While looking at the numbers of hits on my site the other day I noticed quite a dramatic increase in visitors and on investigation I discovered that the vast majority were from the Guardian Web Site; as an avid reader of that great newspaper for 40 years I was real chuffed. On closer examination I realized that the comments were full of hostile rants against things that I was quoted as saying on my blog which were printed on the Guardian blog; the problem with it was that I had never written a comment to the Guardian Web Site in my life. The Guardian when contacted apologised and took down the comments; the same thing happened in the Scotsman a couple of months ago. I asked the Guardian and indeed the Scotsman a while ago to tell me who was behind this and they both replied that they do not discuss third party sources. I find it hard to believe that someone can impersonate me and do God knows what damage to me and the newspapers that accommodated them in doing this can wash their hands of it; that is how I see it at the moment but; if anyone reading this thinks or knows otherwise I would be delighted to hear from you.
The numbers of visitors continues to soar and the same thing is happening only they are now coming from various web sites and they are unremittingly hostile and abusive. The method remains the same; web sites which I have argued with for years are now printing lots of bogus comments purporting to come from me and the hostile comments are flowing in; many of them are of a vile nature and I am still in the position of being unable to do anything about it unless someone can advise me differently.
One aspect of all this is that I am very happy to learn that I am such a threat to them that they have gone to all this trouble and not in a very subtle way; unless you believe that these hundreds of hostile comments are spontaneous and not orchestrated which they clearly are. There is an unmistakeable pattern to them; they are anti me; anti Socialist and pro Zionist; I doubt that the mighty Zionist lobby is very concerned about little old me so my money would be on the knuckle dragging cybernats as I said they are not known for their sophistication. I feel quite vindicated; here are these people who have vilified me as an idiot; a clown; a nut case etc. etc. and they are now going to incredible lengths to damage me and doing so using blatant lies; Joe MCArthy will be spinning in his grave; bring on the wee sleekit timorous Gnats this is going to be interesting.
Monday, January 25, 2010
THEY SAY THAT IMITATION IS THE SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY.
Posted by Cllr Terry Kelly at Monday, January 25, 2010
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
That would be an extremely low thing to do to steal your picture, your handle and impersonate you with a load of comments that are unfit to print. Given what they do actually print, the stuff they delete would have to be quite a collection of rants indeed. If that stuff isn't really yours, then that's a nasty and cowardly way to commit slander.
Anyone who reads the comments and reads my blog will know that I did not send them but; there are some very sinister people in the blogosphere; they have been attacking me for years and have never really managed to damage me; mainly because of their obvious partisan attitudes and an inability in most cases to best me.
This is a result of years of frustration for them; it’s just the latest in a long line of dirty tricks from a bunch of low life incompetents.
You're an anti-Semite, pure and simple. Just a step above Goebbels.
Another one with no argument except to yell “ant Semite” it’s not working.
Would you like to prove that anti Semitism or do you prefer the Goebbels method?
"I believe that Zionism is not Judaism; the Zionists treatment of the Palestinians is a blot on Jews everywhere; "
I think you need to resign now.
It seems to me that not a few of the posters at Harry's Place raised perfectly valid questions, none of which you saw fit to answer. E.g., your claim that "the Zionists treatment of the Palestinians is a blot on Jews everywhere," powerfully redolent of the argument from collective guilt that will, indeed, be familiar to "Jews everywhere," raised the rather obvious question: are there any other species of such collective blots you would endorse? Equally, your movement claim that "I want peace and justice for the Palestinians; that makes me anti Israel not anti Jew" skips a few logical steps, and raises the question: why is opposition to Jewish self-determination in the context of your support for Palestinian self-determination not antisemitic?
Or you could, of course, resort to the easy ad hominems that seem to characterize your responses to any and all questions that challenge your claims.
You are not even close; you can’t even name yourself; what are you made of?
None of the posters from Harry’s Place admitted that they had been duped so I decided not to take them too seriously; they were made fools of and their bigotry allowed them to walk straight into it.
“are there any other species of such collective blots you would endorse”
Ordinary innocent Germans still carry the guilt of Nazism.
