|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Another Love Letter From Cui Bozo |
Current rating: 0 |
by David Gehrig
(No verified email address) |
16 Oct 2002
|
|
Our favorite Dan strikes again, this time in the IMC-process mailing list, where he is practicing his special form of "how to win friends and influence people." |
Here's a letter Cui Bozo just posted to the IMC-process list that I thought deserved a wider audience:
---- post begins
I believe the thrust of you remarks can be summarized thus: some way should be found to stop this "cuibono" from posting to this list, because a) I don't like his political priorities; b) his attitude; c) he isn't "nice".
In other words, it's okay for some zionazi terrorist to post photos of what he thought was cuibono's home and family, and it's okay for this jive pettybourgeois punk motherfucker Brian Hagy to post a bunch of lies he made up about cuibono, and it's fine for Sasha Meanrat to defend his dalliance with the CIA by posting a bunch of scurrilous nonsense about cuibono -- but if cuibono dares to try to respond -- that's too rude. In other words, slander, lies and setting people up to be visited by the Jewish Defense League spooks is within your definition of Global Justice, but protest of same is indicative of Bad Breeding and must be suppressed by the Provost.
There are some fine people reading this list along with a bunch of highly educated scum, so I will content myself with expressing my opinion without really conveying how I feel about it.
Let me just observe in conclusion that the atmosphere on this list is so fucking pettybourgois I can't believe it. Did this IMC group really have anything to do with what I saw of the Battle of Seattle? .
Assholes like this Windymiller make me sick -- this ruling class gunsel calls himself a "Conflik Resolver " -- then sends me an email and calls me an "old fart".
All these whiners asking to be respected! Haha! Conduct yourself in a way that inspires respect, and I'll treat you accordingly!
What most of you need to do, obviously, is stop worrying about whether you are being sufficiently "sensitive to the feelings of Jews", (they have Credit Cards; they will survive) and pay more attention to: the Ethnic Cleansing being carried out, and to the massive population Transfer which is SOON to be carried out in Palestine -- all with the near monolithic support of the US Jewish Community; (the courageous efforts of a relative handful of heroic individuals like Adam Shapiro, Lenni Brenner, Eduardo Cohen, David Mandel, Maxie Elbaum and others notwithstanding).
And please please: stop being so goddam Whitebred yuppified! It's Booooring. The world includes -- brace yourselves -- a lot of people who are not Yuppies.
And a few of them even have managed to beg, borrow or steal a computer. The internet -- surprise? -- is not a college campus.
---- end letter
My only comment is "no comment necessary."
@%< |
Comments
|
Paranoid Lies Of Dan Elliott |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Oct 2002
|
#1 The supposed pictures posted of qb/cuibono/Dan Elliott's were originally claimed by him to be real. Then his story changed when someone pointed out that it was an obvious fabrication (probably by Dan himself.) Now he claims that it was just somebody trying to set him up with fake photos. His story changes on this so much, why should anyone believe what he says about it (even if he wasn't already proven to be a fraud and a liar)?
#2 Why does Dan speak in the third person when saying "it's okay for this jive pettybourgeois punk motherfuckerBrian Hagy to post a bunch of lies he made up about cuibono..."? Everybody knows that cuibono is Dan, so it is odd that Dan should speak of cuibono in anything but the first person. Why doesn't he just say "about _me_" instead? This could be a sign of mental illness (which would not be a surprise, but it is not an excuse for Mr. Elliott's behavior, either.) More importantly, it indicates that he is so used to pretending that his multiple screen names are someone other than himself that he has a hard time emerging from the delusion to speak about them as himself, which they are.
#3 Brian, as everyone knows, is not petit bourgeois, but Mr. Elliott seems to see all who disagree with him as some part of a larger plot against him, when the reality is that Mr. Elliott is a very vile person in his conduct and political views. Mr. Elliott seems to want to place the responsibility for his conduct and the disgust that it evokes on the part of others on those other people, rather than asking himself the rather obvious question, "Why do people dislike me so much? Could it be something I said?"
#4 As far as what Brian said about Mr. Elliott's attacks on UC IMC, it reflects the evidence that the Tech and Steering groups have compiled about the person that has been attacking the UC IMC website at various times and in various ways since last April. We have pretty much put a stop to this crap, which mainly consists of materials that are hate-filled, fantastical screeds and reposts involving Mr. Elliott's all too familiar fascination with neo-Nazi themes regarding the situation in the Middle East, posted via anonymous proxy servers which he _thinks_ make him anonymous. There is no real anonymity on the Internet, so he should disabuse himself of that notion.
