I was just randomly looking stuff up on google when I found this:

All Translated from Korean(not very well, lol)
Korean Forum wrote:

Five present bells(user on there) 2004-01-15 11:54:25, inquiries: 77, recommendations:

China is propelling, ' northeast process (northeast amount of work) ' the project to make all histories which are developed inside the Chinese border it is to sleep with Chinese history and to do. It will burn stinkingly to begin, culmination presentation, it will emanate and it will burn, it interprets volition, to negate the true identity result orthodox characteristic of the Korean race, it incorporates it is to be a conspiracy with history of the edges of China.
The Chinese assertion broad way step which is not history and the tradition where stinkingly the company the Chinese history ramyon, the Han River north area being incorporated with history of all China, in us remaining the country which 2,000 years which are shorter the Japanese history which 5,000 years is not a historian more keeps a history, river weight lifting Han River is abridged to south the nation which is not the times when it will sleep falls down and it rolls up.
Patriotic netizen everybody of this ground!
Us all happen hereupon and resolutely confront powerfully.

January with 15th ICOMOS (international monument ruins discussion sliced raw fish)" it informs our intention to the UNESCO send the confrontation mail ".
The mail the place which it will send ==> the
The mail the place which it will send ==> the
Mail contents (example)
}jan{. 15. 2004

A Letter to the Members Board from Korea wrote:
Dear members:

We Koreans are deeply concerned about China's bid to put Koguryo ruins including tomb murals in its territory on the World Heritage List since we have reasonable doubts on China's political intention for the bid. We do not oppose the historical value of the remains or the application itself. We were so disappointed when North Korea's bid for its Koguryo tomb murals in North Korea was put on hold in the 27th session of the World Heritage Committee by Chinese objection. Just a few years later, China is pushing its own bid on the similar Koguryo burial sites and murals in northeastern Chinese border cities. We can hardly believe that China has no other designs beyond the preservation and protection of the historic sites, which both North and South Koreans regard as their spiritual symbol as well as the origin of national identity.

Koguryo heritage in northeastern China has not been paid any attention or proper care and has completely been abandoned until January, 2003 when China registered the application for Koguryo ruins including tomb murals in cities in Northeast Asia. China has been severely neglected the Koguryo burial sites in its territory for a long time. Several murals have been stolen since 1966, and from 1997 to 2002 tomb murals of the Koguryo Kingdom in Jian, China, were reportedly stolen by grave robbers. We question at this point: Why has China changed its attitudes dramatically? We point out that between the period of this series of China's sudden attitude changes, there is the "Northeast Asian Project," a five-year government research program launched in 2002 which includes a several suspicious lines of distorting historical facts.

The Chinese have been insisting since 1993 that the histories of all ethnic groups within their current border as part of their national history. In February 2002, the NAP officially started to create its own definition of national history. This China's self definition on national history has provided the ideological framework for China's policies of merging of ethnic minorities from its cold years to the recent. Now China, in the NAP, is trying to expand the same framework to histories of all ethnic groups including two countries, North and South Korea, in Northeast Asia in order to strengthen its political influence in the area. According to the five recent papers on the issue in question released by the NAP, China focuses on proving the lack of continuity between Koguryo and the current States of the Korean peninsula. The arguments are summarized into two points: Koguryo originated from China's tribe and current Koreans have no connection to the ancient kingdom.

What we concern is: first, there is a clear conspiracy in the project that China is trying to revise the history of Koguryo as its own, which is an obvious history distortion, based on not-proven its own theory. Secondly, all the events from China's interference with North Korea's bid to its own bid have deeply rooted in China's history revision plan. What China pursues in the win of the bid is "successful claiming Koguryo," not just for the preservation of the sites or reconstruction. We remind you that China's possible history distortion is not merely a matter of a scientific dispute in Northeast Asia. It will seriously affect boundary and territorial disputes following the possible collapse of the North Korea.

We agree that the purpose of the World Heritage List is to protect cultural heritage for mankind as a whole and we don't deny China's right to bid for designation because although Koguryo's remains have been the land of our ancestors, it is now in China's territory. However, it is also true that Koguryo is the old kingdom of both North and South Koreans. It is not just a theory, but an acknowledged fact for centuries by historians. That's why we also have a right to speak for the destiny of the ruins in China. Moreover, in this dispute between past and reality, we both may concur on one aspect: Koguryo's heritage must be preserved and protected.

