Insight - Bradblog Censorship

Big Dan's Big Blog is frequented by just a few active posters, each of whom seems closely affiliated to BradBlog. At least one of the posters at Big Dan's Blog is a moderator at Bradblog, namely Agent99. (This is the same person whom continually deleted my comments at BradBlog: Agent99 lied that I'd been previously banned, continually deleted my posts and eventually suggested I was "mentally deranged". It seems posting a relevant Guardian article at BradBlog about Obama's Healthcare Reform means one is "mentally deranged". Clearly the issue was really about preventing anyone arguing against the premise that Obama was betraying people, had always meant to, and is in fact, an agent of ThePowersThatBe (jews?))

Whilst checking through the old threads at Big Dan's Big Blog, I came across an interesting post made by Agent99, the moderator at BradBlog.

Agent99 was responding to a request by another poster (at Big Dan's) to "approve" a comment made over at Bradblog:

I don't know why the suddenly over-avid spam filter is picking on you, plunger, and I spent a good deal of time going through the banned list to see if anything in there is causing it. I have my admin window now set to include blacklisted comments so I can approve the ones that get shunted over there wrongly.

Big improvements are looming, but not soon enough to suit me....

Sorry.

99 | Homepage | 12.22.08 - 9:54 pm | #

LINK

Agent99's response is quite revealing of the techniques used at BradBlog to suppress commentary they wish to prevent appearing.

It shows the influence of the moderators' own politics on what gets posted, of course, and also the extent to which "approved" members privileged status will inevitably skew the content of comments, and thereby also skew what appears to be the view of "the general public".

How can it be a representative view when only "approved" comments are allowed?

This is quite interesting and ironic in light of how Big Dan's Blog and Bradblog seem to insist that any and all critical comments are the responsibility of the pro-Israeli "Megaphone network", or organised right-wing, fake, grassroots campaigns.

Likewise, Bradblog and Big Dan's Blog, and any number of other such "alternative news sources" believe this sort of censorship and control of opinion is behaviour typical of mainstream media - an (assumed) characteristic which they perpetually condemn.

The self-described "alternative" sources like to pretend they are superior to 'mainstream media' specifically because (so they claim) to offer a wider range of views and give expression to views considered verboten in what they consider to be the "mainstream corporate controlled fascist media'.

[Because the mainstream is all part of "the great conspiracy", don't you know, and stamps out the least voice of opposition......as the following example, posted by "plunger" at Big Dan's Big Blog illustrates:]

ALL LIES. Media = Jewish-owned and complicit.

plunger | 12.28.08 - 11:43 am | #
LINK

Such a view of the mainstream media as strictly controlled and these peoples' "alternatives" being more 'open' is patently untrue: the mainstream media are often far more willing to publish opposing views than are these "alternative" sources; the mainstream reflects a much wider range of opinions than allowed at Prionplanet, Brad'sBlog, Big Dan's Blog, WhatReallyHappened, SmokingMirrors blog, Desertpeace, etc etc. Yet it's these blogs that claim to represent "liberty" and "freedom of speech" and condemn the mainstream for limiting those same things. What a con.

Banned from Big Dan's Big Blog

LOL - what a surprise.

I'll post the "dialogue" that led to it later.

Brief synopsis - they suggested AFP et al were "good sources of information".

Denial of knowledge about Willis Carto, AND suggestion that because Carto is "an anti-semite" then my purpose was to defend Israel - I must be a zionist, mossad, etc etc.

Suggestion that I was Socrates - wrong. Suggestion I was the person banned from Bradblog earlier - correct. (I posted from my default IP, as I had done initialy at Bradblog.)

Then they flooded the thread with irrelevant stuff about Israel/zionism/jews.

I was asked if I was a zionist. My suggesting the question is totally irrelevant but very revealing about them is, of course, reason to confirm that I must be.

Then they banned me.

Progressives huh? Defending AFP as a "good source of information" whilst suggesting Chris Bollyn (formerly of AFP) was "anti-nazi", and whilst condemning the NewYorkPost for being "NAZI"

They really are badly deluded or dishonest nazi sympathisers. what other option is there?