At first we thought that this may, in fact, had been, an attack by an intelligence service seeking to discredit IMC by linking resistance against Israeli occupational policies in Palestine with neo-Nazi ideology and racism. Further research and consultation with others on the IMC network soon pointed in a different direction. Agencies such as the Mossad, while far from the omniscient image they like to project, just don't make mistakes like those that have been made by Dan Elliot, who we have identified as the source of this material. The most damning piece of so far publicly released evidence has been the report compiled by IMC-network-anti-abuse activist "anti-spam," which is posted as a comment to this thread on SF IMC, wherein Mr. Elliott screws up and inadvertently posts an article on IMCP under his own name which he was posting around the IMC network under the nick, "Q Disk," up to the point where he fucked up under his own name: http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/10/1535498
It seems Mr. Elliott started this particular network attack right here on UC IMC, along with rationalizing his other wretched tirades against UC IMC, because we have effectively put a stop to his attempts to post such crap here. Since we post material on the struggle in Palestine/Israel in general (but do not any longer allow him to post such materials here) this must be at the root of his accusation of UC IMC as being a den of CIA/Mossad agents, as he has so often claimed on the IMC listserves. There is no other reason that he could hold an opinion that UC IMC is opposed to the struggle of the Palestinian people, other than to claim that the hiding of _his_ HUNDREDS of posts of this sort of material, at times resulting in what amounts to a crude denial of service attack on our server, somehow represents a cozy relationship in his eyes of UC IMC_ONLY_ with Zionism. I know that might be a little hard to follow (and impossible to believe on the part of those who are familiar with the work of UC IMC), but as is oftentimes the case with delusional obsessive paranoia, it is what he believes.
#5 His characterization of many of those on the IMC Process list as "a bunch of highly educated scum," "so fucking pettybourgois[sic] I can't believe it," and "so goddam Whitebred yuppified" certainly doesn't help his case, although it is oh so typical of his attitude toward diversity, discussion, and unity within the IMC network. He should take his own advice, "Conduct yourself in a way that inspires respect, and I'll treat you accordingly!" But that's a lot to ask of a narcissistic nutcase like Mr. Elliott, isn't it? |
|
Cuibozo Gives TOO Much Love |
by concerned
discloseqb (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Oct 2002
|
if the u-c imc wasn't more dilligent, the whole godddamn newswire would be full of that bozo's love. check out the hidden files to see the poorly re-edited reposts that jackass wants to flood the u-c imc newswire with:
http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/hidden/index.php
i guess he's just pissed that he cant get it together in sacramento. i'd bet the rest of the sacramento imc people are finally finding what he's all about and keeping their distance. their e-mail list has been awfully quiet since cuibozo got outted as a bigoted keyboard-jockey 'activist':
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-sac/2002q4/date.html
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-sac/2002q4/000299.html
it only takes one egomaniacal monomaniac to screw up a good thing like a new imc. of couse he'd like to screw up imc-process and the rest of global if anyone would give him the chance. |
|
Cui Bozo And IMC Sac |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
18 Oct 2002
|
It's up to the IMC-Sacramento collective to decide what to do with Dan, of course, although if they've been following IMC-Process they must surely have some clues now to the character involved. His stance -- as he has pretty much said in as many words -- is that antisemitic posts should be excused in the name of anti-Zionism. I think he will have great difficulty persuading many people to accept that stance.
Aside: you might recall that in March or so, this IMC took a lot of heat for noting, in its letter of support for IMC Switzerland in its conflict with AKDH, that anti-Zionism is no excuse for antisemitism. There are people who apparently think that nothing is truly bad if done in the name of anti-Zionism.
@%< |
|
Qb's Many Words |
by ? of jerusalem.indymedia.org
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
18 Oct 2002
|
I have dealt with qb on this issue extensively on this issue. It all resorted from a rather straight-forward conversation on Zionism wherein qb slowly revealed his biased view. Several weeks of discussion followed and the depth of his prejudice became shockingly apparent.
For those who wish to know more, I would recommend perusing the articles from which these comments were found in a SEARCH where the author is "?" (me), the search term is "qb", and the sort is oldest to newest.
