portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article portland metro

Thought Police

Bush Admirer has been censored and deleted thanks to our tireless Portland IMC Thought Police
Thanks to our very own Portland IMC Thought Police who read each and every comment deleting those that don't conform to 'acceptable thought.'

One helpful suggestion would be to make a list of 'unacceptable thoughts' with a link from the top of the front page. This would let people like BA know that we mean business and which thoughts are not acceptable here.

Unacceptable thoughts would include such items as:
- Republicans are not Nazis;
- Noam Chomsky isn't infallible;
- Saddam isn't wonderful;
- Capitalism isn't the same thing as enslavement;
- People deserve to keep the wealth they've created for themselves,
- Bush is not Hitler reborn,
- etc. etc.
Orewell would laugh at you. 31.Dec.2002 10:12


If you can't handle indy as a far-left, anarcist site well go find a nice pro-war, bush's boot lickin', greedy capitalist, pig lovin' site. And then you can stop wasting bandwith at indy media.In short take a long walk of a short peir 'cuz you get no sympathy here. 'nuff said.

Watch out 31.Dec.2002 10:19

The Redcoat

You're going to be censored when they catch you at this.

The Problem is this... 31.Dec.2002 15:19

Salmon Girl

Many rightwing posting sites do not tolerate moderate or leftwing views. They are deleted and the authors are banned, even though the hosts of such sites are quick to attack anything they see as "liberal attacks against free speech". And while we might wish to show "tolerance", posters such as Trilox and Bush Admirer have no tolerance for our views. That is the hallmark of the right. They can not stand that beliefs differing from their own should have a public audience. That is why they attack us, here and elsewhere. That is why Indymedia is being spammed by these people, with the intent to disrupt, discredit, and destroy. Indymedia belongs to *us*, the moderates, liberals, progressives, and leftwingers of all degrees. We created it. We support it. Posters such as those mentioned above do not. And I believe it is right for Indymedia to protect itself against the inroads of rightwing trolls who have nothing constructive to offer.

Salmon Girl 31.Dec.2002 17:43


I hang out here quite often, but I seldom speak up. Censorship seems contrary to my philosophy and so this issue raises my ire.

Where is it stated that this website only accepts postings which support a particular point of view? And where does it say that anyone who disagrees with 'the party line' is to be ridiculed as a troll.

Bush Admirer argued his points and engaged in debate. That's not true for some of us who disagreed with his reasoning. See "None's" post above for a pertinent example. If I'm going to choose sides in this debate it is difficult to line up with someone who is so rude as "none." I don't care for BA's points of view, but I'll defend his right to have them and to speak them here. Deleting all of his posts was vindictive and unfair.

If Portland Indymedia is to become an Indoctrination Center where you simply log in and find out what we're suppose to be protesting this time, then count me out. I think Radical Lib (above) has raised some great points.

I found this site interesting because it appeared to be a place to discuss issues, even if you disagreed with the so-called conventional wisdom. Disagreeing with 'conventional wisdom' is not the same thing as banning it. BA is a good spokesman for 'conventional wisdom.' If you kick him/her out then you can't blame him/her for thinking that Portland IMC has hoisted the white flag of surrender and given up, having lost the battle.

Those of us who speak for the left are a small minority (that is if you don't count the Democrats -- I don't). How can we expect to win over the public if we expel anyone who disagrees with us? It's a false debate if we only discuss issues with each other?

Let us learn from history. Richard Nixon made up 'enemies lists" and tried to squelch anyone who disagreed with him. Daniel Ellsberg comes to mind. It didn't work for Nixon, and it won't work for Portland Indymedia.

I won't labor the point, but I do hope the Administrators will rethink this.

are you are retarded? 31.Dec.2002 17:51


Yes, you are retarded.

-BA was a Troll and a spammer.
-he had no interest in helping our community.
-his free speech was not violated because he is guaranteed no free speech in these or any other forums.
-no one

calling the IMC ed's "Thought Police" is like me going to a conservative Christian site and complaining that the webmaster was trying to control my mind and make me into a Christian. -your list of "unnaceptable thoughts" are ridiculous and extreme exaggerations much like your ilk.

we are not the government hence no police other than the collective who, unlike BA and other trolls, CARE about indymedia.

I mean if you hate us and our views so much then WHY COME HERE? answer: you are here to disrupt.

Ragnar 31.Dec.2002 18:08


Hello Ragnar

You said:

-BA was a Troll and a spammer.
-he had no interest in helping our community.
-his free speech was not violated because he is guaranteed no free speech in these or any other forums.
-no one

You make it sound as if Indymedia is a private club. Is it? If it is then we need to revise the definition of open publishing on this website.

