-=*=-
How exquisitely apposite!
«With regard to Geoff's saying you [meant is DD/HH] write things that aren't meant to be read, perhaps he's suggesting that you use your blog to "vent". That you are letting off steam rather then [sic] writing something considered for a target audience.»
[Tony Powers Thursday, October 11, 2007 at 00:20 ]
Venting (one's spleen), or opinionating[1] (unsubstantiated rubbish) would in itself be relatively undamaging (like other forms of self-abuse/release, like masturbation, eh Sol?) - if a) it was done exclusively 'in private,' and if b) it hadn't been for one (criminal!?) stunt, namely the deployment of the
Jay White = Paul Morrella = lying fraud and troll, and then the subsequent re-entry into Webdiary of a swag of DD/HH-refos.
-=*=-
The above heading-keywords are some of the answers to "What are ya?"
That question must be posed because of what you lot have over time posted; now I do not claim to have read everything, everywhere you (filthy!) lot have been, (most of my time is actually and better spent elsewhere), but just to be sure, I list (some[*]) of whom this missive is directed towards:
1. DD/HH, aka David Davis/Harry Heidelberg: the arch-opinionator[1a].
2. GP, aka Geoff Pahoff: the arch-pseud[2] Zionist.
3. Pa, Pa & lit'ly (pron. Pa(Huh?) - Pa(Sss!) - and little-Eee...), aka Pahoff, Parsons & lyvers: part of the local amateur Israel lobby (but see next).
4. C Parsons = Eliot Ramsey = lying fraud and troll.
5. Jay White = Paul Morrella = lying fraud and troll.
6. Two more prime perpetrators, Michael Park & Justin Obodie, the latter known to be a pseudo-[2a] (and not 'just' by name).
7. Any left-over rest[*], Craig Warton, Kathy Farrelly & Hyacinth (the latter a self-confessed and unrepentant children's-minds abuser).
-=*=-
What each and every one of the above perpetrators have in common, is that they have expressed negative opinions of me personally - in direct contrast to what I write about - in other words, they have attacked the messenger, not always or instead of attacking the message. Under free speech - and especially on the internet - one may in general say what one likes; Voltaire misattributed: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." However, when anyone comes out in support if the crimes - bloody big crimes - of the US, UK, Aus & Israel - I feel that I have not just the right, but the solemn duty to object, and that's exactly what this missive is: an humungous objection to injustice, and those who push and/or support it.
-=*=-
An aside: Contrary to any (scandalous!) allegations from the likes of David Roffey, Margo Kingston and/or David Davis/Harry Heidelberg, I do not give a flying f**k about the 'true' identity of any poster; the problem is the deception involved in knowingly deploying a pseudonym - with the dual-prime purposes of deception and performing mischief - and then further compounding the offence by lying about it. Lies are lies, and *one lie* is usually enough to destroy *all* credibility; the identity frauds of JW/PM and CP/ER are hardly on the scale of 'little whites.' The reasoning here is that the lying does not start then stop with the pseudonym, it is carried over by the perpetrators into them pushing the standard, lying paradigm - which alleges, for example, that the US and Israel are justified in their modus operandi, when in fact they (the US and Israeli *regimes*) are murdering in order to steal, and spinning endless and filthy lies as attempted camouflage.
Lies which are passed on to us, via the MSM *including* the publicly financed AusBC & SBS (boo! Hiss!) And these lies are also being pushed by most if not all of the above mentioned perpetrators.
In opposing me personally, the above mob of *paradigm-tools* (yeah; rhymes with fools) oppose my cause, which is in general justice via truth, and specifically to stop the lies, stop the cheating rip-offs, stop the killing and stop the bloody, murdering wars!
Oh, yeah, and stop the CO2-caused greedastrophe®, before it stops us.
-=*end*=-
PS Yes, this is a big spit. And also yes, it is complicated. It is caused by the cognitive dissonance aroused when confronted with massive hypocrisy, i.e. the above or their ilk saying one thing (like "Truth, justice and the 'Merkin way!") but doing the absolute opposite, i.e. lying, cheating, murdering for spoil; US (plus UK & Aus in support) murdering for oil, Israel murdering for land, water. And the conscious misbehaviour of the above-listed perpetrators to rev me further up. Someone has to point all this out; the disgust I feel compels me. But I tell you this (for no extra charge): I would much rather be left in peace, to enjoy every part of every pico-sec.
Harry Heidelberg:
«I don't do debates.
I don't provide evidence.
I don't provide references.
I don't Google on behalf of others.
