Saturday, December 08, 2007

Why Does LGF Lend Credibility to Eurabia Deniers?

The Fjordman Report

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.



I notice Charles Johnson and Little Green Footballs are at it again with their biweekly — or is it daily? — bash Fjordman/Gates of Vienna/The Brussels Journal/Fascists/Euroweenies post, which is by now becoming as predictable and exciting as watching paint dry.

I admit my initial reaction to all this was a desire to yawn, ignore it, and watch the latest Harry Potter movie on DVD. CJ made another post a couple of weeks ago where he made up claims from scratch with the sole purpose of discrediting me. As was later confirmed by external sources, the claims CJ made were 100% without any factual basis whatsoever. The upstanding thing to do would have been to admit this and perhaps apologize, if not in public then at least in a private email to me. Johnson has had ample time, yet has failed to do so. If CJ and his crowd at LGF cannot even admit it when they publish blatantly false information then I see no point in having any “dialogue” with them about the situation in Europe. Besides, having a rational conversation with LGFers about the threats to freedom in Europe and the West in general is like having a rational conversation with the average Muslim about “Zionists”. I simply have better things to do with my time.

For the most part, I will therefore try to ignore the rantings of LGF as much as I can. However, even though dialogue with CJ may be pointless, there could still be independent readers and third parties who can be reached. I notice that CJ has ceased his attacks against the Sweden Democrats and concentrates on the Vlaams Belang. Is that an indirect admission that he didn’t fully understand what he was doing regarding the SD?

As blog reader Zonka comments:

Another good reason to continue this fight against CJ and LGF, is that if LGF doesn’t succeed in squashing the Counter-Jihad movement, somebody from the MSM and/or the left will pick up the fight using the writings from Charles and his followers as ammunition against the Counter-Jihad movement, painting LGF’s view as the mainstream rightist view, and confirming their claim that everybody who is fighting the islamization of the West is Fascists, Neo-nazis, Racists or worse. So in effect what Charles is doing is not just rattling on in his echo chamber, he is deliberately sabotaging the efforts of countering islamization. His efforts have nothing to do with Vlams Belang, they were just a convenient target for his campaign. The proof of that is that he silently dropped the charges against SD, when it became apparent that he couldn’t use them as a vehicle to smear the Counter-Jihad movement. If his main complaint had been the involvement of the Counter-Jihad movement with VB and SD, he would have stated openly that SD had been cleared or at least that there weren’t sufficient charges against them to continue to oppose them into the Counter-Jihad movement. But no such statement have been made implicit or explicit. The conclusion thus must be that it was never about VB or SD, but to smear the Counter-Jihad movement with any means at his disposal.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to respond to CJ’s every whim, but I will write a reply every now and then if I have the time and feel that some matter of substance is touched upon. In this case, this is Eurabia, the deliberate merger of Europe and the Arab world, conducted by the leaders of the European Union.

The website quoted by LGF’s latest post is run by the Norwegian Leftist Øyvind Strømmen. Mr. Strømmen called me a Fascist long before the current debate began. He has also stated that Bat Ye’or’s writings about Eurabia are “conspiracy theories,” and he is extremely critical of Oriana Fallaci for her views of Islam. This is now linked to approvingly by the “anti-Jihadist” Charles Johnson, who has a photo of Fallaci posted on his website.

So the question to Mr. Johnson becomes: If you link approvingly to “Eurabia denial” websites, what next? Will you also link approvingly to sites claiming that there is no global Jihad, no Islamic threat to the USA and that 9/11 was an inside job? If you discredit Bat Ye’or, perhaps the world’s foremost expert on dhimmitude, the repression of non-Muslims under Islamic rule, is there anything at all left of LGF’s supposedly anti-Jihadist position, or is LGF now simply an anti-European hate site?

Øyvind Strømmen repeated several times his criticism of Bat Ye’or at LGF, and stated that although he doesn’t believe Bat Ye’or is a Fascist, she “spreads a conspiracy theory, a conspiracy theory which in fact makes up a significant part of the mythos of Eurofascism and which sadly has gained quite a bit of a hearing amongst both conservatives and liberals.” He again stated that “I do blame her [Bat Ye’or] for providing a considerable part of the Eurofascist mythos by spreading the false idea of a Eurabian conspiracy.”

I have spent some time checking the Eurabia thesis, and I find it to be perfectly sound, as I have demonstrated in my essay The Eurabia Code, a shorter version of which is also available in Norwegian under the name Eurabia-koden. Strangely enough, this “conspiracy theory” was publicly confirmed by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who said in November 2007 that the European Union should expand to include Middle Eastern and North African countries.

Please note that the EU involves the free movement of people across borders. If the EU is expanded to include Muslim nations, Muslims from the entire Greater Middle East would be entirely free to move into and settle in France, Britain, Germany, Italy etc. This would mean the end of European civilization as we know it, and is now actively supported by senior European leaders behind the back of their own peoples. This constitutes nothing less than the greatest betrayal in the history of Western civilization, yet “anti-Jihad” website LGF seems to think this is overrated. The regular LGF reader Thanos says that Europeans need “to get over their hysteria” about the Islamic threat.
- - - - - - - - -
Surprisingly few readers of the “conservative” LGF were critical of the viewpoints of the Socialist Strømmen, although the reader wilinsky stated that “I am widely read and have some professional expertise on the subject of ‘global warming’ and I am, I believe, well-informed on our problems in Iraq. I think you are very, very far off the mark on both issues, so I suspect that anything you have to say about European fascism or Bat Yeor is equally ‘reliable’.”

Indeed. Mr. Strømmen has criticized the conservative politician and writer Hallgrim Berg for including a quote by the “Fascist” Fjordman and several quotes by the Fascist-enabler Bat Ye’or in his book about the dangers posed by militant Islam to the West. Mr. Berg’s book is also available in English. Here are some excerpts from the introduction:

The Euro-Arab ‘bridge-building measures’ are self-deceiving, as long as there is only one-way traffic on the bridge. The author maintains the United States the only power in the world that may secure the world’s free nations. He is discussing the growing anti-Americanism in Europe, a phenomenon evolving despite America’s role as a guaranteeing force for democracy and freedom. Anti-American sleepwalkers do not see that if the American way goes down the drain, Europe will follow. Hallgrim Berg attacks international leftism, which is constantly marketing twisted stereotypes of America, and is also criticizing the feebleness of European politicians, particularly France, where hypocrisy is developed into mastery. Challenged by the most comprising and hard-core totalitarianism the world has seen, the only hope for Western democracy, culture, and our way of living is a more confident cooperation and pooling of resources among European nations and the United States.