And whilst I am supposedly part of some organised network of zionist shills, the thread was flooded with responses denouncing me. Where did they all come from so quickly? If there's any network it's working against what I was trying to say - my viewpoint was the solitary voice, I was the one whom was banned.

Weird.

I have a few copies of the dialogue, need to sort the format before posting it. I'm interested to see if anything is deleted, and what it is (if anything).

ETA --- Agent99(?) seems to have posted this in that thread:

Danny, you got yerseff the Giant Haystacks, Auntie Semite, Socrates, and any other name he can dream up asshole who's made himself extremely unpopular all over the net. He comes in loaded for bear, armed with a bunch of different proxy servers and non-viable email addresses, and screen names. The instant you ban one set, he pops up with another.

I advise you to keep at it as long as he does or yer apt to find yourself wishing to stop blogging.

.
99

Interesting. That's quite a leap that they can put together usernames I have used - I did use Giant Haystacks at Bradblog - and I used "Auntie Semite" at Prisonplanet. (I have never used Socrates anywhere.)

They put that together within a few posts of mine at Big Dan's Big Blog. So Bradblog seems closer to Prisonplanet than they'd like be known, I imagine. Certainly some of the same people are visiting both, at least. Maybe they are sharing more - like IP addresses? Nevertheless - that shows at least some continuity between someone/some people at Bradblog, BigDans' and Prisonplanet. Kinda surprising on the face of it, but not if the accusations that they're all succouring fascism, and are essentially all the same group are true.

Big Dan's Big Blog

Having looked over Big Dan's Big Blog - I noticed a few things, which are quite striking.

The site has an appearance of being liberal/progressive/left - judging by the tone, subject and perspective of the content. There are two main links section - one called "NEWS", the other called "Exposing Fascism".

Under the 'NEWS' links there's a link to AmericanFreePress! Also WhatReallyHappened, and Alex Jones.

Under the "Exposing Fascism" title there's a link to Christopher Bollyn! Judging by some of the other links in this list, Bollyn's appearance there is not to suggest Bollyn is himself fascist, but rather that he "exposes" it!

I posted the following comment..........

You have a pile of links under the title "Exposing Fascism".

Under your "NEWS" links, you have a link to AmericanFreePress (AFP).

How can you have a title "Exposing Fascism" and then link to Willis Carto's AFP under the title NEWS?

And you link to Christopher Bollyn under "exposing fascism"!? Presumably that's because you wish to suggest Bollyn somehow "exposes" fascism - not to elucidate the facts about Bollyn having worked for fascists - like AFP?

What on earth are you up to?

AFP is run by Willis Carto. Founder of The Spotlight, Liberty Lobby, numerous Holocaust denial publications etc etc. AFP's 2006 conference - jointly held with the holocaust-denying "The Barnes Review" was hosted by Joe Fields - a leader and organiser for American Nazism. AFP's conference included guests such as Paul Fromm (leading Canadian Nazi), a former SS officer and collaborator with Einsatzgruppen A, and John De Nugent. All racist, anti-semitic fascists - the real mccoy. And you link to them?

WRH publishes all the Willis Carto stuff they can - they even publish and promote Curt Maynard, IHR, Barnes Review etc. Mike Rivero is very close to N American organised fascism, and serves to promote and protect it.

Alex Jones publishes Willis Carto's stuff (AFP), he employs AFP's Jim Tucker, publishes Reverend Pike whom also writes for Willis Carto's AFP and David Duke's "White Rights Website".

I'm interested to hear what your justification is for promoting all these people whilst creating an image that you are "anti-fascist", liberal, left, progressive, etc.

You're promoting the leading and most active far-right propagandists in the business.

Either you know that, or you don't. If you don't, then perhaps you better do a little more checking on your sources?
COMMENT
SITE

BradBlog Hypocrisy

Funny, BradBlog seems to pretend to be some "progressive" place, concentrating on election/vote fraud.