I quote:

"At the heart of Indymedia is the principle of "Open Publishing", which allows anyone to self-publish their work on the IMC web sites. The IMC Newswire encourages people to become the media by posting their articles, analysis, videos, audio clips and artwork directly to the web site using the "Publish" form.

Indymedia relies on the people who post to present their information in a thorough, honest, accurate manner, but has no control over what people post."

"Like all IMCs, portland indymedia hosts a website with an open publishing newswire to which anyone can post text, images, audio and video using the online publish form, anonymously if desired. Unlike a newspaper or other form of media, content uploaded to the website using this form is published directly to the newswire without being approved or edited. This feature empowers anyone to become the media for the purpose of sharing information and views that are blocked out or misrepresented by the corporate media; that is, to stand with the oppressed against the oppressors."

If censorship is now the plan, then we need to revise these rules to state that anyone who disagrees with us is not welcome here.

calling the IMC ed's "Thought Police" is like me going to a conservative Christian site and complaining that the webmaster was trying to control my mind and make me into a Christian. -your list of "unnaceptable thoughts" are ridiculous and extreme exaggerations much like your ilk.

we are not the government hence no police other than the collective who, unlike BA and other trolls, CARE about indymedia.

I mean if you hate us and our views so much then WHY COME HERE? answer: you are here to disrupt.

Didn't mean to start a big argument 31.Dec.2002 18:18

Radical Lib

I hate right wingers like BA

But one of the things I hate most about your average Republican is their intolerance. I just don't like intolerance.

And I don't like censorship. If someone disagrees with me I'd rather call them out and argue the point, than to pull the plug and cut them off.

"None" is an embarrassment. I'd much rather debate BA than None.

And I don't think it serves Indymedia very well if the editors delete posts by those with an opposing point of view. In fact, such actions are repugnant to me.

The reason I posted those "Unacceptable Thoughts" (above) is to illustrate just how ridiculous we look by cutting off debate.

You people are full of crap 31.Dec.2002 19:01

Right-Wing Pinhead Troll

The Left is ten times more intolerant than the Right.

Just watch Fox News sometime. You'll see dudes from The Nation and FAIR.

And the Republicans have gays (Logcabin) and pro-choice speakers at their conventions while the Dem wouldn't even let Gov. Casey of PA speak because he is pro-life.

And don't even get me started about who disrupts speakers on college campuses and throws out college newspapers.

Republicans and the right are the live-and-live folks in this country. The Dems and the left favor higher taxes, more regulation, speech codes, and the rest of the PC thought control garbage.

Censorship 31.Dec.2002 22:32

Bush Admirer

Thanks to all who have commented in this thread. I'm sure they'll delete this post as soon as they find it.

However, freedom of expression will find a way to overcome such abusive practices.

that's a cute kid 31.Dec.2002 23:00

sdneirf dnu xolirT

"I'd much rather debate BA than None."

good luck to you. in some imcers opinions, "Bush Admirer" (et al) isn't here to debate but to disrupt, overall. yeah this personality will chime in time2time with what on the surface would appear to be pretty reasonable "common folky" assertions; this does not necessarily make him the Andy Griffith of pdx-IMC (or whatever imc he may be echoed on). weighing his commenting as a whole, i can tell that many others, as well as i, consider BA to be an unenlightened troll for certain obvious reasons (if you want me to spell them out i will).

you can read "Marc" and you can weigh out exactly what this site represents: it provides not only a voice for the voiceless, but also a way to communicate with "like minded people" who do not want to suffer the foolishness of certain others (politicians, "world leaders", crooked cops, industrial murderers, web troll-0ps...) anymore.

i once argued on behalf of people like you and "Bush Admirer", but even i'm not that stupid that i'll sit here thinking that this person is here to make a positive contribution to imc--use your eyes and that big brain you have.

if IMC is like a village than i'm that MFer who, on behalf of the village, would respectfully ask (or provide "escort" for) "Bush Admirer" and "Trilox" and "The Lamet VOv posse" to leave. they are clearly an unneeded disruption in what can be considered a most critical period in human history.

i compare Bush Admirer et al to Brainy Smurf, if you're familiar with the early 80s NBC cartoon. most of the Smurfs could work together and solve the villages major problems (avoiding Bush..uh, Gargamel and his cat), but one Smurf by the name of Brainy thought he was so smart and that his way of thinking was superior to the other Smurfs, including wise Papa Smurf. the tolerated his ass because he was a fellow Smurf. they tried to be civil about it. Brainy's "cynicism" was never outwardly relevant; it always served to drag the Smurf clan down, never Gargamel. this is like BAs sassy butt, and i wouldn't doubt it one bit that this persona (non grata as sum would c it) was indeed an admirer of gw bush.

adhering to idealistically good principles is fine Marc, but this world is ideally "evil" and good things often get bludgeoned to death, just ask the dodo itself (the bird that is).