Thus, we call on you to defer your decision on China's application until China, North and South Korea agree on proper terms to prevent China's possible trial of history distortion or to give China a chance to clear the conspiracy. We again remind you that China's winning the bid without any strict terms will provide China the best condition to "claim Koguryo," which is just the beginning of further history distortion, and that may cause a great political chaos in Northeast Asia. The terms should include:
(1) China must clearly specify Koguryo is an old kingdom of present Koreans in North and South Korea. (2) China must allow Korean scholars' full access to the sites that is completely limited now. Until recently Korean scholars have kept being denied access to Koguryo ruins as well as a museum opened to the public. We have a right to pursue a research on the remains of our ancestors. (3) In the long term, it is worthwhile to pursue a joint research project among China, North and South Korea.

Secondly we call for the immediate adoption of strict and detailed plans to monitor China's any trial of history distortion in the area under the supervision of multinational personnel.

Finally, we call on you to adopt a letter including North and South Korea, which are the two countries concerned with this issue, into members of the UNESCO.

We appreciate China for its current efforts and interests in the symbol of our national identity, the Koguryo heritage sites. However, we also urge that China must stop further cultural assault on Koreans by trying to distorting our history. We know that the UNESCO has been working so hard to preserve and protect the world heritage sites, and you deserve admiration from the world. We sincerely ask you to remind one more thing: the preservation and protection of the ancient ruins are not merely for the disappearing objects. Dear members of the Committee. Please remember that the purpose of the World Heritage List is also for the preservation and protection of the spirit itself buried in the objects. Koguryo ruins don't speak, but we Koreans hear the voice from the past now.

Institute for Traditional Korean Cultural Studies (
Alliance of Korean Citizens for True Korean History (


and this.

Korean Forum wrote:
WAD RK America (TIME) -???? .
jungsolo (homepage) 2003-01-24 15:11:49?? 301 ?? 0
- SiteLink #1 :

European Time Magazine wrote:
Posted Sunday, January 12, 2003; 2.09 p.m. GMT
It which A cozy, intimate of dinner party for some OF Brussels ' leading lights, hero RK the home OF one OF the city's Prime Minister architects. Leonard cabinet, the American chief executive OF the financial services firm Swift and president OF the American Chamber OF Commerce in Belgium, took A seat NEXT tons on elegantly woman he recognized as one OF Belgium's richest people. During the pre more dinner chitchat in A room full OF museum quality contemporary kind, she ventured offhandedly that it which "good that the Americans got hit on Sept. 11. Maybe it taught them A lesson."

"What the brightly acres you talking about?" Cabinet responded. "More than 3.000 people died!" The woman wilted more under his assault, but for cabinet the moral OF the story which CLEARS. "She which just repeating what she had heard," he says. "The material POINT is that 90% OF the people she of talc ton every day would agree with ago."

Welcome ton the strand world OF the transatlantic relationship, which lately seems tons borrowing less from traditional manual OF diplomacy than from pop psychology books about dysfunctional families. The Brussels woman May belong tons of Europe's more upper crust, but thesis days it seems that every social stratum on the Continent is seized by fear and loathing OF the U.S. Hundreds OF thousands march through the capitals OF Europe ton denounce the looming American LED was against Iraq, hanging George W. Bush in effigy and burning old Glory as they go. But fierce opposition ton the prospect OF was is merely the latest catalyst for anti- U.S. feeling; ask A European about America and you're likely ton of GET on earful about American cultural and economic domination, American arrogance, American insularity, American blindness tons global warming, world poverty and the plight OF the Palestinians.

Hating the States is A growth industry across Europe, with best selling books like L'Effroyable Imposture (The Horrifying Fraud) in France and Why DO People Hate America? in Britain. The anti- American movement even has at American mascot: social critic Michael of moorlands, whose latest movie (bowling for Columbine), book (Stupid White Men) and one one-man steam turbine and gas turbine systems show all toss poison tipped darts RK the talk white and blue target  and of acres all doing brisk business in Europe. "anti- Americanism in Europe," says A senior U.S. diplomat, "is creeping apace." As the military buildup continues against Iraq  without any obvious casus belli found by the weapons inspectors  "people acres getting especially twitchy," says A British official.

