-=*=-
The recent reappearance of Hamish Alcorn (aka the dialectic dilettante) marks an end-point (for me) of a Webdiary journey which began on or before Wednesday, December 11, 2002 09:15 (1st archived eml to Margo Kingston, titled "re: Never give up your disbelief.")
Near the end of that article, MK: "Remember - disbelieve. We are being lied to."
One of my early posts may still be seen on the web, it's in "Osama's back, suitably censored - Opinion WebDiary Archive 2003." Scan for 'peace plan.'
-=*=-
A very important Webdiary waypoint was this one, on March 29, 2006:
HA: "you have a race-based theory of domination..." which (apart from being untrue - aka an HA lie) provided the stimulus for the start of my research into the I/J/Z-plex. Then came M-W; any doubt disappeared. Another HA 'gem:' "the Left today ... guys, just f**k off" on August 24, 2006. As no BTW and IMHO as usual and of course, 'the Left' is usually right - in the sense of being correct, and 'the Right' is most often wrong. And now HA is 'back.' I have accumulated many 'enemies' in WD, skipping over the Jay White = Paul Morrella = lying fraud and troll[1] and C Parsons = Eliot Ramsey = lying fraud and troll suppositions as not requiring any further comment, two 'stand-outs' must get another mention. I have already cited Harry Heidelberg (aka David Davis) and Geoff Pahoff in my 'digging some dirt ... ,' but here're another couple'a quotes.
HH/DD:
«I just don't want to be a slave to my own blog and as you'd appreciate, I'd rather die than become involved with something like Webdiary again.
Literally, I would rather DIE than do that!!!»
[Thursday, September 21, 2006 at 23:40]
On Wednesday, 20 June 2007 at 11:15 Harr'äh encouraged his troops to decamp: "I am sure if anyone wants to participate on Webdiary..." - in other words, off you go, kiddies. And so they did, see my 'webdiary time-line.'
GP:
«May I once again congratulate the IAF ... Their mission was important beyond your imagination.
By their skill and courage the world is safer today.»
[Your Spin. Your Game. on September 22, 2007 - 5:04pm.]
Pahoff was talking about yet another illegal Israeli incursion into a sovereign neighbour-state. The now passing 60 years-long pillage and murder in ex-Palestine and surrounds continues; just who is 'safer?'
-=*=-
Q: Does any of this matter?
A: Well, both yes and no.
We have some real and pressing problems:
1. Information; the lack and bending thereof.
2. Criminality; the effects and our part therein.
3. Death-threats; specifically the greedastrophe®.
In reverse order the greedastrophe, aka CO2 induced run-away climate change will get us, unless we take *urgent* and *effective* action. A book by Monbiot, "Heat," says we (Aus, UK, US) must reduce our per person CO2 output by 94%. No joke.
The criminality is a) murder for oil, aka the illegal invasion turned brutal occupation of Iraq, looks like Iran could be next. Then b) the resource rip-offs in general; see Perkins' "Economic Hit Man." Finally c) the failure of the democracies in Aus, UK, US and Israel, all a-c summarised as the wannabe hegemon, its illegal sprog and poodle with dag, all in greater or lesser degree (mass-) murdering for spoil. These are the worst and most criminal of thugs.
The lack and bending of information is thanks to the mostly venal and corrupt MSM (incl. big bits'a the AusBC & SBS - boo! Hiss!) It is this lack and bending which seeks redress in Webdiary. I, for one, am smarter and more knowledgeable; but it appears that the sheople® are neither by very much, if any at all. Recall MK's 2002 lament:
"Remember - disbelieve. We are being lied to."
Dear reader, what's changed, 5 years on?
-=*end*=-
PS Some reference must be made to the Webdiary model. Not all opinions are valid or equal, nor all posters of equal merit. Their "Hail fellow well met!" patter is particularly galling when used on known baddies. Civil discourse with the Devil is probably impossible, and the mere association with criminals is dangerous. As the results show.
My blog is called "¡no more of the same!" for a good reason.
Ref(s):
[1] Oh, alright; one last *smack!* For JW/PM, the following key-words: specious, fallacious & ridiculous. Your pitiful attempts at denying my JW=PM evidence do not even rate as specious, your 'arguments' vis-à-vis inflation and M3 are only fallacious and your overall performance invites total ridicule. By the bagfuls. And thanks to an Anonymous posting referring me to an indymedia item, I now know how to treat trolls: a) identify then b) ignore. Their, their & bye!
[cross-posted]
2 comments:
Hello Phil,
David Roffey has written and published his "management update" on Webdiary in which there are serious allegations/accusations as well as numerous material innaccuracies.
David has engaged in malicious misrepresentation of what occured, probably because I have evidence of him lying about something.
I send this to Webdiary Directors and Editors requesting that it be published as a fair 'right of reply':
The characterisation of my comments and communications by email as a "small blizzard" is a misrepresentation of what included a great many duplicate or copy comments caused by software problems, numerous simple syntax editing requests where editors had missed the mistakes in comments, several comments notifying the editors of formatting issues on the site caused by html mistakes by other people submitting comment, thank you notes, and so forth. The misrepresentation as a "small blizzard" also implies a motive to cause 'snow in' the editors or cause some 'damage'; a motive that I simply did not have.
The numbers of comments with the 'types' listed furthers that misrepresentation of the nature of my comments. Of those comments not published (26) the minority were 'ignoring' Margo's edict that "we do not publish debate on the identity of other webdiarists". In fact, I marked most, if not all, comment on the issue of identity (in general as well as in the specific) -- Not For Publication.
There were a number of comments, amongst those that I did seek to be published, which included questions about the application of Webdiary Ethics and the Editorial Policy. All of those comments were raised in a manner that was clearly within what is 'allowed' under the published Editorial Policy. For example, I submitted comments/questions about David Roffey claiming publicly to be unaware of the person registered as Paul Morrella submitting defamatory comments about the mental health of another person who'd been a Webdiary 'customer'. I asked such questions in the interests of ensuring that Webdiary was accountable and transparent. There is evidence of David Roffey having seen and added his own comment supportive of those defamatory comments by the person registered on Webdiary as Paul Morrella.
Margo Kingstons emails to me do not convey the message that David Roffey says they did with the clarity in which he presents the message to have supposed to have been. I took it that Margo herself was busy and I did not contact her again for a number of weeks. I only contacted Margo again to raise an issue of application of the Editorial Policy and that was due to the Editorial Policy itself stating that issues should be escalated to Margo as part of the normal process.
At no point did Margo advise me that she had extended the 'suspension', which I had appealed in accordance with the process set out in the Editorial Policy. I can clarify this by publication of all correspondence by email between Margo and I dealing with this issue.
It is not true that in September I created a number of other identities, including identity theft of at least one other real person.
Phil, if it is okay with you I'd be happy to submitted copies of the correspondence between Margo Kingston and I for publication here.
Sorry I can't offer this as an exclusive or anything as for the truth to out I have to make the complete conversation record available to all outlets.
Post a Comment