For this book, Berg was attacked by members of the Norwegian Left. Another Socialist, Lars Gule, warned that Berg’s writings about Muslims were similar to the writings about Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, although Berg pointed out that he did not write about individual Muslims, but about the threat posed by Islamist ideology. Berg also pointed out that the Palestinian-friendly Gule went to the Middle East with dynamite in his backpack in the 1970s in order to carry out an attack against the Jewish state of Israel. Mr. Gule himself — who was stopped before the plan could be carried out — has never denied this, and continues to be extremely critical of Israel. Yet Mr. Gule gets a free pass for warning against the dangers of anti-Semitism, always coming from the political Right, of course.

Charles Johnson is critical of the Baron from the Gates of Vienna for his use of sources:

One more note to the Baron: it’s time for you to start treating your European ‘sources’ with a little more skepticism. They burned you with their latest attempted cover-up, and now you have egg all over your face.

In defense of the Baron, an upstanding man who tolerates a lot more ideological dissent at his website than LGF — as does The Brussels Journal — I’d just like to point out that CJ linked to a state-sponsored website which used to be run by a rabidly anti-American, anti-Israeli and anti-Christian Communist as his source of information about the Sweden Democrats.

Now LGF links to another Leftist who thinks the Jewish writer Bat Ye’or, who has written excellent books about the treatment of Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and other non-Muslims under Islamic rule, is an enabler of Fascism by publishing “conspiracy theories” about the advancing Jihad.

Somebody should perhaps inform CJ and his followers that the Scandinavian Left is brimming with Hamas-supporters, Arafat-cheerleaders and anti-Israeli and anti-American attitudes, and that they should be a little bit careful with whom they associate or lend credibility to.

76 comments:

EtNorskTroll said...

Yep. It's tough talking with some of the posters at LGF. Baron came by yesterday while I was posting there. He saw my hat sitting on top of the muck and mire there on one of the threads. He picked it up and I looked up at him. He was shocked!
"Norsk Troll! Why, how very deep that muck and mire must be at that LGF thread!" the Baron said.

"Oh, this is nothing, Baron." I replied.

"I'm sitting on a horse."

(I'm still trying, though.....)

~Norsk Troll

AngleofRepose said...

That's gonna leave a mark.



"I refuse to debate an anonymous person"

/Charles

Conservative Swede said...

I wonder if CJ is more interested in rats than in Eurabia. If he is so careful to distance himself from VB, how come he links--with full approval and without any disclaimer--to a Eurabia denial site?

If he found the information useful, he could still have used it, but pointed out that it's a horrible Eurabia denial site, and that he completely disagrees with Øyvind Strømmen description of Bat Ye'or as a fascism-enabler.

Quite as he said that he supports VB's anti-Jihad resistance, but distance himself from some of the content of Dewinter's bookshelf.

Or how he expressed his support for the SIAD demonstration, but distanced himself from the excesses of right-wing extremist violence by that 74-year old woman.

I'm not requiring ideological purity here. CJ can link leftist pro-Islam sites if he wants to, but he should make sure then to point out what he disagrees with. I'm sure this is just a mistake and that he will correct it. Or maybe he is more interested in rats, than in Eurabia after all, and considers all this unimportant? Maybe he considers Eurabia, and his leftist sources description of it as a fascist myth, a deviation from the core issue: rats.

I'm sure we will get a satisfactory answer by CJ on this one. He wouldn't want to give people the impression that he is turning into a Eurabia denier or Eurabia minimizer himself.

Catamount said...

Thank You Baron, Dymphna and Fjordman for answering lies and distortions by speaking the truth. Western Civilization is worth fighting for.

Conservative Swede said...

AngleofRepose said...

That's gonna leave a mark.

"I refuse to debate an anonymous person"

/Charles


Charles is a man of principles. He can link to a leftist pro-Islam site, but there goes the line. But he would never stoop to debating an anonymous person. Maybe that's why he dislikes Bay Ye'or too? Or maybe he likes her, and that's why he made her real name public? I wonder what he thinks of Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina. We might never get to know, since he doesn't want to deal with anonymous people. He seems to prefer to associate himself with dead anti-Jihadist. They are guaranteed to stay as complacent as the unbanned lizards. And they wouldn't scare him into PC spasms but participating in concrete action against Jihad.

AngleofRepose said...

CS, I don't think rat's are his core issue. I think it's what's associated with them; "white power" symbols.

Otherwise, a very fair assesment and it motivates me to defend Charles a bit -

The conclusion thus must be that it was never about VB or SD, but to smear the Counter-Jihad movement with any means at his disposal.

I don't agree with that conclusion at all. His main motivation for peeking under the bed was whether some within the movement had neo-Nazi affiliations. He's a philo-Semite after all, so his initial motivation was understandable. Their rallying cry has consistently been "No Nazi's in my foxhole!".

It was only after he was compared to CAIR that he went on the war path. The motivation changed, IMHO. I don't think it's to discredit the Counter Jihad movement, it's to be right. "Compare me to CAIR did you? I'll show you whose the bigger fool!"

Witness his lack of apology to Fjordude. I don't think anyone would have thought any lesser of him if he'd just owned up to his mistakes. But he couldn't even do that. Because it's all about being right. And to do that, he has to discredit both Pamela and Fjordude, not the entire movement.

Of course, I could be completely out to lunch.

Dan Bostan said...

When the fight AGAINST islamo-fascists took the turn to also be a PRO WESTERN EUROPEANS fight, the lizards moved on.
I think we can glean quite a lot about their agenda from this.
Don't we?

AngleofRepose said...

But he would never stoop to debating an anonymous person.

CS.. you always make me chuckle.

Dan, was that directed at me? If so, I admit that the quote from Thanos kinda discredits my argument, but I still don't think they're out to smear the movement. Just certain *cough* Fjordude *cough* Euros.

Archonix said...

It strikes me that part of the problem is simply that we don't fit his narrative. We, "europeans" of all nationalities, are standing up for our culture rather than simple standing futilely against an invading culture. It might sound like semantics but there's a world of difference. When you stand for something it unites people in a way that simply standing against something never can. The problem is, what we're standing for isn't what Charles wants us to stand for. What we're standing for is our own culture and our own history and the right to celebrate and preserve these things. I did a blog rant about this a while back but my basic thread was that Charles is from the school of thought that considers history and culture to be so much bunkum, not worth preserving if it's "obviously" failing. To him, Europe is "obviously" failing because it's not standing up for itself against the Islamic threat, yet when it decides to stand up against that threat it's reverting to nazism and has to be challenged and beaten back, all because it's not following the narrative he had laid out for it.