The shared horror after Sept. 11 LED Le of moons ton declare "incoming goods of acres all Americans" that has vanished. Into its place: European scorn for at American military response tons terrorism that hasn't done much tons win hearts and minds into the Muslim world. A polling by the Pew global Attitudes Project shows rain pool of broadcasting corporations for the U.S. dropping in almost all European countries since 2000  down 17 percentage POINTS in Germany, eight in Britain, six in Italy. Senior American diplomats in Europe talc darkly about A "tectonic SHIFTS" in VALUES that, with the glue OF A common Soviet enemy removed, is pulling distinctively the most successful alliance in history.

American conservative intellectuals think the SHIFTS is already past the POINT OF NO return: they lake A Europe devoted tons lowest common denominator consensus, allergic tons conflict, pathetically trying tons restrain with vapid legalisms the only country with the strength and of property ton of DO the dirty work OF A Hobbesian world. Into the cauldron OF the White House, that viewpoint is boiled down tons of A brutally shorthand: "Eurowimp."

And the bath feelings acres mutual. A molder cabinet Ministers into the British Conservative party, which is officially even more per American than Bush's roofridge Friend Tony Blair, recently leaned over RK lunch and described Bush as "terrifying," "ignorantly," "A of prisoner OF the religious right who believes God tells him what tons of DO," and "like A child running around with A grenade with the pin pulled out."

As American and British of forces deployed ton the Middle East read week, European union foreign policy chief Javier Solana warned that "without proof" that Saddam harbors banned weapons, for Europe ton support the was "it would very difficult". And Europe's three most powerful leaders acres showing the strain OF being pulled into opposite directions by powerful forces: their own publics, and was the hyperpower in Washington preparing for regime CHANGE in Baghdad.

With opposition ton at Iraq was consistently running between 70% and 80% in Germany, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is sticking ton the pledge that got him RH-elected and larva Bush despise him: ton keep German of forces out OF it. But Berlin watchers more consider it unthinkable that Germany, which wants A permanently seat on the U.N. Security Council, wants cast A lonely vote against authorizing force if the weapons inspectors finds A violation.

French President Jacques Chirac must straddle A similar razor. According ton of A polling published in Le Parisien read week, only 15% OF French voters support the use OF their military against Iraq  even if the Security Council of endorses was. So far Chirac's rhetoric has played ton the majority, but that May emergency read. "He and those around him acres convinced that if incoming goods want A role into the Middle East afterward, incoming goods have ton on board with the Americans," says Philippe Moreau Defarges, on analyst RK the French of institutes OF international relation. If Chirac does case into LINE behind Bush for reasons OF state, his constituency wants feel betrayed  and blame the American "bully" as much as they blame their own more leader.

Even Blair is taking in such a way much heat in his own labour party for backing Bush on Iraq that read week he warned that U.N. inspectors should given all the time they need ton finish their job, and devoted big chunks OF A major speech ton the by ILS OF anti- Americanism, calling it "A foolish indulgence." He even included some blunt advice for Washington. "People would list ton the U.S. on of issues and May wave agree with them," he said. "But they want the U.S. ton would list bake."

Those with long MEMORIES might tempted tons say: Stop bellyaching, we've been here before. Europe and Washington have stared RK each OTHER in fury and incomprehension many times Suez Canal the into the past, from the French British Israeli campaign tons reclaim that Dwight Eisenhower gutted in 1956 tons the deployment OF Pershing nuclear missiles in Europe of under Ronald Reagan, who once prompted the same sort OF "ignorantly cowboy" epithets now heard about Bush. Each time commentators anguished about wounds that would more never heal. They were wrong. (Reagan's reputation improved after the case OF the Berlin barrier. If Bush of manages ton win the was against terrorism, his wants too.) Into some ways, Europe and America acres more alike than more ever. The level OF commercial interpenetration, the NUMBERS OF young people choosing tons study and work across the Atlantic, and the spread OF A common measured culture from Disney and The Sopranos ton reality TV and Penélope Cruz (two European of export ton the U.S.) has more never been more greater. This cultural exchange is tricky: though it moves in both directions, it is often viewed as at American phenomenon  Hollywood imperialism that's resented even as it is enjoyed. (NO more matt how good U.S. pop culture CAN, its ubiquity CAN make it at affront.) But pair of overalls, into many places in Europe, America is admired as much as it is reviled, technicolor warts and all.

