Behaviour of Members

[Myra Bronstein]

Well since John raised the subject and now we're all sitting around the virtual campfire sharing our anecdotes--I've traveled extensively, including two trips to England. The only place I encountered systemic rudeness and haughtiness (aside from the Bahamas) was England. The worst experience I've ever had with a company was with British Airways. The only time I've ever been thrown out of a restaurant (because they didn't like the way my companion was sitting on the chair, and she did not have her shoes on the chair, nor did she argue with them) was in England. By contrast, the French were downright cuddly. Oh, and I worked for a British company for three years and the top five managers--all Brits (one Scottish) were the worst, most duplicitous unscrupulous, people I've ever worked with or for. And of course there is my experience on this forum...

I am sorry you have had some bad experiences of the British. I cannot do anything about the way you were treated in the restaurant.

I didn't ask you to do anything about it.

You shared your experiences in the US in post #128, then I shared my experiences in England in a later post.

However, I am keen to sort out any problems with the forum. Could you explain about how the British have treated you so badly on this forum?

John, reputed Brit/Post 1 in this thread>

"I have had a lot of complaints recently about the insulting comments of some members of this forum. The names of certain people are constantly being mentioned. ...In virtually every case, the culprits are Americans. I suppose this abusive behaviour must be part of their culture, however, people from outside the United States find it very offensive."

Andy, reputed Brit/Post 18 in this thread>

"John's original post in this thread amounted to an appeal for an end to bad language and gratuitous insults. I agree with him incidentally that many of the Americans here appear particularly poor at expressing themselves effectively without recourse to either."

Andy, reputed Brit/Post 26 in this thread>

"GK Chesterton could perhaps teach you all a lesson or two about what is wrong here - "The problem with this country is me"

The British have treated all Americans badly in this thread, and I'm American. In the above quotes we Americans have been told that abuse is part of our culture, that everyone else in the world finds our abusive ways very offensive, that only American forum members have a problem communicating without gratuitous insults, and that we should "all" know that the problem with the US is each of us. The tone is haughty and snide and condescending and superior and judgemental and bigoted and hostile and harsh and... kind of abusive.

I would say that's bad treatment of each American member.

I would also point out that those quotes contain gratuitous insults directed at Americans.

I've already pointed out the hypocrisy of the two English moderators publicly chiding American forum members over behavior, often by name, which is in itself rude. I'll follow up this point by noting that neither of these Brits have exhibited the qualities of introspection, contrition, humbleness, sense of humor about themselves, personal growth, or the willingness to admit error. Americans, and other nationalities, do exhibit these qualities, which I personally value.

I think the mods underestimate the extent to which they set the tone.

Regardless, I still think it's a well moderated forum. I appreciate the restraint the mods have used thus far in opting not to censor discussion, and I consider this forum by far the most valuable one on the internet. FWIW. So if the new mod system helps it survive then I'm all for it.

[Myra Bronstein]

Ask the Brits. They should know 'cause they're still over there in the North being imperial, in spite of John's assurances that those days are behind England.

When did I say that. Have you not read any of my posts on Iraq?

Post 110 implies the British empire is a thing of the past. But I see England still occupying Northern Ireland.

I wasn't referring to Iraq though I did read your posts on the subject and thought you offered great insights and comments.

[John Simkin]

Post 110 implies the British empire is a thing of the past. But I see England still occupying Northern Ireland.

I wasn't referring to Iraq though I did read your posts on the subject and thought you offered great insights and comments.

I was just stating Winston Churchill's view in 1945. It was also the view of the Labour Party after the war. However, in the 1950s and 1960s efforts were made by Tory governments to hold onto parts of the British Empire.

One of the most disturbing things about Tony Blair is that he wants to revive this idea of Britain being a superpower. Hence his policy in Iraq. However, this is not the view of most of the British public.

I am against keeping troops in places like Northern Ireland and the Falklands. However, the situation is complicated by the fact that the majority of people living in those countries want to retain these troops. This is of course the reason why Ireland was divided into two by Lloyd George. Given the current birth-rates of the Catholic and Protestant communities in Northern Ireland, this situation will change in the future.

