago at being straightforward about this. I doubt even the rest of the DPF’s members will ever find out what happened exactly.

I wonder what the ‘Gang of Five’ will do now. There options are:

1. Keep posting at the DPF as if nothing happened despite saying that the forum’s owner and sole administrator acts were "destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal...[and] 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" and was NOT authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum"

2. Start a new forum

3. Join a new forum en masse

Interestingly no posts have been made since the forum ‘came back’

The DPF is NOT back. I just attempted to access it.

Jack

[Evan Burton]

The DPF is NOT back. I just attempted to access it.

Jack

Wrong again. it is back up.

[Jack White]

What happened Jack?

Beats me! I am just an innocent bystander.

Jack

[Jack White]

The DPF is NOT back. I just attempted to access it.

Jack

Wrong again. it is back up.

It must have a new domain address. I have the old address bookmarked and use it to access the forum.

I get a message that says "1984...site not found".

Jack

[Evan Burton]

I'm still using the same old address...

Try hitting the refresh button on your browser. If you still get the same message, the problem may be with your ISP.

[Anthony Thorne]

It's back up for me (same old address) and a couple of new posts have appeared. Jack, trying Googling DEEP POLITICS FORUM and clicking on whatever links pop up, or try maybe deleting your cookies from your computer. I've seen this happen on other forums in the past (a forum goes down and when it pops back up a member or two suddenly can't access it for a while) but I can't recall the immediate solution other than suggesting the above.

[Len Colby]

It's back up for me (same old address) and a couple of new posts have appeared. Jack, trying Googling DEEP POLITICS FORUM and clicking on whatever links pop up, or try maybe deleting your cookies from your computer. I've seen this happen on other forums in the past (a forum goes down and when it pops back up a member or two suddenly can't access it for a while) but I can't recall the immediate solution other than suggesting the above.

I think it is a PEBKAC error.

[Len Colby]

Though nominally up and running, the DPF seems to be effectively dead. By my count there have only been 7 posts by 5 members (none of whom were founders) on 4 threads since it ‘came back’. It is sort of like the Velvet Underground after Lou Reed left though continuing in name it really ended with the exiting of its key member(s). I imagine the ‘Gang of 5’ will attempt to start a new forum again. I doubt either venture will bear fruit unless those involved own up to what happened, dishonest declarations will only lead to failure.

Edited December 20, 2010 by Len Colby