posted 10-17-2002 12:11 AM            

That this is a massive, covert, black operation, sanctioned by our own government, is both an obvious and substantial understatement. With rare exception, the topic itself is taboo in mainstream media. Inquires of our elected representatives are met with canned denials, or worse, a total stonewall.

As such, forums like these are important resources for individuals to share information on this topic of mutual concern.

Such information gathering is, of course, threatening to the authors of this program. As a result, substantial resources are invested in a systematic process of disrupting the flow of communication on this and other forums. Debunkers regularly hinder the flow of communication through divisive, inflammatory and distracting posts.

Does anyone really doubt both the intent and the ability of the government to carry out such activities? If so, please do a little research on the FBI's COINTELPRO program.

The true defense against such attacks on the sincere efforts invested by members of this board falls to the administrators/moderators.

It has increasingly become my feeling that these individuals are failing miserably in fulfilling this responsibility to other board members.

Deborah's thoughtful and well researched "Pretty Clouds" thread,
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001556.html

was responded to by theseeker with 43 minutes, with an inflammatory and intentional provocation that was completely off topic:

"speaking of annoying, what annoys me is how disgustingly neagative you people are, with the exception of a few thermit and lulu, all the "old-timers" chemtrailers are neagative pessimistic overbearing rude paranoid and obviopusly have not had a good day in at least 10 years..."

Later in the thread, this same individual clearly issued threats to me implying potential problems for my both family and employment:

"considering what I know about your own personal hypocrisy, your personal life, your job, and how you personally profit from the misfortune of others and don't say shit about it...you can F/O"

Thermit, the board's moderator, took the position that these were merely empty threats, since there was no evidence that any follow through action had actually taken place to date:

"Seems to me that even if theseeker actually had some valid information about SoreThroat, I don't think SoreThroat would have anything to hide, thus any threat would be purely an empty threat."

Thus, all individuals participating on this board could easily conclude that any and all are potential fair game for the "empty threats" from the debunkers and their desire for intimidation and disruption.

Is this truly in the best interests of the sincere members of this forum? Will this encourage further legitimate communication on the issue? Do any activists really want to potentially place their family, friends or employment at risk? Should they have to tolerate such threats to participate on this forum?

Or will the spineless inaction and negligence on the part of the board's administrators force them to abandon communication with others that they value?

Who truly "wins" in such an outcome?

Increasingly it seems that the board's administrators/moderators seem more intent on actually inciting verbal altercations between the sincere members and the debunking element.

An example of this is Lulu's post in the "What" thread, page 10:
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001545-10.html

Lulu taunts a poster with the challenge,

"You can always debate Cydoniaquest over at Mav's board...if ya have the balls".

Tonight a thoughtful post by efmx13, Chemtrails 101, is followed by a link, posted by the seeker, which is a personal attack on regular members of the board.
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000005.html

Both Thermit and Lulu choose to respond by actually complementing the author of this post.

Once again I ask, are these individuals acting in the best interests of the members of this board, in a manner the promotes the original mandate of this forum?

...Searching for Answers in the Chemtrail Issue...

If not, why not?

Who benefits if contributors abandon the board in disgust?

posted 10-17-2002 09:25 AM            

Good question.

And it occurs to me that it's actually the CONTRIBUTORS who will benefit by abandoning a non-productive venue in favor of an alternative that genuinely facilitates a productive discussion and problem-solving process.

It's my observation that, one way or another, people will end up with exactly what they want in this regard.

I'm really disappointed in the level of tolerance here for the kind of thing that was linked to last night by "theseeker".

And it has nothing to do with being thin-skinned or incapable of understanding why the moderators choose to handle these ridiculous situations the way they do.

posted 10-17-2002 12:15 PM            

In an effort to communicate to others about chemtrails, I sometimes refer them to the Chemtrail Central site, but do not always feel comfortable referring those new to the chemtrail issue due to the debunkers on the board.

posted 10-17-2002 03:45 PM            

17 October 2002
The Boston Globe

posted 10-17-2002 06:09 PM            

It is now about 6:08 in the evening. I just went outside and observed more chem-jets laying the same miles-long trails over and around my residence. They will no doubt continue their spraying job well into the evening. I'm watching the local news, only to see chemtrail after chemtrail in every viewing of the sky they give.

posted 10-17-2002 06:56 PM            

But the fact is, I have been threatened several times on this board and I pretty much consider this activity part and parcel of posting on this particlular forum.

It's an amazingly fine line, balancing freedom of speech with attempting to create a productive (and hopefully positive) environment. Hell, I started posting on this forum because I didn't like the idea of being gagged on issues that I thought important to pursue. A dual-edged sword, if there ever was one.

