DU Boothill

A fellowship of unjustly "tombstoned" DemocraticUnderground members. We use this space to talk about our feelings in reaction to the experience of first joining in the wonderful DU community and then expelled with no warning, no reason given and no response to our pleas for reinstatement. We feel this constitutes Anti-Democracy by DU Admin.

JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Thursday, February 17, 2005

Renaming blog to DU Boothill

Hopefully this won't mess people up too bad. I just thought since it looks like my tombstoning is a rather permanent thing at DU it'd be fun to change the name to something a little more self-expanatory, at least for those in the know.

JamBoi

JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Friday, January 28, 2005

Satori Blogs DU-Suppressed Info: HAARP-like electromagnetic weapons deployed to Iraq

[JamBoi editors note: Satori was kicked off of DU for posting similar material as this. This information needs to be seen by the American public and DU is making a very poor choice to suppress this information. I've reposted this article for its primary discussion of its actual subject at our related blog, The X-Files Wing. Here we'll take any commentary on the DU suppression of this info]

Microwaving Iraq:“ Pacifying” Rays Pose New Hazards To Iraqis
By William Thomas 01/24/05


JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Friday, January 21, 2005

My response to DU banning me because of the New York Times, Fox News, and Kooky Tsunami Conspiracy Theories

My Response to Democratic Underground for banning me
because of my and others research into the HARRP
project offended the NY Times and Fox and the majority
of DU members.

I think Skinner the owner of Democratic Underground
banning me as a member with no notice of warning or
notice or reason was unreasonable.

I also think his thread explaining the threads that we
had started with the implication that anyone that
would say that the Asia earthquake may be natural or
man made is obviously to kooky for a majority of DU
members to tolerate so therefore we have to ban any
discussions of kooky conspiracy theories, and if
anyone sees any of those topics in a thread hit the
alert buttons for the Mods.

But if they were so kooky and so defamed DU as he
argued then...Why not just repost the
kooky theories in his thread to prove they are kooky?

Skinner
ADMIN

Skinner's DU Thread About the New York Times, Fox News, and Kooky Tsunami Conspiracy Theories

[Ed. note by JamBoi: Satori's HAARP investigation report can be found at txfwing.blogspot.com]

____________________________________________________________________

Satori

[JamBoi ed. note: Satori has a blog at Satori-Society.blogspot.com where URLs to his green enterpreneurial ventures can be found also.]

JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Wednesday, January 05, 2005

Plucky DU poster sticks it to Skinner for anti-democratic policies!

I am enheartened that this DU poster stands up to Skinner and questions Skinner's suppression of democracy on this supposedly "DemocraticUnderground.com" Let Skinner live up to democratic standards or withdraw his faux democratic claims.

Here's the text of the post by "Conspirationalist"

Conspirationalist (3 posts) Wed Jan-05-05 07:43 PM
Response to Original message

153. "Kooky Tsunami Conspiracy Theories"

You know what I think? I think this site has too many rules. I've just read them all, my eyes started to glaze, and I think they're a little - excessive. I don't see why a Democratic site feels the need to be so prescriptive. Leave it to the Republican sites - only funnily enough, most of them don't make such prescriptions; I suppose they feel it might offend the libertarians among them!

Now, admin johnnies, before you start posting nasty replies to me, or thinking about throwing me off, 1) I am new to this forum - might have viewed it once or twice before, but only signed up today and 2) I am a Brit. So you'd better be nice to me!

I'm a VERY progressive person; only of course I can't vote for any of your lot - nor, to be quite honest, would I want to! But I'm pretty well-informed; about America too; so basically I'm claiming that you want me on your blog! (Otherwise it's back to about.com!)

Yes, all this has relevancy to the current thread! Here it comes:-

I find it VERY interesting that "mainstream" journalism such as the NYT and Fox News is finding it so fascinating; what blog sites have to say about the issues of the day. And they obviously find all the non-mainstream forums threatening; after all, if there are all these blogs around, EVERYBODY's opinion has to be electronically "printed" somewhere; they can't just edit out the opinions they don't like and only publish a few carefully selected letters on their pages from professors, etc.