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/?keyword=qb&author=%3F&category=
&medium=&year=&month=&day=&comments=yes&display=&limit=20&sort=reverse
[editor's note: I have put a line break in the URL above to make this entire page more readable. If it no longer works as a hyperlink, simply cut-and-paste it into you browser. ML]
1. WHAT IS ZIONISM ANYWAY? -- qb rejects the notion that Zionism (historical or modern)was/can be inclusive of peaceful, cooperative Jews
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/65607_comment.php
2. SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM IN THE MID EAST -- qb reveals that he views Herzl as the definitive example of a Zionist and Lenni Brenner as the definitive historian of Zionism. qb will not tolerate any milder form of Zionists or Zionism to be discussed without ridicule
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/65786_comment.php
3. The rulers of Hebron -- qb rejects a ZNet article which claims Jewish immigrants & Arabs coexisted peacefully for decades prior to British Administration at the end of WWI
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/65875_comment.php
... and it continues with qb's close ally Tom who initiated a long campaign of articles and insinuations that the entire Jewish religion is immoral.
ZIONISM IN THE AGE OF THE DICTATORS
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/65096_comment.php
WHO ARE THE MODERN JEWS?
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/04/23869_comment.php
... and so on |
|
And Cuibono/qb/dan Elliott Continues To Make Friends |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
18 Oct 2002
|
his tirades today on the global imc process list show that he is losing it, or really just wants to make friends.
dig this:
"here you have the entire collage from which this
"anon" "safedropbox" terrorist chose what she/he wanted you to see. I must have assumed when I saw the first few quotes out of context, that he/she had reposted the entire "job" but apparently that would have been a bit tricky technically? Too much for me, but if you open IMC Palestine and find the original "collage" you will see that whoever did this has some nice graphics competency. Maybe it was another person who did the reposting to the List here? Maybe not?
So the photos are not precisely the point I thought they were -- unless the reader is interested enough to start opening links and comes across th e original "collage"? But it's still pretty sick -- if you take note of that
little "photos of sacramento home"? The imc-sac archives which were on this originally are not in evidence on the List archives either. Or have the List Archives been "edited" since I first saw them? Who knows? Not me -- I just got here.
But since all this was posted and everybody has been forming opinions based on it, I'm going to proceed to post the entire threads from which the excerpted remarks were taken in the hope that they may make more sense to
you all in the context in which they originated? That is, if the UC IMC Thought Police don't succeed in imposing Proper Drawing Room Behaviour first?" |
|
It Just Keeps Getting Better |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
18 Oct 2002
|
when calmly asked to chill out a bit, this is dan/qb's response:
"Lissen motherfucker, this bullshit started on the Process list, and I am responding on the process list.
Anybody who opened that "up close and personal" and decided to check out what the reference to "sacramento home" was about would have found out where
I lived -- if the terrorizer had located the right Dan E out of the phone book or wherever he found this guys info.
You must be really fucking sick. Sick, stupid, and reactionary.
Oh well -- another victim of Zionist brainwashing. Hohum.
By the way: have you checked out whether this Hagy has anything to back up his bs about me spamming his site?
Yeah, I know -- he's an IMC oldtimer so he can lie and bullshit all he wants but you don't know who Dan is, so fuck 'im.
Well, as things develop you will either have to go Left or go Right --
because that icefloe you now occupy is melting fast. If you go Right as I would guess you will, all this is irrelevant. But if you should by some miraglo wind up moving Left -- you'll be very embarrassed.
Don't say I never warned you!
Have a nize day;^)"
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2002-October/004091.html |
|
More Facts |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 3
19 Oct 2002
|
For ?: "Tom" is also "qb" AKA Dan Elliott.
And yes, the more talking "qb" does as himself, the better. He tends to hide behind his many nicks, even though that is a ridiculous and very untenable position at this point.
When the exact same opinion appears under the supposed authorship of so many people on IMC, it is a sure sign that the many "authors" are being faked by the same person. I guess that "qb" thinks he is being sly with this crap, but he fools no one except those that are even more stupid than him. And there are very few people on IMC that are that stupid.
The chickens are starting to come home to roost and none of them are "kosher," if you know what I mean. It may irritate Dan Elliott/cuibono/qb, but no, it isn't a "zionist" conspiracy that has figured this out, but good old-fashioned paying attention.
Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't hide the pig, at least here in the Midwest. Mr. Elliott may believe that simply taking another name cloaks his personality and point of view, but only someone as stupid as he is would believe that this would work for anyone with more than a fifth-grade education.
And he should not think that just because we let a few of his less inflammatory stories stay up on our Newswire that we don't know _exactly_ who is responsible for them. Maybe we are just feeling generous that day if we don't hide them, too, assuming he isn't being too obviously neo-Nazi for a change.