“why is opposition to Jewish self-determination in the context of your support for Palestinian self-determination not antisemitic?”
Because I am not anti Semitic that’s why; it’s really all you people have got isn’t it’ all criticism is anti Semitic; by the way it’s lazy as well and lacks intellectual rigour.
Do you realise that your last para. is ad hominem. See me; see semantics what a laugh; you clearly think you are clever but!
"Because I am not anti Semitic that’s why; it’s really all you people have got isn’t it’ all criticism is anti Semitic; by the way it’s lazy as well and lacks intellectual rigour."
That's simply not an answer. I am offering you a proposed working definition of antisemitism: denying to Jews a right (self-determination) you advocate for other peoples, especially given the historical context in which the persistent *lack* of self-determination and options for self-defense has, as I think you acknowledge, left Jews vulnerable to a lengthy history of unspeakable treatment at the hands of majority populations. If it's intellectual rigor you're after, I think you need to address this point in seriousness. Simply saying "I'm not antisemitic" doesn't tell me anything, because I'm not sure what you think "antisemitism" means.
I must admit I was fooled when I saw 'your' comments on the Guardian site. I disagreed with them, but then I usually do disagree with you.
They couldn't have been too far away from your usual stuff ... a pretty dirty trick though.
re the nats, I do notice that pretty much every Scotsman news story that's critical of the SNP, or even mentions them, seems to attract comments accusing anyone commenting who's not a Salmond-fancier of being anti-Scottish, 'fake Scot', traitor, etc. You do wonder if there's some kind of organised 'spontaneous comments' campaign.
I have been blogging for almost five years and you are right when you say that there are some weird people out there. Harry's Place attracts them like flies to a cowpat
Basically HP will go after anyone who doesn't support their globalist agenda. Using sock puppets is all par for the course on that site so welcome to the club.
Of course your crime was to support the Palestinians, so you can expect quite a shovel load of insults from now on in. I rarely blog about the Palestinian Question, mainly because I am old enough to remember what happened to the French in Algeria and the British in Southern Rhodesia. Put simply, the Europeans in Palestine are losers in the long run, so why work up a sweat?
Whether or not you are anti semitic has perhaps yet to be established, but what is clear is that you generalise enormously, you are prone to aggressive outbursts and you have an inflated sense of your own importance (not to mention intelligence).
I know that if i was to be misinterpreted as a bigot, by anyone, my first step would be to attempt to reassure my accusers and correct the misunderstanding. Instead, you resort to posture, invective, accusation and naked bullying. You may not be an anti-semite but you seem to be a very unpleasant man. I look forwards to you proving me wrong.
Your definition of anti Semitism is a dissembling lot of B******t designed by you for the purpose of this encounter. Try this one: anti Setmitism is a hatred of Jews for one and only one reason: the fact that they are Jews.
They were quite a way from my usual stuff but to realise that you have to compare them; some of them lifted things said by me out of context and mixed them with their own stuff written to sound like me; it’s obviously easier for me to spot things which I would not say than for someone else: they were very devious; if you know my site did it not occur to you that I never write to other blog sites?
The cybernats are an orchestrated bunch of hoodlums; everyone laughs at them now.
Thank you for your support: clearly the folk who came up with this wheeze to target me were unaware that I never write to other sites: they have been made to look stupid and they are now as angry as hell.
Jumping mad Zionist thugs: I haven’t had so much fun since--------- well a long time.
(pete woodhouse) 26/01/10
What can I say Pete? To you I am an unpleasant man and I’m proud of that.
I want to be quite clear that I do NOT believe that you are an anti-semite. If I thought you were I wouldn't bother commenting.
However the remark you made about forcing the Jews to act as they did under the nazis and subsequent remarks about Israel being a blot on Jews everywhere are not helpful and come perilously close to inciting hatred.
Synagogues in Scotland have been vandalised with anti-semitic graffiti by people who think all Jews are somehow responsible for Israel. Similarly Mosques have been vandalised by people who think that all Muslims are responsible for Islamist terrorism.