They have been irate this past week, accusing Obama of "betrayal" over health reform. I thought they were engaging in something akin to the right-wing conspiracy theories of NWO hoodoo, and forgetting about political realities, so I posted, suggesting that I thought "betrayal" was far too strong a term, as was their suggestion that Obama was always intent on betraying supporters of reform, because he's in the hands of his (NWO?) controllers, etc etc. I asked for evidence for this being purposeful "betrayal" rather than realism and political dealing to obtain some reform - none was provided.

Whilst responding to a ridiculous comment by "agent99" that I was posting at the behest of someone who was "paying me", I found my post disappeared. Using a proxy my post appeared - so I was being blocked by IP. My post was subsequently deleted and a note appeared by "agent99" saying I had previously been banned.

Never having posted there before, I found that somewhat disconcerting. Effectively that's lying - how can they know who anyone is - so how can they know if someone had been previously banned? Of course you can ban a single IP address, or a block, but I'd never posted there before, and barely ever even visited (place looks like ebay, and is slooooow)

I then posted from an article by the London/Manchester Guardian's Michael Tomasky, saying claims of "betrayal" and "sell-out" were wrong, because they assumed a level of presidential control over Congress which didn't exist. I also posted an article by a healthcare professional, arguing much the same thing in The American Prospect.

Here's the Guardian writer Tomasky's comments which Bradblog deleted, over and over -

The thing they do have to watch is the "If there's no public option, Obama is a total hack and sell-out" rhetoric, which emanates from a few quarters and is just wrong because it assumes a degree of presidential power over individual senators that doesn't exist.
LINK

And here's one of the quotes from the American Prospect article which BradBlog also repeatedly deleted:

So my advice to progressives is to chill, at least on this matter. To get health-care reform through the Senate, the public option is almost certainly going to have to be dropped. Perhaps, after House-Senate conference, some version will survive; for example, if the House bill includes a public plan and the Senate bill includes health co-ops, a logical compromise would be to give states a choice between them. But if no public option survives this year, it can be enacted separately later.

If health-care reform passes this year, a lot more will need to be done to make it work. But if it dies this year, it will be very dead indeed. The opponents of reform understand that, and the supporters must too.
LINK

Hardly the most outrageous comments? Yet these posts were repeatedly deleted - even though posted from different proxy addresses. Amazing! Bradblog deletes Guardian articles! Too dangerous, huh? Or is it that they just disagree with Bradblog? Or what?

Following deletion, "Agent99" posted the following explaining why he was deleting my comments:

forum, COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
... Agent 99 said on 8/21/2009 @ 11:52 am PT...

NOTICE: THERE IS A MENTALLY DERANGED PERSON WHO HAS BEEN BANNED FROM THE BRAD BLOG FOR A LONG TIME, CONTINUING TO COME IN OFF A NUMBER OF PROXY SERVERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD AND USING A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SCREEN NAMES. SO IF YOU SEE COMMENTS WHINING ABOUT "A FIRST-TIME POSTER" BEING BANNED FOR DISAGREEING WITH US, ETC. JUST DISAPPEARING, THAT IS WHY.

SORRY.

LINK Also here.

Nice! First they lie that I have been previously banned, they delete my posts, then claim I am "mentally deranged". They pass these lies and denunciations off to their readers whom seemingly accept it without comment. That seems very interesting. No-one at Bradblog minds Guardian Commentary being deleted!? Or that people genuinely enthusiastic for radical reform are accused of being "mentally deranged"?

Intrigued, I reposted the above comment from "Agent99" in a subsequent thread about "hatespeech"......again, it was repeatedly deleted. Also, the Guardian commentary was repeatedly deleted - even when it appeared on its own without any commentary by myself. Quite amazing for a self-proclaimed progressive blog - one that criticises the mainstream media for effective censorship and distortion.