Assholes like him give _real_ communists a bad name. |
|
More Zaniness From Our Fav Cuibozo |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
as the imc-process list comes to consensus for his removal, he just doesn't get the message and keeps digging his hold deeper:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2002-October/004105.html
"We see the likes of Perle, Wolfowitz, Rice et al in key spots/roles -- which must mean that somebody backs them? I mean, what is the social/economic/power-apparatus base which this fresh crop of creeps represents?
How are the interests these folks represent divergent from those a Colin Powell or a Sen Levin represents, if any? Or is it all a big Goodcop/Badcop routine w lightning rods for all demographic niches?
Explain in your own words; use both sides of index card if necessary...
Q: what pct of US Jewish population is represented by people like you, Rich Becker, Eduardo Cohen, Adam Shapiro, Lenni Brenner, Jane Hunter, Max Elbaum etc, and what pct actively/passively support Sharon?
Why don't we see more Jewish Radicals actively chastising/scolding the "Jewish Community" and those who -- on the basis of Shared Jewishness/Values of Jewish Traditions etc. -- support its Eretz Yisroel Fetish?
People in general are overwhelmingly opposed to this war (marked contrast to the Gulfwar experience!). People say things like "It's all bullshit -- they just want to jack up the price of oil." Then somebody else will say: "It's
the Jews, man. They're dragging us into this war so they can deport more Palestinians. I mean, I don't give a shit, but I hate to see American kids dying for something got nothing to do with us."
It seems to me important to mobilize all the Jews you can find to oppose this insanity, and to do it together as Jews? To establish loud and clear that not ALL Jews are infected with this zionist madness?
I mean, what priorities can a Progressive Jew have that top the issue of Zionism and the impending Transfer? the issue of the Big Lie even a Cynthia McKinney loses her seat for daring to challenge? I mean, a non-Jew who dares raise the matter of the Exodus mythology is automatically suspect as a likely Antisemite? So it falls to progressive Jews to do it, right?
Are there really this few hip Jews with the guts to come out of the closet, or is it just that we never hear about them?
Or: We have Harry Belafonte to challenge Uncle Colin and Condoleeza -- but where is there a "Jewish Belafonte"?
Anyway that's my "goyische" take for this morning. Thanks for the article.
Cordially,
Dan in Sac
(aka Generalissimo A-rak Shaboom...)" |
|
Yeah, He's Really Losing It Now... |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
when all else fails, insult eveyone and everything within a 1000 mile radius.
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2002-October/004111.html
"Okay, Hagy. You mealymouth phony. Why didn't you admit a month ago that all you had was speculation?
Yah yah "polly wanna anti semite". The standard zionist answer to everything.
Why didn't somebody mention that you have this "resolve" list? I told everybody that I didn't know shit about IMC up front, when I jumped your shit about the Ford grant scam.
Talk about time being wasted! What about MY time, you lying zionist bastard!
Abusive language? You abuse me, I abuse you in return. "ladies" are offended? If they were real ladies, they would have spoken up and asked you to either substantiate your lies or apologize. So they aren't "ladies" as far as I'm concerned -- just a bunch of privileged broads trying to live in a bubble.
And "walt" -- haha! now we see where you are coming from!
"isreal delendi est!" kuz ya no wutt?
zionism IS racism... Wake up, dummies, before history comes up behind and rolls over yawl. "Sheesh"." |
|
Now Threats? Please Don't Tease Me |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
for a guy who says he knows little about the internet, he sure knows enough about ip addresses to know thats how he can be tracked. or maybe he knows enough about imc-palestine and that they probably dont log ips -- like most imc -- and so he can use 50 different names without anyone tying the zionist and antizionist rhetoric all back to his computer. too convenient.
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2002-October/004113.html
"Since there are no Hit Counters, how do you know that you are reaching any significant slice of the public?
Since my focus has never been on nerd-toys/games, or BillGates-hype fantasies, but on the US and Isrealy Terrorist States and how to rein them in a bit, I really have little idea what has gone on other than on IMCP
since it started. And that site is as you know flooded constantly with zionist spammers/trolls/saboteurs/vandals etc. And functioning poorly tech-wise pretty often as a result of the repeated hackings.
I will submit to the IMC network that to me it appears that you and your accomplices at UC set IMCP up to fail. You insisted that IMCP had to be housed with the AIC, right? Your position is that the Palestinians involved
had to be willing to "work with" Israelis, right?
Are you seriously trying to tell everybody that there is no way IMC Tech could have looked at my IP and that of the Spammer you referred to, and determined if they were the same? Given weeks to do it?