I believe that you would fully condemn such actions, which is why I cannot understand why you stand by these remarks.
I accept it wasn't your intention but surely you must be able to see how such remarks can fuel the increase in anti-semitic attacks we have seen in recent years.
Just because you aren't violent and anti-semitic does not mean that everyone who reads your blog is a decent person. There are some pretty nasty people out there and we should be very careful about saying anything that gives them any encouragement whatsoever.
In making and continuing to stand by these remarks you do neither yourself or the Palestinian people, no favours and you may unintentionally be contributing to hatred against Jewish people.
I am quite clear on the difference between hating the actions of Israel and hating Jews. I honestly believe that you are two which is why I urge to reconsider your remarks on Jews. It is these I find worrying not your other remarks about Israel or Palestine.
“However the remark you made about forcing the Jews to act as they did under the Nazis”
Let me say first that that is misquote: I referred to Israelis not Jews a slightly different emphasis but important: I never accuse Jews of anything. It was however a very badly expressed thing to say and I have apologised to anyone who was genuinely offended by it: I was trying to say that I would like to see a return to the heroic and courageous behaviour displayed throughout history against oppression and injustice as opposed to the oppression of Palestinians.
Many from the Zionist lobby who have attacked me and impersonated me by writing filthy comments to other web sites have seized on this remark to assail me but: if you are worried about it I will accept you as genuine and acknowledge your rebuke: I will be more diligent in future. I suspect I might know you and if you are who I think you are you can be assured of my respect. The remark about a blot on Jews could have been similarly better put I was actually trying to express sympathy for the many Jews who are opposed to Israel’s actions and are seen as supporters of Israel because they are Jews.
I remember being taught by a lecturer in the Glasgow College of Building and printing who was I think from memory a Lithuanian Jew who was more pro Palestinian than Arafat; a captivating man who always reminded me that he was anti Israel not anti Jew and Anti Zionist and proud to be so; I agreed with him then and I still do.
Thank you for writing.
"Let me say first that that is misquote: I referred to Israelis not Jews a slightly different emphasis but important: I never accuse Jews of anything."
Well, that's inaccurate. You have stated openly that you hold "Jews everywhere" responsible for "the Zionists' treatment of the Palestinians." To say that we all are 'blotted' is a pretty strong accusation.
"Your definition of anti Semitism is a dissembling lot of B******t designed by you for the purpose of this encounter."
Not really -- to deny to Jews, as Jews, a right you advocate for other groups is a perfectly recognizable expression of antisemitism. I would point, for instance, to the entire scaffolding of Church and secular policies constraining the activities of Jews through much of European history before the ninenteenth-century emancipation.
"Try this one: anti Setmitism is a hatred of Jews for one and only one reason: the fact that they are Jews."
OK. So we can advocate for policies that target Jews and seek to deprive them, as Jews, of rights we advocate for others, but because we don't personally hate them, or if we hate them, say, for what they *do* rather than for what they *are*, we are absolved from charges of antisemitism? It's all about the passion and not the conduct, then, is it?
terry.......you don't know me, you've never discussed anything with me, so i fail to see what you're proud of. i was (i admit in a very round about way) trying to give you a hand up, i gave you the opportunity to prove that your "accusers" were wrong. instead, in your short answer, you have clearly displayed that you don't care if people think you're anti-semitic or not, and proud that i said you SEEMED unpleasant. i find that peculiar.
i am not jewish, but if i was, and found myself living in your ward, would i feel comfortable going to you with a problem?
(pete woodhouse) 15:11
Pete: we have a problem here: I don’t believe you OK.
“you don't care if people think you're anti-semitic or not”
You are not even close to landing a blow: how about this interpretation
“I don’t care if Zionists think I’m anti Semitic”
Try a bit harder.
mate, you're doing a better job of making my point than i've done. cheers
“You have stated openly that you hold "Jews everywhere" responsible for "the Zionists' treatment of the Palestinians”
Not true: where/when did I say that? Your dishonesty is breathtaking.
I’m not reading your pompous lectures I’ve heard / seen / read it all before it is not as complicated as you would like folk to think: that is why you spout this convoluted nonsense at every opportunity.