Conservative Swede said...

AngleofRepose: CS, I don't think rat's are his core issue. I think it's what's associated with them; "white power" symbols.

Which makes rats more important to him that Eurabia, which is exactly what I said. Await his answer to this and you will see. He will claim that talk about Eurabia is diversionary chatter, and then he will go back talking about rats.

I don't think it's to discredit the Counter Jihad movement, it's to be right.

There are many things that are more important to him than the counter-Jihad movement. He do not care sh** if he sabotages the whole counter-Jihad movement. In fact, being "right" is infinitively more important to him than the counter-Jihad movement.

He's possessed by his hallucination of Nazi ghosts. He's in a self-righteous witch hunting rage mode. The best way to understand him is to think of Linda Blair in The Exorcist. This is what PC does to people. There's nothing special about Charles here. He's not driven by anything different from the average leftist. They have just as good motives as Charles (or had initially), it's the force of the PC gravity that sinks them. And as you can witness, this is happening to Charles now. He's melting down.

Gerard said...

There's somethin' happenin' here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a blog, over there
Tellin' me I got to beware

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your blog it will creep
It starts when you're posting afraid
Step out of line, Lizards come and take you away

(We better)
Stop, hey, what's that sound?
Everybody look - traffic's goin' down?

Ed Mahmoud said...

I still think trying to analyze Johnson's politics or motivations are futile. It seems obvious it is all about a delicate ego, and the fact that LGF posters like Atlas and Fjordman would dare disagree with him.

I'll admit, I could be wrong, but he comes across more as a petulant child than anything else.

AngleofRepose said...

CS,

I understand your point about Eurabia and diversionary chatter, but I still contend that it ain't rats he's focused on, but the "white power" symbol. It's really neither here nor there (diversionary chatter, lol), so let's call it a draw.

He do not care sh** if he sabotages the whole counter-Jihad movement.

Good point and I should've qualified my statement with "deliberately discredit"... Or maybe I should just shut up. ;)

Gerard.. good one!

Mark Richardson said...

You can be counter-jihadist for two differing reasons. The first is that you identify with the values of political liberalism and you see Islam as a threat to these values.

The second is that you wish to preserve the existing character of the Western nations, and you see Islamification as a threat to this character.

CJ is apparently a counterjihadi for the first reason. What he wants to preserve are political values.

The problem is that these political values also lead him to attack those counterjihadis who wish to defend their own national traditions.

I suspect his real motivation, therefore, has little to do with any taint of neo-nazism in the European counterjihadi movement. He has gone hunting for this kind of evidence *after* his initial falling out with the Europeans.

What he dislikes are those Europeans who are seeking to defend something more than political values: those who wish, like the VB, to maintain the existence of a distinct national (or regional) tradition.

Lamedon said...

Dan Bostan
When the fight AGAINST islamo-fascists took the turn to also be a PRO WESTERN EUROPEANS fight, the lizards moved on.
I think we can glean quite a lot about their agenda from this.
Don't we?

12/08/2007 6:13 PM

Exactly. I have also noticed that. I hadn't read LGF till the beginning of the scuffle. I remember the unwilling answer on Fjordman's repeated questions whether Europeans could decide on their own immigration policies. I have never trusted some of those pseudocon sites like LGF and I have read Fjordman only occasionally at Brussels Journal even though he could remember me from his original blog. I'm not surprised by this end of "alliance" between Fjordman and LGF. The problem with LGF people is that they are not looking for allies but slaves. In order to became their "allies" we should submit to them and their agenda unconditionally. I believe this is because they are "Teddy Kennedy" conservatives (conservatives with very small 'c'). If they were a hope for Freedom and Dignity then I wouldn't embarrass myself with the struggle at all.

Conservative Swede said...

AngleofRepose: I understand your point about Eurabia and diversionary chatter, but I still contend that it ain't rats he's focused on, but the "white power" symbol.

Which I have agreed with you about all along. And as I have stated all along, the conclusion of this is that rats are infinitively more important to Charles than Eurabia. This is a consequence of his obsession with "white power" symbols.

Conservative Swede said...

Charles Johnson has reacted to this post:

"Yep, he's at it again. Ignore the substance, attack the messenger, blah blah blah, same old story, day after day."

The substance being rats and crosses. As confirmed by his subsequent comment:

"Yes, and notice they aren't disputing any more that the rat character with Odin's Cross armband is used by fascist groups."

The Eurabia denial and the fact that he had linked to a hard-left site didn't even register, quite as I predicted. Isn't he at all worried that it will start looking as if he's dismissing Bat Ye'or, and starting to embrace the leftists? Normal people would have added a disclaimer here, but with Charles and the lizards it didn't even register. The Eaurabia issue is just seen as diversionary, compared to the core issue, i.e. currently black rats.

And about CJ's comment about "attack the messenger". We can compare it to this. Paul Belien linked carelessly to an arguably anti-Semitic article at an arguably anti-Semitic site. CJ took him to task for it. I do not think that Belien handled this well, but at least he acknowledged his mistake. Now Fjordman brings up a perfectly congruent case -- an approving LGF link to an Eurabia denial site -- and takes CJ to task for it. But with CJ it doesn't even register. He bursts out in how it's "ignoring the substance" and "attacking the messenger". Did he even read what Fjordman wrote?

These two cases are perfectly similar. But at the same I can predict that CJ and the lizards won't admit this (because they are too blinded to see it). And the question is why? And my answer is: linking to hard-leftist sites, using them as sources, giving them credibility, is all compliant with PC orthodoxy. And that is the guiding star at LGF when it comes down to it. Say the magic word: "I'm an anti-fascist" and you will soon be welcomed to hitch a ride on LGF for less than honourable reasons. CJ has even been an apologist for the "anti-fascists" that committed attempted murder on the peaceful SIAD demonstrators. And the fact that Fjordman disagreed with this apologism, is what lead to his banning. It should be clear to everybody by now what CJ and LGF stands for.

Morgenholz said...

"Norsk Troll! Why, how very deep that muck and mire must be at that LGF thread!" the Baron said.

"Oh, this is nothing, Baron." I replied.

"I'm sitting on a horse."


