portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

election fraud | media criticism

'Moderate' and 'Infiltrator' Trolls are SPINNIN' LOOSE!

the reason that 'Snaggle', 'Commies Go Home', and their Troll pals have *suddenly* materialized here on Portland IMC in the past 24 hours:

LOTS of Spin Control to do!!

the brand new, breaking Electronic Vote Fraud and WMD Lie stories need to be QUELLED.

a few of the Trolls have adopted a 'moderate' or 'stealth' approach to their craft:

check out the Troll attempted Spin-Control on these postings--

Vote Fraud (check first comment)

Bu$h WMD Lies for Iraq war 'justification'

Americans trust GWB
Get a grip... 09.Jul.2003 19:24


Everyone who disagrees with you is not some man in black, CIA operative working to quell your "revolution". Why would anyone in the intellegence community waste the keystrokes to post anything on this site, when they could pull the plug on the website with a few well placed keystrokes (as could I if I were so inclined)? Maybe, just maybe its someone exercising the same first ammendment rights that make this website possible in the first place. You remember free speech,...right?

I think your tinfoil hat is a little too tight... might be time to go outside and take a reality break.

"Tin Foil Hat" is a favorite of the "Free Republic" 09.Jul.2003 19:59

Troll Killer

Anyone that exposes trolls is always accused of being paranoid. The accusation of paranoia is part of the troll tool box. Trolls not only exist on IndyMedia, but many have been outed, including, but not limited to, Officer John Daley of the Boston Police Department Special Operations Unit, former military employed by Computers N.L.A. of Harbor City, CA (send the prick an email at  sarge@compnla.com), Danny Wayne Carlton (aka Jack Lewis), Zionist of Tulsa, OK connected to the Jewish World Review, and so on...

Trolls exist. Destroy trolls.

Awww! 09.Jul.2003 21:47


Leave the cute little trollie alone.

Ozzy gets around, but a troll can't change his warts.

When he shows up, it is a sign that something good is happening.



Notice how 'Snaggle', 'Commies Go Home', and their Troll pals haven't commented on the article about the banishment to Portland of the former FBI honcho at  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/07/267740.shtml

Nah 09.Jul.2003 23:43


Didn't read that one. Didn't sound interesting to me. I just now looked at it, too, and it's still not interesting to me.

I'll Get You My Pretty! 10.Jul.2003 01:28


Some guy spraying similar tripe likes to spew at the iraqwar.ru site. He said that this is his website:  http://wizardisland.net/wizardisland/. I think maybe he someone held him under a bit too long down there at Crater Lake.

To ;-), "Ozzy gets around, but a troll can't change his warts.

When he shows up, it is a sign that something good is happening."


Flaming Bush 10.Jul.2003 02:27


Why the CEO in Chief Needs an Audit

By Richard Cohen
Thursday, July 10, 2003; Page A23

 link to www.washingtonpost.com

The Bush White House is run on a business model. The president is the CEO. He delegates to others, including the vice president, who was once a CEO himself. It therefore should come as no surprise that George W. Bush, a Harvard MBA after all, is doing what other CEOs do when they get into trouble. In his case, he's "restated" his reasons for going to war.

Corporations do this all the time. If a profit of, say, $2.8 billion turns out to be a loss of a similar amount on account of unanticipated developments (corruption, greed, the demands of mistresses), the figure merely gets "restated." Usually no one is held responsible for this, because a billion here or a billion there can, as we know, fall through the cracks. In fact, the CEO -- having been given a bonus for such a banner year -- is then given another one for managing his company through difficult times.

In the same way, the president recently restated some of the reasons for invading Iraq. Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program, which Bush told the world was being "reconstituted," may in fact not exist. The White House the other day restated its earlier insistence that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from the West African nation of Niger. It turned out that the supporting documents had been forged. The White House admitted that in a press release left behind after Bush had departed for Africa.

Similarly, the accusation that Iraq was buying high-strength aluminum tubes, which Bush said were "used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons," has to be restated. The tubes appear to have been bought for another purpose entirely and may not be high-strength after all.

As for the charge that Iraq was bristling with other weapons of mass destruction, none have yet been found, raising the distinct possibility that -- in an upcoming quarter -- this too will be restated and the Bush administration will take a one-time charge against future credibility.

In fact, should we -- the stockholders of this operation -- look back at the original business plan for the proposed Bush administration, we will find that almost everything has been restated. During the campaign, Bush said he would not go in for peacekeeping operations abroad. He appears ready to do so in Liberia. He also said he would not get engaged, as did the previous CEO, Bill Clinton, in the nitty-gritty of Middle East peace negotiation. The administration is now choosing intersections in Gaza for traffic lights.

