user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : No, the whole idea of taking user's karma away for mentioning these kind of things is ridiculous
I believe the idea of zeroing a user's karma, simply for mentioning such things by name, is ridiuclous. Especially since they were merely being mentioned to be dismissed and condemned.
Voted : No, the whole idea of taking user's karma away for mentioning these kind of things is ridiculous
exactly. and i've seen many users post links to questionable sites. some even have them on their user page. if the rule applies to herzog, that it's got to apply to all.
Voted : No, the whole idea of taking user's karma away for mentioning these kind of things is ridiculous
Obsurd! This site is suppose to be about free speech so how the hell should a person lose all their karma for merely mentioning Adolf Hitler or Mein Kampf?I really don't know what is going on around here anymore;liberalism is truly a mental disorder.
Corrupt- "This site is suppose to be about free speech so how the hell should a person lose all their karma for merely mentioning Adolf Hitler or Mein Kampf?"
- No one has for mentioning Hitler or Mein Kampf. But a user got into trouble for mentioning a racist website (which another user had sourced) in order to condemn that site as bigoted and unreliable. But of course, nothing happened to the user who originally sourced it.
If mentioning that by name can result in having all ones karma taken away, then shouldn't I also, for what I have just stated in my ballot? I will await judgement on this. If I am not stripped of my karma, it will display how ridiculous things have gotten (why punish herzog's circumstance and not mine). If I am stripped of my karma, then this would also display how ridiculous things have gotten in regards to censorship. I am willing to take the risk. If one does not stand for principle, then principle falls out of reach.
Do you think you're going to bully LCD into giving Herzog's karma back? Or by provoking him? I think it's admirable for us to support Herzog, but do it in a way that will work huh?
The more you go about it this way, the more you just irritte LCD and Herzog will never get his shit back. So could you just chill?
"No but I dare you to cite the website"
- So if it is on the internet then it is evil? But if it is in a book it is okay? LoL that's silly.
Voted : No, the whole idea of taking user's karma away for mentioning these kind of things is ridiculous
But of course
But of course
If you are cranky (who has everyone on block) you can do whatever the hell you want without repercussion.
passiveson- bully LCD? No, not at all. Perhaps implicitly raising controversies surrounding the reasons used to take from herzog of all his karma, but not bullying. I believe it is more about raising the issue of reason and logic surrounding such a rule.
"The more you go about it this way, the more you just irritte LCD and Herzog will never get his shit back. So could you just chill?"
- You don't get it. This isn't just about herzog. It transcends that. It is about the basis of the whole rule that was utilised, and is supposedly still in force for the rest of us.
"If you are cranky (who has everyone on block)"
That's not true, I just have a few stalkers blocked, including Fiddle.
"you can do whatever the hell you want without repercussion."
Also untrue. I have been spanked by LCD on several occasions, with both warnings and negative karma. I have not, however, openly -- and arrogantly -- flouted the rules, childishly daring LCD to respond.
This obsessive vilification of LCD by the herzog cultists is appalling and immature to the extreme.
LCD was in the right. What's-his-name was in the wrong.
cranky- Firstly, what did he do that was 'wrong'? If he is 'wrong' for his comments, am I not also just as 'wrong' for the unashamed statement I made in my ballot?
Secondly, disagreeing with the new rule that suddenly appeared does not equate to being a 'herzog cultist'.
Thirdly, this is not vilification of LCD. It is a discussion of the issues concerned with the new rule and its implications (which transcend the circumstance of herzog's, as this rule applies to the rest of us as well supposedly).
The thing is that if you are tank_girl, meteor7 or lovelynice (all really the same person) you can directly cut and paste from such "unnamed" websites and be free from repercussion. I ask: What is worse, being a shill for these unnamed websites of pointing out their names?
Apparently free speech is ok when you cut and paste from them but not if you mention the source.
IN any case, Herzog was wrong on that ballot.
by aya on Sun Mar 04, 07 9:10am
[+]
"Mein Kempf is my bible" as John Tyndall - founder of the BNP once said.
The whole things a strawman "rule" of the site, a"legitimate" tool to stifle dissent.
Thats the way its starting to seem anyway.
cranky, you're full of it. what is the very first thing you do at the first sign of a heated debate with someone? you run like a coward and put up a karma block and add them to your ignore list. you're a facist.
funny thing is, bbc did the exact same thing within mintues of you doing it to me. odd. even funnier is that i was giving you good k to test it out -- sure enough, you didn't skip a beat -- both of you put up the shield and added me to your ignore list.
oh yeah, what a man.
and as for stalkers cranky, you should know -- you lead the pack. you're the king of pyshcotic stalking.
This obsessive vilification of LCD by the herzog cultists is appalling and immature to the extreme.
LCD was in the right. What's-his-name was in the wrong.
by cranky on Sun Mar 04, 07 10:43am
^ another of your on-going lies. so go find those supposed "vilification" comments. or is that just another of your bs false accusations.
lcd's a big boy and can handle himself. you continue however with your sick-minded delusions, a-la the "cultist" comments. lcd can handle people asking him questions. you make it seem like people are bad mouthing him and vilifying him. so prove it.
i challenge you to post those supposed vilification comments. or is that you realize you're on the defensive now and are trying to stoke the fires and rile lcd up with your typical lies.
won't work. he's smarter than that.
Apparently, a very specific issue was mentioned, which was past problems with infiltration of B&W by people from supremist websites. That doesn't apply to mentioning Mein Kampf.
^Au Contraire, I seem to recall Hitler posting on this site for a significant period of time. Our most famous user, second only to Michael Jackson.
Hitler posted here? The problem was even worse than I thought.
TNG: The way I refer to is taunting, challenging, badgering, and antagonizing ballots and comments.
I want Herzog to be restored, but the more you push this, the more resistance you'll generate against that gaol. But I spoke my piece, I just Herzog will be reinstated to his original status despite the push.
aya- "IN any case, Herzog was wrong on that ballot."
- Wrong about what? Wrong that the five men were Israeli? That was not even what was being debated. There were two phases to the that discussion. The first phase was when LCD had only provided one source as answer to his quiz. The whole thing was disputed at that point in time, as the source that LCD used was a racist anti-semetic one, and thus unreliable. The specific points being enquired of were whether the 5 men were secret agents, whether they had prior knoweldge of the 9/11 terrorist attack, and whether they were part of a conspiracy to push the US into a war. All three of those points of which were questioned were not proven as absolute fact by LCD. Even when he later found a second source (the second phase of the discussion)- when the ABC source was brought up, that source itself shed reasonable doubt on the three points of discussion. So I do not see that herzog was wrong in that ballot. Perhaps you didn't notice that the first source (which was racist and anti-semetic) as all references to it were deleted, and there are only references to the second source that was used (which was only brought into the discussion much later), fogging up how the discussion actually unfolded.
Secondly, even if he was wrong, what does that have to do with anything? Herzog didn't have his karma removed for being wrong, but rather for mentioning the racist source by name, the racist source of which LCD was the one to refer to first.
Prove to me that LCD showed that the the five men were without reasonable doubt secret agents, had prior knowledge of 9/11, and were part of a conspiracy to push the US into war. Secondly, tell me how it makes any sense to remove a user's karma for referring to a source (which was indeed racist), but they only referred to it to enquire of its reliability, of which LCD was the one who had brought it up in the first place as his original source?
And aya, if herzog was wrong on that ballot for naming that source (that LCD used as his initial source), should I not also be equally wrong for mentioning Mein Kampf? IF not, explain the difference?
Socrates, Herzog said the story was fabricated.
LCD said Prove it is fabricated.
Herzog did not prove the story was fabricated, even though some elements of the story remain in question.
Did Herzog prove the story is fabricated?
ABC NEWS 20/20 affirms the story is legit even though some elements of the story remain in dispute.
Despite the ABC Story, I am still inclined to beleive that the 5 Men were Israeli intellegence agents and there are many questions that remain suspiciously unanswered concerning them.