Taller horse or different trail. You're choice. (Yeoman's job over there, by the way, though I think you're pissing into the wind for distance).

AngleofRepose:

His main motivation for peeking under the bed was whether some within the movement had neo-Nazi affiliations. He's a philo-Semite after all, so his initial motivation was understandable. Their rallying cry has consistently been "No Nazi's in my foxhole!".

And a fine motivation it was. But I've checked my foxhole, and even the ones next to me, and guess what? Not a Nazi to be found. Hold on...... OK. Turned over that little rock back there, and not even a rat....imagine that. Found a displaced meteorologist, though.

Mark Richardson:

What he dislikes are those Europeans who are seeking to defend something more than political values: those who wish, like the VB, to maintain the existence of a distinct national (or regional) tradition

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.

Morgenholz said...

"Yep, he's at it again. Ignore the substance, attack the messenger, blah blah blah, same old story, day after day."

And that is what passes for discussion there. Drive-by intellectualism.....

Zonka said...

@Conservative Swede,

I don't know what CJ and LGF stands for, but I know with certainty that it's not what I'm standing for.

laller said...

I don't really understand this fascination with attacking the sources instead of attacking the material. What does it matter if it's a leftist (or even communist) source? What does it matter if it's a rightist (or even nazi) source? If the material is correct, then it doesn't matter where it comes from. If the material is incorrect, then it should be possible to show it's wrong(naturally, not everyone will be swayed by facts, but that's life).

The real issue seems to be a form of ethnocentrism, doesn't it? I mean, Belgiums culture and history are deliberately ignored (if not deemed laughable arguments) in the analytical process. Instead, the symbols are being analyzed by applying the cultural traditions and history of other countries(and the ideas/ideals of "internationalists/internationalism"). It doesn't matter what the Odins/Celtic cross means/meant in the US, England or Ireland if it means something else in Belgium. It doesn't matter what the rat means/meant in France, Germany or Italy if it means something else in Belgium. And it doesn't matter what the swastika means/meant in Japan, Denmark or Canada if it means something else in India...
We all have a tendency to judge things on the basis of our own "cultural framework", but that's what's known as ethnocentrism. It takes a special kind of person to set aside his "cultural framework" and view an issue from another "cultural framework". LGF (and others) seem to have chosen the ethnocentric approach.
When it comes to judging values, morals and customs I'm all for an ethnocentric approach as I believe some things are better than others. When it comes to determining the meaning of symbols... Well let's just that ethnocentrism is not the most "scholarly" approach.

Conservative Swede said...

Zonka,

CJ and LGF are with the "anti-fascist" crowd. This is what AngleofResponse refers to as an understandable motivation. But Morgenholtz and others looked into that foxhole and there were no Nazis there. But we live in the sort of sick culture where the hysterical person suffering from the hypnotical paranoia of seeing Nazis where there aren't any, is considered honourable and understandable. There's no limit to how wrong you are allowed to be, or how destructive and vile you are allowed to be, when on this sort of holy mission. You will always be forgiven. The goal justify any means. However, for those trying to oppose these pathological people: a single tiny mistake, and you are doomed.

It's this immense gravity from the left, that makes virtually everyone adapt the principle of "no friends to the right", while being hurriedly sucked into the black hole of the left, once trying to act as a moral saint. It's this immense gravity from the left that makes honourable "anti-fascists" almost kill peaceful 74-year old ladies, while honourable "anti-fascists", such as CJ, dismiss the whole thing as extremist infighting. Remember that the average Muslim do not openly applaud the violent elements of Islam, either. But they silently approve of it, which is exposed in apologist statements; statements very much comparable to to one by CJ above.

Conservative Swede said...

Laller,

I have already covered this in my first comment, and I agree with you. I wouldn't hesitate to link to a Communist or Nazi site, if it was the only available source for useful information.

However, I would definitely make sure to add reservations about the site, making clear that I in no way agree with their position. This is not only the civilized way to do it, it's fundamental self-preservation, if you at all care about your reputation. The same with Holocaus or Eurabia denial sites. I would add a disclaimer, or I would be dead as a blogger.

CJ however do not care the least about his reputation. He's to obsessed with his witch hunt. It's clear by now that he would link to a site of any degree of the left, even the darkest red, as long as they are anti-fascist brothers.

"Forgetting" to add such reservations, is a sign that you have your priorities in the wrong place. It's actually very telling. And we can actually see how CJ is being gradually transformed into a leftist.

He's lost his mind, and his reputation is going down the same drain.

AngleofRepose said...

CS,

CJ and LGF are with the "anti-fascist" crowd. This is what AngleofResponse refers to as an understandable motivation.

Excuse me, but I do believe I clarified that it was his initial reaction I found understandable. His subsequent posts have been nothing more than smear-by-associations, as I thought I made perfectly clear.

Don't try to ascribe to me positions I do not hold. It's most unappreciated.

Conservative Swede said...

Angle,

I forgot the word initial which I intended to put there.

My point is that what you see as an understandable motivation initially, in most of the cases leads on the path that I described. So strong is the leftist gravity. Only very few people have the mental strength to oppose it. However, once described it is easier for people to identify it and resist it.

My point is that something that most people would agree (such as you) is reasonable and commendable, because of the strong asymmetry between left and right, easily gets sucked into to black hole of leftism, especially when they try to act as self-righteous moral saints.

So I'm not describing you here. I'm describing a general phenomenon.

Zonka said...

@Conservative Swede,

I'm in complete agreement with your accessment of CJ gravitating towards the left and the “anti-fascist” crowd. My point was partly sarcastic, but also true in the sense that it is hard to predict exactly where CJ and LGF will end and which principles they will adhere to once this is blown over... I mean he alienates the friends he have on the right and he is seen as a fascist by the left, so where will he end up? That is a good question...

Alexis said...

It is rather interesting how this particular quarrel illustrates the necessity for guidelines on how one conducts internet journalism. References are important, footnotes are important, and commenting on the nature of each reference is also important. Journalistic etiquette is important.

Some people delude themselves into thinking that new technology makes etiquette obsolete. Not so. New technology may change the shape of etiquette, but it does not change the necessity of good manners. Neither does it change the necessity for good technique. Professionalism is necessary for journalists, historians, social scientists, and political commentators; technology does not change that. The early years of any technology are typically a time of experimentation, and with that experimentation often comes a certain measure of sloppiness. If there is any illustration of the problems sloppiness brings to a given discussion, it is the quarrel Charles Johnson has begun with the counterjihad movement.