It left me wondering what their purpose really was. There really isn't much difference in their critique of Obama from that of the "right-wing mobs" they criticise - the comments are littered with the same crude denunciations of fascism that litter Alex Jones' Prisonplanet - the same accusations of "NWO" stooges and puppetry appear, just as at prisonplanet - the same conspiracy theories appear. Although the cheap, undefended accusations of "betrayal" attack Obama from the position of pro-reform: apart from that, there doesn't seem much difference.

Does suggesting Obama is NWO puppet purposefully "betraying" reform actually help or hinder obtaining reform?

Seems to me it does nothing to support reform - so it functions as similar criticism as appears at Prisonplanet, and any other number of right and far-right venues.

Agent99's own website seems to pursue the usual far-right heresies about taxation being unconstituitonal and the Federal Reserve being 'the root of all evil' and even features a link to Mike Rivero's WhatReallyHappened. Hardly classic "leftwing" concerns. And this person - Agent99 - is running (wild?) as a moderator at "progressive" Bradblog?

Agent99 denounces myself - a supporter of socialised medicine (and socialism) - as "mentally deranged" and working for pay for some mysterious "controller".....

Agent99: I mean, hell, just ask the guy paying you to come here and spread all these talking points in the classic "concern troll" mode if you have any doubts about the veracity of my assertion here.
LINK

Agent99 seems to operate upon essentially the exact same conspiracy theories as the right-wing commentators at Prisonplanet - s/he shares the view of taxation being unconstitutional and has the perspective that "fascism" is present amongst both the (mainstream) American left and right. Agent99 likes to represent all shades of government, including Obama, as "fascism". Aaron Russo and Prisonplanet, all over.

Here's a quote from Agent99 at his/her website:

I'm no economist, but I know that ..... awareness of certain realities enable one to spot which economists.... should be... well... shot.

Nice. Dontcha love a progressive? Hey - sounds just like Prisonplanet.

And here's "Agent99" promoting Alex Jones' Obama Deception.

Alex Jones is a maniac. He has armies of maniacs maniacally following him. The guy tries very hard to tell the truth as best as he sees it. Just... well... he also goes wild with outrageous predictions that sometimes come true. ...... Obama isn't running diddly. He's the same as * already. The same. There is no possible other explanation. He's not the man running our country.

Hmmm. Now the President is supposed to be single-handedly "running the country"? And if he isn't, who is? Woooooo. Scary,huh? One minute it's a dictatorship, the next moment, Obama isn't running the country? Both are indicative of a malevolent "NewWorldOrder", apparently.

And Alex Jones "tries very hard" to tell "the truth", does he? For who - Willis Carto? And he makes predictions that "sometimes come true", does he? Oh yeah, sure. A broken clock does too, right?

This all seems a very peculiar slant for a moderator of a supposedly "progressive" blog, such as BradBlog. As familiar as I now am with the rhetoric and concerns of the (far)right-wing in America, I find this "progressive" moderator of Bradblog surprisingly similar.

Another video provided by "Agent99" is "Al Qa'eda Doesn't Exist".

the fraudulent ways the Al Qaeda myth is propagated in the controlled corporate media. The documentary also offers ways that citizens can become involved in helping to spread understanding about the true government-sponsored terror paradigm.

The video is produced by TheCorbettReport. Who they? Checking their website, we come across familiar (and frankly tired old) territory:

The Corbett Report provides podcasts, interviews, articles and videos about breaking news and important issues from 9/11 Truth and false flag terror to the Big Brother police state, eugenics, geopolitics, the central banking fraud and more.

The website has the now familiar look and feel of right-wing pseudo grass-roots propaganda.

Sure enough checking under the LINKS tab, we get four (!) LINKS to "REAL NEWS" including a link to Alex Jones' INFOWARS.COM Under the main page, The Corbett-Report links directly to a domain specifically about the film "Al qa'eda Doesn't Exist", "http://www.alqaedadoesntexist.com". The "film" so far only comprises of a trailer and a prologue.

A check run against the WHOIS entries for both sites produces the non-surprise of Go-Daddy's proxy registrar. Why do so many of these hokey websites return Go-Daddy's proxy registrar as the registrant? Rather, why do the registrars insist on using Go_Daddy's proxy registration service?