[Guest]

The tone is haughty and snide and condescending and superior and judgemental and bigoted and hostile and harsh and... kind of abusive.

I will forgive, for now, Myra's snide and falsely judgemental assumption that I am "English".

I also interested by her apparently recent conversion to Celtic peripheral nationalism

But I see England still occupying Northern Ireland.

More seriously the attack on John and I for being "anti american" is absurd drawing quite ironically on a number of negative racial stereotypes about the English.

Entertaining though it is, this sort of childish knock about is not however what the forum was created for.

I would urge Myra and any others of her persuasion to concentrate their minds on posts of educational worth, substance and merit implemented of course in a polite and friendly tone.

If anyone feels abused or attacked on this forum we have a facility to report such things to an expanded group of moderators who will resolve each case on its merits.

[John Simkin]

[John, reputed Brit/Post 1 in this thread>

"I have had a lot of complaints recently about the insulting comments of some members of this forum. The names of certain people are constantly being mentioned. ...In virtually every case, the culprits are Americans. I suppose this abusive behaviour must be part of their culture, however, people from outside the United States find it very offensive."

Andy, reputed Brit/Post 18 in this thread>

"John's original post in this thread amounted to an appeal for an end to bad language and gratuitous insults. I agree with him incidentally that many of the Americans here appear particularly poor at expressing themselves effectively without recourse to either."

Andy, reputed Brit/Post 26 in this thread>

"GK Chesterton could perhaps teach you all a lesson or two about what is wrong here - "The problem with this country is me"

The British have treated all Americans badly in this thread, and I'm American. In the above quotes we Americans have been told that abuse is part of our culture, that everyone else in the world finds our abusive ways very offensive, that only American forum members have a problem communicating without gratuitous insults, and that we should "all" know that the problem with the US is each of us. The tone is haughty and snide and condescending and superior and judgemental and bigoted and hostile and harsh and... kind of abusive.

I would say that's bad treatment of each American member.

I would also point out that those quotes contain gratuitous insults directed at Americans.

I've already pointed out the hypocrisy of the two English moderators publicly chiding American forum members over behavior, often by name, which is in itself rude. I'll follow up this point by noting that neither of these Brits have exhibited the qualities of introspection, contrition, humbleness, sense of humor about themselves, personal growth, or the willingness to admit error. Americans, and other nationalities, do exhibit these qualities, which I personally value.

I think the mods underestimate the extent to which they set the tone.

I don’t know how many times I need to reiterate that I never made any anti-American statements. I just made the observation that Americans are responsible for nearly 100% of all cases of people being reported to the moderator. (It also true that in virtually every case the person making the complaint is American).

I added that maybe this aggressiveness was due to cultural differences. Later I suggested that factors such as capital punishment, the very high murder-rate, the percentage of people held in prison, the carrying of guns, U.S. foreign policy, might be involved in this.

I also pointed out that I have been to the United States several times and visited all different types of communities. As I explained, American people were always courteous and polite. That is not only my experience of America. My friends tell similar stories.

However, it is also my experience on this forum that some Americans (very much in a minority) do get aggressive and abusive in their postings.

The claim that critics of American foreign policy are “anti-American” is common in the UK. Tony Blair has said it several times. So has American politicians, diplomats, journalists, etc.

They also said the same to us when we campaigned for civil rights and against the Vietnam War in the 1960s. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Most of my heroes are American. For example, take a look at this section of my website.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcivilrights.htm

Regardless, I still think it's a well moderated forum. I appreciate the restraint the mods have used thus far in opting not to censor discussion, and I consider this forum by far the most valuable one on the internet. FWIW. So if the new mod system helps it survive then I'm all for it.

Have you considered why this is? I would argue it is because we allow people of a wide variety of different opinions to post on this forum. The reason Andy and myself set up this forum was because we were banned from a forum for posting anti-Tony Blair comments.