Restatement follows restatement until we poor stockholders have no choice but to conclude that either the Bush administration did not know what it was talking about when it came into office or does not know what it is talking about now. Not even in corporate America can you hold two contradictory positions simultaneously. One of them, as any CEO can tell you, has to be restated.

The Bush administration's interim business plan called for the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden. On account of a botched operation in the Tora Bora area of Afghanistan, this now has to be restated. Similarly, the proclaimed determination to rid the world of Saddam Hussein also has not succeeded. As with bin Laden, this failure will be restated as not being all that important. You learn this sort of thing in business school.

In fact, the entire business plan for Iraq has to be restated. It turns out that the country simply will not govern itself, that some elements resent the U.S. occupation and that it will take more troops to administer the country than originally thought. In some way, this abject failure to plan for an occupation -- despite repeated warnings -- will have to be creatively restated. To paraphrase the president, bring on the restatement.

The dangers of an immense budget deficit have been restated. Rising unemployment has been restated to blame the Clinton administration. The critical importance of relations with Mexico has been restated. The evils of affirmative action were -- after the Supreme Court ruled -- restated and so, of course, were the reasons for going to war in Iraq. Now it is to rid that country of Saddam Hussein and establish the predicates for a Middle East peace. I like them both.

Still, all these restatements suggest a business plan that was both flawed from the start and implemented with an appalling level of incompetence. Despite that, the CEO of this mismanaged operation is not held accountable and remains popular with the shareholders. It used to be that the buck stopped with the president. To state the obvious, that's been restated.

2003 The Washington Post Company

Classic Bush 10.Jul.2003 02:42


From:  link to www.boston.com

Asked whether he regretted making the claim and whether the statement cited by him and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain misled the public, Bush said there was ''no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was a threat to world peace.''

''And there's no doubt in my mind that the United States, along with allies and friends, did the right thing in removing him from power,'' he said.

He continued, ''And there's no doubt in my mind, when it's all said and done, the facts will show the world the truth.''

Then, asked a second time whether he believed Iraq tried to buy nuclear materials in Africa, Bush answered, ''Look, I am confident that Saddam Hussein had a weapons of mass destruction program. In 1991, I will remind you, we underestimated how close he was to having a nuclear weapon.''

He leaned forward on a podium shared with President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa and said angrily: ''Imagine a world in which this tyrant had a nuclear weapon. In 1998, my predecessor raided Iraq, based upon the very same intelligence. And in 2003, after the world had demanded he disarm, we decided to disarm him.''


''Just because they [weapons of mass destruction] haven't yet been found doesn't mean they didn't exist,'' he said. ''The burden is on the critics to explain where the weapons of mass destruction are. If they think they were destroyed, the burden is on them to explain when he destroyed them and where he destroyed them.''

how's life under the bridge? 10.Jul.2003 10:18

troll patrol

Why else would someone come here to hang out with all us commies and risk exposure to painful facts? Either they're evangelizing at the allegedly hopeless, they're just plain jerks, or they're trolls if you ask me. Probably paid. Plenty of admission elsewhere about paid trolls infiltrating all over the place debunking everything from free energy to merits of Democrats. And they'd do better to sit here and spew ad infinitum, than pulling the plug on the place, because that would be most obvious, and no one could read their troll trot if they did. Because the brain viruses they host can be contagious, and even more so on the Internet, they're not concerned how small the initial point of contact may be; any vector for their urban legends will often do.

I do expect that anyone who doesn't agree with me might state half a real reason for their beliefs (which I like); if they can't, I smells trolls, and I hates trolls... often, trolls are so pround and sure of their positions (not) that they can be neutralized just by establishing who they are in real life... (but who's got time for that stuff?)

PS: Usually it helps to wear the tinfoil hat as trolls are easily distracted by, and worshipful of, shiny things. They've been known to follow shiny new quarters down toilets and sewer drains and things, and bite the tires of shiny new cars. Be sure to wear the foil shiny side out, for this reason and because of toxic gasses released from tinfoil when their collective plan to overheat the brains of actual thinking people, start to momentarily succeed...

HAHAHAHAHA 10.Jul.2003 13:49

Commies Go Home!

I don't get paid for this, it's my new hobby!

love ya!

Quick! Lets call all dissenters Trolls! 10.Jul.2003 21:34


Quick! When somebody tries to dissent from our accepted viewpoints, lets label them trolls!

snaggle and commies go home 10.Jul.2003 22:01


Interesting to see the dodges to avoid commenting on the appointment of the FBI refugee to Portland..