Checking the "bibliography" for the "Al Qa'eda Doesn't Exist" documentary shows it includes a link to a Prisonplanet article(!)

Another link at Agent99's website leads to Jason Bermas' "Fabled Enemies". Bermas is an Alex Jones crone, responsible for Loose Change, and the film is the usual hyperbole and distortion beloved of Prisonplanet: the film apparently provides

an overview of what is certainly the largest and most audacious false flag attack in American history.

Certainly? Based on......what?

Then there's links to Walt And Mearsheimer - authors of The Israeli Lobby, so beloved of the (far) right. There's also links to Norman Finkelstein - author of "The Holocaust Industry", another trope of the far-right. There's links to 911 conspiracy theories - soooper-de-doooper nano-thermite: "Yup there were bombs in the buildings and the Danish have the balls now to come out and say it."

There's links to Israel/Palestine, of course, and even a video here titled AIPAC - with a continual caption advertising Willis Carto's AmericanFreePress! It says "Welcome to the real world".....of Willis Carto? Oh yeah.

Then we have Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley, here.

There's conspiracy theory junk from Zeigeist Addendum here.

"Proof" bombs were planted in the towers on 911, here.

Dr. Jones tells of his discovery of unexploded nanothermite particles in the WTC dust, apparently - lol. Here.

A link to The Israeli Art Students...at antiwar.com...a link to "save antiwar.com".....and even a link to holocaust denial : "A Jew unveils the farse of the Gas Chamber in Auschwitz", which Agent99 links to under the heading, "a basis for the bishop" - presumably in defence of the Holocaust denying Bishop, central to the bruhaha with the Pope. Gee. Some real Holocaust denial to go along with Finkelstein, AFP criticism of AIPAC, Walt * Shearmeister, Alex Jones, Webster Tarpley, Jason Bermas.......

Then a link to Mike Rivero's (holocaust denying, crypto-fascist) WhatReallyHappened: the link says "compare holocausts", directing to a WRH page which equates Israel and The Occupation with the Nazi Holocaust.

Another link, and we're brought right in touch with Aaron Russo - director of "From Freedom to Fascism" - which is nothing about fascism, and everything to do with escaping any obligation to pay income tax.

Another link from Agent99's website goes to UNObserver.com - which I have only ever found linked to from Rivero's WhatReallyHappened.com. It's a site I have had suspicions about before. Their "subscriptions" page says it all - there's a load of options to subscribe, but no way to pay the subscription fee! The page says

Thank you for visiting our website. We hope that you will be interested in our monthly magazine, which is available only to subscribers. Since 1978, the U.N. OBSERVER & International Report has earned a reputation within the Diplomatic Community for accuracy and unbiased analysis. We are now making this information publicly available.

Each monthly issue contains additional in-depth information on the United Nations and other international organisations, but is available only by subscription. The printed version costs $93 (€79) per year for institutions or $70 (€59) per year for individuals. The electronic version costs $35 (€29) for one year. Please indicate your choice in the form below.
LINK

It smacks of being a disinfo/propaganda website. No way to actually pay for a subscription? Must just be an oversight, huh? Sure........reminds me of coming across 911 Conspiracy Guru Karl B Schwarz's website, which was selling his book. But nowhere to buy the book.....which elsewhere was always claimed to be "forthcoming". I'm a great author too - you should read my forthcoming classics......

Anyway, UNObserver looks like a variation on BankIndex to me - a load of conspiracy stories masquerading as something "serious". Looks like propaganda outlet to me.

All good "progressive" stuff. Sure.

Something odd about BradBlog letting Agent99 moderate, especially in that fashion. And what of Agent99? Links to Rivero, Alex Jones, Holocaust denial, conspiracies, tons of anti-Israel stuff whilst indulging Ahmadinejad, various Islamic sources etc.......accusations of "fascism" everywhere - against Obama and other democratically elected leaders.....a video with Willis Carto's AFP captioned throughout......links to Jason Bermas' rubbish, Stephen Jones, Richard Gage, bombs in the towers, all the rest of that junk.