It is of course very difficult to run such a forum because when people feel very strongly about subjects they can become very impolite. That is of course why I started this thread. For domestic and business reasons I cannot devote as much time to the forum to sort these problems out. Six members generously offered to take over my moderating role. Now they are being attacked before they have taken up their duties. I would appreciate it if you judged these people by what they do rather than what you think they might do?

I would also remind everybody that these pages are read by more than members. I am sure you are not helping your cause any good by making irrational and abusive comments. It might make you feel better, but that is not the same as obtaining supporters.

[Miles Scull]

Although I have no specific problems with certain aspects of the Scientology movement, I am nevertheless always leary of anyone who would follow the "truth" as preached by those such as L. Ron Hubbard

Then there's another fine reason for you to be leary of CIA: they built their remote viewing program on it, and ran it for over twenty-five years in supreme secrecy—using your tax dollars. Or hadn't you thought of that part?

Ashton Gray

Mr. Grey, thank you for your very interesting time-line. What was the CIA doing by building their remote viewing program? Was this part of their mind control program & investigation? What function did their remote viewing program have? Was Scientology a front, a manipulated tool? Further elucidation appreciated. Thx.

[Charles Black]

Everyone

I cannot imagine how John and Andy, realizing that their prior comments can be reviewed by the entire forum, can state that they have made no Anti-American comments. It's true that you two didn't imply that we Americans should be sent to the gas chambers, as you are too cultured to do so,

but you you have in the past, and continue to at present, taken evey opportunity to "degrade" Americans. John even implied to me in a recent post that since he is "footing the bill", that if there is something that I disagree with, that I should "go away". This followed what I considered, as will most of you who read it, my non-abrasive post. This is like saying that if you are picking up the dinner tab, that I should agree with you or forfeit dinner ! That's OK ! Overhere we can still wander into the wilderness, sneak past the "redskins" and bag dinner!

John also espouses that because "he personally" does not agree with Tony Blair's policies, that he himself should be excused from the Briish position on these issues. However he repeatedly has refused, by word and inuendo, this same "SANCTUARY" in his criticism of Americans. We Americans must be looped together because we culturally deserve no more.

Furthermore, I, as do most persons who have any degree of self respect, do not like being "talked down to". A few of us in America have risen both mentally and emotionally above the grammar school level, toward which most of his comments seem directed.

This will never happen; however I feel very strongly, as a matter of fact I would "Bet The Farm",...... that a truly independent researcher of these threads, would without hesitation determine, that there exists a great deal of "animus" toward Americans. What has previously been posted cannot be changed by someone saying something similar to .......... "I like some Americans, but most of them seem to be handicapped by the lack of culture which most of us Brits have of course inherited."

Since I have graduated grammar school, I do comprehend that a smart person would not be addressing his master, who also holds the forum "purse strings", and who has previously exhibited animosity toward this depraved individual, in such a challenging manner. But as a poor uncultured American, I am unable to refrain from stating my "very true beliefs", even though I realize that my next correspondence from John will be an invitation to the Tower of London !

I suppose that we "uncultured" don't much give a damned about "protocol" !

Charlie Black

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I am against keeping troops in places like Northern Ireland and the Falklands. However, the situation is complicated by the fact that the majority of people living in those countries want to retain these troops.

Britain's ruling class are past masters of the art of justifying their imperial crimes, and I imagine every British schoolchild is indoctrinated along the lines that Britannia bears the white man's burden, in a few ungrateful outposts still. Equating the British occupation of northern Ireland with the Falklands is very clever, because the two territories actually do have something in common: They are about the same size.

I had occasion to experience the British occupation in action on Divis Street in Belfast in the late sixties, and believe me I never had to endure anything like it on Park Avenue or even in sinful old New Orleans, Crime Capital, USA.

AND STILL HOME OF THE WORLD"S GREATEST OYSTER BAR

The attitude of the British army is well-captured in THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY, the big winner at last year's Cannes film festival. Actors playing British soldiers were actually British ex-soldiers who simply reenacted how they had been trained to behave in northern Ireland. I can attest to the movie's awesome authnticity. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0460989/

I

This is of course the reason why Ireland was divided into two by Lloyd George.