With the compilation of internet archives, it becomes important over time to avoid making mistakes. This is especially true concerning old-fashioned newsgroups and open forums. Some web sites use robot exclusion to keep the Internet Archive or Google from keeping archival web pages. For example, the custom of robot exclusion is often used by courtesan websites to protect a woman's identity in case she decides to retire. This custom of robot exclusion is also used by Little Green Footballs; the last LGF webpage listed on the Internet Archive is from August 7, 2007.

YouTube may be a useful source of information, but ascertaining its usefulness still requires the discernment of someone who can sift through the information and find what is truly useful. Watching a video showing the first steps of a baby boy named Mohammed is not particularly relevant. If the baby name with the largest number of baby videos on YouTube just happens to be Mohammed, that would actually be news, though. Discernment between importance and triviality is critical to ensuring the relevance of one's news.

Showing the fascist origins of an organization may be a pleasant parlor game for some people, but it also can be irrelevant. I can show ties between the early American Legion and Fascism. I also can show ties between early Zionism and Fascism. Eventually, someone will ask, "So what? What are we going to do about Islamic imperialism now?" That's a good question, and it is a benchmark for gauging the relevance of past history to our present common struggle.

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

You'll know from my blog that some of us are waging fairly constant war on the EU and Milliband's antics are part of all that. There is most certainly a move to include more North African nations - more so on their part but the EU has become a monster dedicated to chsllenging the U.S. hegemony. The English want no part of it.

Conservative Swede said...

Zonka: I mean he alienates the friends he have on the right and he is seen as a fascist by the left, so where will he end up?

President of the United States?

At least it's a spot-on description of the current president.

Roger said...

Qustion: can anyone get in contact with Dewinter? And ask him for a close up, high quality, readable picture to be taken of the object on his shelf? Ask him politely to provide an explanation about where he got it and what it means to him?

Epaminondas said...

I have no idea what LGF has to do with Bat Yeor, but she is untouchable, as far as I am concerned.

But this will live forever now, won't it?

Each side has to be right, and will simply 'find' whatever it needs.

LGF will find this, and the GoV defends with that. Then the reverse.

Mark Richardson has this fight almost right, but he is missing the last step

"What he (CJ) dislikes are those Europeans who are seeking to defend something more than political values: those who wish, like the VB, to maintain the existence of a distinct national (or regional) tradition."

Just add...'which, btw,is unfortunately, and historically, necessarily BLANCHE'

Quelles dommages, eh?

And THERE is the rub. That movement in expressing what they want is indistinguishable from the CCC in the USA. That is why Dewinter had to obfuscate his call for white europe last month, rather than throw it in the garbage which would have GUTTED an awful lot of what has gone on. But of course, he can't.

Maybe someone can count the number of minds changed by all this? What do you think?

How does ZERO sound?

It makes me ill to use the very words, but isn't it time to MOVE ON?

Zonka said...

@Conservative Swede, that's a scary thought, but I think his form curve topped too early to reach that position... ;)

@Roger, at this point it wouldn't matter what he said, would it? Irregardless of what he says there will be those that don't believe him. Time has run out for divinating the values of VB by looking at paraphernalia, tea-leaves etc. and instead looking at what VB actually do in the real world... i.e. let their actions speak rather than the contents on their bookshelves.

@Epaminondas, you say "Move On" like the whole thing is just a misunderstanding, and patch up the differences and get on with the show... Except that it is no show, this fight is essential and very important, although not very entertaining. The differences cannot be patched up any longer, there is a fundamental difference between the two sides, which by now is abundantly clear. And your call for moving on is like asking conservatives and liberals (US meaning) to just patch up their differences and move on... Ain't gonna happen!

Archonix said...

Epa, if your assessment were true then there wouldn't be the current, massive outcry about central european immigration into west european nations. That's white people moving en masse to places inhabited by other white people, in numbers large enough to begin swamping the indigenous culture with their own in some areas. That's what it's about in the end. Culture. History. All that bunk. Race has f*ck all to do with it.

Now the difference, of course, is that these "white" external cultures aren't given to spontaneous self-combustion when they're "angry" and they're largely christian or christian-ethical so the immediate impact is far less obvious. It's still there, though, and people resent this cultural influx attempting to override their own culture as much as they resent other more aggressive cultural influxes.

It isn't the biggest problem we face for sure but it's proof, if it were needed, that this obsession with "white power" politics is completely groundless.

Roger said...

@Zonka
The readable picture is important. Even though I have posted at LGF for years I am still an individual and there are many individuals who would benefit from what I ask. Understand that I am one that is looking for a different and independent dialog. People have different roles in life. Peoples from different countries, language and culture need to work extra hard at understanding what the other means/believes.

Not looking to arrogantly question and question and question someone of a different country. But rather seek a dialog. I am an American, scientist and a Christian although not a Christian Scientist:-) Not joined to any Christian denomination. Now politicians get asked to reveal and answer more questions because of the public nature of their lives. This is international yet the internet now makes it possible. Yet it also has the possibility for dialog increasing learn rather than verbal combat for verbal combat's sake.

I am an individual who does not agree with Charles' first Exhibits 1-3 maybe 4. The video is a snip and I never heard who the videographer was or who was making the video. They never fully focus on the object on the shelf or make a plainly readable image of it but swing from it before getting a good picture as Dewinter enters the study. But the basic shape was there albeit of a shape that ADL says one should not jump to conclusions over. So I didn't. Yet since seeing the video, there has been so much heat & smoke a clarifying interview/dialog was never made. I asked the above question since day one of the youtube video being discussed.

Again because of the public nature of a politician's life a clear readable image of the object on the shelf is something needed by a politician seeking to clarify their world view.

AngleofRepose said...

CS,

So I'm not describing you here. I'm describing a general phenomenon.

OK, gotchya. I was being a bit of a hot head last night... sorry.

I'm really enjoying all the various input here.. thanks to all.

Witch-king of Angmar said...

Only the accident of Bat Yeor's birth prevented Strommen from smearing her with the "nazi" label. If she wasn't Jewish he would in no way hesitate of using the most vile qualifications. The man is beneath contempt and so is imam al-Charles(peace be upon him) for using him as a means of fueling his paranoia.

Archonix said...

Only the accident of Bat Yeor's birth prevented Strommen from smearing her with the "nazi" label.

There are many people who show no such restraint in labelling the entire state of Israel as "nazi".

Archonix said...