This is supposed to be the "progressive left"!? Really? Webster Tarpley! Jason Bermas! Alex Jones! Mike Rivero! Aaron Russo! Errr......hold on a minute?

ETA - TheCorbettReport, linked to by Agent99 certainly has the now--familiar hallmarks of (far-right) bullshit website. It is of course registered through GoDaddy's proxy registrar, thereby hiding its registration details (effecting anonymity and violating the spirit of the registration laws) but looking through its "content" it is obviously operating under the same agenda as Alex Jones' Prisonplanet, and the countless other crappy websites dishing up stuff such as

WeThePeopleWillNotBeChipped.com joins us to discuss the growing opposition movement to implantable RFID and other biometric control grid technologies. We discuss the internet of things, emoting across the web, IBM and the holocaust, transhumanism and the crypto-eugenicist agenda.

James Corbett of The Corbett Report joins Captain Jack on Badlands Radio (99.9FM KVMP in central Texas) to discuss Bilderberg, the corporate media and how the people can really fight back against the agenda of a global government by and for the financial oligarchs.
LINK

HAHA. Yeah - issues concerning all Progressives. And Prisonpunnet, of course. LOL

There's Huxley's Brave New World too, with the usual tedious Alex Jones-type slant

-Brave New World - Film, Literature and the New World Order

Most frightening of all, Huxley's own family background and experience might show that Brave New World is not so completely fictional as we would like to believe...

How revealing! Then there's ponerology - SOTT's (Sign of The Times) ludicrous non-explanation of "how the world works:

ponerology and psychopathy are two significant concepts that best explain the sorry state of human affairs in this world which continue to negatively impact on our society, our lives, and our future. No, I don't think it has anything to do with "greed" or even "moral weakness" (however you define it). It has to do with psychopathology and its influence on the nature of evil in society.
LINK

See - it isn't capitalism to blame, it's psychopathology! Ah - we can safely put Marx and socialism to bed then........what a relief, eh?

This is all the same bullshit you can find oozing out of a million (far) right conspiracy websites.

Look at the interviews - the list includes Daniel Estulin, Alex Jones, Jim Tucker, Mike Rivero, Gerald Celente, Jermoe Corsi! ......a veritable who's who of the alumni of American crypto-fascism. The page on "Bilderberg" links to Willis Carto's AmericanFreePress.

They also have an interview with Paul Grignon, animator for a film about "money", which was linked to by Agent99 at Bradblog.

Amusingly at the Alex Jones interview it says:

Alex also mentions that he visits and approves of this website.

No shit! LOL What more proof of it being a great place for lefty progressive types to get some "real news" does one need, eh Agent99? HAHAHA

How to make rules do what you want

I found out why I was banned from Total War forum........

here's the message I received:

From: daelin4
To:the last name left
Sent:June 28, 2009, 2:13 am

Since you can't find out by looking at your own posts, rules 3, 4, and 11.

As for "condoning crinminal behaviour", when were you entitled to know how and when we deal with other posters? If you see other members breaching forum rules, tell them so and report it to a staff member. You did neither.

Now back to you, on what grounds and evidence do you accuse me of "protecting" those who endorse criminal behaviour? Not being able to see what we do to other offenders?

So what are rules 3, 4 and 11?

3. You will not use this forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, is material of a sexual matter, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise unlawful. You will not use this board to express your religious or political views.

4. You must not provoke, or engage, in personal attacks of any nature. You agree not to post any kind of spam or advertising. Trolling (behaviour with the deliberate goal of being controversial or offensive) is not acceptable and is likely to result in a ban.