Here you have identified the fatal flaw that meant that this particular Titanic was also doomed.

I had the opportunity to closely observe the apartheid system in South Africa in the seventies. Apartheid was a clever idea. With about 4 million whites dominating 20 million Africans (if memory serves), the whites decided to copy the blueprint created by that great band from the 20's, Lloyd George and the British Brains Trust: Make it appear that the minority is actually a majority by creating new political boundaries that are completely artifical.

History books tell us that time ran out before South Africa's apartheid could be fully implemented as it had been implemented in Ireland, and accepted by the Irish under Lloyd George's threat of "immediate and terrible war." South Africa is today the most successful ex-colony in Africa, while England still has its hand in the Irish cookie jar, and Her Majesty still has no clothes.

Given the current birth-rates of the Catholic and Protestant communities in Northern Ireland, this situation will change in the future.

A great great Irishman named John Lennon supplied the inside dope on the most enjoyable way to kick the English out: MAKE LOVE NOT WAR.

Edited February 12, 2007 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Myra Bronstein]

Regardless, I still think it's a well moderated forum. I appreciate the restraint the mods have used thus far in opting not to censor discussion, and I consider this forum by far the most valuable one on the internet. FWIW. So if the new mod system helps it survive then I'm all for it.

Have you considered why this is? I would argue it is because we allow people of a wide variety of different opinions to post on this forum. The reason Andy and myself set up this forum was because we were banned from a forum for posting anti-Tony Blair comments.

That's EXACTLY what I was saying John. I was trying to give you some props, you know--try to find good in everybody--but you even manage to make nice statements impossible. I wont try that again.

It is of course very difficult to run such a forum because when people feel very strongly about subjects they can become very impolite. That is of course why I started this thread. For domestic and business reasons I cannot devote as much time to the forum to sort these problems out. Six members generously offered to take over my moderating role. Now they are being attacked before they have taken up their duties. I would appreciate it if you judged these people by what they do rather than what you think they might do?

And this twisting of words is just so typical of you John. My post could not have been more clear about who I feel the abusive mods have been. I specifically named you and Andy, and gave actual post numbers. Of course I wasn't referring to six moderators who haven't moderated yet.

Really, it's impossible to have a genuine sincere discussion with you when you take quotes out of context, as you did with my post--#199, and twist words so that you can dispute things that were never even said. You don't demonstrate any sense of fair play or honor.

You claim the high road and take the low road.

[Myra Bronstein]

I don’t know how many times I need to reiterate that I never made any anti-American statements. I just made the observation that Americans are responsible for nearly 100% of all cases of people being reported to the moderator. (It also true that in virtually every case the person making the complaint is American).

...

Well that's not true. I've complained about John and Andy, non-Americans, numerous times on this thread.

There goes your beloved "100%" stat you keep throwing around to give your biases moral heft.

[Guest Gary Loughran]

I had occasion to experience the British occupation in action on Divis Street in Belfast in the late sixties...

Why were you in Divis Street Raymond?

I happen to live a couple of miles from there.

Essentially what happened in around August '69 in Divis/Percy/Bombay Street was a pogrom. The Brits guarded the loyalist terrorists as they made their way from the Shankill to burn Catholics out of their houses. Between '69 - '73 around 60,000 Catholics were displaced from their homes in the North as a result.

We now hang our hopes on another Lennon classic "give peace a chance"...ahhh we're easily led.

[Guest]

I don’t know how many times I need to reiterate that I never made any anti-American statements. I just made the observation that Americans are responsible for nearly 100% of all cases of people being reported to the moderator. (It also true that in virtually every case the person making the complaint is American).

...

Well that's not true. I've complained about John and Andy, non-Americans, numerous times on this thread.

What complaint have you made about me? I recall quite a lot of pointless bickering filling up precious forum inches but no specific complaint.

You utterly misunderstood my GK Chesterton reference but I rather hoped that with some quiet reflection on your part the penny might eventually drop.

On an online forum it is easy to infer offence from the comments of others, especially perhaps for those who have been stung in legitimate debate. However the vast majority of members have thankfully a great deal more good sense than to seek solace in such nonsense.