I issue opinions. I do so in the manner of a sage or cult leader.
If that makes me a boring, opinionated old fart, then I plead guilty. I would also point out that many sages have such characteristics as do cult leaders. It is only the weak who are attracted.
Stay tuned for my next pronouncement from on high.»
[Monday, September 24, 2007 at 21:27]
What complete and utter bullshit! What supreme arrogance! What an arse.
-=*=-
Ref(s):
[1] opinionated adj. dogmatic in one's opinions. [POD]
[1a] -or suffix forming nouns denoting esp. an agent (actor; escalator) or condition (error; horror). [Latin] [ibid.]
[2] pseud colloq. —adj. (esp. intellectually) pretentious; not genuine. —n. such a person; poseur. [from *pseudo-] [ibid.]
[2a] pseudo- comb. form (also pseud- before a vowel) 1 false; not genuine (pseudo-intellectual). 2 resembling or imitating (pseudo-acid). [Greek pseudes false] [ibid.]
[?] The pseudo-word "definately."
Whose is it?
Recently in the DD/HH-blog:
a) JW 4
b) SW 3
c) JO 3
d) CW 2
e) Gif.boy 1
From WD 2007 (spell-checked by Eds?):
SW 2
CP/ER 1
Surjit Wadhwa 1
Are they all dyslexic/illiterate? (Haw!)
«definately
Idiot-speak for "definitely". One of the most common moronic misspellings found on the internet.»
[urbandictionary]
[*] If anyone feels left out or insufficiently insulted, by all means feel free to yammer out a complaint. (yammer colloq. or dial. —n. 1 lament, wail, grumble. 2 voluble talk. —v. utter a yammer. [Old English] [POD])
[cross posted]
52 comments:
Phil, I made the mistake of clicking on the link you provide and got onto some execrable blog that has gathered to its bosom the greatest collection of losers I've ever witnessed.
Why should it matter to you what anyone on that inferior blog thought?
G'day Daniel,
agree about execrable blog and its nefarious inhabitants etc; I have an answer in the form of a riddle:
Q: Why do crims try to rob banks?
A: Because that's where the money is.
It amazes me how many blogs engage in mindless trivia, Phil, and how many people spend time contributing to them and vie with each other for the most vulgar and/or asinine comment.
I hope you can get your blog up and running soon and focus on the serious world issues that I know concern you.
Given the parlous state of the world there's no time to waste! Good luck!
"It amazes me how many blogs engage in mindless trivia, Phil, and how many people spend time contributing to them and vie with each other for the most vulgar and/or asinine comment"
Daniel, what have you changed in the world lately with your blog?
Just keep reading it, Craig. You'll find out eventually!
G'day boys,
nice to see you having a friendly chat; I'd join you except that I'm a bit tied up with family.
Nevertheless, I'd like to put up one thought: some people think blogs have the ability to change the world, others think that the world is unchangeable (by mere mortals such as we.) The reality must lie between the extremes (even including right at each end); but one thing is certain (to me) and that is: "Enjoy every part of every pico-sec." The important thing vis-a-vis blogging is that we (the honest united) row in roughly the same direction, eh?
'See' y's lay-dah & regards.
Phil, its not cynical on my part. I simply dont think that a blog (however well intentioned) will change anything. Simply put, I think they are nothing more than a chance to "talk" with a range of people. Most of it is venting, and that goes for all blogs irrespective of political affiliation.
Is there anything wrong in that? Not at all. Face it though, most people come here or any other site from other blogs. If they comment its because they totally agree or totally disagree with you. I am the latter camp, but despite that I dont bear you any ill will at all. Same with you Daniel by the way.
I just put up a comment or two as I please and dont lose any sleep about it.
Enjoy the family time Phil, Im off to a dinner with my son.
"I just put up a comment as I please and I don't lose any sleep over it!"
Then why bother, Craig? If you're not sincere then take up lawn bowls or pocket billiards and stay away from blogs especially those which are trying in their small way to make the world a better place.
Is that your role in life, Craig: to be a spoiler?
As I said before Daniel, how have your comments on here or any other blog "made the world a better place"
Do you have any verifiable, measurable data to show you have?
Just one example will do.
Whats wrong with people playing lawn bowls, or even pocket billiards if that s your cup of tea anyway?
Freedom of choice........
Apostrophes and question marks have an important place in written communication, Craig.
Perhaps you should do a bit of research into their purpose. It might help to make your comments a little clearer. Cheers!
Maybe you could just take a stab in the dark and answer the question?
Perhaps I could be of some help here.