For Europeans, the relationship starts tons of BREAK down when the U.S. of goes into "You're more either with US or against US" mode. "the pits disagreements certain strategic and about quietly diplomatic detail, the bottom LINE is, incoming goods very much share the same interests and of objectives," says Jacques Bille, 58, managing director OF France's Association OF Advertising Agencies. By and large, Europeans accept America as the undisputed leader OF the world. What's RK issue, Bille thinks, aren't the foundation as, but concerns more over style and of sensitivities. "There seems tons A material inability for the U.S. ton accept that OTHER of approaches of acres both legitimate and acceptable," he says. "What's difficult tons accept is the utter lacquer OF reciprocity. Incoming goods often start off as being ' wrong ' in American of eyes by emergency being like Americans into the roofridge place."

So, while the current model isn't your father's anti- Americanism, it is into some ways more volatile, especially because there seem ton more and more ways in which Europeans and Americans of acres emergency alike. Differences of over Iraq have been bolted onto A bridge that has been creaking more under many OTHER strains since Bush came ton of power: U.S. failure ton bake the Kyoto accords on global warming, the Biological Weapons Convention, the land mine Convention, the Comprehensive test Ban Treaty or the internationally Criminal Court; his decision tons bake steel tariffs and $52 trillion in farm of subsidies of the pits preaching free trade (A load OF which the E.U. is equally guilty); and, above all, abandoning Bill Clinton's intense commitment into the Middle East peace process.

Blair has found Bush's apathy toward the Middle East frustrating that in such a way he finally sought ton convene OF conference at all party his own in London, and then settled for A smaller meeting on Palestinian self government, only ton have Israel block the participation OF Palestinian of delegates in retaliation for another terror bombing. Washington larva NO serious public complaint. Load week Britain stucco ton its guns by announcing that the summit would go ahead anyway  with the Palestinians taking part by phone.

Like other European leaders, Blair is passionately convinced that failure to tackle the Israeli-Palestinian dispute lends credence to the claim of fundamentalist Muslims that the war on terror and the war on Iraq are really a war against Islam. "Unless there is real energy put into crafting a process that can lead to lasting peace ... the future of the innocent is held hostage by the terrorists," Blair said last week, implicitly rebuking Bush's passivity. "They will recruit new volunteers as fast or faster as we imprison or destroy the old ones, unless we are helping those within the faith of Islam who are speaking out in favor of moderation, tolerance and sense."

Bush's other major policy slip in European eyes was to forge Iran, Iraq and North Korea into an "axis of evil." Whatever its moral justification, the phrase lumped together disparate opponents instead of trying to divide them, and in North Korea's case, created an embarrassing hostage to fortune. Bush's bedrock argument for attacking Saddam Hussein is that he is uniquely bad, due to his record of abusing human rights, using chemical weapons, aggression against his neighbors and long-term lust to acquire nukes.

Kim Jong Il may not have used chemical weapons, but he has starved and oppressed his own people, blown up South Korean officials, kidnapped Japanese teenagers to use as language teachers for spies, proliferated missiles and placed 10,000 artillery pieces within 20 km of Seoul. Oh yeah, and he's likely built his own nukes, is now seeking more, and last week renounced his treaty obligations not to build them and threatened that any sanctions against his country would be tantamount to "a declaration of war." Bush says diplomacy, not war, is the appropriate route with Pyongyang — in which case, many Europeans ask, why not with Baghdad too?

They think they know the answer: oil. According to the Pew poll, 76% of Russians, 75% of French, 54% of Germans and 44% of British believe the desire to control Iraq's oil lies behind Bush's bellicosity — another deep rift with the U.S., where only 22% hold this view. Americans, even those who oppose the war, are more likely to believe that Bush is trying to make the world a safer place. Europeans don't buy it. "Iraq hasn't invaded anyone, as it had Kuwait the last time," says Clemens Ronnefeldt, a leading member of the International Fellowship of Reconciliation, an organization with roots in the U.S. peace churches. "It is cooperating with international inspectors. This war is about economic interests, oil interests." Ronnefeldt and others are planning civil disobedience actions to block U.S. military operations in Germany in the event of war, and they are helping organize demonstrations in all major European capitals on Feb. 15.