No, man, you jivin'.
Well, I got signs to make. But I Shall Return. gitcher shit reddy cuz y gone need it:)" |
|
Now Threats? Please Don't Tease Me |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
for a guy who says he knows little about the internet, he sure knows enough about ip addresses to know thats how he can be tracked. or maybe he knows enough about imc-palestine and that they probably dont log ips -- like most imc -- and so he can use 50 different names without anyone tying the zionist and antizionist rhetoric all back to his computer. too convenient.
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2002-October/004113.html
"Since there are no Hit Counters, how do you know that you are reaching any significant slice of the public?
Since my focus has never been on nerd-toys/games, or BillGates-hype fantasies, but on the US and Isrealy Terrorist States and how to rein them in a bit, I really have little idea what has gone on other than on IMCP
since it started. And that site is as you know flooded constantly with zionist spammers/trolls/saboteurs/vandals etc. And functioning poorly tech-wise pretty often as a result of the repeated hackings.
I will submit to the IMC network that to me it appears that you and your accomplices at UC set IMCP up to fail. You insisted that IMCP had to be housed with the AIC, right? Your position is that the Palestinians involved
had to be willing to "work with" Israelis, right?
Are you seriously trying to tell everybody that there is no way IMC Tech could have looked at my IP and that of the Spammer you referred to, and determined if they were the same? Given weeks to do it?
No, man, you jivin'.
Well, I got signs to make. But I Shall Return. gitcher shit reddy cuz y gone need it:)" |
|
Requests To Remove Cui Bozo From IMC-Process |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
There have been several requests to remove Dan Elliott from the IMC-Process mailing list because of his disruptive and insulting behavior. His replies are becoming more incoherent as he repeats his argument that we're simply not
seeing his point about The Immanent Zionist Takeover of the IMCs. I note that "Concerned" has forwarded some of the IMC-Process posts calling for Dan's removal to IMC-Sac, although again I note that it's up to the Sacramento collective to decide collectively how to proceed.
The real pity, I guess, is how mischanneled and crosswired Dan's considerable energy is. If he weren't so hellbent on being self-defeating or illustrating his mood swings so dramatically, I think he'd really have something to offer the IMCs.
@%< |
|
It's A Pity It Takes To Long To Get Rid Of The Cuibonos |
by concerned
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
gehrig says:
"The real pity, I guess, is how mischanneled and crosswired Dan's considerable energy is. If he weren't so hellbent on being self-defeating or illustrating his mood swings so dramatically, I think he'd really have something to offer the IMCs."
i've met too many people who fall in this category, and i've stopped feeling sorry for or pitying them. i've seen too many organizations waste too much energy or time -- or have their energy and time wasted -- by people like cuibono. we want to see the smart and constructive side come out, but it doesn't unless the person wants to use it. usually the person is too lazy and self-involved to make the effort.
there's always reasons why the cuibonos of the world are the way they are. and nothing will change them but them.
i'd say the imc-sac is pretty screwed if they continue with him.
good riddance to him. |
|
The Balance |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
19 Oct 2002
|
At this point, in specific reference to Dan Elliott, I have to agree with "concerned" that he fits the model that you elaborate on above. However, our IMC has always sought to use progressive action so that a person is given many opportunities to resolve issues in conflict with our principles. That has certainly been the case with the behavior of Mr. Elliott/DAN/cuibono. He has had multiple chances to choose for himself a different outcome. But in every case, he makes the decision to escalate instead of negotiate.
I think the saddest part is his practice of hiding behind (or is it actually being?) multiple personalities. The hundreds (here at UC IMC) and thousands (across the IMC network) of posts of his might have been more effective if had posted under his own name, so that people could at least see a specific position that HE was promoting. Then people could decide whether they agreed or not and we could have all gone on from there.
I suspect that he realizes that the message he has, however one chooses to characterize it, is one that that meets with very little patience among serious activists. And IMC certainly wouldn't stand for being flooded by all of his dreck if it was clearly identified as being from him. And that is the reason he feels he must conceal his identity. There is, however, no mistaking this identity for exactly who it is. Part of his problem is that he thinks he has some sort of "cloaking device" going on by just changing his name and then proceeding to flood the IMC network with his material via an anonymous proxy server.