Hey check this out:


#145 Charles 12/09/07 11:52:34 am reply quote report 1

"57Chevy," "Oladunk," and "saywhat?" have all given this post a minus rating. Would any of you three like to explain why you believe it's OK for Fjordman to ignore factual points?


No subtlety anymore, Charles? Disagree and you're denounced in public now.

Of course Charles can hardly talk about ignoring "factual points" since the majority - no, the entirety - of his argument consists of ignoring facts.

AngleofRepose said...

Charles could've just as easily wrote "To the three people who dinged this post - would any of you.." etc.

Instead he's 'outing' the unfaithful lizards.

Creepy.

lowandslow said...

Her's more Archonix. Just a lttle example of how dishonest CJ can be and the effect it has on his commentors.

#630 Charles 12/08/07 8:58:07 am
5) I hope the Gates of Vienna people are proud of the community they've created. Their comments are now just as full of nasty insults and hate speech as any loony left blog's. Congrats!

#1 storagemanager 12/09/07 10:15:01 am
That thread is very nasty.


Where is all the nastiness? Where are these insults? Come on lizards, I know you're stalking, go cut and paste all these nasty insults from this site. I'll wait, since I can't post on LGF ever since I was banned for the cardinal sin at LGF, I commented on another site.

Zonka said...

@Archonix,

It's just a gentle reminder that "Big Charles is Watching You"... You know in order to prevent neo-nazis and fascists from infiltrating LGF it is regrettably necessary to use stalinist methods to smoke out the rats!

AngleofRepose said...

#194 Jackba 12/09/07 1:21:02 pm reply quote report 1

Charles,
Please remove the 4th negative on this post, it was fingers moving ahead of brain. Was supposed to be a positive.



Heh.

AngleofRepose said...

Check out what this ignoramus had to say -

227 americanstar 12/09/07 2:15:42 pm reply quote report 0

Every time I read a rant from "Fjordman" or "The Baron" I feel ill and scared for my children and the world. They reminds me of past euronationalist racists from the 1930s, namely Hitler and Goebbels. And why do they feel the need to hide behind phony names like a KKK member? Is there ANY way these modern hate-mongers can be prevented from spewing their vile message? Is there any anti-hate legislation that can be used or even decent people willing to interceed? I mean, if someone would have stopped the original Nazis in 1930, millions of lives could have been saved. I do think VB, Fjordman, The Baron, and Brussels Journal are that dangerous. Scary.



That tactic remind you of anything?

Talk about scare-mongering - Charles has this wilting willow calling VB etc "dangerous".

Get. a. grip.

lowandslow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lamedon said...

I have visited LGF blog and it appears to me that they are runing contest who will be the most abusive and rude against Fjordman and/or this blog.

Products of the schools of our time :(. Better to look after our own children.

By the way children, lets make children, they are our destiny :).

lowandslow said...

I do think VB, Fjordman, The Baron, and Brussels Journal are that dangerous. Scary.

And these are the brave souls that are going to fight the Islamic jihad? They're already wetting their pants over Fjordman and the Baron.

1389 said...

I say it's OUR turn to go to the UK and file suit against Charles Johnson and Leftist Green Footballs - AND against everybody who is doing CJ's dirty work - absolutely every last one of them - whether or not they were ever members of Leftist Green Footballs.

Give 'em hell!

1389 said...

Lowandslow,

I have reached the conclusion that Charles Johnson and Leftist Green Footballs never had any intention of participating in the counterjihad - let alone leading it - but only in co-opting the counterjihad and leading it astray.

Among other things, CJ and his remaining collaborators are attacking and libeling everyone who is taking any effective action against the global jihad, particularly in Europe, and they are spreading the same old blood libels about the Serbs.

True, Charles Johnson posts a lot of terrorism news stories on LGF, but don't be fooled! It seems to have been nothing more than a ploy to gain page views for ads, and to get would-be activists to waste their time and energy on a site that is going nowhere.

As soon as anybody attempts to get people to take effective action (such as enforcing existing laws) - even if they discuss it on another forum - they are banned from LGF. This has a chilling effect all across the Internet, not just on LGF itself.

Whatever good that site may have done initially (and inadvertently) by making people aware of terrorist activities is far outweighed by the harm that LGF has done recently. They must be, and are being, discredited with such finality that no follower of theirs will ever again be able to harm our cause.

Wimbledon Womble said...

I wish this feud would end.

1389 said...

WimbledonWomble,

Peace, in the blogosphere or anywhere else, can be gained only through victory. We are making good progress.

Russet Shadows said...

Something has cracked; or perhaps we are now seeing past the makeup, but from this moment on, I cannot see either peace or reconciliation. LGF has opened up its registration to restock its membership pool; Charles actively outs members of his own community; Charles bans those who dissent from the party line; LGF actively mocks those who wish to defend the culture and traditions of European countries. We cannot hope for this to vanish overnight, for doing so would be naive and Pollyanna-esque. The time of division is here and the lines are clear. The only answer that needs be provided is to this question -- where do you stand? As for me, I champion the Germans, the Italians, the Serbs, the Czechs, and anyone else who wishes to preserve their own culture against that of an invader. I champion my own countrymen as we preserve and celebrate all that is American, and to deny others this right is wholly uncharitable and morally rotten.

Conservative Swede said...

AngleofRepose said...
CS,
So I'm not describing you here. I'm describing a general phenomenon.
OK, gotchya. I was being a bit of a hot head last night... sorry.


No Angle, I'm the one that should be sorry. You had every reason to react. I had been sloppy in my description (my focus was on the other part). I thank you for forcing me to formulate it more clearly.

Anonymous said...

I used to lurk through the Islam debates on Bjorn Staerk's site three or four years ago. Oyvind Strommen was a classic Islamo-apologist. He attacked Ibn Warraq, Bat Ye'Or and Robert Spencer many times. In fact, he even attacked Charles Johnson and LGF many times! He also tried to defend Islam after the assassination of Theo Van Gogh. I stopped reading that site in disgust a couple years ago because the blog-owner was giving Oyvind such a big platform to air his Islamo-apologist views. In fact, I suspect that Oyvind was/is a Muslim convert. He used to have another blog (which I think he has taken down now) which praised Islam and which featured a mosque as artwork in the background. Here some threads from 2004 where Oyvind makes clear his views about Islam and attacks Ibn Warraq and other anti-jihad intellectuals:

http://blog.bearstrong.net/archive/weblog/000764.html

http://blog.bearstrong.net/archive/weblog/000790.html

Here is one of Oyvind's posts attacking Ibn Warraq:

"I have read Ibn Warraqs book a long time ago, it is in fact one of several anti-Islam books I have read during the last few years. I do perfectly well know what Ibn Warraq says about the relationship between Islam and Fundamentalism - and I am aware that he suggests that Islam is "a fascist ideology".