11. Although feedback negative or positive concerning our products is welcome, unconstructive, inflammatory or deliberately provocative posts are not. If you want your post to be taken seriously then a polite, well-argued post will be well received and passed on to the developers. A post along the lines of "your games are rubbish and you are nothing but a bunch of money-grabbing corporate swine, let's all not buy any of your products and we'll try to damage your reputation" will be deleted and the poster will be banned (obviously).
( LINK )

Well, that pretty much covers everything. They can ban anyone they want on those grounds - they're so open to abuse and arbitrariness.

Rule 3 is about "abusive", "threatening" and "otherwise unlawful behaviour". I was protesting about exactly those things, not engaging in them. The other posters whom did break this rule did not receive any public admonition, nor did they suffer any posts being deleted, whereas I did.

As for Rule 4, somehow condoning violent vigilantism as some posters did, fails to contravene rule 4's prohibition on "controversial or offensive" material (aka trolling according to TWF)? But my protesting violent crime does?

Rule 11? The thread was off topic - it had absolutely nothing to do with the game Empire: the thread makes no references whatsoever to the developers or their game.

Somehow I transgressed those three rules, but posters advocating criminal violence didn't transgress any?

I replied to Daelin:

Sorry, but the facts are that you banned me, deleted a post of mine, and publically announced punishing me - for the most tenuous and spurious reasons, whilst at the same time there's no similar action taken whatsoever against people clearly condoning and advocating violent crime.

That's disgusting.

I don't have to do anything other than point to the thread concerned to prove that you, and the forum, did nothing about people advocating violent crime.

The same thread shows you have banned someone whom did protest it - myself. Even though I did so politely, calmly, and without abuse.

And you deleted my post which was protesting *against* violent crime - and you took the trouble to post a note saying I was immediately banned.

You raised not a word about the other posters' advocation of violent crime - there were no deletions of the posts advocating and condoning violent crime and vigilantism - there were no messages of account suspension over it. It's there in the thread! Those penalties were reserved for myself alone ie you took action against the only person who was (calmly) protesting violent crime and vigilantism.

Now you're trotting out the most arbitrary of rules to justify banning me. Hilarious.

Clearly, whatever you deem to be trolling is considered a matter of far greater offence than the advocation of violent crime.

And here's more proof of your arbitrariness: you refuse to recognise other posters' complaints about "the police doing nothing" as being "political". Whereas my protests about violent crime somehow *are* political? What a joke. I think that exposes *your* politics interfering with the board, not mine.

Maybe you don't understand? Try reading the following, and note vigilantism is illegal, OK? ( LINK )

Banned (again) from TotalWar Forum

Not only have I lost £33 buying a piece-of-shit game from Creative Assembly, Empire:TW - they keep banning me from their forum, deleting my posts, and generally stomping over anything that goes "too far". Of course it's a game forum, and it's the official one, so one doesn't expect it to be a riot, and there are children likely present too. But what is going "too far" exactly? A lot of legitimate criticism of CA is effectively censored because of the mods' leeway for interpretation of the rules, which are so contrived that any moderator can arbitrarily declare someone is "trolling and flaming", and by so doing, have cause to ban them.

The latest episode which led to my ban is quite revealing of a shocking sort of mentality. I was banned - presumably for trolling and flaming, but I don't know for sure, as no reason has yet been given despite my requests.

What happened? Well, I took umbrage when a poster suggested violent, criminal behaviour - vigilantism. Mine was the only voice raised in protest at a poster whom had claimed he'd once taken revenge on someone when he was younger: someone had taken his bicycle so the poster had beaten them up, and listened to them "squeal like a pig". The poster claimed this was "a fun afternoon", and also revealed that in his profession today he is "only" armed with a truncheon and pepper spray - so he's a security guard, cop, or some such.

The result was getting myself banned again, a post of mine was deleted and no action whatsoever was taken against the posters whom had endorsed criminal behaviour as revenge against theft. The poster concerned had even justified themselves on the grounds that the victims were "scumbags" and had "broken the law". Never mind that vigilantism is "breaking the law" and that violence outside of necessary self-defence is also a crime............?

Here's part of the exchange for which I was banned.......remnants of it are here, for now at least.