There is an absolute match between materials that flooded this website and that which has been seen elsewhere on the IMC network. In most cases, there is the rather obvious pattern that his work has. In a few cases, there has been direct, corroborating evidence that associates him clearly with the identified pattern that we consider abuse which violates our policies here at UC IMC. A recent example is the one spoken of in connection with IMCP post # 77827, spoken about in this thread:
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/10/1535498
One or two coincidences would be one thing. But a vast interwoven pattern of behavior over time, verified as such by other evidence, indicates that Dan Elliott is at the root of it. All of us here at UC IMC have somewhat different takes on this pattern and what it means, but the fact of the eerie and significant parallels between him and the person who we identified is one that, in our eyes, cannot be ignored, but must rather be explained by Mr. Elliott.
It is also odd, I might add, to hear him claim that he has never been to our website. He seems to certainly have formed a strong opinion about us here. Mr. Elliott, can you explain what caused you to form your strongly held opinions about UC IMC if you have never actually visited our website? Just gossip on the lists? Someone you trust who came through your part of the world who happens to know us well and who spent much time explaining to you about the "zionist conspiracy" that you claims controls our IMC?
More than likely what you really mean is that you have never paid us a visitation as "Dan Elliott" or "qb" or "cuibono," your public faces. But you do have the anger at our standing up to your abusive practices under a wide variety of other names. And you don't want to admit it, because you don't think you have to because you always use anonymous proxy servers. That is exactly why you are so certain that your IP won't match that of the person we have identified as the persistent abuser here. I think it is rather obvious that your rather unique personality has not been duplicated by some anonymous person. I think it much more likely that someone who writes just like you, who has the same dramatically overemphasized concerns as you, and who uses anonymous proxy servers just like you is probably just you.
And I think you seriously underestimate the resources available to an IMC in a town that has plenty of experience with making the Internet what it is today -- the good, the bad, and the just plain ugly. You're a bully, Mr. Elliott, and we won't be pushed around by the likes of you.
That's my opinion and a number of people here share it. Another group thinks it's probably true that you have some relationship with the person responsible for the abuse on our website, but that is less important than the fact that we have formed a strong policy here at UC IMC that clearly identifies and deals with such abusive practices that occur from time to time on IMC, whoever is at the bottom of them. And that policy and its impact on your abusive practices angers you. So that is why you attacked UC IMC over the Ford Foundation deal, even long after it was clear to everyone else that it was history.
For Palestine you could care less, it just gives you a chance to vent your hate at Jews.
For Latin America you could care less, except the FF thing gave you a way to get at us.
It seems like it's just another part of the same, sad pattern of displaced anger that drives you to the attack.
This is your Wizard of Oz moment, I guess. You can keep insisting that there is nothing behind the curtain, to the point where the only one you are still fooling is yourself. Then you can pick yourself up and try to move on. Because you owe us an explanation at least as good as Dorothy got.
Do you want to explain IMCP post #77827:
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/09/77827.php
and the prior spamming assoicated with it that began here at UC IMC?
http://www.ucimc.org/editor/index.php?class=Article&function=editor_display&id=7765
Or do you just want to keep insisting the curtain is still there? |
|
QB: "Zionazis Control The IMC." |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 Oct 2002
|
Lastest from Cui Bozo on IMC-Process: "But now the zioniztz have taken off the Velvet Gloves and revealed the Iron Megaphone! Oh well, I guess it's just more of the same. The zionazis control the rest of the Media, so why should I be surprised to see that they control this IMC trip."
One of the techies at lists.indymedia has set up their list server to block posts to IMC-process by "cuibono," after half a dozen list members called for it. IMC-process is now considering a list-moderation strategy, since the last two or three months have been marked by the appearance of two different abusive posters.
I hope that IMC-Sacramento is taking note of Dan's increasingly persistent comments against the IMC network itself.
Let me also publicly state my agreement with ML's statement. We know that Dan Elliott has used anonymizing software before, in his "safedropbox" posts to IMC-process. We know that he is subject to foul antisemitic generalizations. We know he thinks The Zionists are the root of all evil can cannot be condemned strongly enough, even when that condemnation overflows into raw antisemitism. We know that he does not shy away from the relatively unusual usage "zionazi" when angry. (And we know he's frequently angry.) We know that he considers himself above any law of netiquette, even when that leads to abuse of the system. We know that he has a special bee in his bonnet about UCIMC.
To me, that's a match. To me, the ball's in Dan Elliot's court.
@%< |
|
DAN Elliott And His Other Nicks Whining In Harmony |
by anti-spam
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 Oct 2002
|
|
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/10/83777.php |
|
A Response To Dan's Attacks And Misrepresentations |
by John
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 Oct 2002
|
I'm the John that Dan is directly attacking in the message that started this thread. For those curious, here was my reply to the list:
I know I shouldn't rise to the bait. But it's late. I hope the list will forgive me.