Someone over at the Carnicom board referred to the 'debunker' contingent here as being parasitic in nature. I think that's a very appropriate analogy. For myself, I try to limit my contact with intellectual parasites as much as possible.

Occassionaly, however, you can learn something from even the most parasitic entity.

Speaking of which, I can recall someone complaining about my treatment of Cydoniaquest back when I was modding the now defunct Neutral Zone. I believe my reply was "If you don't like it, start your own forum".

Eventually, that's what I wound up doing myself. I wish I could tell you that our policy of not allowing 'debunking' of the chemtrail issue has resulted in a huge membership... but it hasn't. I'll stack my page views against anyones, and I'm quite certain that a lot of collective efforts wouldn't have come to fruitition if the Flat Earthers were allowed to run riot... but it's hard to argue with a 1000+ members.

On the other hand Lori Kramer has a no-debunking policy and she manages to consistently kick everyone's ass... Yahoo and all.

If there's an upside to the less-than-exclusive nature of this board, it's that there is absolutley no reason to frequent EZboard 31... even for a cheap, slummy thrill. You can play with the parasites right here, if the fancy strikes you.

High Hopes? Hope is a concept I find increasingly esoteric these days. I expect nothing from no one, except myself... and am therefore rarely disappointed (and often pleasently surprised).

It'a big internet. My suggestion is to analyize the strengths and weaknesses of each particular venue and use them to your best advantage...

posted 10-18-2002 02:06 PM            

"But the fact is, I have been threatened several times on this board and I pretty much consider this activity part and parcel of posting on this particlular forum."

If this is true, and those who have attempted to intimidate with such threats are allowed to continue to post, what does that say about the administrators of this particular forum?

Are they protecting the GROUP INTEREST that is theoretically the foundation of this forum?

It is my position that to allow the debunking element to run amok, they are in fact encouraging such intentionally disruptive behavior.

posted 10-18-2002 04:33 PM            

"You can always debate Cydoniaquest over at Mav's board...if ya have the balls".<<

This was not taunting fellow moderator Dan Rockwell, but stating a fact.

there could be far less negative crap and mudslinging from all sides

>>You can play with the parasites right here, if the fancy strikes you.<<

and trolling and name calling and needless bs and bottom line is it's insulting the man who makes this cyber get together here possible

thanks for everything Thermit... and for the record I don't think you're negligent at all

posted 10-18-2002 05:08 PM            

Add in Chemtrails as the central topic, and it takes on new dimensions of challenge.

In this situation, I do understand your concern, SoreThroat and it's gravity for you.

However, as always the situation is complex, and it is what the situation demands that is the correct response, and not necessarily exactly what you are demanding.

There are two histories to consider, the mole and the duel.

The mole episode accounts for why some personal information of SoreThroat may have passed beyond his circle of friends some time ago. The original "betrayal" was here, with personal info being spread for no respectable purpose to God knows who besides theseeker.

The history of the duel is that SoreThroat and theseeker have enjoyed a many year relationship of verbal sparring, if not abuse. As these things go, they tend to get nastier over time. As they did in this case, until SoreThroat pushed theseeker to respond with his threat. Based on my interpretation of the recent abuse, I'm not approving, but also not surprised. It was a line crossed.

So here we are. SoreThroat you want me to ban theseeker (for a second time), but that won't help with the threat of your personal information being spread further, because if theseeker, or others wanted to post your information there is absolutely no stopping them from posting it somewhere on the net, or whatever.

posted 10-18-2002 06:32 PM            

On the the other end of the spectrum, I'm sorry Lulu finds it neccesary to label my response as some sort of 'troll'. I will leave it to the reader to make up their own minds whether such a characterization bears any validity. Of course, as a supporter of the Debunker's Forum, I understand I may have hit a nerve. Oh well.

"If you have the balls" is obviously a taunt and NOT a statement of fact. As I said before, I try an limit my contact with intellectual parasites. If someone wants to believe that no such thing exists, far be it from me to question their grasp of reality.

But please don't label me a troll for doing so. Or engage in hypocritical reprimands for 'name-calling'. I have tried to be civil and restrained and offer a balanced perspective on this ongoing controversy and unless I am somehow in violation of this forum's rules, I would appreciate it if you, Lulu, would refrain from giving me any further advice.

It is not requested, appreciated or (given your reputation for duplicity) respected.

Thermit is perfectly capable of speaking for himself, and I'm sure if he feels my opinion is somehow 'insulting' he will inform me of that fact. In any case it has nothing to do with you (as usual).

Sorethroat asks:

If this is true, and those who have attempted to intimidate with such threats are allowed to continue to post, what does that say about the administrators of this particular forum?