MATRAY: Bahahahaha. I had a haro group 1 freestyle thast got stolen off when i was 15. I was only small at the time and basically they just took it off me and nobody cared. 6 months later I had a growth spurt and towered over that fat %%%+$@! as i saw him walking with a notherHe didnt recognise me til after I had kicked 6 colours of s#*t through him. Took my bike back and nobody in the neighbourhood ever heard from that guy again.

But I busted one of my fingers and it still isnt the same. But every time I look at that wonky knuckle I think back to that guy screaming like a stuck pig and think what a fun afternoon that was.

There is probably some morale to this whole episode but I cant be bothered looking into it.

My response, quoting Matray:

M: nobody in the neighbourhood ever heard from that guy again.

TLNL: probs coz you killed him.

M: every time I look at that wonky knuckle I think back to that guy screaming like a stuck pig and think what a fun afternoon that was.

TLNL: hmmm. fun? and that's the last time you engaged in violence, right? tsk.

M: There is probably some morale to this whole episode but I cant be bothered looking into it.

TLNL: no e in moral. not much room for violence either.

Matray replied, and I replied again, saying much the same thing - calmly. I offered that violence is violence, a crime, two wrongs don't make a right.....etc. Pretty reasonable argument, I thought.

Matray had suggested he wasn't violent.......hell! - he was just an ordinary guy.......

Oh and just so you know I am not a violent guy I am just an ordinary schmo.

In my repy, I'd said:

Ummm.....ordinary schmo's aren't violent guys? They are, aren't they?
............
Maybe, in fact, you're a little too keen to "help the little guy"? Maybe in fact it's an expression of your willingness to engage in violence, and it gives you something of an excuse, and maybe even a way to exorcise your own past and to take some revenge for the violence inflicted upon you when you were "picked on"? I don't know - I'm just saying btw. Hopefully you're not like that, but I don't know - I'm just responding to what you've written.

You'll perhaps feel I'm picking on you now? That's understandable, so sorry about. But I'm not - I'm only taking the opportunity to condemn violence - that's all. It's really not "fun". And it is related to the topic at hand. We wouldn't want to encourage aceblazer to use violence to take revenge on someone he suspected of having stolen his bike, would we? Well, I certainly wouldn't.

Pretty straightforward argument imo. "Ordinary guys" are violent? And it isn't a stretch to imagine someone so obviously enthused by his violent revenge to be harbouring a violent streak. I mean, the dude explained his work involved violence.

Then Bloodbane replied, offering

Bloodbane15: If someone picked on me and stole my personal property i would definitely beat the stuffing out of him, and probably gloat about it too.
Serves the person right for being a dirtbag.

..........If you dont be a prick and you dont break the law then you should have nothing to worry about.

I also think you are reading to deeply into matrays comment about it being "a fun afternoon", the meaning i saw behind that comment was that matray enjoyed finally being able to put that scumbag in his place not necessarily that he enjoyed being violent.

I responded again, around the point Robert Bolt famously makes in the play A Man for All Seasons:

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper:Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Meaning, of course, that one cannot disregard the law to take revenge: the law is there to protect one's self against violence, and it applies to everyone. Discarding such laws for the sake of one's own wishes actually jeapordises one's self (and everyone else).

How such an argument can cause offence at a game forum, which has children present, and even censors swearing is hard to imagine. It condemns violence and vigilantism, and supports the law. Not exactly controversial, I thought.

However, my post was greeted by the moderator, daelin, thus:

Read the forums rules again and again until you understand it. Until then, you clearly need another ban.

Funny sort of standards. I'm banned, and censored - but there's silence and inaction over the advocation of violent and criminal retribution. Well, ain't that brilliant?

Condoning and advocating violent criminal behaviour is more acceptable than "flaming and trolling"? And of course, it seems protesting against violent criminal behaviour constitutes "trolling and flaming". So, no surprise to get banned for it then, eh?

Ah - you gotta love real standards.

Anyway - simple point is, vigilantism and violence are both criminal behaviour.

Empire is still total crap.

And that forum is a joke.