I'm pleased to help a struggler.
i live in leith. i was born in edinburgh. i grew up in linlithgow. my parents are both scottish from a church of scotland background. i am not religious in any way.
now what exactly do you think makes me a zionist? i've no doubt you feel you have zionists bashing your door in, but actually there's just people who want to take you to task for your clumsy comments on israel.
Mr Kelly has asked Mensch:
"Would you like to prove that anti Semitism or do you prefer the Goebbels method?"
Well, anyone who says "What would these cowards have been like in the Warsaw Ghetto if they can’t face me?" clearly has some major issues with Jewish people.
And the fact that you automatically call your accusers "anti Socialist and pro Zionist" is simply laughable.
I suggest you do the decent thing and at least remove that "against racism" nonsense from the top of your homepage - because it clearly does not apply.
"You have stated openly that you hold "Jews everywhere" responsible for "the Zionists' treatment of the Palestinians"
I believe "a blot on Jews everywhere" was your exact phrase. I haven't seen you retract it, so I feel safe in assuming it stands.
"I’m not reading your pompous lectures I’ve heard / seen / read it all before it is not as complicated as you would like folk to think: that is why you spout this convoluted nonsense at every opportunity."
You're quite right, of course, that an exchange like this will, sooner or later, reach a point of more or less complete impasse. In the final analysis, that is why nations have armies.
(pete woodhouse) 17:57
Not quite right Pete. There is an orchestrated campaign by Zionists to attack me: despite your underprivileged past and your chaotic family background which by the way I sympathise with: I have to say that if you don’t realise that you are a fool or a liar.
You’re a bit mixed up here Francis: he didn’t try to prove the anti Semitism did he?
“clearly has some major issues with Jewish people”
The Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto? Heroes! I learned a lot about them when I visited the place. The Zionist cowards and thugs who are spreading vile lies about me are the ones I have the major issues with.
Francis you really are not the type of person to accuse or lecture anyone about racism.
So “a blot on Jews everywhere” is the equivalent of saying (I hold Jews everywhere responsible for the Zionist treatment of the Palestinians)
Only one word does you justice and if it isn’t a word they should make it one in your honour – Goebellesesque:
To my mind, "blot" = "guilt" = "responsibility." Perhaps you clear up where the equation breaks down such that you are not assigning "all Jews everywhere" (your words, I remind you) responsibility for the "Zionist treatment of Palestinians."
once again you prove everything i've said up to now. true to form (of you and your doppleganger) you resort to insults. good for you! pat yourself on the head (careful with the wig) and have a drink on me. good luck with the zionists, keep looking under your bed and check your cupboard. if you're important enough they'll get you in the end, although i reckon you'll be safe. GFYS ;)
This is where defending the indefensible leads you: you are reduced to arguing about the interpretation of words rather than what we both know was meant. What you are now writing about is a side show: a red herring.
Some day you will accept that you can't defend the indefensible.
(pete woodhouse) 27/01/10
I had a fair idea that it would not take long for you to unravel. Perhaps it’s the guilt that you people are saddled with over Palestine: it’s quite a burden right?
So this conspiracy against you. Do you think it's a group of Zionists within the SNP or have the SNP and the Zionists joined forces as a one off?
It’s not rocket science I have been targeted because of my support for the Palestinians: these people are well known for this kind of behaviour.
I suspect the SNP who follow my every word on this blog will be joining in as best they can even if they are incapable of grasping what it’s about: the issue doesn’t have a kilt on it so they will be mystified.
"This is where defending the indefensible leads you: you are reduced to arguing about the interpretation of words rather than what we both know was meant."
I'd say the meaning of words is pretty important, since in this exchange that's all that we have to communicate with. If we both know what you meant when you said "a blot on Jews everywhere," and I'm wrong to interpret that as a claim that all Jews are personally responsible for "the Zionists' treatment of the Palestinians," why are you not able to articulate how I am wrong?
You are playing games because you fear and can’t accept you shame: you are a defender of evil and you are unable to explain it away so you come up with these devious diversions.