It is distressing and frustrating to those of us who would like to see this forum develop as an educational resource that it so often descends into the petty squabbling and point scoring of the minority. It always centres around the JFK and conspiracy sections and hence the appointment of new moderators in those areas. Given the familar path of this thread today I can only wish those new moderators the best of British (and indeed American) luck

[Ashton Gray]

Although I have no specific problems with certain aspects of the Scientology movement, I am nevertheless always leary of anyone who would follow the "truth" as preached by those such as L. Ron Hubbard

Then there's another fine reason for you to be leary of CIA: they built their remote viewing program on it, and ran it for over twenty-five years in supreme secrecy—using your tax dollars. Or hadn't you thought of that part?

Ashton Gray

Mr. Grey, thank you for your very interesting time-line. What was the CIA doing by building their remote viewing program? Was this part of their mind control program & investigation? What function did their remote viewing program have? Was Scientology a front, a manipulated tool? Further elucidation appreciated. Thx.

Hi Mr. Scull. I hope you don't mind, but I've created a new topic in the Watergate forum to answer your question to the best of my ability there, so this topic doesn't get further derailed: CIA's Remote Viewing Program and Watergate—The Parallel Universes 1971, 1972, and Beyond.

To keep things somewhat straight, I just want to mention that the webbed Remote Viewing Timeline I've linked to and mentioned at times is not mine, nor is the site that it's on. That's a myth that's been insinuated by several members here. I don't know if you've fallen under its spell or not, but I wanted to make that clear.

The timeline that I more or less created—based to a substantive degree on that webbed timeline, but also including other information I had access to that is not in that webbed Remote Viewing Timeline—was in an older thread in the Watergate forum, but I've reproduced it in the new thread. So if you'll click here you'll find that I've copied your question there and have done the best I can to answer: CIA's Remote Viewing Program and Watergate—The Parallel Universes 1971, 1972, and Beyond.

And please call me Ashton. I'm not part of the "Mr." set here.

Ashton

[Guest Gary Loughran]

Given the familar path of this thread today I can only wish those new moderators the best of British (and indeed American) luck

Myself and John G already being anointed with the luck of the Irish of course.

Thanks for the good wishes

[Myra Bronstein]

I don’t know how many times I need to reiterate that I never made any anti-American statements. I just made the observation that Americans are responsible for nearly 100% of all cases of people being reported to the moderator. (It also true that in virtually every case the person making the complaint is American).

...

Well that's not true. I've complained about John and Andy, non-Americans, numerous times on this thread.

What complaint have you made about me? I recall quite a lot of pointless bickering filling up precious forum inches but no specific complaint.

You utterly misunderstood my GK Chesterton reference but I rather hoped that with some quiet reflection on your part the penny might eventually drop.

I'll re-meditate then. Thanks for pointing that out.

On an online forum it is easy to infer offence from the comments of others, especially perhaps for those who have been stung in legitimate debate. However the vast majority of members have thankfully a great deal more good sense than to seek solace in such nonsense.

It is distressing and frustrating to those of us who would like to see this forum develop as an educational resource that it so often descends into the petty squabbling and point scoring of the minority. It always centres around the JFK and conspiracy sections and hence the appointment of new moderators in those areas. Given the familar path of this thread today I can only wish those new moderators the best of British (and indeed American) luck

In this thread, post numbers: 22, 28, 199.

I complain very pointedly in those posts. I take the direct, public, overt route in my objections to behavior I feel is over the line. Thus it was right up front for all to see in those posts. Perhaps you didn't notice. I rather hoped that you'd read them and "with some quiet reflection on your part the penny might eventually drop."

However, if protocol dictates that I must send a PM to a mod to officially complain about the behavior then I'll jump through the hoops and do so. Anything to put a stop to that silly "100%" stat repeatedly being flung in the face of American forum members.

You know what they say about lies, damned lies, and statistics.

I'm looking forward the the new mods. Maybe they'll set a tone, by example, that's uplifting.