Passive... its a non-story. A couple of websites (one Israeli and ABC News). Neither of those websites nor any other credible news website throughout the world deemed the story worthy of any follow-up. One minor story of dubious value much like the alleged "insider trading" prior to 9/11. LCD tried to make a ballot to use a ballot as a sledgehammer on herzog and to a lesser extent - me. The only websites that continue to flow this dead horse are conspiracy and neo-Nazi. Its an archived story on ABC news much like all the other breathless frenzied reports that came out after 9/11. Herzog did a good job of showing who was pushing the spy angle and why there is no credible or definitive evidence and certainly none of pre-knowledge. Pre-knowledge of the event belonged to Al-qaeda and its sympathizers in the US and elsewhere. As does any "conspiracy" claim.
"I am still inclined to beleive that the 5 Men were Israeli intellegence agents and there are many questions that remain suspiciously unanswered concerning them."
Based on what? There are no credible unanswered questions. Its a dead issue even in much of the Arab world.
"ABC NEWS 20/20 affirms the story is legit even though some elements of the story remain in dispute."
Lots of news reports came out of 9/11. A report of something doesn't necessarily credible. If there was anything credible to the spy angle don't you think it would have been extensively covered elsewhere. It isn't like other western news outlets are all pro-Israel. A good number are not, especially in Britain. People were paranoid and any perceived unusual behavior was magnified.
"some elements of the story remain in question"
No, not really. No follow-up stories anywhere. No story. No big deal. Dead non-story.
Basically, LCD did not prove his point.
FFLSD, I asked for evidence and you provide none. To the contrary, Kev offered this on another ballot. Did you miss it or just ignore itr? :
According to the police report, one of the passengers told the officers they had been on the West Side Highway in Manhattan "during the incident" referring to the World Trade Center attack. The driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers, "We are Israeli. We are not your
problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the
problem."
The other passengers were his brother Paul Kurzberg, Yaron
Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari.
When the men were transferred to jail, the case was transferred out of the FBI's Criminal Division, and into the bureau's Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which is responsible for espionage cases, ABCNEWS has learned.
One reason for the shift, sources told ABCNEWS, was that the FBI believed Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation.
After the five men were arrested, the FBI got a warrant and searched Urban Moving's Weehawken, N.J., offices.
The FBI searched Urban Moving's offices for several hours, removing boxes of documents and a dozen computer hard drives. The FBI also questioned Urban Moving's owner. His attorney insists that his client answered all of
the FBI's questions.
But when FBI agents tried to interview him again a few days later, he was gone.
Three months later 2020's cameras photographed the inside of Urban Moving, and it looked as if the business had been shut down in a big hurry.
Cell phones were lying around; office phones were still connected; and the property of dozens of clients remained in the warehouse.
The owner had also cleared out of his New Jersey home, put it up for sale and returned with his family to Israel.
A Scary Situation
Steven Gordon, the attorney for the five Israeli detainees, acknowledged that his clients' actions on Sept. 11 would easily have aroused suspicions. "You got a group of guys that are taking pictures, on top of a roof, of the World Trade Center. They're speaking in a foreign language. They got two passports on 'em. One's got a wad of cash on him,
and they got box cutters. Now that's a scary situation."
But Gordon insisted that his clients were just five young men who had come to America for a vacation, ended up working for a moving company, and were taking pictures of the event.
The five Israelis were held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in
Brooklyn, ostensibly for overstaying their tourist visas and working in the United States illegally. Two weeks after their arrest, an immigration
judge ordered them to be deported. But sources told ABCNEWS that FBI and CIA officials in Washington put a hold on the case.
The five men were held in detention for more than two months. Some of them were placed in solitary confinement for 40 days, and some of them were
given as many as seven lie-detector tests.
Plenty of Speculation
Since their arrest, plenty of speculation has swirled about the case, and what the five men were doing that morning. Eventually, The Forward, a respected Jewish newspaper in New York, reported the FBI concluded that two of the men were Israeli intelligence operatives.
Vince Cannistraro, a former chief of operations for counterterrorism with the CIA who is now a consultant for ABCNEWS, said federal authorities'interest in the case was heightened when some of the men's names were found in a search of a national intelligence database.
Israeli Intelligence Connection?