Overlooking everything else there, I do want to reply to the accusation that as a conflict resolver I just up and emailed Dan calling him an "old fart". I think it's useful to reply to this because it sheds light on the way Dan has a way of intentionally misrepresenting things... why, I honestly don't know (doesn't seem to help either him or the group).
Shortly after Dan began his missives on the list, I tried emailing him privately in the hopes of better understanding his position and encouraging him to find more constructive ways to engage in the list. Things started out as cordial, but it became harder and harder to engage Dan is constructive conversation.
In an email to me, dan wrote that "Aahh -- undoubtedly you are a nice kid -- but I doubt if you are unconventional enough to figure it out."
At 31 don't happen to be particularly young by imc standards, but I was worried about the implied ageism there and here was my full response. I think you'll find that it's far from the sentiment depicted of calling him an 'old fart'... it was explaining that using age to dismiss someone--be it because of youth or older age--seems hurtful and unproductive.
I'm posting this not because I'm particularly worried about my credibility with IMC folk--many of you know me personally or have at least met at various imc convergences. I'm posting it to serve as more evidence that Dan is systematically misrepresenting discussions (and yet another reason to consider a ban here as well).
Here was my message to Dan in full:
----
From: John Windmueller [mailto:john (at) conflictresolver.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 1:29 AM
To: 'cuibono'
Subject: RE: [IMC-Process] Fw: As war looms
Dan,
Wow. I'm rather old to be called a kid, nice or otherwise, but I suppose I've also reached the point where I've actually taken to rather enjoying it when people assume I'm younger than I am. Still, age stereotypes--be they against the 'young' or 'old' are rather nasty, yes?
Does that mean I get to call you a "nice old fart," "well meaning, but far too taken to rigid thinking and self-righteous moralizing amidst old age?" I usually think those sorts of stereotypical assumptions don't do justice to the complexity and intent of the people they're meant to describe.
I do agree that anytime one benefits from unjustly being in a privileged class or group, they have a special and necessary role to play in challenging that system. That's why I often teach graduate and undergrad courses about and do dialogues around issues of race and gender (being a white guy and all in a racist and sexist society). That's also why--hazy affiliation or not--I've been outspoken against Israeli policy. Did you assume I wasn't aware of this dynamic?
You also seem to assume that I'm unfamiliar with the authors and historical conflicts. Again, along with my practitioner work, I'm a university instructor and academic by training--the assumption is wrong, and perhaps you need to investigate the possibility that someone might disagree with you for reasons other than ignorance or bigotry--that, perhaps, your truth is not the only one.
Aside from community conflicts here in the US and what we've been discussing in the Middle East (setting aside the politics of that name of the region), I've worked with the Basque conflict in Spain, the Nogorno-Karabak conflict, and South African truth and reconciliation initiative. Every conflict is unique, but there are some common themes I've seen woven throughout them. One of them is that individuals taking such "us or them" and rigid stances rarely help resolve the conflict, but instead only ensure their entrenchment and perpetuation.
Humility, curiosity, understanding, respect, and the unconditional high regard of others. They don't offer the same sort of fun kicks as provoking others and taking militant, self-righteous stances--and I've certainly succumbed to that urge myself--but my experience has been that they're far more constructive in finding ways to just and lasting peace.
John
----
Now that that's cleared up, for the sake of reference, the personal flame that apparently was the last straw and resulted in Dan being banned from the imc process list began with the remark by Dan of:
"you lying motherfucking zionist dog! Hahahaha!"
The full text of the message can be found in the IMC Process archives.
That message wasn't to or about me, and I wasn't involved in the decision to ban him as a result.
Whew!
John |
|
Cui Bozo Takes It To The Resolve List |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 Oct 2002
|
Dan takes his inimitable diplomatic skills to the Resolve mailing list. An excerpt:
--- begins
My gig is Globalization, the Highest Stage of Imperialism, and the role of the US Jewish Community and the Racist Fascist Theocratic Apartheid zionist state apparatus therein.
But what was the response to my little sally? Was it an upfront, direct defense of the UC IMC's "record of struggle"? Did somebody from the UC group, or some defender of same such as yourself come on and say "fuck shit damn, man, these are some good comrades and I can vouch for all of them from personal knowledge, and you are full of shit and out of line, so back your shit or shut up". Or words to that effect in whatever variant of English the intervenor might have felt most comfortable with?
Like "hey dude, you jivin'." Or "Chale, ese!". Or "Pu ho! Pu ho! Diddymao with all that!"