There is only one big problem with it all. His statement is not only false, it is completely absurd. Ibn Warraq says that the fundamentalists (who are the fundamentalists anyway, the islamists can hardly be called fundamentalists, eventhough Ibn Warraq uses these words synonymously) are "utopian visionaries who want to replace the liberal Western-styled democracies with an Islamic theocracy, a fascist thought system intent on controlling every act of every human being".

What liberal democracies is he talking about? Saudi-Arabia? Kuwait? Egypt? Pakistan? Tell me, what liberal democracies are there to replace in the Muslim world. Alas, it is not many. And the few countries where the Islamists have gotten power are definitely not amongst them.

One of the few democracies in the Muslim world is Turkey, a country that has long secular traditions, but at the same time a country ruled by a party with Islamist roots. And in fact, this party have passed several democratic reforms since they gained power, and are gradually moving Turkey further in the direction of Western democracies. In Norwegian newspapers they are seldomly referred to as Islamists. Instead they are called "Western-friendly". Turkey has a long way to go yet, but today it is often the secular Kemalists that act like reactionaries in that country.

The main enemy of the Islamists is not the West. It has never been. The main enemy is regimes in Muslim countries, which the Islamists feel should be replaced by Islamic regimes. The Islamists are, ironically, often inspired not only by Islamic ideas, but also by Western ideas; fascist ones, truly, but also liberal democratic and socialist ones. Thanks to many corrupt regimes and considering that American and other Western democracy-iniativies are not taken seriously in the Muslim world - Islamism has very often become the sole political alternative for alienated young Arabs and other Muslims.

Another thing with Ibn Warraq is his dubious use of sources. He is the master of cherrypicking, for instance using carefully selected quotes from Khomeini to make his points. He does not even care to look at how Khomeini was inspired by non-Muslim movements, how he reinterpreted classical Islamic concepts and how the Iranian revolution wrote Islamic concepts into a sort of class analysis. Ibn Warraq does not write about how Khomeini used populism, socialist rethorics and so on. Ervand Abrahamian, a leading scholar in the field, writes:

"The result (...) was closer to Latin-American populist than to fundamentalism".

There is no doubt that the Iranian revolution was hijacked by religiously inspired political fanatics. However, they were not fundamentalist. The real fundamentalists were soon to be angered by Khomeinis claims that Iran superceded every other Muslim society through times.

The roots of Islamism can not be understood without looking at the Islamic religion. However, they can neither be understood without considering the Modern world Islamism surfaced in, developed in and live in. Ibn Warraq does not even try.

Øyvind"


http://blog.bearstrong.net/archive/weblog/000771.html

Plenty more of the like to be found at Bjorn's blog. Note that there are several people who seem to have been "lizards" at LGF, circa 2004, trying to argue with Oyvind's Islam apologia. Why do the same "lizards" now embrace Oyvind as credible?

Conservative Swede said...

Queen: Oyvind Strommen was a classic Islamo-apologist. He attacked Ibn Warraq, Bat Ye'Or and Robert Spencer many times. In fact, he even attacked Charles Johnson and LGF many times!

Charles Johnson has become a useful idiot, a tool, for people like Oyvind Strommen. They do not respect CJ the least, but they find him very useful.

The list of hard leftist sources used by CJ is getting long. The foremost examples being Expo.se, Yelloman and Oyvind Strommen. CJ sees them as brother in "anti-fascism", they see him as a useful idiot.

Anonymous said...

He also attacked Bruce Bawer and LGF's beloved Oriana Fallaci. Read the old threads. It's all in there.

Anonymous said...

Notices how Oyvind whitewashes the Islamist party of Turkey, whose leader has declared that "Democracy is the bus we ride on the way to sharia."

Bert said...

It appears CJ lacks the ability to grasp he's being used as a mouthpiece of quite vile leftist gangs in Europe, those that attack the counterjihad full time with all means, including manipulation, agitprop, smears, lies, terror attacks, etc: the marxist and "anti" fascists. CJ is an easy target, he doesn't speak all those languages and believes anything he is being told as long as it comforts his defence. When somebody tries to add some nuance in clear English he just presses the about now redhot "CJ bans you" button and therefore becomes the lousiest informed blog around.

Allready CJ has happily entertained hard boiled communist-informants from radical left-wing fascist groups, whom he gave room to feed him, just because he seemingly doesn't care about misguiding himself nor his Lizards into ignorance.

In the meanwhile, his commy-pals in Europe are cheering him and his Lizards in their absense. Blocking Fjordman, aaahh victory is sweet with comrades like LGF. The pc brigade can easily say so, CJ doesn't know what they're talking about anyway and certainly nobody will warn him.

But whatever, at least one of his informants likes music. One of his fine lists of recommendations he should pass through to LGF, they are ready for it about now.

EtNorskTroll said...

C'mon, low & slow~

Stop with the horsefeathers.

I post here and at LGF and I've disagreed with Charles a couple of times in the past (not to mention the VB flap).

For you and Russert to say that Charles bans people for dissent is untruthful and dishonest...a tactic you ironically accuse Charles of!

You may continue to discredit yourself in front of the posters here at GoV if you wish, but it is to your shame.

Besides: isn't there ENOUGH hatred and strife in the world without you spreading lies and hatred, too?

Think about it...
~Norsk Troll

lowandslow said...

Hey Norsk,
I was banned in this latest purge for posting here and at GCP. So don't accuse me of being untruthful or dishonest. Look at my profile on LGF and my posts there. I can't, I'm banned.

Next time you "think" before you talk about things you know nothing of. I don't know why you're not banned, Charles probably finds you comical.

lowandslow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
lowandslow said...

In fact Norsk Troll why don't you come over to GulfCoastPundit and repeat your claim about me being dishonest. Out of respect for GoV feelings toward profanity, I can't properly express my views about you right now.
Plus you can tell all the commenter's over there how Charles doesn't ban people just for disagreeing with him or just for being a member of another blog. That would be interesting. It will open your eyes on just how dishonest Johnson can be.

Cincinnatus said...