What, no clever spin?

Apparently your new boss hasn't yet set policy about how you robots should respond.

Trolls are 11.Jul.2003 11:14


"as carrion
by the violet
in the sun
with vertuios season."

William Shakespeare

dissent vs disruption 11.Jul.2003 12:42

indy volunteer

Discussion of ideas is important; it is the means to have our thoughts evolve. But indymedia has always existed as place where such discussion can take place, even though it is not the purpose of the sites. Check out the current discussion and disagreements on the subject of the effectiveness of civil disobedience ( link to portland.indymedia.org) which are just 2 among several other lively debates right now. No one is calling one another trolls, even when the debate gets heated. I remember a comment on seattle indymedia once asking how could we determine a disruptive post from a post that disagreed. There are sometimes gray areas, but for the most part it is very easy. People using dated rhetoric and false stereotypes (such as "get a job" or "you're all commies") are obviously not conveying any serious critique. Posts that are nothing but insults, name-calling, personal attacks are also easy to spot. For the past couple of months we have been hiding most of these comments at the request of our community of readers to keep the noise level down, and the level of discussion up. Unraveler makes a good point, whenever there are major actions, events, or news stories, people trolling the site does indeed rise. Several years ago, portland indymedia didn't have the readership and was only bothered by the exceptionally rare troll. So it is a testament to how far we have come to have such active interest these days by those who wish to silence or discredit much of what is posted here.

It's really interesting... 13.Jul.2003 00:56


Even though I was part of the subject of this thread, all but one of my comments has been removed. Certainly I know there is no "contract" between me and this site, and this site has every right to edit what it wishes, but there's something mean-spirited about deleting my posts. These threads are just typing, for chrissakes, not person-to-person confrontations. It's just typing.

I do think it would be "honest" if the Portland Independent Media Center website would be forthright on it's editorial policies by stating somewhere on the title page just what the editorial policy is here, and unabashedly admitting that it is biased toward a specific audience.

On a positive note, I must say how impressed I am with this site in how easy it is to use, how it looks, how it works, and the high level of technical expertise shown in its operation.

Personally, I like it when goofballs come in here, and I like it when opposing views are given. The opposing views make me think, and the goofballs make me laugh. I enjoy laughing.

nothing mean spirited 13.Jul.2003 01:23

indy volunteer

Snaggle, obviously you've noticed not all of your posts have been removed. Maybe you should give some thought to what was hidden and what wasn't. If you want to see the editorial policy there's a link to it on the publish pages ( http://portland.indymedia.org/en/static/edpolicy.shtml). Portland indymedia functions as a community, more so than any other site I've ever seen, used, or worked with. The community complained that your posts are disruptive, and so many were hidden. The reason is that many of your posts are nothing but insults with no meaningful critique, commentary, dialogue, or anything that would make it worthwhile to leave up. It's easy to feel targeted for your beliefs, and if you decide you want to feel that way we cannot prevent you from doing that (you will not be alone). However, we remove meaningless insults from all ends of the political spectrum (we even composted the story requesting that you be censored). We encourage debate and multiple points of view, but we discourage people posting nothing but insults on as many threads as they can. That is merely being disruptive and adding noise to the site. This site is not meant to be a discussion forum; there are thousands of other sites you can go to for that. This is a news site, and we provide the opportunity for feedback on news stories. Often, these turn into discussions in their own right (as this one is) and that is fine but we are not looking to promote this site as a discussion forum, but rather an independent news media site.

As for bias, you will find no problem with people here admitting that we are biased and not objective. To suggest otherwise is a lie, the same lie provided by most journalists in this country that they can somehow remove the totality of their own personal experience in the way they perceive, record, and report a news story. To claim to be objective is a lie; Indymedia is a place for truth: the truth of any individual's experience, regardless of their viewpoint. Yes, their are certain viewpoints that are hidden or moved to the compost bin (nothing is ever deleted) such as posts promoting racism, homophobia, etc., as listed in the editorial policy. But you will find many libertarians, free-market advocates, and true conservatives among the many other viewpoints represented here. I suspect that one can find more viewpoints on indymedia sites than on any other news site. And the expression of all those truthful viewpoints is what leads people to their own personal truth, not the absorption of supposedly "objective" reporting of facts.

Thanks for the compliments on the site, we work hard to make it worthwhile and useful. Good luck with your experience here.

Contrite 13.Jul.2003 14:44


You stated clearly what your editorial policy is. And I appreciate your candor and honesty.

Thank you.