Wow. "Shame." "Evil." "Devious." Are you really so ignorant of the history you invoke with those adjectives so redolent of ancient bigotry?
Really, if it's so obvious to you how asserting "a blot on Jews everywhere" is *not* an antisemitic attack, why is it so much harder for you to articulate the obvious than to hurdle insults?
They are not insults they are the truth: one thing and one thing only matters to you: you have found a target who is outspokenly pro Palestine and anti Israel: nothing else matters. Truth doesn’t matter: decency: fairness? It’s all been sacrificed for your cause, anything goes, you are tied in to the same mentality of those who carry out the crimes in Gaza.
You do not speak for your people and you never will.
I don't claim to be speaking for "my people." Do you claim to be speaking for yours? You know nothing about me but the assumptions you make based, I suppose, on my name, and on the fact that I ask questions you'd rather not answer. OK. Yet on the basis of a half-dozen brief exchanges, you grant yourself the freedom to assert that I'm shameful, devious, evil, and (on the basis of a previous message in this thread) probably dirty. Can't imagine where I might have heard any of *that* before. In fact, I can hardly imagine a more compelling demonstration of why there needs to be an Israel, and why it needs to be well-armed. Are you sure you're not a hasbarist double agent? If so, all I can say is, keep up the good work!
Is that it ? do you feel better now? Can you not go and pester someone else? I can write your comments before I see them.
"do you feel better now?"
Felt just fine before, but thanks for asking.
Ending David: not with a bang but with a whimper: put it down to experience: you can’t bully everyone.
"you can’t bully everyone" Such grandiloquence. I... "you can’t bully everyone"
Such grandiloquence. I suppose you're to be congratulated for standing with such fortitude against the overwhelming power of my harangue, fueled as it is by the most powerfully evil lobby on the face of the Earth. Good for you.
On the other hand, in what universe is asking questions synonymous with bullying?
(Oh, and I have to say, I like your fine distinction between "insults" and "truth." So if I were to make some childish remark about the fact, say, that you wear glasses (as I do, by the way), would that only be an insult if you did not, in fact, wear glasses? Just asking.)
Publish Reject (David) 17:37
I can put up with almost anything except terminal boredom; this is now over. Please feel free to have another go on another post.
I saw you posted at Harry's Place "This is truly worrying. I expected better; it would appear that I am not to be treated fairly after all. You are reinforcing the Zionist stereotype; there is clearly no point in discussing it; none of you is even prepared to admit that you were duped and the reason it was easy to dupe you is quite evident in your latest reactions."
These people are haters. They're the same people who were involved in the Seismic Shock incident, where their victim, a Rev. Stephen Sizer, was obliged to involve the police to protect himself. The charge was harassment.
It seems to me that you are not yet being harassed that badly. You're exposing these people, you are actually winning, so in reality you will convince all but the bigoted few.
I don't agree with your politics, by the way -- I think they will destroy Israel, as Rhodesia was turned over to Mugabe. But I defend to the utmost your right to say it.
(Roger Pearse) 28/01/10
Thank you for taking the trouble to write: I have been aware for some time of the tendency for some Zionist supporters of all things Israel to shout anti Semite at anyone who argues with what Israel is doing but this is the first time I have been targeted in such a way. I am prepared to deal with whatever comes not least because I am 61 years old and have been involved in the Labour movement all my life: I am absolutely confident that I can hold my head high against such vile accusations.
IT also strikes me that these people are not very tactically aware: unless these methods are some new technique unknown to me of how to win friends and influence people.
An extremely unpleasant business right enough but I will continue to support the Palestinian cause: without trying to intimidate or lie about my opponents.
Roger Pearse, Stephen Sizer? Interesting company you keep. Who knew you considered the New Christian Right allies? It'll be Nick Griffin next.
I can no more stop Roger Pearse or Stephen Sizer or indeed Nick Griffin or even a cretin like you from writing to me: I have no idea who the first two are: you of course are predictably anonymous and Griffin I know of but don’t want to know: have you ever heard of McCarthyism?
Post a Comment