Consider being a passenger in a car heading over a cliff.
Q: Do you
a) sit there quietly with your mouth firmly shut, or
b) request the driver to take evasive action?
Craig, I would urge you to look at the Google Ranking of Seeking Utopia. Compare it with other established blogs you often leave your frequently rushed and ill-thought out comments on.
If you do I'm sure you'll get the answer you're looking for though it probably won't make you happy.
Craig, I have the feeling that you're not really such a bad fellow. Why don't you stop knocking everyone who is trying to do something positive on the Internet and try in your own way to make the world a better place for your son? Cheers.
A little bit judgemental aren't we Daniel?
I can leave comments when and where I like - and in any form I choose to.
I have looked at your blog Daniel, quite a few times as a matter of fact. I always find your simplistic remarks on religion amusing while I find your comments on homosexuality disturbing.
Quite what answer I should get out of that I am not certain.
Thanks for deciding I may not be a bad fellow. I can go to bed in peace now.
Phil, if the driver wont take evasive action would you do it for him?
Gee, Craig, I see from your comment that you're being judgmental.
There's a certain irony there!
*plonk*
Seeking Utopia is ranked 263,682nd by Technorati.
In comparison, Damian's blog is ranked 129,395th, Webdiary is ranked 96,541st and Tim Blair is ranked 4,908th.
Yeah, Anonymous, and Seeking Utopia is rated by Google as 5/10, the same as Webdiary and Lavatus Prodeo. Damian comes in as 4/10 and Club Chaos at 3/10!
So what? Small things amuse small minds, I guess!
How does one find a Google ranking?
I'm really not surprised by Warboy's view of the world.
From his perspective he must engaged in always pointless conversation. Warboy must always engage in banal talk that never leads to meaningful thought, nor through that means to any meaningful action by anybody.
If I spent so much time (in-between trolling two or three sites on the entire world wide web) constantly cramming my mind with minutia like model railway wheel profiles or SS Uniform Patches and such, then I'd probably see things the same was as widdle Warboy.
Anonymous said...
How does one find a Google ranking?
Here: http://www.prchecker.info/check_page_rank.php
Bitter little coward arent you Rowley.
No wonder webdiary doesnt want you.
Bitter? Little? Coward?
I'm not any of those things, widdle Warboy.
You want to debate issues of substance? ... well c'mon widdle Warboy, I'm quite prepared for that.
You want to stack up you pathetic post on Webdiary and cowardly call-it-quits after receiving a few critical comments vs my long list of posts with hugh numbers of comments some of which have been highly critical and my record of continuing to hold my own against detractors? ...well c'mon widdle Warboy. I'm quite prepared for that as well.
You want to make it real high stakes, come face to face, slug it out mano et mano? ... well c'mon widdle Warboy. I'm quite prepared for that as well.
By the way, widdle Warboy, nothing is as clear cut as you imagine...
When I resigned as a director of Webdiary, Margo sent me numerous emails seeking my return. I wasn't satisfied with what she offered because it didn't address the core issue I had raised with her.
It was only when Margo Kingston was completely stressed out by the pending publication of "Still Not Happy, John!" and felt she couldn't face dealing with the mess created by her earlier poor decisions and David Roffey's lies compounding the problem that she took the easier (and unethical) option of ignoring her own Ethics and Editorial Policy to ban me for two weeks.
So, widdle Warboy, the reality is that I was banned for making the same kind of complaint to Margo as you had before you wrote "Nothing is as clear cut as you imagine...".
I have the proof of that in the email exchanges between her and I.
Your record?
The biased moderation and dummy spits when the other mods dont agree with you?
Oh I would be real proud of that stuff too. It must make you feel pretty good about yourself.
Holding your own..you mean against C Parsons and Jay White. You jest surely, unless by holding your own you mean conducting vindictive campaigns to try and have them banned. Yes, bad to ban Phil but fine to ban others you dont agree with. I dont agree with you being banned by the way Phil, I dont get your posts but I wouldnt have banned you.
oh and you want to be a real hero now and threaten physical voilence.
What a joke you are.
Just saw your other comment below the other one.
"Whatever"
Get a life, or let someone put the oxygen to use who might appreciate it.
You prove yourself a dickhead with evey comment you make, widdle Warboy.
Again, one more time so your moronic mind can absorb and process it - nothing is as clear cut as you imagine...
I'm actually on record within the Webdiary management team's internal communications advocating dealing with Chris Parsons' (aka Eliot Ramsey's) baiting, trolling and 'remorseless ridicule' routine by means other than banning!