So good on all blogs! Especially the big ones that bring lots of people together!

But I find it also interesting - and discouraging - that basically all they could find to comment or "criticise" re the blogging phenomenon, was that blogs such as yours supposedly allowed "kooks" a point of expression! Whoever "kooks" may be! (Well, it had to be something they could trivialise, didn't it, in the usual patronising manner of such established "organs" - that being the right word! They would never expose certain blogs such as Freeper as being something really sinister and therefore worthy of worry, would they?)

But actually I'm cross with you guys, too, now, and I'm going to tell you why! (Noblesse oblige! This, by the way, is because I was a knight in one of my previous incarnations. And I feel you have offended against the rules of chivalry. Bear with me.)

For it was a very small posting, was it not, from a woman, who I am pretty sure uses her real name (lindashaw): as I do myself on another forum, incidentally. Entitled "One more dumb question regarding the earthquake in Asia." A VERY tentative, undogmatic, non-pompous little post; as many posts by women and those who feel themselves to have "non-mainstream" theories tend to be.

It is therefore both ironic and amusing that this small posting, plus one or two others, sparked off a furore, among several groups; narrow-minded Republicans, newspapers seeking to recapture their "we are the arbiters" status and their legitimacy, and narrow-minded admininstrators on this site.

The bit about asking people to alert you if anyone came on with any more "kooky tsunami theories" was what got ME! Who are YOU to say what exactly caused the earthquake, or whether or not it didn't have any environmental aggravators - global warming, for instance?

I followed a lot of links to find the "kooky theories" on your site; (and I hope I can find the one with the Reuters reference; pity you restrict your search function!) basically because I have a close friend (female) who has much the same idea.

I think you would be surprised how many people, both in Britain and America,and indeed worldwide, think something very similar, about the bunker-busting bombs in Iraq, for example, busting into fault lines and having something to do with the disaster in Bam. (Why there's even an old Superman movie plot, that's very much like that!)

What do you lot know about it? Where are your scientific credentials? Plate tectonics is a relatively new theory - don't you know that? It doesn't explain everything about the inner earth by any means. And there are always hundreds of other factors in a real-world situation. Saying plate tectonics is the only factor in earthquakes is like saying that weather is purely caused by cloud formations!

Anyway. I wouldn't have expected censorship of ideas to be found on a Democratic site; merely because you were sensitive because some silly Republicans and their pals at Fox would paint you as "kooks"! They think everybody is a kook that doesn't bow before Bush; don't you get that yet??

No, I would have expected to find censorship of certain ideas, and hostility in particular to more "alternative" dissenting points of view, environmental theories, etc, to be found on something like a Marxist site. Those with experience will know what THEIR prejudices are. Well, guys, if I want that, I can always go to www.wsws.org ! (Quite a fine site, by the way. But no blogs!)

You're supposed to be Democrats! You're not supposed to be censoring of anybody! Think liberal! Think wishy-washy! Think environmental. WHATEVER you do - don't pander to Republicans. And don't censor! Leave it to the dogmatists. Last time I looked, no liberal had a dogma. And that goes double for Democrats.

Here's a bit of shoddy journalism:

2. The Times failed to mention that the post was completely anonymous, and there is no way of knowing what the person's intention was. The person who posted it was not a donor, so we don't even have a name from a credit card. We have no way of knowing if the person who posted it was a misguided fellow liberal, or a conservative trolling to make us look bad. For all we know, the right-winger over at whizbang blog could have posted it himself. On the Internet, there's just no way of knowing.

The post was NOT completely anonymous - the person - a woman - used a proper name, what was probably her real name! (More than this blogger is prepared to do - though if you want to know what mine is, you'll find it on my e-mail address!)

They might not have been a donor - so obviously not a favoured contributor! So - do you think that just because a name isn't from a credit card, it isn't a real name? Why not use the usual internet style alias? I feel that the intention of this poster was HONORABLE.

This lady, lindashaw, who it is my desire to defend, is not a "fellow" of any kind, as you can see - she's a woman! (This is even emphasized in the avatar she has chosen for herself; males aren't usually so cute.)