I think I've figured out WHAT CHARLES JOHNSON IS UP TO. It is a common frustration that leftists do not address the issue of Islamism. CJ is trying to create an inclusive environment where they can do so. To do this, he needs to build up left-wing credits. This can only be achieved by righty-bashing, which he is fervently doing. Sorry guys, but we are a necessary target for this exercise.

Really, it is just a matter of filling an ecological niche. A leftist-friendly anti-Islamic site is in fact needed. So we need to write off LGF (since CJ has to bash us), whilst appreciating that such a site has merit. But we must do our part -- we need to sneer and jeer at LGF, because it is good for both sides to do this: (1) it makes us a better target for what CJ is trying to achieve, and (2) jeering is far better than whining for all sides. Indeed, CJ complains about whiners not just to insult, but because he is genuinely frustrated at the bad form of some bashees.

So the best strategy is to write off LGF, accept that it is now a left-wing site, do not try to change that or reconcile to it, but sneer, jeer, and bash, whilst (the key part) recognizing that this is a strategic ploy to broaden the base of anti-Islamism. In other words, play the game, get the joke. ALWAYS GET THE JOKE. Cc.

P.S. Baron, to fix the width problem, increase blog width to 1024 pixels. Also, some posters' icons are HUGE and wasteful, there should be a size limit.

Morgenholz said...

Norsk Troll:

I love ya, man, but Low&Slow is right: CJ just itches to ban people, and he bans based on ideology. Tow the line or you're gone. Very simply, and in disagreement with Cincinnatus, it's because he has become enamored with his "cult of personality". When you read the fawning posts of Sharmuta, you'll see what I mean. She's obsessive to the point of surrendering autonomy:

34 Sharmuta 11/29/07 5:59:37 pm reply quote report 3

Helpful Hatchling Advice-


*You answer to Charles


It takes a weak mind to become a cult follower, and that explains the general descent of the discourse over there. Simply Darwinian. (That phrase ought to give them something to talk about. Heh.)
Glad I'm out of there, because I answer to no one.

Conservative Swede said...

Thanks Cincinnatus,

That was like having the ecological system explained to me in a TV documentary.

"So the lion is really supposed to brutally kill and eat the antelope... This is all for the best, a perfect system, where all parts interplay for the best possible outcome"...

So when CJ continues to act as an idiot and we then attack him for that, this is the necessary interplay of the best of the worlds, making anti-Jihadism bigger and wider?

Interesting...

Cincinnatus said...

Hmm, LGF's new poster boy "Oyvind Strommen" is from Norway, like Fjordman. I daresay Charles is grooming him as a sort of alternative Fjordman, LGF version.

Wait... it's coming to me... It's kind of like in the Superman story, there is a Bizarro character...

Charles Johnson prrreeeeesents...
Oyvind Strommen... the new...
** BIZARRO FJORDMAN ** !!!
(cue wild applause and cheers)

Vasarahammer said...

This new Bizarro Fjordman seems to be the main source of Charles's smear campaign judging by the content of his site.

Fascist is an old buzzword used by far left to smear opponents and Bizarro Fjordman seems quite capable of using that.

Eurabia, the new giant conspiracy theory! Fascinating. Even if Eurabia were a conspiracy theory (I have no opinion on Eurabia concept, since I haven't read Bat Yeor's book), this wouldn't make uncontrolled muslim immigration any less of a problem.

Baron Bodissey said...

Cincinnatus --

I can't widen the blog to 1024. I have extreme far-sightedness (presbyopia) that limits me to 800x600 resolution, even on a 21" monitor. In fact, I hated it when I had to switch from 640x480.

So y'all are stuck with this until Hillarycare is instituted and I get me an eyeball transplant...

Roger said...

@Baron Bodissey

But then you can increase the text size on your browser to make the font where you are most comfortable; every other user can independently do the same for themselves.

For Firefox & IE the Text Size is under the View menu

Cincinnatus said...

Baron, go out and buy a wide-screen monitor today. This blog NEEDS to go to width 1024. Cc.

Simon de Montfort said...

One aspect which I think should be noted in All This is that The Johnson is clearly not a well-educated person nor an especially intelligent one. I've read his comments and believe that they prove we are dealing with average intelligence, an enormous ego, and very little actual knowledge of history and 'political science'--especially regarding Europe.

Perpahs if The Johnson actualy KNEW more about current and recent events in Europe, none of this Mess would have occurred

As for the anonymous thing, anyone can find my Christian name and surname in my 'profile'.

,,,another red herring

Archonix said...

From the last Fjordman Bashing thread at lgf...

German Udo Ulfkotte is not Security Chief of Belgian Vlaams Belang. The Belgian contingent of Blood & Honor answers to VB Security Chief Bart Debie, not to Freddie Thielman.

It was VB that made a street theater mockery of SIOE's work. Violating their agreement with SIOE by doing so.

Somebody leaked the location of the SIOE people that were beaten up in that parking garage. Somebody who knew what parking garage it would be and when the SIOE people would be arriving there. That's the kind of information only a Security Chief and the victims would have...

STANDARD
OPERATING
PROCEDURE,


Is it me, or is this Render person accusing VB, a flemish independence party, of conspiring with the mayor of brussels to get the SIOE people beaten up?

Sodra Djavul said...

Archonix,
You really shouldn't assign any real credibility to Render's postings. If the idea can't be summed up in THREE and THREE WORDS ONLY, it just won't register.

On a humorous front, I stooped to a full-blown reinfilitration of LGF over the weekend. If you wish, go looking back through threads for "EFF Puppet." Some really funny stuff in there, especially after I convinced some of the more dull-witted that I hailed from Eastern Europe and thought the site was about discussing "football" (soccer).

Heh.

- Sodra

Of course it was juvenile, but it really was a blast. :)

Honorary Yooper said...

Sodra, don't flatter yourself. You may have fooled some, but not all (including me).

Passionate Conservative said...

EtNorskTroll,

I got blocked at LGF, and never a reason why. The only beef I had was with his bootlickers, Highrise, Sharmuta and NY Nana. But I have seen Chas. ban for dissent, and so have you. You just aren't being honest with yourself.

Sarah said...

Charles started constructing his echo chamber quite a while ago.


The Purge

Many many people have been banned for no reason at all.

Sodra Djavul said...

Yooper,
I'll leave it up to you to figure out who my new puppet is. That last one was so much fun, after all.

And thanks for welcoming the new hatchlings, trolls, mobys, and reruns.

Hey HEY Hey!

- Sodra