One might have expected to see a disclaimer issued: We the members of the UC collective hereby declare that we do not in fact support or sympathize with Zionism in any way shape or form, that we view same as a form of Racist Fascism, and we call for the establishment of a Secular Democratic State on the entirety of the territory of Mandate Palestine on the basis of One Person, One Vote, equal rights for all, separation of religion and state, and with recognition of the Right of Return for all Palestinians, and of the right of all born in the area or having resided there for three years to remain in the country with full citizenship rights.
Had something along such lines appeared, I would have immediately said Oops -- my bad. Con Permiso -- I'll be leaving now. Sorry -- I was having a Bad Hair day.
But no. What did we see instead? "Up close & personal, the repost" which I have characterized before, and Hagy's foray into the realm of Creative Fiction: "Is this the same Dan who spammed UC IMC seventy times in one hour?" Of course he was careful to maintain Plausible Deniability by putting
his false allegation in the form of a question -- but when he let it stand for almost a month in spite of my repeated protests, it is clear what he wanted your "struggling comrades" to think. Is it not absolutely clear that this was an attempt to fool people?
Next came Sascha's tortured missive, in which he accused me of "trolling" IMC sites. Since the only one I've spent any time on worth considering is IMCP, I guess that must be what he had in mind? But this charge was also totally without foundation. See the responses his sally got from people who have followed what I have -- I should say "had" -- posted to IMCP. One told him to take his charges and "go back to Park Bench, Utah."
--- end
As before, no comment is necessary.
@%< |
|
So He Wants Us To Take A Loyalty Oath? |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 Oct 2002
|
That sounds pretty McCarthy-ish for someone who claims to be a radical anti-imperialist.
He obviously hasn't the first clue about how real radicals do their thing.
I think he's pissing up a rope to get anyone, anywhere, on IMC to take him seriously when he tries to suggest that we should take the specific position of a particular party to the conflict as official policy. By this he demonstrates his complete ignorance (or, more likely, dismissal of) the IMC Principles of Unity.
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2001-May/000160.html
Sometimes our Steering Group, as the UC IMC Steering Group _only_, takes a position in support of local issues here that we perceive as having broad agreement within our collective. He's off his rocker if he thinks, after all he has put us through already, we are going to swear a loyalty oath to his pet project.
I believe the DSM-IV refers to this as "Narcissistic Personality Disorder," but since I'm not a doctor, this is not a diagnosis, merely an observation.
From:
http://www.psychologynet.org/npd.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
Overview
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Associated Features
* Depressed Mood
* Dramatic or Erratic or Antisocial Personality
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Given that he need only exhibit five out of the nine symptoms, the fact that he's batting nine for nine is probably a pretty accurate observation of what is going on here. |
|
"Go Fish, Capt. Ahab." |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 Oct 2002
|
"Sometimes our Steering Group, as the UC IMC Steering Group _only_, takes a position in support of local issues here that we perceive as having broad agreement within our collective. He's off his rocker if he thinks, after all he has put us through already, we are going to swear a loyalty oath to his pet project."
Well, to be fair, he hasn't really put us through much, except as one of the first victims of his slanders, which now -- thanks to his active participation in the discussion, and his unmistakable displays of Dan-hood -- now hold about as much weight as, say, the charges of a supposed connection between Iraq and al-Qaida.
Unless, of course, he's not just Dan but DAN, in which case he's the single dumbest and most unnecessary problem the IMC tech team has to deal with.
It's really been pretty funny, watching how he's backpedalled from his Absolute Certainty about UCIMC ("it is a cancer" on the IMC movement, etc.) to a mere fishing expedition. But, as the stuff you posted indicates, he seems to believe that his word alone is enough to demand that we all take his particular obsession and make it the "most important single issue for the IMCs." And when IMC-process doesn't fall all over itself at his order, then they're "Zionazis" anyway.
Dan's tendency to fly off the handle, spewing charges left and right, and then backing away from them when challenged, hasn't endeared him to the "Resolve" list any more than it has to IMC-process or us. If, after all that, he imagines that UCIMC is in any way constrained to jump through his private, personal hoops -- well, Dan, I can't think of anyone in UCIMC who would disagree with the following loyalty oath: "Go fish, Capt. Ahab."
@%< |
|
conflik resolution |
by saadet
saadet__kuru (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Apr 2004
|
|
The purpose of researt isto examine how school managers,teacher,studentand parents resolve conflik that occor among students from teh point of view. |
|