I very much doubt that it was a "conservative troller" posing in the role, nor the "right-winger over at whizbang" - not unless they're VERY persistent and prepared to spend a lot of time fabricating posts; or some kind of master hacker who can hack unnoticed into your system and make it look as if a blogger has been on there longer than they have.

For, "Sherlocks", the poster in question has previously notched up 907 POSTS!!!!

Try checking what you're talking about!

Linda, whoever you are, I raise my hat to you. You're a freethinking liberal; forget the "misguided". It was an insult by an admin of this board; HE SHOULD APOLOGISE!!

(And he would if I ever went over there and to his office.)

Well I still say it's not very surprising, that a couple of patronising mainstream organs and Republican web sites should have made a whole lot of fuss about a few tentative comments about the earth being organic and possibly having "bones" - ie, a structural framework that might be disturbed or broken, wouldn't surprise ME!

And mentions of "Gaia" in other posts ... yes, that would excite the little anti-pagan bigots and snobs and slobs... Well of course it would! This society is a patriarchy! Gaia is a goddess archetype. Male chauvinism in yet another form.

And by the way, "Gaia", referring to the Earth as a system, or organism, is also a SCIENTIFIC theory, pioneered by Dr James Lovelock, which has to this day got a lot of respect and a large following.

So. There.

PS. Why is it possible to post "Smilies" in these threads - and yet I can find nothing to put in bold, underline, or italics?

Skinner Finally Reveals Basis of Censorship: No Conspiracy Theories Allowed

Heil Skinner, arbitor of all truth... Below all truth is revealed to us minions. Thank heavens we have Der Fuerer Skinner to think for us! For me I'd actually be fine with agreeing to not post Conspiracy Theory stuff. All he needed to do was ask me not to and I'd be happy to take it elsewhere. But no, he didn't have the courage to tell me what his issue was. In a strange karmic twist of fate, Skinner and DU get it in the head from Fox News and NYT. Poetic justice, I must say.

JamBoi

Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Wed Jan-05-05 04:48 PM
Original message
About the New York Times, Fox News, and Kooky Tsunami Conspiracy Theories

Edited on Wed Jan-05-05 05:02 PM by Skinner
In case some of you missed it, The New York Times and Fox News have recently highlighted DU as ground zero for Kooky Conspiracy Theories regarding the tsunami. The New York Times article is here, and here's a DU thread about Fox News.

They say that all publicity is good publicity, and that is certainly true to some extent. Many of our members found this website because of some negative publicity we got elsewhere. Still, I don't think any of us really appreciate being painted as kooks.

I just emailed a Letter to the Editor to the New York Times. I hope they choose to run it. I think it is only fair, considering that their publication did not bother to contact us about the article when they were writing it.

We probably won't directly contact Fox News. My guess is that it would be a waste of time. But we'll address their report here.

Here's what we want all of you to know about this issue.


The official opinion of the DU Administrators

This should be obvious to everyone, but I'm going to say it anyway so there is no doubt what I believe, and what the other DU administrators believe: The tsunami in Asia was caused by a massive earthquake. This earthquake was a natural result of the movement of tectonic plates, as explained by the Theory of Plate Tectonics.

How we feel about kooky tsunami conspiracy theories

We think they're a bunch of crap, and we believe most -- if not all -- DU members think they're a bunch of crap. We do not wish to see them posted on our website. If anyone posts a kooky tsunami conspiracy theory on our website, we would like to know about it so we can remove it and then investigate the person who posted it as a possible troll.

What you should do if someone posts a kooky tsunami conspiracy theory

Please click the alert link on the post so the moderators can be made aware of it. The moderators will discuss it and decide if it needs to be removed. Do not personally attack people who post such things.

You are encouraged to reply to such posts and explain why they are wrong.

About the New York Times article

As I already mentioned, I have sent a Letter to the Editor to the Times. I am not going to reproduce the letter here, because they expect their letters to be exclusive, not published elsewhere. There are a few points I would like to make, however:

1. The Times never contacted us for comment.

2. The Times failed to mention that the post was completely anonymous, and there is no way of knowing what the person's intention was. The person who posted it was not a donor, so we don't even have a name from a credit card. We have no way of knowing if the person who posted it was a misguided fellow liberal, or a conservative trolling to make us look bad. For all we know, the right-winger over at whizbang blog could have posted it himself. On the Internet, there's just no way of knowing.