Radical Lib is full of shit 01.Jan.2003 00:01


You are a manipulative bullshiter Radical Lib! I can remember a number of articles featured in the center column by the Editorial Collective where Chomsky was strongly criticized, and I have yet to hear anyone saying that Saddam is wonderful.

You then saying that you didn't mean to start an argument after posting an inflammatory and highly inaccurate post shows that you are a liar.

BA and others like him, HAVE NEVER ONCE engaged in meaningful discussion with people holding differing views. What the Editorial Group is doing is not censorship, it is protecting the space from abusive destructive individuals with an agenda which has nothing to do with dialog. It is protecting the space so that respectful intelligent dialog about all sorts of pertinent inssues can take place.

This ridiculous piece of bullshit post by Radical Lib should have been deleted too! It is nothing but a waste of space that makes no attempt at honest critique.

Bullshit Artistry 01.Jan.2003 01:12

Thoughtful Police®

Bush Admirer is not a human.

Bush Admirer is a program initially entered as candidate for the Loebner Prize, and like every submission since, it failed the The Test.

However, BushAdmirer™ produced the most volatile discussions ever witnessed between computer and human since the very first competition in 1991, so the GOP purchased the code for our "benefit".

We need a pattern recognition program to detect and automatically remove its posts.

"There's going to have to be some changes to that internet thing y'all seem to know so much about"
- Poppy
~ September 16, 2001

sarcasm? 01.Jan.2003 01:23


is the original post sarcasm or not?? I am very skilled at missing small hints in the english language

computed intelligence is not intelligence 01.Jan.2003 02:34

Brainy Smurf strikes again

"Bush Admirer is a program initially entered as candidate for the Loebner Prize, and like every submission since, it failed the The Test.

However, BushAdmirer™ produced the most volatile discussions ever witnessed between computer and human since the very first competition in 1991"

did the AI "program" (a human's "knowledge" + a *finite*, semi-dynamic set of basic *well defined* rules) *'care'* at all about the outcome of the discussion, or was it just trying to keep its battery fresh for a big date later that night with a sexed up fax machine?

if BA produced volatile discussion between different human interests (or really, certain people and the air), and such discussion really didn't go anywhere, what does that say about human "intelligence" and ingenuity? are people really as undynamic and dumb as a computer, or can computers be real wise asses?

some people may act like machines, but a machine with artificial intelligence must display FULL INTELLECTUAL CAPACITY, whatever this entails. (then there's still the problem of "ego" or self-awareness). or maybe a lot of people are getting dumber and more 'souless'.

oh well, more smoke screen distractions--thanks for the heads up Thoughtful Police­®. whatever.

the weird thing is some people believe in computers more than they do people (Bush Admirer, would you consider such people "self-haters"?)


where's my article composter?...

BA...I'm obnoxious, but you're just a turd 01.Jan.2003 04:26

Lamet W Vali

Yes, it is I, the irrepressible Lamet W Vali. You, Bush Admirer, are a pathetic turd. At least I, lover of many women, occasionally made a point. You, on the other hand, simply suck ass.

Yawn, I must go and put out the slug bait now.

BA is not being censored 01.Jan.2003 05:42

GRINGO STARS gringo_stars@attbi.com

BA's very typical, warmed-over sentiments are being broadcasted, printed, listened to, read, and watched in every corporate media news outlet there is. If one was to measure the amount of Bush The Second Toadie pablum being spewed to people in the guise of news - versus the amount of information that DOESN'T lick the boot of authority, you would find that over 90 percent of the news faithfully parrots the BA line (actually BA parrots the pro pundits, to be fair). BA spending over 10 hours a day at a variety of IMCs tipping the scales of propagandic favor towards authoritarian capitalism is overkill. It's not like he's spreading the truth, folks. He lies and misrepresents constantly. He VERY rarely says anything even factual. It's like letting the toddler in on the conversation - sure its kinda cute sometimes but more than an interjection every once in a while is tedious and ruins the flow of information. Trolls (and that's what he is) live to suck valuable time from activists' lives. Some are even paid for it. The next time BA says something toddleresque and you feel compelled to "set him straight," - don't. That's what he wants you to do. Take a deep breath and realize his adolescant craving to dishearten those who give a damn about anything other than themselves is not worth your time. He is impervious to your attention. Here is a list of the many less-than-honest tactics BA uses in the course of his day:

This reminds me of something 01.Jan.2003 10:48


When trolls get bad-mouthed on this site (and then deleted),the Michael Savage school of debate gets practiced. "You don't agree with me? Then you're a #### #### treasonous piece of ####!! I'm hanging up on you!!" Might be emotioally satisfying to do that, but you haven't proven squat.

Thankyou Postman 01.Jan.2003 16:13

Bush Admirer

If you're a Hare Krishna, and you don't want people making insulting comments about your hair style or your fashion sense, then your best tactic is to restrict you contacts to other Hare Krishnas and block out the outside world.

That's the modus operandi for the thought police here.

BA is the Thought Policeman here 01.Jan.2003 20:56

GRINGO STARS gringo_stars@attbi.com

BA is the Thought Police. IMC isn't. This is a community of those who deny the mind control mechanism of corporate news. Obviously, the Thought Police can't stand the idea of Thought Criminals having ANY kind of sanctuary, so they come to IndyMedia to parrot what they heard from Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter or whoever else is the state-sanctioned pundit of the moment.

Phew! 01.Jan.2003 21:20


I'm glad they're gone. They didn't promote thoughtful dialogue or debate. Unlike most people, who only occasionally "lose it," those guys ALWAYS spewed hateful trash. They usually managed to divert attention from the subject or question at hand. Trying to have a meaningful give and take with them in the picture was like trying to have a normal conversation while a stereotypically bratty child throws a tantrum at your feet - except I assume BA and Trilox are (supposedly) adult humans.

Indymedia 01.Jan.2003 22:50

Sean Henderson lohan1@msn.com

Maybe it's just time that Indymedia be more upfront about it's design and purpose. We're here to promote that which is independent of the corporate controlled sludge out there.
We're not here to debate with people like BA - what good would that do?

We're here to provide information about opportunities for activism, ammunition in the form of information, and a support base.

I think it IS helpful to have some moderation and outside points of reference so that things don't become idiosyncratic but this is no place for the spawn of scum.

On that note, it would be good if Indymedia deleted the occasional bullshit conspiracy theory crap that just wastes time (I'm not saying that there aren't conspiracies - but that occassionally we get untrue postings designed to just stir things up.) Such things should be verified.

I want to see more original art 02.Jan.2003 09:02


and Flash too.
I want to see more original art
I want to see more original art

trolls 02.Jan.2003 18:51


These kinds of arguments give BA and his assorted little friends exactly what they want--attention; they post to the site writings designed to elicit a response, the easiest way to do this being comments with which they expect us to disagree, seeking to obtain responses from as many people as possible. I suppose they might be paid agents of some entity who wants to distract us, but lacking any evidence of this, I suspect we're more likely dealing with individuals (very likely adolescents) who use the anonymity of the Internet to seek the social validation they lack the self-confidence, for one reason or another, to pursue in their more immediate and less anonymous environs. When they become enough of an irritant to the people whose websites they use for this purpose that they begin to interfere with the function of these sites and administrators threaten to diminish the attention-generating potential of such posts, the posters will begin complaining about censorship, often with a very juvenile understanding of the concept, as Trilox and others have so clearly illustrated. Anyone else who was an introverted or socially akwkward teenager within the last ten years will probably understand what I'm talking about (how many of us used to go online just to see how long it would take get kicked off of Free Republic?) Visit www.kobehq.com to see a website devoted to just this type of activity; you'll also find immature jokes and pornography, which tells us roughly the (mental) age group the site is targeted at. Freepers (BA can actually argue, so I suspect he/she is slightly older and might be in this group) behave in a very similar fashion.

If you ignore the trolls long enough, they'll give up on trying to get attention and will find some other website to seek this attention from. The only reason they keep posting to this site is that people respond to them. If it ceases to be a source of surrogate social validation ('stroking' if you're into Erik Eriksen's work), they won't bother us and the site can continue to function in its intended role as a media venue. Seems simple enough to me.

censored fact 02.Jan.2003 23:14


"(how many of us used to go online just to see how long it would take get kicked off of Free Republic?)"

45 seconds. Honest!

Is that a record?