The squalid low life character behind the symbol (C4') writes to me regularly, some times I have to reject what he has written because of the language he uses which is sometimes unprintable.
He has written to me again and despite the vile nature of what he has written I have decided to print it, I'm doing this to let people see what this guy is like and what he is capable of.
He has decided in his frustration at not being able to land a blow on me that the missing child Madeline McCann is a suitable subject to make fun of while trying to damage me, some people might think me wrong for printing it and I apologise to them if they do but, I think people ought to know the kind of right wing vermin who are out there.
HIS (LAST) COMMENT IS UNDER THE POST CALLED 'CHE' SENT ON OCT. 9 TH. AT 2.43 P.M. ------ HE WILL NOT BE PRINTED AGAIN ------
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
"some times I have to reject what he has written because of the language he uses which is sometimes unprintable"
Isn't that censorship? Thought socialists were in favour of free spe.... Oh hang on. I've got that wrong haven't I. It's socialists that suppress free speech.
Then you are to be applauded. You DO understand free speech despite the selective moderating of comments on your blog.
Yes, he overstepped the boundary with his Madeleine 'joke', but his first was rather funny - although I can see that you would not appreciate it in quite the way some of the rest of us do!
It's boring, I know, but couldn't you just edit the Madeleine passage out and give 'C4' a yellow card warning? It's a bit drastic to ban some one, and I should know having been thrown off more blogs than I can remember. Also it is a tad hypocritical to write a provocative blog and then complain when people are provoked!
No one honestly thinks you had anything to do with the McCann case and quite frankly your reaction here is nothing more than girly hysterics. We all make fun of that which is tragic, you no doubt have heard some of the jokes. It is how we as a people cope with things like this.
You really have made a mess of this one Terry. No doubt the MacKay has emailed this story round his council group already.
Is this a Gordon-Brownesque series of portraits? Are you going through everybody whom you dislike on this blog? Who is next?
Henry Crun - My dad told me that if you wait long enough you will hear/see everything - we now have a white supremacist S.A. supporter of Apartheid lecturing us on free speech, wow !
David Duff - I find it disturbing that you can say something nice about someone like that. I'm a reasonable man but he is a vile character he's out.
"we now have a white supremacist S.A. supporter of Apartheid lecturing us on free speech, wow !"
A bit like having a Scotsman set out spending plans.
RFS - This doesn't surprise me people like you have your standards and I have mine.
Rumbold - No comment on what he wrote then ? can I take it that you would continue to deal with him ?
Henry Crun - Was that an example of the famous S.A. sense of humour ?
I agree that C4's post was in poor taste.
Here's an idea. Rather than play the Great Dictator, why not go for the democratic option? Why not ask us to vote? Why not ask us if we think he should be allowed to return?
I appreciate this idea puts you in a tricky position. Mugabe doesn't like putting things to a free vote, so if you refuse, you won't be in delightful company. But you won't want to put it to the vote because you fear what our (inevitable) answer will be, given that we're all keen advocates of free speech.
" Was that an example of the famous S.A. sense of humour ?"
No, an example would be: What's the definition of a Scottish Labour Councillor? A useless git that does makes no valid contribution to society as a whole but makes a lot of noise about outdated socialist values, venerates terrorism and revolutionary murder.
Well, you make me laugh.
The joke was in bad taste, but it hardly merits a ban.
I realise, Councillor, that you are - er, what's the word? - an 'ideas' man, and as such, mere facts are an optional extra, but may I point out that I did not say "anything nice" concerning 'C4', only that one of his jokes was quite amusing even if the other was anything but.
Sorry to interrupt the free flow of your ideas which remain, of course, as stimulating as ever.
There is a fine line between sarcasm and offence. While C4 might have gone too far, it's clear that the target of the Madeleine McCann jibe was just you, not the girl. If it had been aimed at her, everyone could understand your stance.
The problem here Terry is that you yourself have made a number of bad taste remarks about RfS, Henry Crun, Will, African children, Israel, Jackart, Clairwal and C4 being ethier mental ill, gay, paedophilies or nazis who would gladly shoot anyone with their back turned. Surely by your own yardstick, you should ban yourself.
The ultimate irony here Terry is that you're more than willing to direct people to C4's last words, yet when people asked you to publish what you consider to be bad comments by Henry Crun, you refused. I take it that with this u-turn on your part, you've conceded that should have published Crun's statements.