3. The Times took the post out of context. If you check the actual post you will see that it has the tone of an innocent question, albeit an ignorant one. The title of the post was "One more dumb question regarding the earthquake in Asia..." In other words, the person who posted it was not claiming it to be true, but was simply proposing it as part of a "dumb question."

4. The Times gave prominent placement to the fact that we were ridiculed on "other sites," but did not mention disagreement from other DUers until much later in the article. I do not know if this was intentional, but it did downplay the fact that almost everyone on DU disagreed with the post.

5. Picking out random anonymous postings on an Internet message board is shoddy journalism. There are so many things posted on the Internet that you could literally write whatever you want and find a quote to support it. One wonders why the author did not spend five minutes over at Free Republic and instead write an article about how conservatives think the tsunami was some sort of retribution from God, or how Muslims deserved it. (More on that later.)

About the Fox News report

Another admin has been home watching Fox News today, and was able to get a video tape of their report. Not surprisingly, it was a disgrace. I am not going to write a transcript, but I'll make a few observations.

Fox News is claiming that someone on Democratic Underground has claimed that the earthquake and tsunami were caused by an underground nuclear explosion. I haven't seen such a post, but this is a big website and I certainly believe it is possible that such a post exists. (If anyone knows where it is, please hit alert so we can make it go away.)

Here's the really underhanded thing about Fox: They're maliciously and deliberately giving their viewers the false impression that this is the official opinion of Democratic Underground. Of course, they aren't coming out and saying it directly, because that would be lying. But they have prepared their report in a manner to give that impression.

They never state that the claim comes from an anonymous posting on our website. Instead, they just report that the claim is being made on the Internet, while showing screenshots from our website. Interestingly, they are showing our homepage as it looked yesterday, when we were running a large graphic with the words "The Hell That is South Asia." They also click on that article and scroll down the page while they are talking. The clear implication is that our article makes this absurd claim, when in fact our article makes no such claim. Read it yourself; no conspiracy theories there.

On a side note, the Fox News report claims that such kooky claims are hurting our international reputation. Never mind the fact that Fox News is the mass medium which is reporting these kooky claims to the world. Methinks they might have another agenda here.


So, what's going on here?

Some people have speculated that The New York Times and Fox News are attacking us because they have decided that Democratic Underground is a threat. I don't buy it.

I don't think Democratic Underground is a threat. But I do think that some people have figured out that they can use extreme posts from Democratic Underground to paint all Democrats as extremists.

This is nothing new. Right-wing websites and radio programs have been doing it to us for years: Pick out something extreme from an anonymous message board, and then post it on your own site as "proof" that liberals are nuts. In fact, if you can't find something extreme enough, then all you have to do is create an anonymous login and post some extreme stuff yourself. (To be clear, I'm not accusing the Times or Fox News of doing this. But it does happen.)

Anyway, it appears that this type of thing is no longer limited to right-wing websites. Now we're seeing "mainstream" news outlets engaging in this kind of lazy, underhanded reporting.

But as long as they're writing this stuff, here's some helpful info:

From Free Republic

If any lazy, underhanded journalist wants to write an article smearing all conservatives as insensitive racists who cheer the deaths of non-white people in the tsunami, here are some quotes for you:

"Jesus Christ would not aprove of giving money to people to build houses again in an area that is.... lets face it...prone to this activity. Nothing in the Bible does it say "Blessed are the Stupid. The government taking money from you and I and giving it away is not charity. It is forced slavery of You and I." --Radioactive

"I was looking up a map of the affected areas and Indonesia seems to have been hit hardest. From the CIA World Fact Book, Indonesia is 88% muslim. Sometimes foreign aid money is well spent (goodwill, political influence, etc), but giving it to a muslim country is a waste." --benjaminjjones

"So just give money to our "allies". Indonesia gets nothing. Let the ragheads take care of their own." --benjaminjjones

"This is what I want to give to them: (Picture me shaking my hands up in the air singing..... LALALLALALALLLLLLAAAAALLALALLALALALLL). Just like they did when they celebrated 9-11. By the way...did any countries donate anything to our hurricane funds?" --benice

Much more here: U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims

And then there's this one, blaming the tsunami on, well, you'll see...

