90-percent
A DU learning experience I'm compelled to share with my DU mates
Long story short. I goggled a subject and found a web page that substantiates a point I was trying to make. First time in my life I went to the site and the page concurred with my understanding of the subject. Cut and pasted the url into my post and carried on.
Unknown to me, the link I posted on DU was actually a known anti-semitic conspiracy theorist, identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti Defamation League as a hate group.
So the most popular and well received OP in my eleven years on DU was removed by a 5-2 jury decision.
A very hard learned lesson in do's and don'ts for posting on DU, as the jury decision carries the implication that I tried to surreptitiously slip in hate website links on DU, as if I was promoting and sanctioning what that hate website had to say.
So the next time I google to find a link to make a point, I'll be more careful before I post it on DU. And I share this with my DU mates because I want you all to avoid the unpleasant experience I had learning this lesson the hard way.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025966634
90-percent
6.....
But I will tell you the subject; The business relationship between Salem Bin Laden and GW Bush in the early 80's.
Sometimes it's not really the lie they have decided they want to believe that's the issue, but the source from where the lie was obtained. And even then, it's the public perception of seeing the site listed more than the site itself.
If they were really worried about eliminating websites that makes them looks like haters, they wouldn't allow alternet, businessinsider, commondreams, crooksandliars, dailykos, huffingtonpost, mediamatters, motherjones, newrepublic, politicususa, salon, slate, talkingpointsmemo, thedailybeast, thinkprogress, and others along that line, to be referenced. So they really don't mind hate websites when it comes down to it.
They should be apologizing to the 90-percent primitive.
.