Guthrie - "I appreciate this idea puts you in a tricky position." Actually it doesn't, it's a question of standards, I have mine and you have whatever.
Rumbold - We clearly have different standards.
(David Duff) - "one of his jokes was quite amusing" is that not saying something nice ?
boo hiss - I suppose there is a fine line between what is and isn't acceptable we clearly have different standards. Who was the target has nothing to do with it, he chose to joke about something which I find to be grossly unsuitable and unacceptable.
Your assertion about what I have called people is deliberately misleading, I have never set out to insult anyone, I have however retaliated when someone has insulted me and I'm not ashamed of that. Paedophile ? Wrong, Mentally Ill ? Wrong, Nazi ? possibly. .
"I take it that with this u-turn on your part, you've conceded that should have published Crun's statements." No, H.C.'s words were unprintable, C4's were printable but unacceptable and as such I thought I'd let people know why he was being cut out.
"No, H.C.'s words were unprintable, C4's were printable but unacceptable and as such I thought I'd let people know why he was being cut out."
I fall to see what you are getting it. Maybe i'm too stupid for a man who carries himself across as an intellectual colloseus such as yourself, but could you go into a little greater detail into why C4 gets banned but his comment published but Henry Crun is censored for alledged racism but is not banned.
Speaking of people being banned, I wonder what Clairwal did to get banned? Joke about James Bulgar perhaps?
"No, H.C.'s words were unprintable,"
I've laid down the challenge. You haven't got the balls to either publish or go to the police.
"one of his jokes was quite amusing" is that not saying something nice ?"
No. It is saying something nice concerning his *joke*, not *him*. Do try to pay attention, Councillor!
What do I have to do to get my own post. Clairwil, RFS, Henry Crun, Shotgun and now C4.
C'mon terry, say something nasty about me.
Boo hiss - I didn't ban Henry Crun I just didn't publish his first two comments, I've done this before but C4' was banned, as was Clairwil and I explained why she was banned as well and now you are too.
I wonder if you and C4' would write such things to the McCann and Bulgar families, now that would be a great laugh wouldn't it. I don't often come up against people who turn my stomach so much that I decide not to engage with them, you are very sad people.
H.C. - I don't need the police I'm quite happy with my position. Can I ask you again, why were you not printed ? now that we have established that your assertion that you were banned for calling Mandela a terrorist was a cheap lie, can we settle this point ?
I have a theory that C4' wanted banned because he was becoming more and more frustrated at not being able to handle the arguments and, judging by your language you might be looking for the same get out.
Girly hissy fit.
The Bulger thing was not a joke it was sarcasm. Nothing was said about Bulger but he is banned? Why?
Can I make jokes about the Marie Celeste or is that too soon as well?
David Duff - Have you no shame, no sense of decency ? you and C4' deserve each other.
If anyone comes across as being frustrated, it's you councillor. I bet Clarwil and C4 are laughing their heads off at you and your double standards, I know that I would. It's okay for you to accuse Henry Crun over gunning African children and calling American presidents "pygmies", yet when someone sarcastically ask you if you're responsible for the death and disappearance of a missing child, you soon change your tack.
You can't have it both ways Terry. You can't complain about people hitting you below the belt when you're doing it all the time to Henry Crun. I wouldn't be surprised if C4 wrote that remark because it would provoke a typically self-righteous outburst from you. Whos the one frustrated now Terry?
There is simple solution to all of this Terry. If you don't like what people write, stop blogging. It's obivious that you can't abide by people having different opinions than yourself, otherwise you wouldn't so hostile and defensive all the time. It must be taking a toll on your health, so maybe it is time stop and focus and your council duties and leave the "right wing vermin" to harass someone else?
"Can I ask you again, why were you not printed ? now that we have established that your assertion that you were banned for calling Mandela a terrorist was a cheap lie, can we settle this point ?"
Again you fail to have the moral courage and yet again deny everyone the right to judge for themselves. How very socialist of you.
You refusal to press charges must lead everyone else to believe that you have no grounds for your charges of racism. Your accusations are baseless, your credibility shattered.
So, final chance: Put up or shut up!!
"I have a theory that C4' wanted banned because he was becoming more and more frustrated at not being able to handle the arguments and, judging by your language you might be looking for the same get out."