Everyone is knocking the Muslims for asking the question why God allowed this to happen, but that is actually a very good question. Though, the speculation given here cannot be substantiated.

As far as I know, there were no prophets warning of this impending disaster. If there had been, who would have listened?

They are also correct in believing that God is angry with the wickedness of fornication and sodomy that is becoming more widespread in our world. Jesus warned that in the last days, before His return, the world would be like Sodom and Gomorrah.

Unfortunately for the clerics, God is also angry with the false prophets and promoters of false religions like theirs.

I am not sure why God allowed this disaster. I know it His mercy that preserves all of our lives, but we rarely ask why about the good days. We just take those for granted.

The days are coming when God's real judgment and wrath will be poured out. And this tsunami will look like a picnic. Because of the murder (including abortion and euthanasia), theft, adultery, fornication, idolatry, witchcraft, drunkenness and drug abuse, and for shedding the blood of His prophets and saints, God will pour out His fiery wrath on this world unlike it ever has been before. In two quick strokes, half of the earth's population will be destroyed. And this will not be the end. Imagine: not tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions, but BILLIONS DEAD. Can you imagine those headlines, if anyone is left to write them? People will become a scarce commodity like gold. And for all of this, there are some who still will not repent to give God glory.

Have a nice day, everyone." --unlearner

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1313784/posts

JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Sunday, January 02, 2005

What's Up with DU?

I was a member of DU for about six weeks until I was "tombstoned" two weeks ago for reasons only the admins at DU know.

My tombstoning occurred on the weekend of what another banned DU'er termed the "Saturday Night Massacre". During that weekend, and for several days prior, at least 10 good DU members were banned, and none of them were given prior warning or were given reasons after the fact.

For me, the most striking aspect of DU was the overwhelming distrust long-time members had of "newbies". This distrust seemed almost impossible to overcome as any dissenting viewpoint a new member posted was typically torn apart by those members who did not agree, with comments about the poster such as "low poster", "disruptor", and "freeper". This was so common, in fact, that an admin stepped in while I was there and posted a message about not "calling out" newbies. While I have since learned that this behavior is by no means limited to DU, it is my opinion that it is exaggerated there, and I believe it is aided and abetted by the admins and moderators themselves.

DU has a policy that indicates that a member may be banned at any time, and for any reason, soley at the discretion of the "administration". On the surface, this is certainly a reasonable policy as this is a political board, and, as such, there are bound to be members who sign up for the sole purpose of degrading and debunking the threads posted there. These types of members usually "blow their cover" fairly early on, and no one is surprised when they find these members have been banned. The problem with this policy, however, is that, as in my own case, a member can be banned for ANY reason, and, unfortunately, the rules are so vague that it is impossible to know just what (if any) rule was violated. The "offending" member is banned under mysterious conditions, and the remaining membership is left wondering what happened to that member.

From what I could see, this practice led to more distrust and paranoia, because, if a seemingly "good" member was banned (and, of course "we know we should trust the judgement of the admins"), then "how do we know that we can trust anyone here"? This effect is compounded when, as is typical, the admins do not provide any reason or justification to the banee, and remaining members continue to be in contact with that ex-member. The thinking might then be "I had better be very careful because I don't want whatever it was happening to me". Of course, since the "whatever it was" is unknown, it is not difficult to imagine that some might tend not to post important opinions or news because the pall of secrecy has effectively censored them in advance.

The banned member is left dealing with confusion, loss, and anger -- feelings that are a direct result of, or compounded by, being rejected for no apparent reason.