In my particluar case, both of the offending parties were subsequently removed. Given enough rope, the usual suspects will well and truly hang themselves. Dealing with their nonsense can be a test, but in the end it's worth it. I've watched with no small amount of satisfaction as every one of the first-string parasites talk themselves right out the door and into the cyber-equivalent of standing on a street corner with a cardboard sign. He who laughs last...

Re: 'Poles'

Be careful what you wish for, Lulu. People who play both ends against the middle are regarded with suspiscion by most people that are sincere about(and familiar with) this issue, and with good reason. The 'mole' incident certainly left a lasting impression on me and I wouldn't even think about divulging personal (or otherwise sensitive) information to someone whose contact list includes Jaybird's and housewive's from Indiana.

This thread's very existance is proof positive of what trusting the untrustable will eventually lead to.

posted 10-18-2002 07:04 PM            

By the way. Thanks for the great message board medium.Great potential for various types of media from different sources from different backgrounds. There is room for all kinds of discussion here for and against.That's a good thing. Let's not let personal disagreement resort to threats. That's not how we get across our message and/or gripes.I will say this though,beware of the two headed monster, not just here in cyberspace either.

I'll do my best not to do the same. Having someone disagree with you should be just another step for you to prove them wrong.I am constantly learning all the time on how to better get my message across and try not to let my petty grievences take center stage.It is getting harder and harder to trust anyone at this point, but I try not to let it get to me.It distracts from what you are trying to put forth.

Once again, thanks for the forum Thermit.

posted 10-19-2002 02:40 AM            

I made this clear the first time around in the post of reference, some folks certainly not you thermit, do not understand the words "principle" and "character"...ideas that seem to have little meaning in their lives so in an effort to clear the water let me repeat my original words in italics...

just consider yourself very fortunate that I am a man of principle....

to further clarify, things said to me in trust...in private...and in confidence...are just that...and they remain there...this type of philosophy is called *principle*...to act on it takes *character*...got that throat ?

also this has nothing to do with the mole aspect, deb has never supplied knowingly information to me about any of the anonymous researchers "the group"...

nor does any info that I have come from government sources as deborah and throat like to paint on those who oppose their dismal paranoid views on things....

naturally thermit you touched ever-so-slightly on the real motivation behind throat's personal campaign to remove me from this board...

it's not about his safety, personal, privacy or work, clearly it's about his bitterness over the chemtrail issue and a vendetta that has seemed to manifest itself in some sort of *power* and influence he is attempting to wield against you thermit to pad his ego in a way to claim some miniscule victory in his own personal war against the world...

lack of argument...and not being able to withstand contrarian views...surely is a facet that can't be overlooked here either...

this ego thing is so high school, immmature and completely distasteful...it's not even funny....

I certainly hope this is the last we have to deal with the subject as throat has brought this up in what appears to be the second time around for a moot argument...

I have been labled a pollyanna many times for my views on things...

like this one :

I believe things happen for reasons and people are where they are for the same...you are here for yours and me for mine..why or what they really are I don't know but in the end...a clear conscience...and knowing I pursued the truth...will do me just fine...

and let's revisit this one too from the same thread...

I'll say this one more time....when you people start cleaning house of all the liars, profiteers, and nuts, gather together and do some research, by scientific standards, get it reviewed by unbias intelligent peers and publish it...then you'll start getting an honest response from credible orgs....

will this ever happen ?

not as long as some try to force others to silence opposing views...and believe it to be a just cause...

divisionism has never been the answer...

(special mention for my boy dave, do we want to go into why and how the zone really came to an end dave ? anyway...the reason your board lacks contrarian views is simple, it's not your rules or regs or those snappy pop-ups, it's the deck is stacked before the game is played....it's that simple)

open discussion...CTC...a cut above...

thanks thermit...

posted 10-19-2002 07:47 AM            

Re: The Zone...

Yes, I remember quite clearly. I came to the conclusion that opening the door for people whose 'contrarian' viewpoint was composed mainly of ridicule, deception and threats was a bad idea, after all (and said so).

You saw the writing on the wall and resigned. If this experiment in failure had never been undertaken, you wouldn't be here now working damage control on your latest adventure in bad taste.

posted 10-19-2002 02:51 PM            

Peace

PS...sorry to hear of what went down here years ago Sore Throat...I hope you and theseeker can work out your differences...personally I believe seeker's word is good when he says he would never *expose* you.

posted 10-19-2002 03:26 PM            

and I'd say thermit does it better than any I've seen...

as far as the rest of your post dave...your can write history any way you want...I see it for how it was...and is...

perhaps as the end of the road draws near our old friend carl may drop by armed with a pop-up blocker and say hey on his way out....

posted 10-19-2002 08:56 PM            

Just make sure Carl leaves his pet orangatang at home, Greg. It's a community-oriented forum... no trees with truck tires to swing from.