Banned ay. Just like in the old apartheid days. Banned, gagging orders -you are no better than Verwoerd, malan, Vorster and Botha. Unable to make or prove a cogent argument you resort to the ban.
Jackart - You can hardly blame me if no-one takes you seriously.
RFS - I've told you before it's a question of standards perhaps a better upbringing would have helped you.
Would you write to the Bulger or McCann families in this way, you could of course say to them come on, its just a laugh couldn't you.
I think you wrote somewhere that you had a child I must have been mistaken.
Would I write to the McCanns? No. But by the same token what makes you think you can empathise with them?
The point here is that you are being a tad pompous and are looking a bit of a fool. I mean, who is really hurt by this "joke"? Do the McCanns read your blog?
It is not a question of standards, it is a question of your false anger getting the better of you and you find yourself painted into a corner. Now that is quality humour.
"Would you write to the Bulger or McCann families in this way, you could of course say to them come on, its just a laugh couldn't you."
No more than you would write to the families of those killed by Che and his cronies. Perhaps you should send an open letter to Che's victims' families telling them how proud they should be that their loved one's were murdered for the furtherance of a completely just cause. It would be of such comfort to them.
Anonymous - "yet when someone sarcastically ask you if you're responsible for the death and disappearance of a missing child (and now someone being sarcastic about a murdered child) you soon change your tack." I'm guilty as charged, you are right.
I do regard making sarcastic fun of missing or murdered children as unacceptable and not comparable with calling some American Presidents 'intellectual pygmies' bully for you if you think it's a suitable subject for humour.
I wonder what kind of person you are though.
"It's obvious that you can't abide by people having different opinions than yourself," actually I can and do 'abide by' people having different opinions from me, otherwise I wouldn't take comments, is that not a bit obvious ?
"It must be taking a toll on your health," Thank you for your concern about my health but I can assure you that I am having a great time, kicking these people around is fun and very satisfying.
H.C. - That's not an answer Henry, I've told you before you are not 'the boss' anymore answer my question, "why were you not printed ? now that we have established that your assertion that you were banned for calling Mandela a terrorist was a cheap lie, can we settle this point ?" I'm beginning to feel like Jeremy Paxman with Michael Howard.
" now that we have established that your assertion that you were banned for calling Mandela a terrorist was a cheap lie, can we settle this point ?"
Certainly and the provenance is in the original comments that you continually call racist poison and which you continually refuse to publish.
Come on Michael, put up or shut up!
H.C. - I have printed this because you have washed your mouth out since the comment I warned you about so, well done Henry as long as you remember you are no longer 'the boss' and behave decently we will get along fine, believe me I wouldn't want to lose you.
RFS - "what makes you think you can empathise with the McCanns?" I have children and I'm thankfull that nothing like this happened to my kids when they were infants, I have deep sympathy for any child of yours though, is that empathising too ?
If I was looking like a fool as you are fond of saying why is it necessary for you to point it out to me ? wouldn't it be better to just let me carry on looking like a fool or, are we to believe that you are pointing this out for my sake, to help me out as it were ? I'm beginning to feel quite humble. See, that was sarcastic humour !
H.C. - I wouldnt make a joke about anyone being killed or going missing, I suspect a S.A. white supremacist supporter of Apartheid who had been so desensitized and and become so callous by having lived there would though.
H.C. - If it wasn't 'Mandela the terrorist' and it wasn't 'racist poison' would like to have a stab at what it was ?
I'm sure I'm not the only one waiting to hear your opinion.
Admit it Terry, you couldn't give a stuff about the McCanns anymore than you care about the victims or Che or the ANC. The real reason you're angry is because someone decided to give you a dose of your own filth and you can't handle it. What goes around comes around.
On the subject of the ANC, something suggests to me that if Henry Crun's allegations about the ANC threatening to burn down their houses or rape their sisters if they didn't do as they were told are true, you'd be glad because in your warped opinion the ANC's African victims would have probably 'failed to show sufficient enthusiasm for the cause' or something just as vindictive. How very Stalinist of you if that's the case.
Rumpole - How could I not print this - You all deserve each other.
The answer to the question posed at the top of this post is 'no' you can't get any lower.
Is that the best reply that you could come up with Terry? You've disappointed me.
Rumpole - I thought it was rather good, Is this though the best that you can come up with ?
People who write this kind of stuff albeit anonymously are fascinating, repellent but fascinating.
Post a Comment