If we look at how DU is set up, there is yet another problem with "banishment at will". While many of us are employed under the same conditions (firing at will), there is one very distinct difference between employment and DU membership -- the employer pays the employee, but at DU, the members pay for the website and it's operations through voluntary donations. And, these donations entitle the member to privileges not available to those who do not donate such as use of the search feature and being able to post in certain forums. Each donation grants the member a full year of privileges, and, after my banishment, I wondered why my recent donation was not refunded. I no longer have the privileges a donation grants, so, it would make sense that my donation should no longer be used to help run a website I can't participate in.

There's more. There is a forum entitled "Ask the Admins" in which members post direct questions to the administrators. I have seen members, time-and-again, be chastised there for posting what a particular admin subjectively considered either a disrespectful inquiry, or one in which the tone appeared disrespectful. I am a big proponent of treating others with respect, and, in fact, this orientation was very much a part of my posting behavior at DU. But, what I don't understand is how the admins can demand respect from the members when, in fact, they afford members no such thing. It is very disrespectful to terminate a membership without so much as a brief explanation. It is disrespectful in several ways: (1) It is treating the member like a non-entity, and (2) It does not afford the member an opportunity to defend against the reasons (real or imaginary).

As a mother, I can vouch for the fact that, even in dealing with very small children, I respected them enough to provide an explanation for a punishment such as a "time out". The DU admins, on the other hand, seem to think that they owe no one respect, but, they, by virtue of site ownership and administration, deserve and demand nothing less. Is this a democracy? Sure doesn't sound like it.

Another problem, which goes hand-in-hand with respect, is DU's apparent refusal to honor the First Amendment rights of each member. Given the degree of censorship I personally witnessed wherein posts and entire threads were deleted without explanation, it seems that DU doesn't think these constitutional rights apply to it's members. And, if a member questions these actions, one runs the risk of being banned. I personally know of a few people whose last actions at DU were those of questioning the admins on why another member was banned. While they received no explanation from the admins, it isn't too far fetched to assume that they were considered "disruptors" simply because they questioned the "powers that be".

DU could be a great board as there are many members there who are very serious about improving the democratic party, and who actively engage in worthwhile endeavors. There are some very intelligent posters who challenge lazy thinking, and who I felt honored to "know". In addition, it is the members who make any board what it is, and therefore members should be considered important in determining the success or failure of a given community. But, at DU, the administration determines what should and should not be spoken about, and it is the administration that arbitrarily decides who is or is not a disruptor, often disregarding the thoughts and feelings of the community at large. The overall membership is therefore not the problem at DU, but, it is, rather, the way the board is run.

Since each member has the opportunity to become a donating member, each member should also have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process of DU. This would include allowing members to vote on rules, and it would include providing members with a means of appeal if they find that their posts are deleted, or if they find that they are banned. DU does have an informal (and superficial) "appeal" process, but, as noted above, they largely do not honor it as most of their disciplinary actions are performed with no interaction with the perceived "offender". In a truly democratic board, this would not happen as the membership would hold the admins responsible to demonstrate that their actions were fair and unbiased. And, if the DU admins do not agree with this type of democratic environment, then they should not solicit funds from their members, or they should solicit them with the warning that DU does not refund donations, and that the donation does not entitle the member to fair or democratic treatment.

While my association with DU was very unpleasant, I now realize that it is just one more board in a sea of websites, and as such, it is neither more or less important than any other. It is good to be able to choose to belong to boards that are respectful of their members as this is what America is all about -- the freedom to choose, and the freedom to say "No". And, it is also possible to collaborate with like-minded people to create a new board -- one that is truly democratic, and one that can effectively contribute to this great country of ours.

This is what I intend to do.

JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Thursday, December 30, 2004

Is DU Sick of Cult-Probing Dems?

Recently posted on DU- 2004 Election Results and Discussion:

Im sick of fair weather Dems. Reasoned thoughts from a Moderate.

Do not blame Kerry anymore than you blame yourself for the election defeat.

Everyone on this board was very energetic about Kerry. No speculation after the convention about Skull and Bones. No talk of him possibly throwing the election. Once WE lose though, people are spouting conspiracy theories left and right.

Was there election fraud, voter suppression and fishy acts leading up to and on Nov 2? Yes, of course.
Was it mostly perpetrated by the GOP? Probably
Did Rove, GWB and the RNC have direct involvement? Possibly
Did the illuminati, Skull and Bones, or the New World Order have anything to do with it? No.
Does the illuminati exist? no.
Is S&B anymore than a bunch college boys playing fort? no.
Did Kerry throw the election? OF COURSE NOT

[snip]

The Democratic party has a recent history of being splintered - the GOP has been able to stick together... that should be your BIGGEST conspiracy theory relating to why WE lost.

I dont want anyone of you to leave the Dem party. However, if youre just going to bitch and complain and blame the leaders of the party of criminal acts and conspiracy. Then leave. If you can channel your anger and your passion into doing good for the party, as we all saw before Nov 2nd then by all means stay. Your extremism only hurts the image of the DNC.

Yes, I like the DLC. Yes, I am a moderate. No, I do not hate Liberals, but I wish that contemporary mainstream liberalism didnt have to be so riddled with irrational thoughts and theories.

[end]

This recent post by Machiavelli05 on the DU Forum "2004 Election Results and Discussion" may shed some light related to the bias behind some of the tombstoning that has been going on recently at DU. Basically, Machiavelli05 is ranting about the continued spouting of conspiracy theories by liberal DUers regarding Kerry's loss of the election. What is particularly surprising is that he brings up various cult-related organizations such as Skull & Bones, and the Illuminati, and even includes the New World Order as the basis for a potential conspiracy theory that Kerry may have "thrown" the election due to his affiliation with one or more of these groups. I have to admit that I do not read everything posted on this forum, but I honestly don't recall a lot of DUers harping much on THIS particular type of theory as to why Kerry lost the election. Could machiavelli05 be particularly sensitive to this issue for some reason? Could this be a pre-emptive strike in order to disuade any further discussion of cult or non-government organizational reasons for the election being corrupted?

Now, you may ask, how does this relate to DUers being tombstoned? As we know, Jamboi was the only DUer (now tombstoned) relaying information from investigative reporter Wayne Madsen [see http://jamboi.dailykos.com for more info] who is starting to look at Dominionist and other far right religious connections to the Bush Administration, and tracing the flow of funds which were allegedly used in widely fixing the election across many states. The central point of this conspiracy theory is that these "Dominionists" represent a well-connected fringe or cult, if you will, of Christian right-wing Fundamentalists. Not only has Jamboi been mysteriously tombstoned for reasons not completely understood, but several relatively new DUers who seemingly did nothing more than stand up for his integrity [see the following posts on this blog] were also immediately banned from the website, with no explanations provided.

Ok, so maybe the Illuminati doesn't exist, but Sun Myung Moon certainly does [see http://www.iapprovethismessiah.com] who happens to be a billionaire that owns United Press International as well as the Washington Times, and he seems to be extending his realm of power to members of Congress as well as the Bush family.

I have seen a list of members of the Council for National Policy (the organization which plans the strategy for the Religious Right) being investigated by another working in parallel with Madsen. The backgrounds of each member list a plethora of various religious organizations and cults which ought to make any mainstream conservative Christian think twice about what Satanic strategizing is really going on behind the scenes in Washington. The organization Skull & Bones is mentioned several times, but there are many others, none the least of which is that of the "Moonies," which would appear to play a more dominant role. Whether or not Kerry has been effected by these groups is really beside the point, what is more to the point is how this web of conspiracies may be affecting our democracy.

Stay tuned.....



JBIE &/or another TombStoned Friend on

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

"I cannot sleep, nor eat, nor speak...all I can do is write.":JEI

Originally posted at jamboi.mydd.com on Mon. Dec. 20th, 2004
JamBoi-In-Exile: Day 4

Dr. Lilian Friedberg wrote me about having been similarly exiled by DU, and shared another point of similarity: The profound disturbance this fraudulent election has had on our personal lives.  People have questioned my non-stop personal activism on this subject and I wrote a humorous diary on this sleepless intensity. Here Friedberg accurately expresses what I've experiencing (and have gotten dinged for) very well:

"I cannot sleep, nor eat, nor speak to the ones that I love: all I can do is write. I have a bag of carrots and some bread, I nibble and chew, longing all the while just to dine, sipping fine wine beside a window to the world. Extra! Extra! Read all about it. I am writing for my life. For the life of the planet and the dignity of humanity. Your violations will be revealed and we will bring you to the most poetic justice the world has ever seen. Our good name shall be redeemed because we, too, write with GOD on our side. But ours is not the god of vengeance, it is the god of justice, of freedom, of peace. We will neither retreat, nor surrender. There will be no white flag. Not this time."



Worse than Watergate? Yep. Worse Yet: Worse than Hitler
by  Dr. Lilian Friedberg
www.OpEdNews.com



[snip]

All I can think about is you. You have invaded my mind. Occupied my consciousness. I cannot put you out of my head. You and your crimes. Soldiers dead and wounded,  murdered civilians, tortured prisoners, lives shattered throughout the world, scatter the corpses make the pile higher! And let's not forget Andrew Veal, the guy who put a bullet in his head at Ground Zero in tragic salute to your victory march--onward we march, onward pissed off soldiers, marching on to war. You have littered the planet with lies--but the bigger crime--you have done it in our name and on our dime. And now you seek to cleanup: every scrap of truth shall be destroyed. How vastly you have misunderestimated these seekers of truth. You thought you weren't leaving a trace. But in your first term, we learned to survive on the scraps, miniscule particles of justice and peace--we have become vigilant vultures, divebombing to snatch any last morsel of beauty and truth.

Then, in a flash of brilliance, one fleeting moment in time, it appeared. There was one who could not sleep through that nightmarish November night--there's something amiss here she said, and sounded the alarm! Millions have since answered the call. We have connected the dots. Performing to our utmost in a public display of persistence, pertinacity and prayer --we have said it: the banality of evil shall not prevail. Indeed we have dared to issue the Eleventh command: Thou shalt not prey upon the planet!

In those sparse moments of sanity when I come up for breath, I ask myself just how much of the American taxpayer's money you and your programmers have squandered to orchestrate this, your most catastrophically successful fiasco  to date. Were anyone to invest as much time, energy and ingenuity as it has taken to make the case against you into comparing the millions points of tragic parallel between you and Adolf Hitler, right down to that smug, self-confident smirk,  what they would find is that you surpass him by a margin of more than fifty five million to one because Hitler set out to slaughter certain sectors of the population--you want to obliterate everyone and everything. Your aim is total annihilation. Totalitarianism to the tenth degree.

I cannot sleep, nor eat, nor speak to the ones that I love: all I can do is write. I have a bag of carrots and some bread, I nibble and chew, longing all the while just to dine, sipping fine wine beside a window to the world. Extra! Extra! Read all about it. I am writing for my life. For the life of the planet and the dignity of humanity. Your violations will be revealed and we will bring you to the most poetic justice the world has ever seen. Our good name shall be redeemed because we, too, write with GOD on our side. But ours is not the god of vengeance, it is the god of justice, of freedom, of peace. We will neither retreat, nor surrender. There will be no white flag. Not this time.

It is a remarkable feat: you have succeeded in dividing this country, not merely along the lines of the Mason Dixon line, but into parallel universes. Those who know the truth, and those who believe the lies. Those who know are glued to their screens: they have gone underground, creeping and crawling, scouring these nefarious bowels to smoke out this craven scourge. Hungry for truth, starving for justice, we have found it. It is here. Indeed, in our search we have discovered it and brought it to light. The others, portent and petrified of the truth, fearing what the million points of light are sure to reveal, go about their business. They have no emails to send, no letters to write. They go to their jobs, teaching the classes, cleaning the carpets, caring for the kids and thank god that they do because otherwise the world would come to an immediate halt--would be sucked into the incendiary backdraft of all you have done.



The lines of communication have broken down: we live worlds, indeed, universes apart.


 (snip)

We know we are winning. Indeed, we have long since won. But no one up there can see it because they've buried their heads in  "conspiracy theorist" spin.



[snip]

My prayers are with you, and, as always, with this country and her people. Today I stand proud despite what you've done. Because we've made the case, and yes, we have won.

Sincerest regards,
Dr. Lilian Friedberg
Reporting from the Democratic Mandate of the United States of America