It was David Roffey who decided in the end to ban "C Parsons", but not do anything about his return as "Eliot Ramsey" because Margo was upset that David did impose the ban without consulting her.
And I didn't seek the banning of Jay White (aka Paul Morrella) either. David Roffey did that as well. Again, I'm on record advocating means other than banning to deal with the Jay/Paul breaking Editorial Policy to target and abuse Phil.
Are you paranoiac? Projecting, perhaps? Feeling less certain about your ability to "play the hero" against a "bitter, little, coward" who happens to in fact be a large man, younger, physically stronger as well as smarter than you who reserves an ascerbic tone for retort to twats just like you?
Now I know you're upset because you can't handle a serve coming your way and that you're a scaredy shaking in your SS boots, but I haven't threatened physical violence, widdle Warboy.
Besides, if it came to it, widdle Warboy, I'm confident that I'm capable of handling you physically using non-violent means.
oh dear, I am really out of my league here.
You do indeed seem to be the perfect man.
I will google "Gay Gym" for you and get you some numbers.
Such perfection deserves a wider audience
Fabulous, now I'll be able to show David Davis how his widdle mate Warboy has tried to use homosexuality today. Thanks.
Thats quite alright yelwor, you are so full of yourself that I figured it might be appreciated there, hell make it a straight gym if that makes you feel better
Idiot
It would seem that you feel the need to switch what type of gym it is, widdle Warboy. Why is that? Afraid of what David Davis will think of you?
No dipstick, just widening your options.
You really are a pretentious twat and so full of yourself too.
I know you will want to have the last word and thats fine by me because you are a waste of space and time
Ahhh ... so Craig Warton ... widdle Warboy ... wants to play the last word game ... okay, now what shall I say? How about this:
Widdle Warboy says he thinks 'blogs' are nothing more than a chance to "talk" with a range of people. He says he thinks most of it is just people venting. He says he thinks that's a waste of space and time.
In a hypocritcal manner, widdle Warboy also apparently thinks anyone else venting is something he should vent about.
Look at his track record. He spends hours at it. He writes a whole essay on it and how "normal" he thinks he is by comparison and submits it to Webdiary for publication. He cops a little criticism and then makes himself nemisis of each he feels to be critical of him. He spends so much time clicking between 'blogs' to drop little spitful, childish comments about each person he's decided to lash out at. He almost never writes about anything that might matter in the world (because he's projected his own sense of impotence onto everyone in the world?.) Instead, he seems to feel fine about being a complete hypocrit, wasting his precious time (better spent on scale model building I suppose) shooting of his widdle weak missives.
Why? Who really knows? Widdle Warboy probably doesn't even really know.
His colleagues at work wouldn't understand it. Why does Craig Warton do this day and night, week in and week out, they'd wonder. Why does he try to pick fights with people whose views he thinks matter not one iota? Why does he waste such much of his time on stuff he says is a waste of time and space?
His neighbours would be likely to think that whilst they always sensed there was something strange about Warton, they'd never have imagined the venting they can see he's been doing on the Internet.
His kids certainly wouldn't get it, nor would their friends, or their friends folks. They'd just think "Freak."
They'd all be likely to end up thinking that upon reading widdle Warboy's constant venting at things he says he sees as so trivial, so unimportant. They'd see it as something weird, something very strange and sad about widdle Warboy.
His wife probably wouldn't really understand fully, but she would recognise his nasty and childish side coming out when he feels frustrated. So would his mother.
They'd look and they'd see widdle Warboy, a flabby wimpy man in his forties, using childish means to lash out in a pitiful attempt to feel some kind of potency he doesn't have in any real interaction.
Perhaps some would realise that this is why, when he's not doing his pointless venting on the Internet, he spends so much time thinking about, if not actually playing with his train set, and obsessing about, getting pendantic with people about minutia, inconsequential stuff like the correct patches on SS uniforms or insignia on SS belt straps. They'd start to comprehend why he gets so het-up about stuff that matters to no-one but those also seeking escape in a similar way to him.
Some of them in the end might even come to understand that it's all about trying to feel something a little more than totally impotent.
Meanwhile, it's highly likely that widdle Warboy will keep showing us how much of a wanker as well as a hypocrit he is ... and come back to try and secure the last word.
Pretenious enough for you, pitiable widdle Warboy?
I had a whole reply written out to put on here after reading that.
But you know what Craig?
You arent worth the effort.
Only worth the effort to write all that then trash, eh?
Poor we widdle Warboy.
Grow up Rowley.
Can't you see what a fool you are making of yourself.