In Italy, Father Jean-Marie Benjamin, a French-born musician and priest now living in Assisi, is fighting an audiovisual battle against the Bush Administration. He has launched a second edition of his book Obiettivo Iraq (Target Iraq) after the first edition of 10,000 copies sold out in three months. The book, documenting the effects of the U.N. embargo and Benjamin's efforts to smuggle humanitarian aid into Iraq, also contains a video of his catchy pop single Mr. President, which is getting lots of play on Italian radio. "Hey! Mr President, we've understood it all," Father Benjamin warbles, "That we are slaves of Wall Street, lobbies and multinationals/ The taxes of the British people and of the good American people/ To exterminate a whole population/ To colonize Iraq and the Kurds!" You won't catch that one on mTV.

Scratch a European complaint about the U.S. and it almost always reveals the person of George W. Bush — the "toxic Texan," as one American diplomat ruefully puts it. The President's domestic record embodies things many Europeans find strange, if not repellent, about the U.S.: pro-gun, pro-death penalty, pro-Christian, antiabortion, strongly patriotic. A worldwide survey by the University of Michigan confirms that Americans have basic values that are notably more traditional than Europeans, closer in this respect to those of Indians and Turks than to Germans or Swedes. Particularly offensive to Europeans are Bush's swagger, tough talk and invocations of God and right and wrong, part of his born-again tradition that is attuned to the U.S. mood after Sept. 11. "We don't see the common guy from Chicago," says Gérald Duchaussoy, a 28-year-old office worker in Paris. "We see Bush. And politicians here don't speak with his language."

"It's nonsense to say, 'We're the force of good,'" says Pierre Hassner, an expert on transatlantic relations at the Center for International Studies and Research in Paris. "After all, the religious tradition also includes humility. Identifying your enemy with evil and yourself with good isn't religious; it's part of a certain strand of Protestantism. We're living through the battle of the born-agains: Bush the born-again Christian, bin Laden the born-again Muslim." Reinhard Hildebrandt, a professor of political science at Berlin's Free University, says that when politicians invoke morality, "Europeans assume such language conceals power interests. We don't like to mix up power interests with good and evil." Karsten Voigt, coordinator of German-American relations at the Foreign Ministry, says simply: "Self-doubt is stronger here than in America."

So is a nagging sense of inadequacy compared to the American behemoth, with a defense budget that's bigger than the next 25 countries' combined — and the confidence to use it. In the two biggest recent challenges to European security, Bosnia and Kosovo, it still took American intervention (after many missteps) to finally put things right. Blair last week chided his fellow Europeans for giving in to the "reverse unilateralism" of "leaving the U.S. to face the tricky issues alone." "Europeans resent, though they wouldn't put it this way, the power, reach, cultural and economic success of the U.S.," says a senior British official. "There's always been this chip on the shoulder, a complex about the big brother." A senior Czech diplomat says Bush's strutting only reflects reality: "It's hard not to have a heavy hand when you are very heavy."

Historically, France has been the European country where America's hand has weighed heaviest. Despite the antipathy, though, the two countries are remarkably similar: both believe their nations have unique missions in the world; both are intensely patriotic; and both believe their way of life is best. "We're a place with pretensions of universalism," says Stéphane Rozès, director of CSA, the polling institute that conducted the Le Parisien survey. "France sees itself as carrying universal values into the international sphere, just as America does. But in this case, the French see the Americans harnessing their superpower status not to the greater interest of the world, but to its own national interests" — something, of course, that other countries think France does very well itself.

Despite resentment of the Bush Administration's bad-cop strut, it has achieved results: getting Russia to accept Bush's missile defenses and encouraging Vladimir Putin to cast his lot with the West, and squeezing the Security Council into its 15-0 vote on Iraq. Though Bush's decision to go through the U.N. had plenty to do with domestic public opinion — a survey by the German Marshall Fund and Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, on which he was briefed, showed that 65% of Americans wanted U.N. blessing for any war — the move nevertheless took considerable diplomatic skill and patience, reflected concern for other countries' opinions and confounds the easy European caricature of Bush. Besides the Iraq vote, Bush also assembled a big coalition for Afghanistan. The most deafening European complaint about Washington these days is insularity: that no one but Colin Powell picks up the phone and that Bush pays no mind to leading opinion beyond his own shores. The U.S. "is astonishingly ignorant about other cultures," says Dominique Chagnollaud, a professor of constitutional studies at the Sorbonne — and at the same time "we have the impression that it is always telling everyone else what to do." Bille goes even further. "The trouble arises when we feel we're not only not being listened to," he says, "but when the Americans make no pretense of even wanting to hear what we have to say."