According to Cannistraro, many people in the U.S. intelligence community believed that some of the men arrested were working for Israeli intelligence. Cannistraro said there was speculation as to whether Urban Moving had been "set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists in the area, particularly
in the New Jersey-New York area."
Under this scenario, the alleged spying operation was not aimed against the United States, but at penetrating or monitoring radical fund-raising and support networks in Muslim communities like Paterson, N.J., which was
one of the places where several of the hijackers lived in the months prior to Sept. 11.
For the FBI, deciphering the truth from the five Israelis proved to be
difficult. One of them, Paul Kurzberg, refused to take a lie-detector test for 10 weeks then failed it, according to his lawyer. Another of his
lawyers told us Kurzberg had been reluctant to take the test because he had once worked for Israeli intelligence in another country.
^ more to this counter story. so a guy did work for israeli intelligence and failed the lie detector test?? and a jewish newspaper in ny is saying they are israeli intelligence. hmmmm.
by Kev24 on Thu Mar 01, 07 9:48pm
Thanks Kev
From the ABC News Article, any reasonably intellegent person who asks "why were these men jubulent at what was an apparent mass murder? Why did they lie about their previous route and location? Why was Bomb residue found in the van? Why were they illegally in the USA working, for a company that a Jewish Newspaper alleges is a front for the Israeli Intellegence? Why did the owner of the Moving company abandon his home and business just days after the 9/11 attack? Is it reasonably probable that the alleged Hi-jackers used box cutters to hi-jack the planes and these 5 Israeli men just happened to also have box cutter knives in their possession?
Do you think that the FBI, Israeli Intellegence or the American Government would admit that there were Israeli Intellegence Agents conducting espionage on American soil and the FBI didn't about it? Would they admit that?
No, at the end of the day, there is no direct evidence proving these men had prior knowledge, but there is sufficient circumstancial evidence to convict these men of complicity if they are unable to provide reasonably convincing answers to many of these questions.
by passiveson on Sun Mar 04, 07 5:09am
Fiddle, claiming it is a non story is a non argument with non evidence.
passiveson- "No, at the end of the day, there is no direct evidence proving these men had prior knowledge, but there is sufficient circumstancial evidence to convict these men of complicity if they are unable to provide reasonably convincing answers to many of these questions."
- Actually where I come from it is an issue of innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Certainly you can say it is suspicious, however one cannot state it as absolute fact (which what is implied when declared on a quiz ballot. Quiz ballots are only about definite facts, not abut 'most probables' or 'suspicion' or 'sepculation', no, only definite facts. Speculation and absolute fact- can't you see the difference?
Besides which, I want to go back to why herzog actually had his karma removed. It was stated that it wasn't because of anything to do with who was right or wrong in that discussion, but that he cited a source that was racist. However, LCD cited the source first, and herzog was only referring to it to condemn it. So why was it okay for LCD to cite it in the first place, and not for herzog to mention it just to condemn it? And secondly, I have cited a racist source in this ballot, so why have I not gotten all of my karma removed? If the rule is really about the rule and not a personal vendetta, then should I not also have all my karma removed for mentioning Mein kampf?
Actually where I come from it is an issue of innocent until proven guilty
That would appear to be the premise, but reality is a completely different application of the rule of law. People are convicted everyday on far less "Circumstantial Evidence" they are unable to explain away.
Now I will agree that Herzog wasn't demoted for denying the verity of the ballot. I also agree that it is not a stated policy of this site that a user is subject to retraction of their full Karma compliment. I also agree that it is inappropriate to retract Karma in this manner.
But it is LCD's right to remove his superuser status, remove or deny publication of any submission without warning or notice, and to suspend or expel abusive users.
So your only legitimate protest here is about the retraction of Herzog's karma rating.
I've just checked this in the Maintainers and Terms faq's.
But you can't force the man with the power to comply!!! He will resist you push even in the fact of being a hypocrit.
You can reason him to mercy and to compliance through earning his respect.
Good Luck
I think LCD's reaction was more than heavy-handed. Belittling users by creating a banner about them (when creating ballots about users is frowned upon) made me consider dumping this site.
"Wrong about what? Wrong that the five men were Israeli?"
Wrong that the story was fabricated, as passivon stated.
"Secondly, even if he was wrong, what does that have to do with anything?
It has to do about the story, to be honest, I don't know why his karma was removed. Go ask LCD, are you sure it was 'cause of his mentioning a site? I don't know what he meant by second strike. Why don't you ask LCD to explain himself?
"Prove to me that LCD showed that the the five men were without reasonable doubt secret agents, had prior knowledge of 9/11, and were part of a conspiracy to push the US into war."
There's still enough elements that make this a fishy story, Kev raises many interesting questions about these men. So neither could Herzog prove beyond a doubt that these men weren't spies.
You seem defensive
by aya on Mon Mar 05, 07 12:31pm
[+]
Why is it up to Herzog to prove they weren't spies? It wasn't his story.
aya- "Wrong that the story was fabricated, as passivon stated."
- I believe that expressions of doubt on the entire story only took place during the stage in time in which LCD had only cited one source, which was the racist and unreliable one.
"It has to do about the story, to be honest, I don't know why his karma was removed. Go ask LCD, are you sure it was 'cause of his mentioning a site? I don't know what he meant by second strike. Why don't you ask LCD to explain himself?"
- Herzof had all his karma removed for referring to an anti-semetic site. He only mentioned it to condemn it, but never mind that. LCD cited it first, but never mind that either. And I have sourced a racist source here too (Mein Kampf), but apparently that doesn't matter either, LCD has seen this and has enforced that supposed rule on me. Sounds inconsistent to me at least.
"There's still enough elements that make this a fishy story, Kev raises many interesting questions about these men. So neither could Herzog prove beyond a doubt that these men weren't spies.
You seem defensive"
- Defensive, no. Skeptical, yes. I have never stated or argued that the five men were defintely not agents or guilty of being part of some conspiracy. Nor have I scanned the internet searching for any evidence that would support their innocence. So I am not defensive about it. All I have done is analysed the sources that were provided. From that I could not see that any definitive conclusion could be made that the five men were agents or that they were guilty of being in a conspiracy. That is mere skepticism. Certainly, there are grounds to say that the story is 'fishy', 'suspicious', 'food for thought' and so on, but that's about it. LCD cited the points of them being agents, having prior knowledge of 9/11 and intending to push the US into a war, on a quiz ballot. Quiz ballots are of a special kind, as they should only be about well established facts, and not speculations. And I am not saying all this because I am generally defensive about Israel. The state of Israel shouldn't have been created in the first place.
*** "And I have sourced a racist source here too (Mein Kampf), but apparently that doesn't matter either, LCD has seen this and has NOT enforced that supposed rule on me. Sounds inconsistent to me at least."
Has herzog had all his karma taken away from him??
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!
Serves him right, he's a cunt.
you know, this really is funny.
herzog has made HUNDREDS of ballots, picking out some obscure news items to make arabs look bad.
ONCE, I give him his own medicine, and he goes berzerk. Comment after comments, accusing me of this and that, without the benefit of my reply. basically attempt to drown dissent.
You know what? Worship herzog as much as you want. Protest, cry, march on the street.
I DON'T CARE.
WHY? BECAUSE YOU DON'T CARE.
YOU DON'T CARE WHY I DID WHAT I DID, AND YOU KEEP SPINNING BS ABOUT WHY I DID THIS AND THAT.
on top of it, you try to goat me by trying the same damn thing.
ok. Get out. I don't want you here. I got better things to do than babysit sickos and racist potheads.
seeya!
by LCD on Tue May 08, 07 12:41am
[+]
LCD- Didn't you say that the reason herzog was expelled was because he cited a source that you didn't like (you cited it first, and he only mentioned it to condemn it as unreliable because it was anti-semetic)?
So why are you talking about herzog's opinions as if it is a factor in your decision to expell him? Kind of clashes with your claims that his opinions didn't influence your decision to ban him, but rather because he mentioned a website that you cited first, in order to condemn it as anti-semetic and therefore unreliable for one of your quiz ballots.
"Worship herzog as much as you want. Protest, cry, march on the street."
This isn't just about him. This is more in general about how flawed, unclear and irrational your new rule is.
|
|