It's not Craig W who is the freak, it's you.
Well, you and your mate Phil the Dill.(It's a photo finish)
I have read many of Craig W's posts, and I think that he is a decent nice guy.
You, on the other hand, are quite a nasty intimidating piece of work!
Let it go Yelwor. C'mon be a REAL man , not a little boy eh?
HELL HATH NO FURY LIKE A COUPLE OF FORMER WEBDIARISTS SCORNED! LOL!
Feeling the need to look after poor widdle Warboy like you do your autistic boy, eh Krassy Farrelly?
He's unable to look after himself so you have to be the REAL man, Krassy?
Like I said, a nasty piece of work.
Thanks for proving my point Yelwor!
Kath Packs away fishing rod, and heads for home.
Turns around and blows Yelwor a kiss! Tee hee.
And in the distance beyond the waves, a faint voice echos....
Hell hath no fury like a former webdiarist scorned!
BWWWWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Looks like David Davis aka Harry Heidelberg aka Harr'äh has closed his blog.
"It amazes me how many blogs engage in mindless trivia, Phil, and how many people spend time contributing to them and vie with each other for the most vulgar and/or asinine comment."
I made this comment earlier in this thread. I thought that perhaps it was worth repeating!
Daniel, please dont keel over here but I agree with you. I should not have bitten in the first place and even responded.
Craig, you can hurl any invective at me you choose I really am not bothered by it.
But your remark about Kathy's child was way out of line and you should be ashamed of yourself
If you have any grace or decency at all you would put an apology up.
Phil and Daniel, we have a fundamental disagreement about what blogging can acheive. Thats cool, I respect your opinion.
I wish both of you well with your endeavours.
The remark I made about Krassy's son is nothing for me to be ashamed of. It was a mere statement of fact. He is autistic. No apology necessary.
If Krassy wants an apology for my mentioning that she seems motivated to constantly play a mothing role for your when you can't handle someone giving you a serve in return, and if she can give a good reasoning for why an apology for pointing that out is warranted, then I'll consider it.
She may want to make a few apologies of her own, eh?
Apols. Should be "...she seems motivated to constantly play a mothing role for you when you can't handle someone giving you a serve in return ..."
Apols again. What the heck is "mothing"? Banging your head against a bright light?
It should be: "...she seems motivated to constantly play a mothering role for you when you can't handle someone giving you a serve in return ..."
ROFLMAO!
Well, we've seen a substantial reduction in the trolling activities of Harr'äh refos these past few days and let's hope it remains that way so the focus can be on the important issues rather than the antics of idiots.
Speaking of important issues, Sol Salbe recommends thinking people read this article by Daniel Levy:
http://www.haaretzcom/hasen/spages/914599.html
Sol suggests bringing it to the attention of your local MP and that's an entirely sensible suggestion.
I do hope that both incumbents and candidates, especially those who are potential Cabinet members in the next government of whatever stripe are scrutinised on this issue.
Who will and who will not blindly support US pre-emptive strikes on any country should be something made clear to electors.
Whoops ... I'd copied the link Sol suggested from what Margo Kingston published on Webdiary and it doesn't work because she's dropped the dot between haaretz and com. The correct URL is:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/914599.html
G'day Phil, thought you may be interested in the work being done to expose who stumps up the money to fund Murder for Oil, etc:
http://www.mediatransparency.com/wherethemoneyleads.php
yelwor, ths post on Phils blog was about Sydneysphere, not about anything else. Still as you said the attention can now be focussed on the antics of idiots. You of course being the prime example.
Speaking of Phil, he is been rather quiet. Hope all is well Phil.
Ahhh ... so Craig Warton ... widdle Warboy ... did end up playing the last word game ... okay, now what shall I say? How about this:
Widdle Warboy says he thinks 'blogs' are nothing more than a chance to "talk" with a range of people. He says he thinks most of it is just people venting. He says he thinks that's a waste of space and time.
In a hypocritcal manner, widdle Warboy also apparently thinks anyone else venting is something he should vent about.
... oh, hang on, I said that before and widdle Warboy needed his mommy Krassy Farrelly to come to his aid.
G'day world.
Craig w, your concern is touching.
Craig Rowley, thanks for the mediatransparency link.
As to my absence, I'm OK but my PC isn't; total re-build (software) required and not yet complete.
See y's all lay-dah! (i.e. soonest.)
Craig, you can vent all you want I am not bothered in the least. Just most of your venting seems to revolve around obsessing about me, which I find rather odd. But each to their own.
Glad you are ok Phil.
Post a Comment