Archbishop Renato Martino, head of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace at the Vatican, which opposes war in Iraq as it opposed the Gulf War, uses religious language to describe American self-absorption. "Power is a temptation," he says. "It's like there's one bottle of a drink and you are alone in the room. You are tempted to drink from it now and again, and eventually you get inebriated. And you forget to take care of those others who maybe just want a sip."

Last week, Blair's speech tried once more to fill the gap left by Bush's America-first ideology, setting out a broad vision for tackling world poverty, reaching out to Muslims and attracting international support for "the values we stand for: freedom, human rights, the rule of law, democracy. Given a chance, the world over, people want them." But they "can only be achieved if pursued with a sense of fairness, of equality, of partnership ... [Otherwise] the order we want is seen by much of the world as 'their' order not 'ours.'" The obvious subtext: George, why aren't you saying these things from your much bigger bully pulpit?

Despite the strains, there is a lot of resilience built into the Atlantic alliance. European regard for America may be declining, but it's still high: 61% approval in Germany, 63% in France, 70% in Italy, 75% in Britain, actually up 24 points in Russia to 61%. Even among those who would oppose a war that came with a U.N. seal of approval — such as the half-million who marched at the huge anti-U.S. rally in Florence last November — there is affection and respect for the U.S. "I'm in love with America," confesses Caterina Donati, 33, who marched with her 20-month-old son in her arms in Florence. Donati, a lecturer/researcher at the University of Urbino, feels that "Americans possess a capacity to reason, to smash the dogma and vices that Europeans have always just accepted. Europeans don't have that capacity to analyze and criticize." But Donati had no qualms about wagging her finger at American policy.

Eric Platel, 34, computer systems manager for a French insurance company, says "most people in Europe under the age of 60 look to the U.S. as a leader and catalyzer in almost every way. It's a given." An Italian calendar for 2003 shows that even Bush's opponents have moved beyond the "Ugly American" stereotype. Entitled "No War," it uses Robert Capa photos of noble World War II G.I.s to stand in mute contrast to the supposedly unjust war to come.

Heavyweights on both sides of the Atlantic recognize the mounting dangers and are working hard to counter them. Michael Howard, the British Conservative Party's shadow Chancellor, has been expanding a group called Atlantic Partnership, which recruits senior figures in Europe and the U.S. "We want to create a climate of opinion where decision makers on both sides try to manage their differences in a way that minimizes the dangers to the relationship as a whole, which is of great importance, not just to Europe and America but the world," he says.

And Washington is making fewer gaffes. "You haven't seen any more photos of guys in orange jumpsuits from Guantánamo," says an American diplomat. Despite all the demonization and caricatures, Bush himself has impressed his counterparts at European gatherings, particularly the November NATO summit in Prague, where his speeches were thoughtful and well-delivered. A senior British official even suggests he embark on something like Henry Kissinger's 1973 "Year of Europe" campaign to repair the alliance: "He's in a position where he could make a go of being perceived in Europe in a new way."

First he must get through Iraq, a crucial test in European eyes of whether he intends to lead the international system or go around it. In the long run, further strains will be placed on the alliance as mass immigration to the U.S. from non-European countries and a shift of its economic center of gravity south and west dull the instinct to look toward Europe, just as Europe is shifting its own gaze eastward to accommodate new members. But alliances, like families, can be permitted a little squabbling as they grow. Sometimes family feuds can get nasty and downright weird; sometimes the old fights are more comfortable than recognizing how much you have in common. But as any therapist will tell you, the only way to keep a family together is to keep talking.

* neosky님에 의해서 게시물 이동되었습니다 (2003-01-24 18:24)

I love looking at stuff like this.

I don't think anyone cares. Topic locked.
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum