Personal attacks on contributors by Jonathon
by Jonathon Blakeley
Friday, August 3rd, 2012
My latest email from Laura Stuart. I would like to know what our readers think?
Good Morning Editors,
I include all of you in this email as I have nothing to say that I need to say behind anyones back.
Jonathon is continuing his campaign of childish and personal attacks on the comments section today.
Even if Jonathon happens to support political views which differ from myself and Khalid Amayreh surely it is not wise, correct, professional etc for one of the editors to attack posters in public on the comments section?
If Jonathon has an issue with contributors and posters surely he could address his issues with us by email or by phone?
I am amazed that an editor would praise so highly those commentators who his views are in line with and be so rude towards those who are of a different view, in public on the comments section.
Don’t sites usually say that the site may not necessarily agree with the views of the authors and leave it at that?
What is going on ?
regards Laura Stuart
Posted by Jonathon Blakeley
on August 3, 2012. Filed under Dissidence.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
419 Responses to Personal attacks on contributors by Jonathon
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 6:31 pm
sounds like she is going for censorship and shunning (their word), rather than discussion and deliberation. in my opinion, it stinks, to put it mildly.
now “who” also does that?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 6:46 pm
Yes Exactly, Laura has been calling for me to be silent. I am not allowed to express myself, i must follow the party line as approved by the D.S.G. (Deliberation Sunni Gang & co)
I have had email asking me to restrict my use of comments, Which i was shocked at.
Laura complained about me using the editor account and the deliberation account to post materials,.
She complained about me posting Press TV material
She complained about Daniel Mabsoout and me giving Alex an account.
There is more….
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 7:07 pm
that’s really bad and what one would expect of the greenstain crowd. or the crowd cosmo represents. it’s their tactics to shut out opposing views.
Blake
August 3, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Laura and that Khaled character are like ticking time bombs if I may give my 2 cents. If one does not agree with them they get offended and attack so I find that very hypocritical to say the least. Not that I have anything against them mind you. Live and let live and all that jazz.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 6:53 pm
Laura’s other favourite trick is of course to play the victim card, which she inevitably plays when her ideas are criticised.
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 7:10 pm
yup, it helps to make the other person look like “the oppressive bad guy” and is a very common debate manipulation trick.
Blake
August 3, 2012 at 9:36 pm
Much like the zionists do.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 7:18 pm
It was always my belief that deLiberation has no party line.
As such I think the whole idea of ‘professionalism’ is quite dubious anyway – if L is willing to call J ‘politically naive’ publicly, does she really believe that he should not respond in kind publicly as well?
To me, the idea of a ‘neutral editor’ is the same as the idea of ‘impartial journalists’, fictions which were created to bolster the idea that the corporate media gives us balanced news, when in fact it is biased to the hilt and ultimately represents the interests of the corporate owners, even if they do allow the odd ‘extreme’ voice now and then.
I do think we would all benefit from fewer personal attacks.
etominusipi
August 3, 2012 at 10:23 pm
Roy wrote To me, the idea of a ‘neutral editor’ is the same as the idea of ‘impartial journalists’, fictions which were created to bolster the idea that the corporate media gives us balanced news, when in fact it is biased to the hilt and ultimately represents the interests of the corporate owners, even if they do allow the odd ‘extreme’ voice now and then.
i quite agree.
deLiberation is to be praised for allowing a platform to certain people whose agenda is very suspect. let them ply their propaganda – it is useful study material to those, like myself, who attentively study the microstructure of false ideologies.
since Jonathon does not, unlike many other forum editors, deny expression to those he disagrees with, why should he not let us know his personal opinion, presented simply as that.
there’s always Harry’s Place, for Gaw_d’s sake.
i have already delivered my fatwah. L.S and K.A. are not muslim. they are not submitted to the will of God. they express a narrow-minded and hate-based agenda which has nothing in common with the revelations of any genuine prophet.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 7:57 pm
“Jonathon is continuing his campaign of childish and personal attacks on the comments section today.”
FALSE. Jon is engaged in no campaign, unless by “campaign” Laura means any post contradicting her views after the first one to which she replied with condescension, nonsense and puerile attempts of intimidation.
Personal attacks I have not discerned in ANY post by Jon but did in those of Laura, who makes rude and tasteless suppositions about people’s personal lives.
“Even if Jonathon happens to support political views which differ from myself and Khalid Amayreh surely it is not wise, correct, professional etc for one of the editors to attack posters in public on the comments section?”
“Even if”?!? Even if he dares, that is?
It is silly to claim that the editors are not allowed to have personal opinions or to comment. In the Islam-according to-Laura that might be true but not anywhere on the web. Whatever she thinks “professional” means, to demand that the editors abstain form participating in the dialog is ridiculous.
I am not sure what “views which differ from myself and Khalid Amayreh” means. Does she considers herself and the other luminary views? And acn she and the luminary once and for all decide on WAHT HIS NAME is?! There is it spelled in yet another version. For Laura, who likes to ake names, that should be important.
“If Jonathon has an issue with contributors and posters surely he could address his issues with us by email or by phone?”
How come? In the first paragraph you saids:
“I include all of you in this email as I have nothing to say that I need to say behind anyones back.”
You have a habit of twisting what people say and even lying upfront (“support for Assad”s murders”) so why would anyone want to discuss anything with you privately which you could then lie about publicly?
“I am amazed that an editor would praise so highly those commentators who his views are in line with and be so rude towards those who are of a different view, in public on the comments section.’
I am instead amazed that spammers like you and your sidekick, who have filled deLib with kilometer-long posts after post of insults and inanities have not been banned yet. Have you convinced anyone you are a victim? You, who suffered so much already, as you never tired of mentioning, in Israeli prisons, you have dragged your child to demonstrations? You, the white hope of “real Islam”! They dare contradict you!
Don’t sites usually say that the site may not necessarily agree with the views of the authors and leave it at that?
If the persecution you have been enduring has been so terrible why don’t you find a hand-chopping and flogging-friendly site better suited to your idea of debate?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 7:58 pm
If you looking for a neutral dumb editor you got the wrong guy, You have choices to make about quality control and ethics here. Becuase deliberation is not living up to its lofty aspirations, it is sinking into the gutter of misinfo and hate speech.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 8:02 pm
Well since Jonathon has decided to publish my email to the editors personal email addresses, there are a couple of points I would like to make.
Firstly, I was not expecting an e.mail that I sent to the editors to be published, if I had wanted to publish my views on Jonathons comments I would have published it on the site myself. The fact that an editor of deLiberation would publish an email from a contributor where no permission was sought or given might be of concern to people who would not expect their emails to appear in public. I guess in future any emails we send to the editor or to Jonathon’s e.mail we have to specify if it is for publication or not. Surely an issue of professional integrity?
Secondly, the comments I made about editors making personal attacks in the comments section against contributors, is a fair criticism – whilst deLiberation has a policy of free speech, the editors have spent a few days trying to moderate the comments section from personal insults, so it is my opinion that it would be unprofessional for the editors then to engage in personal insults themselves.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 8:10 pm
” I guess in future any emails we send to the editor or to Jonathon’s e.mail we have to specify if it is for publication or not. Surely an issue of professional integrity?”
Oh, shucks! From now on you won’t be able to say anything behind people’s backs? Does it mean you have to stick to your hypocritical statement: “I have nothing to say that I need to say behind anyones back”?!
Professional integrity… hard to tell if you have any not knowing what your profession is, because, you know, some professions are more lax than others.
“Secondly, the comments I made about editors making personal attacks in the comments section against contributors, is a fair criticism – whilst deLiberation has a policy of free speech, the editors have spent a few days trying to moderate the comments section from personal insults, so it is my opinion that it would be unprofessional for the editors then to engage in personal insults themselves.”
That’s just repeating the same a combination of lies (personal insults from any of the editors) with silly stuff to which you think you lend credence by repeating the word “professional” like a mantra.
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 9:05 pm
In the spirit of helping to raise the standard of dialogue, I would like to say that you are all mother-fucking, cunt-sucking, shit-eating, piss-drinking, ass-poking, cum-dripping, cock-licking, snot-swallowing sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers of whores, bitches, mongrels and bastards.
This is a test of the free speech tolerance settings of this website.
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Hmmmm.
I’m still here, so the settings must be pretty low. We might want to adjust them a bit. We may wish to publish and enforce a protocol. Here are some poassible standards for consideration:
1. No use of disrespectful language against posters.
2. No personal aspersions and no insults against posters.
3. No ad hominem attacks against each other.
All postings that contain such will be deleted and repeated use will result in blocking.
Please note that I did not say anything about such attacks against persons, ideas or entities that are the subject of postings. That would leave me with nothing to write. However, I am concerned that some of the postings might appear to be racist in nature, i.e. characterizations of entire populations without consideration of variation within a given population or the essential humanity of every person.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:15 pm
“1. No use of disrespectful language against posters.
2. No personal aspersions and no insults against posters.
3. No ad hominem attacks against each other.”
That sounds all good in theory but if you want to apply it you’ll find you have to start building a thesaurus of forbidden words that qualify as ‘aspersions,” “insults,” and even “disrespectful.”
Even then there are ways to go around it, like: “you are such an intelligent gal, I am amazed you can say such an idiotic thing of rank imbecility.” Is that ad hominem? No, supposedly it is about the opponent’s statement not about the person whois in fact “praised.”
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 9:21 pm
Test accomplished, now you can erase it. I’ll try mine, if you don’t mind, which uses terms more en vogue on delLb.
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 9:28 pm
Sure, go ahead and erase it, especially if it is a first step to establishing standards. Is there a way for me to do it or can only Jonathon do it?
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 9:30 pm
can you see a edit button under your post?
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 9:33 pm
No, only on pieces that I publish, in which case I can edit my own and everyone else’s as well.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 9:44 pm
ok – maybe it timed out. I think it should stay because it makes a good point
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 9:46 pm
although I would like to deny ever swallowing snot…..
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:12 pm
Neah, I don’t feel like scrolling through Jay’s posts for invectives directed at feeble-minded stalinists or Laura I-Am-Islam cum K 3.5 Posters for those directed at anti-semitic Syrian agents who support Assad
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 9:17 pm
I agree
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 9:19 pm
YOu forgot gandfather-fucker a great icelandic insult
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 9:23 pm
They are gerontophobes in Iceland? What do they have against old people? Some of us are nice and still nimble
etominusipi
August 3, 2012 at 10:37 pm
είστε γαμημένο
με κάνει να ουρλιάζουν Ariadna
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:51 pm
I have “little Latin and less Greek”
Speak demotic to me or forever hold thy peace
Somoe
August 3, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Now if it were to be ‘ great-grandfather fucker’, it would be a completely difference sentence:-D
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:13 pm
That would be necrophilia–different set of prefereces altogether
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 11:03 pm
“That would be necrophilia–different set of prefereces altogether”
not necessarily. about 15 years ago i worked with a great-grandma and her daughter, a grandma. grandma’s daughter had a 1 or 2 year old baby girl. that makes her the great-grandma’s great-granddaughter. great-grandma was 56 years old. so it’s possible (probable, since she was in good health then) great-grandma would still be alive 15 years or so later and that she and great-granddaughter would be able to engage in sexual intercourse while great-grandma was still alive. in fact, being as it was 15 years ago, it is conceivable that great-grandma and great-granddaughter are going at it as i write this.
although it is extremely, extremely unlikely they would do such a thing.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:10 pm
And all progeny of first cousins?
Oklahoma? Descendants of the McCoys?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Anyway despite all the control freakery I just want to express myself I aint used any those bad words Barb did. Tsk…
so what’s the problem.
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 9:57 pm
Honestly, I find the words used by others to demean each other far more offensive than the ones I used. What I used was merely disgusting, while the others are hurtful. I would definitely like to see some standards in place. If not the ones I suggested, please offer your own.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:15 pm
I agree but one thing you gotta hand Barb: she is not an anti-semite like the rest of us.
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 10:21 pm
I only just arrived and have a lot to learn.
etominusipi
August 3, 2012 at 10:49 pm
Barb, your subtle and humane wit is very welcome. however, as a newcomer you should be warned that you have a counterpart war bribe who also posts under various random permutations of inert bile
i think one experiment worth trying is to serve as an online, and fully visible, experiment on how to deal with trolls in a humane way. trolls constitute a widespread nuisance on the internet, many are interested in the process, so i don’t mind undergoing a little inconvenience for the good of all.
after all, the troll, although apparently a footsoldier of subversion, is really a part of the weakest of the many weak underbellies of the adversary. a troll cannot operate without revealing to plain sight not only the schemata of its insidious agenda, but also the crucial points where it is an obvious fail as a human being.
let us not be irritated. let the trolls reveal their nature, for the benefit of the growing number of students of truth everywhere.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:55 pm
There are no students left. They ate them all.
The site, bearing the trolls’ brown grafitti, does not attract others, thus sparing the innocents.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 9:54 pm
The problem I see is this
Liberty is great but what if people use our libertarian principles against us and try to feed misinformation, half-truths and lies, to infiltrate delibeartion and subvert it to render it useless. using mis info and sowing dissent to cause it to break apart. Normally over trivial stuff I could let it ride, but hell World war three is brewing in Syria and I feel quite upset about it.
There is some horrendous lies and misinformation being spread around and those that question the established MSM view on Syria are being attacked and ridiculed.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:21 pm
Nice of you to bring us back on track, thanks, Jon.
“Normally over trivial stuff I could let it ride, but hell World war three is brewing in Syria and I feel quite upset about it.
There is some horrendous lies and misinformation being spread around and those that question the established MSM view on Syria are being attacked and ridiculed.”
True. I think spam should also be banned. At times I have seen the SAME post put there by K 3.5 seriatim.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 10:23 pm
@Jonathon
“against us and try to feed misinformation, half-truths and lies, to infiltrate delibeartion and subvert it to render it useless. using mis info and sowing dissent to cause it to break apart. Normally over trivial stuff I could let it ride, but hell World war three is brewing in Syria and I feel quite upset about it. ”
When you say “against us” was I not here right from the start ? Was I not included in the discussions and the meeting in London about how deLiberation should be? So how now it is “us”?
How do you claim the opinions of those you do not agree with are lies?
How do you make the claim that those you do not agree with came here to break deLiberation apart and break it?
These are pretty strong claims that you make and only against the two people named in virtually every one of the recent posts.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 10:36 pm
“Was I not included in the discussions and the meeting in London about how deLiberation should be? So how now it is “us”?”
Two possibilities:
1. You were duped. They fooled you by withholding form you that deLib was going to be a site for self-obsessed jews instead of one for righteous sunnis.
or
2. You duped them, i.e., reverse the above.
“How do you claim the opinions of those you do not agree with are lies?”
The opinions are never lies because they do not purport to be facts, unless you misrepresent them as such. Opinions may be delusions based on false info and poorly understood dogma. Might be your case.
“How do you make the claim that those you do not agree with came here to break deLiberation apart and break it?”
You act as if that is your goal: spamming with your sidekick, accusing your opponents of “anti-semtitism” or of being “self-obsessed jews,” trying to suppress a real debate. That can kill a site.
“These are pretty strong claims that you make and only against the two people named in virtually every one of the recent posts.”
No others behave like the two of you.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 10:36 pm
It’s true IMO Khalid and Your articles have not been well received, should we tolerate them or promote them? My argument is you are sowing misinformation consistently about Syria and what is good for it is in fact very dangerous, and we should have been more careful and considered in what we promote as truth.
You have acted as a gatekeeper at deliberation, your letter proves it and i have several other which show you trying to censor and restrict people.
So who is the libertarian, who is promoting peace and who is promting war?
Barb Weir
August 3, 2012 at 10:47 pm
I hope we are all very dangerous. And who decides what is information and misinformation? I sow nothing but disinformation and have a high tolerance for it.
Are we supposed to be promoting the truth? I want nothing to do with that. I can’t handle the truth. In fact, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen it.
I suggest letting the readers figure that out. If we want to expose lies, they have to be published somewhere first. Then we can undertake the deconstruction that we do so well – but hopefully with respect.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:04 pm
That, however, presupposes that
1. The editors still choose what and how much disinfo to publish as opposed to being badgered and threatened into accepting any offals that are pushed.
2. Disinformation is extremely useful and important to be deconstructed, I agree, but under that rubric I woldl include official pronouncements, articles from the MSM or articles that at east purport to present facts. Long screeches and howls are not disinformation, they are just noise that cannot be even commented upon much less deconstructed
3. You can let the readers figure out which of the comments on one side vs those on the other are correct, cogent, informative. If you, however, let the site DROWN in 15-20 “comments’ in a row that are repetitive, tendentious garbage then the reader will conclude THAT is what the site promotes and will never come back
4. I find it hard to imagine what can be “deconstructed with respect” in 99% of K 3.5 ‘s comments.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 10:43 pm
There is no gatekeeping on deLiberation, free speech has been the theme.
You believe that you are have the truth and those who disagree with you are telling lies, so what do you want to do – do you want to censor those views that conflict with your own? Many many people would see this site as promoting propaganda of a sectarian nature but you are not aware of that because you have more people representing the view that you hold.
If you disagree with my views it is fine by me however, you have to make a decision to censor and ban me so that my views can not be read or accept that I will defend my viewpoint.
Above all editors should not post rude and personal comments about contributors.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 10:56 pm
“There is no gatekeeping on deLiberation, free speech has been the theme.”
That clearly isn’t true as there are posters who have been banned. Eg Hamassacre, aemathisphd and Solar.
“Many many people would see this site as promoting propaganda of a sectarian nature but you are not aware of that because you have more people representing the view that you hold.”
I reckon you would struggle to find a site that has the range of views found here.
“accept that I will defend my viewpoint.”
By writing emails asking for someone else not to be allowed to express theirs? Claiming that you are not going behind anyone’s back and then complaining when the other people affected by your email get to know about it?
“Above all editors should not post rude and personal comments about contributors.”
No-one is supposed to be doing that. But they do. How did this role which dehumanises deLiberation editors suddenly come into existence? It isn’t the Guardian (where your comments would have been deleted within minutes….)
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 11:03 pm
Roy not going behind someones back by including them in the email. I could have published it myself if I wanted it to be public – true? Or why would I bother to write an email and not either publish it or post it in the comments section.
The email was about posting rude comments by an editor to contributors – true?
Who is affected by my email, I don’t understand what you mean, I sent it to the 4 of you including Jonathon, so you can not claim it was behind anyones back since it included all of the editors.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:06 pm
“Who is affected by my email”
EVERYONE.
Everyone who values Jonathan’s contribution to this site, which I guess is everyone but you.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 11:09 pm
You make a lot of assumptions don’t you Adriana.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 6:15 am
No, just one.
But of you haven’t tumbled down to it yet, you never will.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 11:09 pm
“Who is affected by my email, I don’t understand what you mean,”
The other posters are affected by your email. So am I. One proposal that followed from your email was that I shouldn’t post comments in light of my role. You asked for an authoritarian response and you certainly got one proposed.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 11:14 pm
The other posters should not have been able to read my email since it was not addressed to them.
I did not make any suggestions other than it seems unprofessional for an editor to make rude comments to contributors.
I would also advise that peoples emails should not be posted in public where they were never intended to go and no permission to publish was given. That would have saved all the commentators on here the “trauma” of having to read it wouldn’t it?
Jonathon did send us all an email requesting for suggestions to improve comments perhaps everyones emails with their comments will be published.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:23 pm
Gee, you should have copyrighted it; you could sue them now.
No “permission” is needed. You may consider your e-mail a work of creation but it isn’t “intellectual property.”
“That would have saved all the commentators on here the “trauma” of having to read it wouldn’t it?”
It wasn’t any trauma. It was a confirmation. Trauma is seeing deLib dragged into a toxic gutter by you and K 3.5.
“Jonathon did send us all an email requesting for suggestions to improve comments perhaps everyones emails with their comments will be published.”
Desperate threat, hoping people would pull back from what is a common disapproval of you and your shenanigans. Unlike you, I have nothing to be embarrassed about. Nothing in it that I haven’t said in comments, so that would be fine with me.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 11:25 pm
“Jonathon did send us all an email requesting for suggestions to improve comments perhaps everyones emails with their comments will be published.”
In fact he didn’t send that email. I did.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 11:47 pm
“I would also advise that peoples emails should not be posted in public where they were never intended to go and no permission to publish was given.”
The subject of the email was Jonathon. He published an email about himself. An email in which the author specifically stated: “I have nothing to say that I need to say behind anyones back.”
Now the author is complaining that people affected by the contents have seen it without her permission.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 11:54 pm
I meant I did not want to say anything about Jonathon behind his back.
I maintain that I said nothing wrong at all in the email, I stand by the belief that editors least of all should not tell contributors to “get lost” or otherwise make rude and personal comments about them.
There is an issue of trust and integrity when you write emails, of course Tony Greenstein loves publishing peoples emails on his website too.
Roy Bard
August 3, 2012 at 11:57 pm
So you didn’t mean “I have nothing to say that I need to say behind anyones back” at all?
You meant “I want this stitched up behind people’s backs so they don’t know what is going on”!
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:06 am
It is very wrong of you to say that Roy since I included all of the editors in the email including the one I was suggesting was out of order.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:08 am
But what you were asking for affected other people as well, so why is it wrong to say that they should also know what is going on?
Oh yes: You were the one who took it away from the boards so that they wouldn’t!
Here’s what I said in one of my emails in the ensuing discussion:
I take it I’m allowed to quote my own email?
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:19 am
Yes I didn’t take it to the discussion board, but that is because I have some integrity and don’t want to run the site down with in fighting in public.
Jonathon now makes the claim that the site decreasing in hits might be because of me, I would have to disagree since until very very recently I have hardly bothered with the comments section and the downward drift of viewers started long ago. It can hardly be blamed on my articles since they are about a rather niche group of readers, and in any case were taken off and posted mostly on Muslim/Islamic sites. So the idea that my contribution on either articles or comments can make a big difference either way on the site is a bit far of the mark.
Strange that all discussions about the site have been done for months by email between those involved from the start but now suddenly become a matter for public debate.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:26 am
“Strange that all discussions about the site have been done for months by email between those involved from the start but now suddenly become a matter for public debate.”
It isn’t strange at all – you called for Jonathon to be silenced – that then led to a suggestion that all editors should not be commenteers. It would have been fortuitous for you if me and Jonathon had been silenced and the other posters didn’t know why.
Jonathon decided to make it public, and I decided to join the discussion. Your action started this. Perhaps you should have emailed Jonathon privately before running to the others.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:33 am
@Roy how does saying that I do not think that editors should post rude comments to contributors in public become Jonathon should be silenced?
Where have I said that editors should not comment?
I said editors should not post RUDE comments and most especially when you and Paul spent days moderating comments to remove the personal attacks. You had actually managed to calm the whole board down with your moderating then along comes Jonathon telling a contributor to get lost not once but twice and then the next day it continued.
I will never find that acceptable but I have not called for editors in general or Jonathon in particular to be silenced.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:49 am
You went over Jonathon’s head to a group you perceived as having authority, and unsurprisingly, an authoritarian response was proposed.
Of the four people you emailed, 2 were in favour of a policy that people who spend time maintaining this site should not be allowed to comment. As you are now well aware, two are not in favour of that.
It isn’t impossible that this will split that group.
And it is not as if you can say that you are blameless. This whole thread is full of people letting you know that they find some of your comments objectionable, and they dislike the way that you do things.
Its a real shame that you can’t hear what they’re saying.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:35 am
“because I have some integrity and don’t want to run the site down with in fighting in public.”
I would think doing it covertly instead does not speak for integrity.
“I have hardly bothered with the comments section”
Perhaps you should have bothered. The fact that you share K’s views should not have prevented you form dissociating yourself from his lurid attacks on posters or threatening me with informing the “authorities” of my views. Instead you supported him all the way, attacking posters who criticized him. You should have “bothered.”
If you look at the other side of the debate, it is entirely different. When someone attacked you personally, badgering you about your life choices I jumped to your defense even though I make no secret of the fact that I dislike your views about… just about everything.
I share who-me’s views about issues but not necessarily all his views about where other posters ‘come from’ and we have had open debates about that. They were never debates that demeaned anyone or made the site toxic and they did not consist of 15 posts of invectives in a row like those of K that you cheered.
You are equally responsible with K for the degringolade of deLib.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:44 am
“Jonathon decided to make it public, and I decided to join the discussion. Your action started this. Perhaps you should have emailed Jonathon privately before running to the others.”
@Roy without looking back at comments I am pretty sure that I commented to Jonathon directly on the board at the time, that I found his comments bad. I also said perhaps he was going through some stress so I forgave him for his personal comments against myself.
“Running to others” I sent the email to the editors, that is not running to others that is bringing something to the attention of the editors which I felt is not right.
To turn the tables I read for the first time tonight that Jonathon feels my articles are lies, misinformation, and allegedly bringing the site down. This is not something that I have heard from Jonathon or any of the editors. I find it most strange that such an allegation would be made in public without having ever mentioned it in the many emails that used to go back and forth between Jonathon and I almost every day.
A very strange situation where I as a very minor contributor to this site who posted articles which would have been mostly of interest to fellow Muslims is suddenly and publically accused of “bringing the site down”.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 1:00 am
Roy I have never suggested that editors should not be allowed to comment so I do not know where that idea came from but not me.
Also Roy you earlier in a comment stated that deLiberation does not have a party line… bearing in mind that Nureddin Shabbir left this site because of the prevailing Syrian articles on deLiberation plus Khaled Amayreh doesn’t seem to have had an article published on here for a while and has also not commented on here today plus plus I am accused by an editor of writing lies and misinformation …. it all becomes very clear that deLiberation does in fact have a party line.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 1:10 am
“Roy I have never suggested that editors should not be allowed to comment so I do not know where that idea came from but not me.”
By a simple process of deduction it comes from the other 2 people that you emailed.
“bearing in mind that Nureddin Shabbir left this site because of the prevailing Syrian articles on deLiberation”
Perhaps that simply makes it clear that Nurredin Shabbir has a party line, and is intolerant of other peoples views. No-one prevented him from publishing his own.
“plus Khaled Amayreh doesn’t seem to have had an article published on here for a while ”
http://www.deliberation.info/america-from-a-shining-city-on-a-hill-to-virtual-jewish-fiefdom/ is from 3 days ago. He isn’t banned – nor is he forced to post if he doesn’t want to. Its up to him.
“plus I am accused by an editor of writing lies and misinformation”
And has that stopped you from posting? Are you banned? Nope to both of those.
“it all becomes very clear that deLiberation does in fact have a party line.”
If it did the answers to all the above would be different.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 10:51 am
“Roy I have never suggested that editors should not be allowed to comment so I do not know where that idea came from but not me.”
You never did explain what you thought your email would achieve. Its clear you meant it to be discussed behind closed doors.
Its clear that you think your way of seeing things is correct.
But I think your judgement is questionable:
Unless the fact that you and Khalid have never been prevented from expressing your views, or posting articles means that one sided propaganda belongs to the two of you, then this clearly untrue and wrong.
Shit stirring causes shit! Who’d have thunk it.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 11:24 am
To further explore your claim that this site has become “a propaganda outlet for a one sided view on Syria”, look at the TOP 20 Comments threads at this stage:
At the top with 431 comments is an article by Khalid – the first line of which reads:
Second is an article by Khalid with 299 comments, which includes this pearl of wisdom:
At number eight we have another Khalid diatribe “Those living by the sword shall die by the sword” which mirrors western propaganda when it bigs up the bombing of Syrian officials:
And with a lot of help from you we have this thread at number 10!
You stand by your “views that deliberation has become a propaganda outlet for a one sided view on Syria ” and yet the evidence flies in the face of it.
Your victimhood is misplaced and sad!
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 1:25 am
Roy you know what I really think ? I think it is all a bit of a shameful shambles.
Firstly, to have an editor speaking to contributors in a rude way, secondly, for being told that if I don’t agree with views on the site I have to argue against them – but when I do I get told I am bringing the site down thirdly “washing dirty linen in public” is never such a good idea, there is so much that could have been said perhaps over the last weeks by email or phone not in public which can only be damaging for the credibility of the site.
At the end of this dicussion (I hope we are) I stand exactly as before by what I wrote in the email, I also stand by my views on Syria, I also stand by my views that deliberation has become a propaganda outlet for a one sided view on Syria and many would agree with me on that.
I am not in the slightest bit intimidated or cowed by any of the negative, comments by posters
I am not running away and I stand absolutely 100% by my views and my right to defend them.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 1:29 am
“but when I do I get told I am bringing the site down”
It’s not what you do, it’s the way that you do it…..
“many would agree with me on that.”
equally many would (and do) disagree with you.
“I am not in the slightest bit intimidated or cowed by any of the negative, comments by posters”
I really don’t think anyone seeks to intimidate you, nor indeed cow you. As I said it is a pity that you can’t hear what they are saying. Your belief in Islam may be unshaken, my impression of it has been damaged by the posts I have seen from you and Khalid.
And believe me, I don’t say that lightly.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:03 am
I don’t think you would find many people who would stand up to those who publish their emails and debate them publically, whilst at the same time the publisher whips up a vote from amongst those who lurk beneath the bridge in the land of Billy Goats Gruff – to ban them.
Kangaroo courts, witch hunts and much dirty laundry.
Not looking good for deLiberation is it?
I don’t think people have seen the like since we watched the “Witchsmeller Persuivant” on Blackadder.
Watch it to see yourselves http://www.blinkbox.com/TV/36248/Blackadder-S01E05-Witchsmeller-Pursuivant
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:20 am
That comment would be mildly amusing if it wasn’t you that started the witch hunt. You didn’t have a quiet word with Jonathon, you involved other people. And somehow when he then involved even more, you object vociferously. And endear yourself to everyone by declaring the commenteers to be trolls in the process.
For what its worth, I’m not in favour of you being banned. But I don’t like the way post here at all.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 9:32 am
its deeply ironic
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 11:57 pm
You have been trying to manipulate deliberation for some time. This email and many others I have received demonstrate this fact.
I published it to demonstrate to our readers how deceptive you have been lobbying behind the scenes.
I was puzzled when I got an email criticising me Posting Press TV material, I thought well you should be aligned because of you opposition to Israel but it seems Press TV are more critical than you really are.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:04 am
Press t.v. is great on Palestine but terrible on Syria or Iran. I have friends who work for Press t.v. one has now left because he could not stomach the misreporting over Syria and the other has made his views widely known about how he feels their reporting of Syria is wrong and all his colleagues know about it but he is hanging on in there.
One is sunni and one is shia if that makes any difference to anyone but both of them say the same thing.
So Jonathon you are the one who said about truthful journalism – what do you say if the reporters (both are reporters) say Press t.v. is rubbish over Syria?
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 11:26 pm
“The other posters are affected by your email.”
i was. i didn’t know who ran the site, but i suspected laura had some clout, given both her and khalid were still around after repeatedly posting comments as abusive as those of zionist trolls who were eventually blocked. i suspect laura had been trying to get ariadna and myself blocked, she had as much as said so herself, but i no idea she had also been working to bounce jonathon (up until jonathon mentioned that maybe laura had been working to get him and others banned, i had assumed this was solely jonathon’s site.)
the thing is i have seen what laura is trying to do on several other sites and the pattern is they attack the posters and disrupt the site, while in the background, they also lobby the site owners to ban the ones who disagree with them so their pov becomes the dominant one. especially those who see through their tactics.
Laura Stuart
August 3, 2012 at 11:32 pm
You enjoy yourself when you get the scent of any trouble don’t you ?
I have never tried to get Jonathon put off the site, not ever, quite the opposite actually.
I really think that it is a mistake on Jonathon’s part to open up for public discussion the running of deLiberation, it is not going to benefit the credibility of the editors or the site at all.
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 11:36 pm
you are always so innocent.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:36 pm
I’d call it a stench not a scent. You have really done a number on this site, sectarian to a “T” in beliefs, strategy and tactics
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:40 pm
“I really think that it is a mistake on Jonathon’s part to open up for public discussion the running of deLiberation”
The running of it includes the principles of operation and posters and contributors need to understand what is withing the bounds of debate, what articles are selecetd for publication and why and why some spammers and rude bullies are allowed to go on and on, or else this would be the site you would only share with K 3.5.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:13 am
I really think it was an amazing mistake to send that emial, but very very revealing.
If anybody at deliberation is causing people to question our credibility it would be you and Khalid.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:19 am
I think it was he best thing to lance that boil. Many of us were wondering: what is it that makes some posters sacred cows, no matter how much obvious harm they do to the site, while the likes of aema are censored–properly, I might add. Now it looks like a combination of intimidation and playing victim. That is a tactic torn out of a zionist manual of operation.
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 12:30 am
a combination of intimidation and playing victim
so precisely true!
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 9:36 am
AEMA was courteous and reasoned in comparrison to Khalid who still has an account. Dont ask me why?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 11:59 pm
This is what they would like to, to subvert and takeover and render us harmless like the PSC.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 12:05 am
“This is what they would like to, to subvert and takeover and render us harmless like the PSC.”
after seeing that email, i’ve no doubt now. deja vu of most every jewish site, or scarred of jews site, i’ve ever looked at. especially guardian and mondoweiss.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 11:04 pm
If we are interested in journalism then we must be concerned with truth and ethics/. Yes defining that has always been tricky slippery fish kind of thing.
If we are concerned with truth and ethics and I am, then we should be concerned about mis-info and lies.
Truth is Laura I disagree with you I am not bothered about attacking you, its your ideas I object to, not you personally.
Where have I been rude exactly?
Alex
August 3, 2012 at 11:08 pm
“Liberty is great but what if people use our libertarian principles against us and try to feed misinformation, half-truths and lies, to infiltrate delibeartion and subvert it to render it useless.”
You should remove “what if” from your statement, because KA used libertarian principles against you and fed misinformation, half-truths and lies.
If you visit my site you will see that I have posted 192 Articled written by KA, before he and his brothers shown their true face.
Though, I am busy, I joined to stop him and tell the other face of the story.
Since my first comments, I felt that I am not welcomed by him and Laura,and I could imagine how they felt after I was granted the right to write and post.
Finally, Laura’s complain about Daniel Mabsoout and me giving me an account, reflects the promised’democracy’ and ‘freedom’ in Syria after the fall of “Dictatoship”, God forbid
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 11:14 pm
“Finally, Laura’s complain about Daniel Mabsoout and me giving me an account, reflects the promised’democracy’ and ‘freedom’ in Syria after the fall of “Dictatoship”, God forbid”
it’s a good micro-example of what jp/corporate fascism has in store for everybody, but a select few who get to make the decisions.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:08 am
Until you and Daniel came along our view of Muslim affairs was being completely warped by Laura and co. I think its done a great damage to our ranking. I have mentioned many times to the editors Gilad and Roy, but inaction has prevailed.
But as the old saying goes…
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 12:25 am
For me it all started heating up when mathis “arrived”. The level of insult moved up a notch or two and I was surprised by the slack he was given, then again impressed at the same time – nice one deLib.
There are some big ego trippers on this site, that ain’t a bad thing though.
The er, what’s the agreed word?, er the ones who support israel and that special group, had a good go at trying to control the parameters of debate. It was good to see them rebuffed and to learn about the techniques they use. It hasn’t been wasted time.
Khalid is in his bubble. He’s got a million lost brothers to save and an act he has to keep up, so it’s all part of the routine. He did make me laugh even though his message was shit.
Hmmm “policing” the site, that’s tricky. The people with the best vocab and english skills will have the insult advantage, but if the insults are so lofty that no-one gets them, is it an insult?
Khalid’s over the topness was generally on his own articles so that’s up to him. As far as it seems he didn’t delete/spam anybody for having a pop at him.
.
You have to show respect when told to cool it on the abuse, if not you’re out – sounds fair to me.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:31 am
Well Khalid has had numerous warnings and I think his quality is way way below what we are looking for. Its not about censorship, its about maintaining high standards.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:39 am
Well said
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 9:38 am
I would say the same of Laura and her writings, they are not of high enough quality for deLiberation.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:34 am
For me Khalid’s abuse and hate speech was much much worse than anything we have had on deliberation. I protested at the time about several of his comments but was accused of censoring, when in reality i was tryin to police what i considered to be in very bad taste.
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 1:17 am
Agreed, he got warnings, ignored them and continued with the abuse – there was a line before him, he choose to snort it and go on the rampage – he can reap what he’s sown as we all can!
Jonathon Blakeley
August 3, 2012 at 11:14 pm
If it was down to me I would vote you Laura and Khalid off deLiberation. The reasons are pretty self evident, I dont think either of you have contibuted to constructive debate, more like toxic debate.
Who else votes with me?
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 3, 2012 at 11:16 pm
I do.
who_me
August 3, 2012 at 11:30 pm
initially i would have voted yes about khalid, no about laura. but after seeing that email and hearing all the lobbying she was doing behind the scenes to get others blocked from this site, i now vote yes about both of them.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:04 am
I am disappointed in your judgment today: wrong on laura, wrong on pgg804
Ok, here’s an emoticon so you don’t get irrascible
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 12:35 am
well, nobody is perfect, not even i.
i figured any damage laura was doing would be offset by counter info provided by alex and daniel, so i didn’t see her as a threat to the eclectic variety this site has. the email, and what jonathon shared about how she had been operating behind the scenes convinced me she was working to have the site express her views only to the exclusion of the others. that means she opposed the stated purpose of the site, and would in the future continue to manipulate it or probably wreck it. at that point, she just became another hostile troll in my view.
with khalid, i thought he was spam from the beginning and i still vaguely suspect the khalid comment writer[s] is not the article writing khalid, but just some spammer[s] using his name to try and wreck the site. the khalid articles themselves i had thought were posted mainly to show what alternative povs there were – and what israel had it’s collaborators writing once khalid started writing the more recent material targeting syria, iran and everybody else israel objected to and showing his irrational hostility towards shiites.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 9:41 am
I also wondered whether there is more than one person been posting comments from Khalid’s account. Perhaps we could investigate this.
Somoe
August 3, 2012 at 11:38 pm
I do
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:07 am
Sock puppet alert
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:13 am
I respect Somoe and have no reason to believe that she is anyone’s puppet.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:17 am
Somoe does a lot of editing, she is very real, but this just another class exmaple of Laura attacking people who criticise her.
Either they are sock puppets as Somoe
or Israeli agents as Daniel Mabsout allegedly is according to Laura.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:14 am
What’s that supposed to mean? An example of the productive comments you are dispensing liberally?
Somoe
August 4, 2012 at 12:50 am
no ad hominem there then!
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 1:04 am
Laura said;
.
“Sock puppet alert”
Now that’s funny
http://www.4thought.tv/system/videos/stills/864/large/Laura-Stuart-WIDE_web.jpg?1323439838
irony??
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:09 am
Never at a loss for an image or the musical score to go with it, are you?
Yes, funny it is. In more ways than one
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 1:39 am
@AT
Have you seen the spanish film called “Even the Rain” 2010 with subtitles?
I saw it tonight, it’s about multi nationals robbing the water (yaku) supplies off the indigenous of Bolivia. Crap ending but worth a watch.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:46 am
No. Did you see it on DVD? The DVD offer where I live is very poor.
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 2:00 am
Nah, we went posh and saw it at the university art centre. Hang on I’ll find a review….
http://thequietus.com/articles/08806-even-the-rain-iciar-bollain-paul-laverty-review
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1422032/
Barb Weir
August 4, 2012 at 12:01 am
I don’t, and what is the point of this vote? Are we a private club where the membership decides whom to admit or remove? We have no protocol or procedure for admission or dismissal, or what posts to delete or when posts become abusive, etc.
I like the views that Laura presents although I disagree with them consistently in the case of Syria. She restores balance to my biases. The same with Khalid, although I think he loses it when it comes to shiites and might cross the line in terms of racist sectarianism. I don’t mind his views on Shia theology and views, but when he says that all shiites are irrational, that’s a bit too much.
Still, without guidelines about what is or is not permissible, how can we fault him? I think he makes an important contribution that I would miss. I’m not sure I could continue if ostracism takes over.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:10 am
It seems that some would like it to be a private club. In fact I was just thinking before about how little children in the playground sometimes decide they don’t want someone to play anymore
Maybe now is a good time for the editors to make some rules about what is acceptable in the comments section. Better late than never.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:13 am
“little children in the playground sometimes decide they don’t want someone to play anymore”
Not a bad decision–children don’t like bullies either and they don’t like getting sand kicked in their eyes repeatedly and being told it’s rain
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:11 am
We’re not voting on what VIEWS we like or dislike, but on debating behavior, like spamming (K), personal insults despite being warned repeatedly by Roy (K), and attempts to silence posters who disagree with their views overtly and covertly (L) accusing them of anti-semitism, trying “to control the site” etc.
Perhaps you should spend the time to read more archived comments on this site by K and L before making a definitive opinion.
Blake
August 4, 2012 at 5:59 pm
Ditto what barb said I dont want to see anyone banned either.
Jay Knott
August 4, 2012 at 9:31 am
I understand why Jonathon wants to ban Khalid Amayreh. But I find it a bit too democratic that commenters from Oklahoma who shout ‘Zionist’ at everything that moves are being asked what they think of Laura Stuart: “I am instead amazed that spammers like you and your sidekick, who have filled deLib with kilometer-long posts after post of insults and inanities have not been banned yet”. That’s chutzpah on steroids.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 9:47 am
“But I find it a bit too democratic that commenters from Oklahoma who shout ‘Zionist’ at everything that moves are being asked what they think of Laura Stuart”
It isn’t an official election….. more of a straw poll
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 12:42 pm
“That’s chutzpah on steroids.”
I defer to you, Jay. I am sure you know more about both than I.
Jay Knott
August 4, 2012 at 7:32 pm
Ariadna – your comment complaining of ‘insults and inanities’ could have been written by Laura about you and your Okie friend. It’s pot calling kettle black. I still cannot understand, having read http://www.deliberation.info/site-policy, why Andrew was banned, Laura is getting a spanking, but who_me is allowed to poison this site with a continuous stream of moronic drivel:
‘a sad person, but a really great example of jp mentality’
‘classic zionazi propaganda’
‘playing the usual jew games’
‘hasbara troll’
‘white supremacist’
‘pro-fascist establishment/pro-jewish views’
‘neo-con’
etc. etc. etc., 24 hours a ******g day.
I find Khalid entertaining in a sick kind of way, but I understand if the editors decide that claiming that all Iranians are into bestiality is unacceptable. But Laura is a paragon of politeness.
My use of the term ‘Stalinist’ is not simply an insult, it’s an attempt to draw lessons from what happened to the communist parties in the thirties – they became self-referential cults in which dissent was explained away as part of a conspiracy against them. This is analogous to what could happen to supporters of Gilad Atzmon. I’m about to submit an article explaining why.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 8:32 pm
looks like jay knott is trying to do exactly what laura stuart tried to do. the boy has been working at it for a while now.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 9:22 pm
“your comment complaining of ‘insults and inanities’ could have been written by Laura about you and your Okie friend. ”
My “Okie friend”? You ruin what was a poor argument to start with. Or did you feel competitive in the poor taste insult tryouts?
Laura could have and still does complain about anything but it would be a ludicrous comparison.
You have a point though about the consistency of application of standards on the site. It is misplaced but it still a point.
– aema was attacking people personally –not just their stated opinions but whatever he knew of their lives–in a nasty and vile manner (Paul among them). He deserved to be banned. I never complained about him to the editors though, despite the gnawing grudge you nurse, convinced that I did.
– Laura has been shown to have actively manipulated, threatened and complained behind the scenes in an attempt to hijack the site turning it into what somoa justifiably called a platform for her (and her sidekick’s) sectarian views, trying to get authors and commenters barred entrance. She used veiled therats of all kinds, while her sidekick used direct threats. That should not be tolerated. EVER.
You seem impressed by her being a “paragon of politeness” but ‘polite’ expression of support for foreign invasions aimed at ‘regime change’ in the ME to the exclusion of any other views amounts to hijacking the site and making it into a MSM outlet, which is contrary to deLib’s stated mission. The same goes for her shrill support of the extension of sharia rule in the world, complete with floggings and hand chopping (which she zestfully recommended) which is exactly what the MSM accuses Islam to attempt.
If she had her way, barring any other views (because a friend of a friend told her something or she saw something on Facebook), deLib would be all-to-wall not sunni propaganda, but the zionist rendition of it.
–Who-me does use shorthand characterizations like “typical JP” but so does Gilad. Since you already indicated your displeasure with Gilad’s linear simplifications perhaps you could straighten out both of them in your next opus, as you announced.
–You I find entertaining occasionally. You get boring when you natter on about the Soviet Union of the 30s and the “party line” making it sound like the MSM, working in samizdat, has a hard time reaching out. You yourself string out enough invectives like ‘moron,’ ‘ignorant,’ stupid etc but I suspect those are uncontrollable patellar reflexes when are ridiculed about your pet theories, e.g., the Boxcutter Boys’ Conspiracy, the “Jewish bankers are just smarter by darwinian selection” theory and other such fun stuff. I would not want to see you gone. For long. The way you show up once in a while is perfect.
Looking forward to your article.
Jay Knott
August 9, 2012 at 2:07 am
“Looking forward to your article” says Ariadna.
Thanks. But things are developing so fast, that it becomes redundant as soon as I think it’s finished.
Phrases like “Boxcutter Boys’ Conspiracy” don’t ‘ridicule’ my ‘pet theories’, they don’t do anything to them at all. ‘Ridicule’ doesn’t just mean ‘make sarky remarks about’, it means countering an argument too. Like I do with 9/11 truth, and you don’t with my counter-argument.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 9, 2012 at 7:38 am
Nice to see you again, Jay, taking time away from crushing the truthers lurking everywhere.
“‘Ridicule’ doesn’t just mean ‘make sarky remarks about’, it means countering an argument too.”
Jay, I am not giving up on trying to make you understand why the ‘argument’ shoe is on the other foot in the matter of the BBC theory.
The ‘moon is made of cheese’ metaphor I used before clearly was not strong enough so I will try something in a more Rabelaisian vein:
If you were to make a squishy noise every time you sat down, while also emitting an unpleasant odor, I would not have to come up with a “countering argument” to your explanation that you have a dysenteric cat living in your pants.
Ridicule, concern, and perhaps avoidance would all be justified.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:21 am
Look are we going to help MI6, CIA and Mossad and spread their misinfo or not?
Its not rocket science.
Work it out and get back to me.
Tomorrow I am going to archive Laura and Khalid’s comments and do crafty edit on them.
watch this space.
Barb Weir
August 4, 2012 at 12:26 am
Thanks. It’s not possible for me to read everything and I’m spending to much on this as is.
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 12:50 am
@JB
. Her comments have been rigorously challenged and defeated. What’s wrong with that? What about a final warning instead of a ban, and an apology or two? Start afresh?
Just a quick thought; I remember recently Roy Bard saying he vouched for Laura Stuart not being an azz in one of his comments somewhere, she can’t be all bad
On the other hand Khalid’s nailed in a barrel and heading for the edge, he’s on one, there inn’t no turning back for him. He ain’t listening. If it’s gonna improve the site, ban him.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 1:17 am
Khalid is way way below the standard of what I consider serious journalism.
If Laura had just concerned herself with writing good well researched articles i would be in favour of keeping her.
What I object to is her covert micro managment.
objecting to Daniel Mabsoout
and Alex from Uprooted
and my Press TV reports (i like presstv, it beats bbc any day)
I object to being told i should not comment or limit what i say.
Several complaints from people she did hatchet jobs on as well.
All this from Laura.
Somoe
August 4, 2012 at 12:47 am
Well, I feel there needs to be a serious modification in their style, as i have indicated on another comment thread that was turning into a platform for Khalid and Laura and their judgemental idea of islam. Jb is right that no real debate was being had. Alex has facilitated debate whilst Khalid and Laura have dodged behind insults, accusations/allegations lacking any evidence and filled with sectarian hate-speech.
I was happy to tackle Laura for her shabby reporting and lack of evidence in the comments but her efforts to exclude others are hidden and most disagreeable. Laura should have allowed free speech for all, but instead she has tried to control the discourse from behind the scenes for a long time now. There is no excuse for such shabby tactics. Sometimes ostracism serves a worthy purpose – it demonstrates that certain behaviour will not be entertained because it is not fair to all players of the game.
I agree there should be a code of conduct that outlines acceptable behaviour and it is by making a stand in this way that such rules are arrived at.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:14 am
“there should be a code of conduct that outlines acceptable behaviour and it is by making a stand in this way that such rules are arrived at.”
I agree comoletely. Doing otherwise would be like those UN resolutions expressing “concern” about the situation in Gaza.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 1:20 am
Roy Bard
“Of the four people you emailed, 2 were in favour of a policy that people who spend time maintaining this site should not be allowed to comment. As you are now well aware, two are not in favour of that.”
i would hope that all involved in the site would want to comment, but not be compelled to do so if they are not interested in doing so. preventing somebody who runs the site from commenting seems repressive.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 1:32 am
“preventing somebody who runs the site from commenting seems repressive.”
I feel the same way about it.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 9:46 am
Some people would like to stop me commenting in a un-approved manner, the answer is simple. Delete me or let me be.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 10:02 am
“Delete me or let me be.”
If you’re deleted the site can change its name to deFenestration :-p
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 1:22 am
as a verbal graffiti artist, i must confess that i never investigated what, or who, deLiberation actually is – due diligence is not one of my strong suits – but i did notice the brief ‘mission statement’
deLiberation are thinkers, writers, artists, musicians and activists, each committed to freedom of thought and to telling the stories that the mainstream media is there to conceal.
At deLiberation we hope for a better future – a Western ‘spring’. Unlike other journals committed to power, hegemony and mammon, deLiberation is committed to:
1. Truth,
2. Justice &
3. Peace.
deLiberation is the future of journalism.
______________________________________________
at its best deLiberation does reflect these idealistic aims.
the present kind of heated editorial questions, with perhaps the faint hint of some power-struggles behind the scenes (of whose causes and nature i happily continue in complete ignorance) should at least warn us against any facile assumption that the passage from the present to the future of journalism will be any kind of automatic process.
as far as readership goes (or hits) i have equally no idea. but i do know there is a not insubstantial minority of internet users who thirst for non-propagandistic and intelligently-commented article/threads which respect the ground-rules of honest discussion and the search for truthful and balanced analysis – the exact opposite of what is offered by the MSM.
such an intended audience will be attracted by well-written material which respects those journalistic values, mingled sometimes with a sprinkle of humour and literary panache, and also presents in a lively, rather than didactic, manner some general useful background to contemporary history. the presence of distinct points of view will increase the value of the site, as long as their respective protagonists show the necessary minimum of mutual respect, and obey the debating imperative of actually attempting to answer direct questions, rather than to evade them through indulgence in irrelevances, diatribes, personal attacks, slander against social groups etc.
i had personally assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that, in its current phase at any rate, deLiberation is specifically focussed, though not exclusively so, on providing a coherent counter-narrative to the ubiquitous propaganda of the post-911 zionist-crusader alliance.
the position of those who would make common cause with this alliance as a tactic in pursuing what might appear to others as a sectarian, theocratic agenda, is, naturally, a thorny issue, and this difficulty is quite easy to be exploited by forces which wish to oppose or subvert the above-mentioned counter-narrative.
what such an audience will be repelled by i leave all to form their own well-considered picture of.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:50 am
Excellent points. To be true to its mission statement deLib must offer information, perspectives and views that the MSM conceals. Barb argues that some MSM material is also useful to publish–to deconstruct.
It is an editorial decision as to where the tipping point is beyond which there is so much materials that aligns itself with MSM propaganda (for whatever goals are pursued by the vendors) that the site actually promotes it.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 9:49 am
thanks etominsupi… I love you writing style
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:37 am
“I am not in the slightest bit intimidated or cowed by any of the negative, comments by posters”
Projection. Like “They are trying to push us into the sea”
That is your idea of ‘winning’ a debate: intimidating and cowing into submission.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:39 am
You really would make a great zionist, Laura.
I guess in your case zionism’s loss is Islam’s loss too.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 1:38 am
Laura Stuart
“but when I do I get told I am bringing the site down thirdly “washing dirty linen in public” is never such a good idea”
well, perhaps you should not dirty the linen in such a way that would cause you this embarrassment?
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 1:49 am
But it hasn’t caused me any embarrassment personally although I do not believe that it will have done the site much good.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:52 am
Light shining on dark corners is never bad.
The fact that it has not helped you learn anything from it is not deLib’s fault.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:17 am
How do you think it has damaged the site?
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 1:47 am
@Jonathon Khalid is way way below the standard of what I consider serious journalism.
If Laura had just concerned herself with writing good well researched articles i would be in favour of keeping her.
What I object to is her covert micro managment.
objecting to Daniel Mabsoout
and Alex from Uprooted
and my Press TV reports (i like presstv, it beats bbc any day)
I object to being told i should not comment or limit what i say.
Several complaints from people she did hatchet jobs on as well.
All this from Laura.
Right so you want to go through everything so be it.
Since the start I regularly proposed and suggested writers for the site and that was fine by you some came on board and some didn’t so involvement getting writers on board was not something I had never been involved in.
I raised concerns about Daniel Mabsout because of a couple of years of experience with trouble he managed to cause on facebook and I also provided a link to another site that had issues – so is that fair enough for me to warn of trouble and a dubious agenda?
I also warned of the tone of the site being on occasion anti semitic.
I also warned about the credibility of Press t.v. reporting on Syria – due as I explained above to the fact that two of my friends are reporters there.
I also warned of the comments being somewhat harsh and personal.
Having raised the above concerns by email and by phone I was told that deLiberation has a free speech policy if I don’t like views on the site I have to counter them. Which I have been doing.
All of the above were part of an ongoing process in which I was a part of from the start, in other words my opinions were invited on the site how it should look and who might be good contributors.
Since I would not have involved myself if I was plainly did not care in what direction the site went and since it was always my intention to warn for the good of the site, I wonder why I am blamed now for trying to bring the site down?
Apparently I am also accused of doing this covertly when in fact I always used to send emails to the group as was at the start and then either between Jonathon and myself or the group of four editors. I had no reason to do anything covertly because I had nothing to hide.
At the point that my input suddenly became unwelcome and my articles became lies and misinformation perhaps I should have been informed.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:58 am
“I also warned of the tone of the site being on occasion anti semitic.”
Too bad you did not care as much about the tone of the site being anti-Islamic–not your kind of Islam perhaps?
“I also warned of the comments being somewhat harsh and personal.”
I hope you complained about K. Do say, you did.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:10 am
“I also warned of the tone of the site being on occasion anti semitic.”
The whole site? I have seen a comment or two that made me flinch, but I really can’t see the tone of the site as being anti-Jew. Its one of those terms that means different things to different people as far as I can see.
“I also warned about the credibility of Press t.v. reporting on Syria – due as I explained above to the fact that two of my friends are reporters there.”
Your friends are likely to have similar views to you, aren’t they?
“I also warned of the comments being somewhat harsh and personal.”
And you have also contributed to that, no?
“Having raised the above concerns by email and by phone I was told that deLiberation has a free speech policy if I don’t like views on the site I have to counter them. Which I have been doing.”
That seems fair enough. We probably don’t agree much on how well you’ve done that.
“I had no reason to do anything covertly because I had nothing to hide.”
If you have nothing to hide, why are you objecting to Jonathon publishing your email about him?
“At the point that my input suddenly became unwelcome and my articles became lies and misinformation perhaps I should have been informed.”
read these comments by Jonathon – its him you’re referring to:
_______________________________________________________________
Submitted on 2012/07/31 at 8:01 am | In reply to Laura Stuart.
Its sad to say but many of the Sunni’s on this site sadly deluded and continually attack others personally who dis-agree. It has really wrecked the comments on this site.
__________________________________________________________
Submitted on 2012/07/26 at 2:35 pm | In reply to Khalid Amayreh.
We don’t care whether Daniel is an Israeli Spy or from Mars all we care about is whether he writes an interesting article.
Yes Daniel you are correct there is no point wasting your time with L & K, they have all the answers and insults too.
_____________________________________________________
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 10:24 am
“Khalid is way way below the standard of what I consider serious journalism.”
Do you sincerely disagree with that statement?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 10:42 am
Daniel’s articles are much more popular than you own Laura, perhaps you could learn something from him.
You thought it a good thing to warn us of his dubious agenda?
What is that exactly?
So because you have a 2 friends at PressTV who left we are to believe that the whole station is rubbish. Who are these friends of yours? Name them if you dare.?
Yes I do accuse you of trying to subvert deliberation to your own particular agenda. I will now publish more evidence to support my claims.
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 8:06 pm
“I raised concerns about Daniel Mabsout because of a couple of years of experience with trouble he managed to cause on facebook and I also provided a link to another site that had issues – so is that fair enough for me to warn of trouble and a dubious agenda?”
A Zionist should have ten links about me instead of one , you are not performing very well.
Why don’t you post the link so everyone can see the kind of trouble i was making
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:30 am
@Roy it has damaged the integrity of the site because a/ an editor has publically told a contributor who is a well known writer to “get lost”, twice plus other comments which were rude to KA and to myself.
b/ internal discussion about site direction and content should not be public when it is done with the sole intention of damaging someone, in other words for a negative not positive reason.
I know that some contributors post under pseudonyms so people do put trust in the editors to maintain confidentiality, publishing an email without consultation or consent does not bode well for people being able to believe in the integrity or confidentiality of the information they exchange with the editor, whether they post anonymously or not.
It has also exposed the fact that there seems to be no policy on moderating comments.
It has also exposed animosity between an editor and contributor (x2) in public which is really not professional.
roy I wonder why you are asking me this question I would be surprised if you thought it was a postive move.
To me all of the above is unprofessional.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:39 am
pro·fes·sion·al
[pruh-fesh-uh-nl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain: a professional builder.
2.
of, pertaining to, or connected with a profession: professional studies.
3.
appropriate to a profession: professional objectivity.
4.
engaged in one of the learned professions: A lawyer is a professional person.
5.
following as a business an occupation ordinarily engaged in as a pastime: a professional golfer.
Which of those do you think applies in this instance Laura?
“should not be public when it is done with the sole intention of damaging someone,”
I’d love to think that this was you admitting that your sole intention was to damage Jonathon in private. But I suspect it is the victim-hood thing – by publishing an email specifically about him, wherein the author stated they didn’t have anything to hide, and weren’t going behind anyones back, you become the victim.
The “integrity of the site” / “professionalism” / group pressure on individuals in back rooms – you do think you’re at the
GuardianTelegraph now, don’t you?When can I expect my pay cheque?
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 2:51 am
it’s a good thing jonathon made this backstage power play visible to the rest of the people. otherwise laura might have been successful in railroading him off the site. with allies emailing in complaints supporting her, she might have bamboozled the others into thinking jonathon was the aggressor here. now she cant do that, since it’s all out in the open.
this reminds me of the many times israel gets caught doing their usual and then incessantly whinges and points fingers attempting to get out of it.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 10:21 am
“told a contributor who is a well known writer to “get lost”, twice”
Hmm, lets imagine you in that position:
if you were told TWICE to make yourself scarce
– would you hang on, deaf to the suggestion?
– if so would that be “professional”?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 10:45 am
I told Khalid to get lost because I had already appealed to the editors to ban him for hate speech and spamming and hijacking comments. I was ignored so I decided as is my right, to try to persuade him to leave.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 7, 2012 at 10:48 pm
i was accused of being rude and attacking Khalid Amayreh
…. I acutally asked him “to get lost”…
and here is a comment we banned …. i think this is a perfect example of hate speech from an expert in it.
========================================
Khalid Amayreh
Submitted on 2012/07/28 at 10:42 am
XXXXXX, you are a woman that is clearly treacherous to your womankind. You enthusiastically embrace a regime that organizes rape campaqigns against Syrian women. And now, you have the face to speake about hatred. It is really hard to imagine a more hateful embodiment of hatred.
——————————————————-
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:40 am
And endear yourself to everyone by declaring the commenteers to be trolls in the process.
@Roy – I have my views, I write them and if necessary defend them, I am confused as to why you might think that I would be here in the interests of endearing myself to anyone.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:44 am
You complain about Jonathon insulting people, and yet somehow you’re free to do it. From where I stand there is a stench of hypocrisy….
What makes you think Jonathon is here to endear himself to you?
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:47 am
Roy I am getting tired now so have no concentration
I did not need to damage Jonathon in private or in public he did that to himself yesterday publically when he told a respected writer to “get lost”, twice plus other sundry rude comments.
In fact I tried to cover his back by commenting that perhaps he had some unknown stress that made him speak so.
Jonathon further shot himself in the foot by breaking editorial integrity and publishing an email.
I hardly need to try and damage Jonathon he has done it to himself and it was never my intention to damage him anyway.
Not only damaged himself but the integrity of the site.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:54 am
It is a pointless discussion.
” he told a respected writer to “get lost”, twice plus other sundry rude comments. ”
Respect is something that is earned Laura. Once I had respect for Khalid. That disappeared when he started with his small minded bigotry and general offensiveness. I tried to get him to moderate his offensiveness and ended up being disgusted by what he was saying.
You and Khalid have been repeatedly rude.
Jonathon published an email which was about him. He broke no-ones confidence as the author was at pains to stress that they weren’t going behind anyone’s backs and had nothing to hide.
You can think what you like – other people reading the thread will think what they like.
Your world is as lop-sided as Khalid’s. And that is pretty damn disturbing.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 2:59 am
re: Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:47 am
that whole spiel reminded me of this one, it’s about as honest and manipulative:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3uYXWtd684
what do you think of this performance, laura? do you have any tips to offer him so he can improve his believability?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 10:48 am
this is ths funniest thing yet. Please dont ever try to cover for me Laura. I don’t need friends like you.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:50 am
@Roy the difference is that Jonathon is an editor and the one that people have to submit their articles to and the one who people haev to communicate with.
One expects better from the editors
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 3:01 am
Yes – for long hours of maintaining this site without pay, Jonathon should put up with being abused and keep smiling.
And Laura can be as offensive as she wants whilst demanding this.
At the same time she can claim to be a key figure on the site.
And right now, I suspect laura is the only person who cannot see the problem with this.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 2:54 am
Who-me you just never give up with the lies and accusations do you ?
I have never tried to get Jonathon off the site.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 3:01 am
Until the last few days when you and Paul started to properly moderate the comments there has been no shortage of rude and personal attacks on the threads, some of them may be just better dressed up in nice English than KA’s were.
By the way some of you always refer to KA and I as a pair yet I have been at pains to remind people that I do not know him at all other than since he started posting on here. The implecation is always that we are a team rather than the same view. There are millions of Sunni Muslims who hold the same views, they just don’t have the patience to post on here.
So, after hundreds of posts I believe the whole thing will be more damaging for de\Liberation than anything else.
Very unprofessional.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 3:05 am
“So, after hundreds of posts I believe the whole thing will be more damaging for deLiberation than anything else.”
yes, those posts of yours and ka referring to shiites as animals and worse probably did do a lot of damage to the site. i was dubious of your narrow minded views of the muslim religion and how it should be practiced well before you and ka went kkk off the deep end on shiites. had the first time i looked in here been during one of your hate spiels, i might not of returned, figuring the site was frequented by some serious whackos – like the freerepublic.
“Very unprofessional.”
yes it was very unprofessional of both of you. very harry’s place or foxnews of you.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 3:06 am
After this I’m off to bed:
“By the way some of you always refer to KA and I as a pair yet I have been at pains to remind people that I do not know him at all other than since he started posting on here.”
You do little to disprove the connection when you write:
Greg Felton
August 4, 2012 at 4:24 am
I cannot take Laura Stuart’s criticism of Jonanthon at face value since I don’t know the posts were deleted, and I have seen no evidence that Jonathon has acted improperly. If anything, I think he has been perhaps to lax in reining in abusive posters.
On another site, which I won’t name, I have been subjected to constant needling, condescending insults from one particular poster. I repeatedly called upon the moderator to do something but was treated with active indifference.
Finally, after I wrote a lengthy post defending myself and putting him on the spot, he did something to bring debate under control.
If a debate gets seriously of track or a poster become gratuitously abusive, then the moderator has every right to edit or delete posts.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 8:12 am
Roy – to sum up why it is damaging to both Jonathon and the site.
1/ – An editor has been rude to two contributors on the comments, telling one to “get lost” twice plus other rude comments. An editor should be above that.
2/ – This was not the right way to behave on the comments section, I wrote an email to ALL of the editors to bring the matter to their attention. The email which was not meant to be public was then published without consultation or consent from the writer.
3/ – The editor then starts saying on comments that a contributor has been writing lies and misinformation. If this was the case that an editor feels a contributor writes lies and misinformation would not either a decision not to publish or a discussion between the contributor and editor take place by other means than wild accusations on a public board?
4/ – The editor then sets about trying to round up other commentators to publically vote the contributor off the site.
Now after the above, how would that not be damaging to the site? How can any contributor come to deLiberation without wondering if they will suddenly have their emails published, suddenly out of the blue be accused to writing lies and misinformation and be held up to a public vote on the board?
That Roy is very wrong and very unprofessional by any means, it shows a great lack of integrity.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 8:24 am
You never did explain which part of the definition of professional I quoted was the applicable one. I’d be interested to know and it would make your claim more explicable.
I don’t think working hard to maintain a site makes a person less human than one who merely pops in to make use of that hard work.
I don’t fear having my emails quoted out of the blue.
I understand that Laura thinks herself blameless, and Jonathon guilty.
Simply put Laura – we don’t agree on this.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 10:30 am
That’s as accurate a summation as Daniel Pipes’ history of Palestine
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:16 am
Equally I expect better standard from our authors.
Laura:- 1/ – An editor has been rude to two contributors on the comments, telling one to “get lost” twice plus other rude comments. An editor should be above that.
JB> Show me where I was rude. I stand by comments to Khalid and later today I will publish my analysis of his hate writings.
Laura:- 2/ – This was not the right way to behave on the comments section, I wrote an email to ALL of the editors to bring the matter to their attention. The email which was not meant to be public was then published without consultation or consent from the writer.
JB>I have the right to express myself as long as I abide by site guidelines. I do not consider what I siad to either you or Khalid constitutes a personal attack, but I find it amusing that you keep invoking your victim status.
Laura: – 3/ – The editor then starts saying on comments that a contributor has been writing lies and misinformation. If this was the case that an editor feels a contributor writes lies and misinformation would not either a decision not to publish or a discussion between the contributor and editor take place by other means than wild accusations on a public board?
JB> I have tried to dicuss these things privately but have been consistently ignored, The problems have persisted and traffic been lost so I took action to remedy the situation.
Laura >4/ – The editor then sets about trying to round up other commentators to publically vote the contributor off the site.
Its called democracy… If we get enough votes or more you are going.
Laura: – Now after the above, how would that not be damaging to the site? How can any contributor come to deLiberation without wondering if they will suddenly have their emails published, suddenly out of the blue be accused to writing lies and misinformation and be held up to a public vote on the board?
That Roy is very wrong and very unprofessional by any means, it shows a great lack of integrity.
JB> Hmmn you really should not have started this Laura. Lets have a look at some more of you emails shall we?
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 10:56 am
to my inexperienced eye there is something askew here.
on the surface of it we have a relatively minor dispute between a frequent contributor to an internet forum and a key member of its editorial staff. to keeps things a little less personal, let us call these individuals X and Q.
X is not an ordinary contributor, because she knows the editorial board and on more than one occasion has communicated with them ‘behind the scenes’ in a manner that suggests an agenda to control the content of the site and who is allowed to post on it. part of this agenda has become focussed on the rather ill-specified accusation that Q has acted ‘unprofessionally’. asked to clarify her use of this term, surely important if Q is expected to offer a defence against the accusation, X has not done so, but has merely continued to use it in repetitions of her initial complaint.
i am not competent to judge of such issues, and neither do i have access to all the relevant evidence.
but i will comment on one aspect of the matter. obviously, what i say represents no more than a personal opinion, but may to some extent represent the response of other ‘ordinary’ readers and contributors.
1. the effect of X continuing to stir up this storm in a teacup is
(a) to exert psychological pressure on Q
(b) to discourage potential readers
(c) to provoke argument within the editorial board.
(d) to distract attention away from the kind of discussion which forms the main purpose of the forum’s existence.
2. X is well aware of these consequences of her actions, since she frequently uses the expression damaging to the site.
3. X’s behaviour in this matter manifests two easily-recognisable traits:
(a) playing the victim
(b) a predilection for the tactics of censorship and disavowal which every honest investigator knows from experience are the stock-in-trade of one particular lobbying group with powerful financial backing and global reach. i shall refer to it here only by one of its acronyms: F.I.L.T.H.
4. it is well-known that F.I.L.T.H. devotes considerable resources in the attempt to oppose and censor any form of free and open discussion.
5. X appears to express views (and on the site these are very much minority views), and toespouse and promote sectarian allegiances (which seem to contradict the very purposes for which the site was set up in the first place) similar to those of another prolix contributor Y. in terms of language used. and the ratio of hate-filled invective to facts and arguments in his posts, Y is by far and away the FILTHiest commentator on the entire site.
6. both X and Y are phony muslims. X in particular, who is an apostate from Christianity, makes a great show of conformity to the outward signs of a specific religiosity, and displays the verbal symptoms of a mental condition i have elsewhere described as NSRPD – (Narcissistic Self-Righteous Personality Disorder, see Brit.Journ.Psychiat. 129, 137-144, (June 2009) .
at this point i shall refrain from a more detailed analysis. i shall not attempt to draw these threads together. but i hope they assist in clarification of what is at issue, and the discovery of some avenue of mutually satisfactory accommodation between the parties to the dispute.
i am very unsympathetic to censorship and disavowal. on the other hand there are many sites all over the internet, and each one does need to affirm its particular identity. this may sometimes lead to the need for people agreeing to disagree, and going elsewhere.
however, i don’t think all this really damages the site. it is informative, and offers splendid entertainment, though one must sadly acknowledge it does little to ease the plight of the victims of oppression by F.I.L.T.H..
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:46 am
Once again A very clever accurate & funny analysis. Always a pleasure. For me etominusipi, Ariadna, Who me and fool me once represent the type of quality comments that we should encourage. But like a graden if we allow weeds to take over soon there will be no more charming flowers to admire, similarly if we allow the comments and articles to become infested with hate, misinfo and bad research we will lose all credibility.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:51 am
Very Interesting.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:19 am
from Laura Stuart 20/07/2012
http://www.deliberation.info/16732/
With these pieces you are really lettting deliberation sink low. Alex is just a nasty hate filled person and the decision to let him post was very immature on your part.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:20 am
from Laura Stuart 19/07/2012
Who is Alex?
Is that jonathon azaziyah?
His posts are just personal attacks on people and his comments are the same, such tirades just brings the site down in my opinion.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:21 am
from Laura Stuart 19/07/2012
Gilad
With the greatest respect I am sure you do not have time to follow the comments. REgards the site in general if your vision is for deliberation to be for the purpose of “taking the piss out of the jews” then so be it if we all are branded anti semites, I don’t care but you should know by now that Jews cannot be responsible for everything, they may be clever but not that clever, the Palestinians and the Muslims are responsible for a lot of what goes wrong for them too.
The bottom line should be that comments doesn’t allow personal insults – these are now continous from who-me and others.
laura
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:22 am
from Laura Stuart 15/07/2012
i have no respect for mabsout and alex if they dont use their real names.
rats !
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:26 am
On 25 Jun 2012, at 09:58, “Laura …..” wrote:
and there you miss the point gilad, i am not arguing pro or against assad in my email i am arguing pro human rights but most of all i am saying that mabsout is promoting anti sunni sectarianism with his articles.
i write about matters mostly related to zionism or zionist muslims in the uk is that true?
i do not write what i know has an undercurrant of anti shia bias i have repeatedly written that the people of syria have a legitimate right to overthrow a dictator.
if deliberation wants to post articles from mabsout which are not there to do anything except promote shia personalities and attack sunni personalities then i am not interested in the site any more, it had anyway become like a facebook page.
i said to you a while ago gilad that the shia are making a weird alliance with the left for the purpose of manipulating the line of “imperialism” and such crap as I never speak about. The left have happily jumpled on the notion that western imperialism is the problem in libya and syria which is just silly.
anyway i do not think that there is anything to debate with mabsout i have no wish to reply to his posts because i can see what he is trying to do he doesnt deserve the oxygen.
if you want to deliberation to be used as a tool for stoking the fires of sectarianism then fine i will not debate or try to counter any of their arguments they will never change and i will never change and non muslims dont understand enough to see what is happening.
it would be typical of some palestinians to be on the shia side against sunnis they have a history of being on the “wrong side” and becoming hated even in Arab lands (Iraq/Kuwait)
fact is that shia defend themselves and their own national interests and the pals have the worst life in lebanese camps.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:28 am
On 29 Jun 2012, at 16:15, Laura ….. wrote:
http://www.deliberation.info/from-palestine-to-arab-lands-turn-the-page-and-keep-the-cause/
Can no one see what is happening here? Why oh Why are we promoting this sectarianism? Do we really want to read every article just hate hate hate on Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood and the whole Sunni world?
JB> Its called FREE SPEECH!
We on deliberation are now promoting the sectarian division of the muslim world and this is what i am trying to tell you people but you wont listen.
By the way I do not support the idea of delib promoting pictures of muslims with guns as it can only fuel the terrorist image
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 11:29 am
On 25 Jun 2012, at 08:53, “Laura …..” wrote:
Jonathon I wrote to you yesterday to alert you to the danger of sectarianism on deLiberation. I do not expect you to understand the hatred of Shia for Sunnis.
The article by Daniel Mabsout yesterday praising Nasrullah is not what we need on the site is it? Do we need to praise individuals? The whole Sunni Muslim world cheered on NasrUllah during the Lebanon war but his stance on Syria has spoiled his reputation.
Today Mabsout has written about how the Yemeni woman does not deserve recognition for the fact that she was a main organiser in the Yemen revolutin (unfinished) for sure the Nobel prize is devalued but you do not understand the article as I or any Sunni would. It is purely out of hostility towards a Sunni woman.
I do not expect you to research or understand the Shia stance towards Sunnis but in short they have stabbed Sunnis in the back through the centuries. The fact that their understanding of their religion allows them to deny and lie means they will never answer that question directly (taqqiyah).
No sunnis support Al Saud or the leaders of Bahrain or Qatar but people like Mabsout want to hate every Sunni Muslim so now anyone who is for the idea of the Syrian people having a revolution and getting rid of a dictator is labelled a zionist.
deliberation is going against the whole solidarity movement who are for human rights in Syria, you may not care but I do, Press tv are very unreliable for news related to any matter of interest to Shia, Palestine they are ok but regarding Iran Syria or Lebanon they are pure state propaganda. Hamas have aligned themselves with the Sunni Arabs – doesn’t that tell you something?
I am very sad that the west is managing to play on the Sunni Shia divide and you should not underestimate the fact that the Sunnis are arming and ganging up against Iran, however, you should not allow propaganda or anti Sunni haters to have free reign on here either.
I will be on the side of human rights and so is the wider solidarity movement and if it was Jews being strung up by Palestinians from lamp posts in Israel one day I hope we would be standing for human rights and justice there too as Human rights are universal. The people of Syria and of Libya had the right to overthrow their dictators and the fact they had to call on western help instead of Arab or Muslim armies is to our shame.
You are allowing sectarian hatred to be propagated on deLiberation, perhaps you don’t relalise it, but you need to stop it.
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 2:33 pm
This is nonsense to say i am sectarian , it is some kind of a joke because i do not belong to Islam or to its sects . I was born Christian, i have studied Hindu scriptures and i believe in all religions ; for this reason i used the picture of Ramakrishna who teaches that all religions are valid in order to remind myself and others that i do not belong to any of these religions but to all of them at the same time . The truth is that the person that is sectarian and is poisoning deLiberation with sectarianism is none other than the person accusing others of doing so . Sectarianism is like quick sands and those who have fallen into it wil bring in others as well . The people who were affected mostly by Israel’s aggression happened to live in the southern region within the proximity of the occupied land and happened to be Shi’a . For this reason the Resistance issued from them was Shi’a . This Resistance who had migrated from one faction to the other had finally landed in the hands of the people themselves.It makes no difference whether it is Shi’a or not . If the Eskimos start their own Resistance , it will be an Eskimo Resistance and we will support it or shall we tell the Eskimos that they should become something else? To sum it up , there is no war between sects that is taking place now, sects have always been there and will always be there. Shi’as and Sunnis have coexisted peacefully for a thousand years or so. The truth is that people like Laura are simply against the Resistance, they knowingly or unknowingly, directly or indirectly work for the Zionists who mobilized some of their agents to create this polarization according to sects in order to expose and weaken the Resistance .this has nothing to do with religions and sects .The difference between sects could be solved somewhere else other than in the battle ground with Israel where the Resistance is facing the enemy.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 12:06 pm
I am the Upsetter – Lee Perry
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:25 pm
@Jonathon
Regards my emails and their content, I stand by what I said and I stand by my intention of trying to prevent issues on the site. Which had happened on facebook with Daniel Mabsout frequently and there is evidence out there on the net to support that.
The editorial response to my concerns was that I have to take people on and argue against them if I do not like their views. It seems you didn’t enjoy the results of that instruction.
Jonathon – strange that you never ever discussed any of this with me, neither your views on what I wrote nor that you harboured feelings that I was trying to silence you or anthing like that.
We did for months exchange articles and comments many times a day by email, you even used to share with me your frustrations about things that were going on with the site and contributors.
Bearing in mind my involvement from the start and the fact that we communicated on many issues related to deLiberation – it makes it all the more wrong of you to publish email exchanges between myself and the editors. You already had a line of communication and there was never any animosity or ill feeling between us.
Personally, I would never stoop so low as to publish someones e.mail exchanges without their permission and also if I had a problem with an individual, I would try to discuss the issues first.
To me the actions you have taken here show a very immature and ill judged behaviour which can only damage the integrity of the site. Even more bizarre is the idea that my input brought the viewing figures down. I have never claimed to be a major contributor, I can be pretty sure that what I write makes little overall difference one way or another to the site viewing figures. The figures went up when Gilad was in America and Gilad has always been the biggest name to attract viewers to the site.
I still stand by everything I said, but I feel you rather lost your integrity by the actions you are taking.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:38 pm
Strangely Laura, I was at that first meeting too. And I have no memories whatsoever of planning a censored site which only reflected the point of view that you hold. In fact I distinctly recall talk about LIBERATING discourse. The immediate precursor to the meeting was the adoption of the PSC of exactly the censorship that you have been advocating as has just been evidenced by your emails, the site was to be set up as somewhere where censorship did not apply and where people were free to express their views.
You did not argue your POV in comments – with the assistance of Khalid you turned comments into a hellhole.
And all the while you were further attempting to silence the points of view you disagree with behind the scenes.
It appears that having failed to get rid of the authors you don’t like, you decided to get rid of Jonathon instead. Perhaps you failed to anticipate that I would suddenly find that my discourse was in danger of being DEliberated (in the other sense of the word) too!
And you have the bare faced cheek to come here and talk about integrity!
And now we are definitely looking at becoming deFenestration.info
The question is simply who will fly through the window first? Or jump….
Integrity my arse!
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:03 pm
INCREDIBLE!
Those few e-mails written by you posted by Jonathon are nothing less than mind boggling.
Laura, even I, by no means a fan of yours, am stunned at the degree of deceitful manipulation behind the scenes of deLib editorial policies and persistent attempts to gain control to turn it into a sectarian hate-filled site.
And even now, with it all hanging out you write:
– “trying to prevent issues on the site”–FALSE. The opposite is true as we all know
–”you even used to share with me your frustrations about things that were going on with the site and contributors.” VEILED THREAT
– “Gilad has always been the biggest name to attract viewers to the site” FLATTERY and MANIPULATION to get support
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:42 pm
@Roy – really I thought better of you than to keep repeating the idea that I have ever tried to get rid of Jonathon.
I stated clearly that I have never ever suggested that Jonathon should go, it was not my business to.
Maybe this is what all this is about, you have falsely believe that I have some agenda to get rid of Jonathon.
Not true – I say it again because it is clearly falling on deaf ears.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Well perhaps you didn’t anticipate the authoritarian response that would follow your email.
Did you just want him silenced and following orders?
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 1:49 pm
No I didn’t want him “silenced” I did want him to cease personal attacks in the comments which was something that you and Paul were working on anyway.
I think we can go round and round can’t we?
I believe it’s not right for an editor to tell a contributor to “get lost” publically and other sundry personal comments, and you believe my belief that editors shouldn’t be rude is silencing.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 6:47 pm
Why not lead by example Laura? Behave in the manner in which you think editors should behave , and I have no doubt that there will quickly be a marked improvement.
Lets see a stop to all campaigning to get rid of people because their ideas are different to our own.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Roy having clearly said, many times, that it was never my intention nor have I ever suggested that Jonathon should “be got rid of” – I would also NOW have to come to the conclusion that after this action that Jonathon has taken, his integrity and stability to have responsibility on the site are definitely in question.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:51 pm
” his integrity and stability to have responsibility on the site are definitely in question.”
Unlike Laura the censor who thinks she comes out this this purer than the driven snow?
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Because after all your supposed self-announced ‘integrity’ is far more more important than the liberation of discourse?
The “future of Journalism” is power games behinds closed doors, and the excommunication of ideas and people?
The PSC already did that Laura! We obviously were wasting our time with this site
Tired old bullshit about “ethics” and “professionalism” – the exact same mechanisms developed by the “old journalismn” to justify their lop sided corporatised presentations of their bosses truths!
The whole western media already did that Laura, we were wasting our time pretending we were doing something different. Laura was there to make sure we didn’t.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:05 pm
” his integrity and stability to have responsibility on the site are definitely in question.”
What’s not in question is your incredible gall. You should not use the word “integrity”
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 1:26 pm
Laura Stuart: if it was Jews being strung up by Palestinians from lamp posts…
i find it hard to believe this weird and highly unpleasant non-sequitur could have been introduced into a sentence expressing support for human rights by anyone other than an Israeli Jew of the more extreme wing of the paranoid persuasion.
am i over-reacting to think this locution in this context sufficiently bizarre to require an explanation? i am regretful that i have had to repeat the expression, but see no other way of making the point with the requisite forcefulness.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:52 pm
I missed that but, no, you are definitely not overreacting.
It makes a nice pair with this, courtesy the same source:
“it would be typical of some palestinians to be on the shia side against sunnis they have a history of being on the “wrong side” and becoming hated even in Arab lands (Iraq/Kuwait)”
Amazing what a Palestinian rights defender would get up….
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 5:20 pm
There are many aspects of Laura’s writings that seem clsoely aligend to a Zionist perspective. I have come to conclusion she is Anti Zionist Zionist or why else would she be so opposed to PressTV?
She says here friend left PressTV becasue the Syria reporting was so bad, yet in other emails she complains about all Press TV material.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 5:26 pm
“why else would she be so opposed to PressTV?”
Beacause Iran is Shia?
Greg Felton
August 4, 2012 at 7:39 pm
If Laura can blame Palestinians at all for their plight or endorse the Syrian “liberation” fores, then clearly she is a zionist. Perhaps her animus against deLiberation stems from her anger at the lack of zionist “balance” or respect shown to zionist “argument.”
At any rate, I think this exchange has been useful but it might be time to end it. Continuing to post Laura’s e-mails might be construed as piling on, and running more of Laura’s feeble excuses just adds to her embarrassment.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 9:31 pm
I agree with you completely, Greg.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 1:38 pm
@Roy – no one comes out looking good when you start washing dirty linen in public, in this case deLiberation will likely be the biggest loser, as readers and potential contributors would have difficulty believing in the integrity of the editors.
I am sure contributors wouldn’t want suddenly to have their emails published for public consumption and find themselves being voted against by commentators.
I doubt people would have much trust in deLiberation after this.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 1:45 pm
yes Laura. In exactly the same way that they will see that this site has become “a propaganda outlet for a one sided view on Syria” in spite of the evidence that it has not YET become so.
Laura has the answer to everything! Laura knows exactly how people will judge a sites integrity! Laura knows she has integrity.
And yet the thread indicates that right now, right here, it is Laura’s integrity that is in doubt.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:56 pm
“I am sure contributors wouldn’t want suddenly to have their emails published for public consumption and find themselves being voted against by commentators.”
You obviously assume everyone did what you did: deceitful attempts at manipulation, back stabbing and distorting facts. Perhaps you cannot imagine any other way of being.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 5:22 pm
thanks 2 yOu and Khalid.
Paul Eisen
August 4, 2012 at 1:56 pm
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this, it’s now degenerated into just simple bullying and it should stop.
You too, Laura, you should stop as well.
And if any bright sparks out there want to interpret this as just more Jewish gatekeeping or something, so be it.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 1:59 pm
Why jewish? You, supremacist, you!
Why can’t you let a new sectarian muslim keep a gate somewhere? It’s true the methods used seem learned from the jewish lobby but the work is all a Goy piece of work.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 2:00 pm
Who is being bullied Paul?
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 2:08 pm
Apparently I am the bully and Laura is the victim, or so Paul sees it, because “whatever the rights and wrongs of this are” we should stop being naughty, even Laura.
fool me once...
August 4, 2012 at 3:43 pm
@Paul
“And if any bright sparks out there want to interpret this as just more Jewish gatekeeping or something, so be it.”
I hear you Paul. I don’t think you’re gate keeping here, I think you’re sincerely trying to prevent a débâcle.
Yes the to and fro is a bit unsavoury and without being familiar with all the in’s and out’s of the discourse one could easily perceive it as bullying.
But because the ill feelings have been festering for a while now, it is better they’re out than in and will set a precedent and help the site in the long run.
The fear that people have of confrontation is used as a weapon by bullies. All the players in this spat are well seasoned, experienced and durable, that is why Laura is called out for playing the victim card. She is in fact being shown a form of respect by her peers, with the rejection of her victim hood moves. When caught being sly, she is expected to defend herself stood up, toe to toe, not snivelling on about unfairness.
Humility is her best defence but that’s something she’s not too comfortable with at the moment.
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 7:28 pm
yes, a very sound, and compassionately presented, view
Paul Eisen
August 4, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Forget all that for the moment, Ariadna, concentrate on the bullying.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 2:10 pm
It really did not take that much of my time to reply to you, Paul, no problem.
I am focusing now.
Barb Weir
August 4, 2012 at 3:09 pm
I’m trying to do my part to make deLiberation a popular website with lots of hits. I do this by letting it be the publisher of breaking news when I get it. I do it by waiting for my pieces to be published before distributing them on my own and then republishing them with deLiberation links. If a piece like Dismembering the Arab World is published on multiple sites, I reference deLiberation. We want thousands of hits per day, don’t we?
What effect does it have to make bickering and infighting the lead story? Not a site I want to recommend. How many are participating in this discussion? Not thousands of readers by a long shot. There are plenty of posts, but all by the same people. This is becoming a dysfunctional listserve of little interest to more than a handful of participants. I can’t possibly keep up with this line of discussion, and I sent Jonathon two posts more than a day ago, one of which is confidential information received anonymously that until now is almost exclusive to deLiberation. Instead, this nonsense is taking precedence.
This is a waste of time. Remove this discussion and the ad hominem photo of Laura from the front page, which means nothing to casual visitors, anyway. Let’s get on with the business of publishing and promoting the site in a constructive way.
I don’t like most of the discussion on most of the articles, anyway, which is why I don’t often read them or add my own comments. They are often nasty and mean without any reason to be and often unprovoked. Being nasty is not the same as being clever, and it doesn’t encourage readership.
If we want to regulate such behavior, let’s establish a set of standards and a protocol, and then enforce them instead of this endless bickering, which is getting us nowhere.
I haven’t read more than a third of this discussion and don’t intend to, although it’s already more discussion than I usually read. However, I’m not inclined to spend more time on this one.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 4, 2012 at 3:29 pm
“We want thousands of hits per day, don’t we?”
That’s great stuff. But if they come on the link you provide, they go straight to your piece and the hit registers anyway, although, granted, if they see the flotsam in the comment section, they may not return.
This tempest has to be sorted out soon. In the meantime keep writing the good stuff, Barb.
Barb Weir
August 4, 2012 at 4:11 pm
I have to apologize to Jonathon. He can handle this nonsense and his editor duties, too. He dealt with both of the issues I mentioned above.
In fact, I think he is an excellent editor and illustrator. However, that’s even more reason not to attend to solutions rather than sniping at each other, and to get back to developing the site and attending to its mission.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 5:36 pm
really Barb you have no idea…
Its not a waste of time and is connected to Syria hence why it is so important. Laura has been championing the Nato backed Syrian liberation for some time and I see it as my duty to uncover what she has been upto.
Consider me deLiberation’s first whistleblower and I am blowing the whistle of Laura and Khalid for the reasons I have stated so far.
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 6:23 pm
“Consider me deLiberation’s first whistleblower and I am blowing the whistle of Laura and Khalid for the reasons I have stated so far.”
Who said journalists are not warriors fighting for truth ? Who can defeat such a warrior ? I did not expect to find such warriors on some journal. Usually journalists stand away from the battlefield. Whistle blowers are the pioneers of journalism . I am a whistle blower also . Laura and Khaled are infiltrators and hijackers with a Zionist agenda set against Syria and inciting sectarian hatred .There is no place for them on deLiberation and there is no deLiberation with them .
Barb Weir
August 4, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Why should Laura not champion the NATO backed effort to overthrow the Syrian government? I disagree with her view, but why should that view be unwelcome on our site? Why do any of us think we have a monopoly on the truth?
Such discussions belong here, but censoring, deciding what is true and false, disrespect and personal attacks do not belong here. Want to “expose lies”? Please do. But let’s be inclusive and tolerant of viewpoints with which we don’t agree or even facts that we don’t buy.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 6:34 pm
“But let’s be inclusive and tolerant of viewpoints with which we don’t agree or even facts that we don’t buy.”
All of this is good advice – does it include being tolerant of intolerance though?
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 6:47 pm
When the media starts catering for military interventions and supporting NATO and invasion this is no more media or journalism , this is waging for war and partaking in war crimes , and this is exactly what al Jazeera is doing it is inciting criminal action in Syria and instigating killings , this is war and has nothing to do with journalism but is using journalism as a means for committing crimes . This should not be allowed . Spreading sectarian hatred among Muslims is extremely dangerous and is the last weapon discovered by Israel. .
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 3:12 pm
It was a very professional move on behalf of brother Jonathon , to publish the E mail and bring the matter to the attention of all so that all share and contribute to sorting out the matter and re assess it instead of keeping all behind closed doors according to the bullier’s wish .This is not a private E Mail because she was whispering in Jonathon’s ears about myself and Alex which is a sin in Islam called Ghiba and which Laura would have known had she been Muslim . It was wise on behalf of brother Jonathon to have disclosed the matter , because had he done otherwise, and in case of conspiracy , he would have been responsible for holding information that could have helped stop it.
Had i told Ken O’Keefe about Catherine Myles who is another converted Muslim like Laura , then O’ Keefe would been spared the conspiracy of Myles and her partners .
If Laura came to one of my posts on Face Book , i will let her state her opinion in one comment and then after hearing her opinioin , i will certainly block her . Why? Because she is not a contributor but an infiltrator trying to push a different agenda on that site under the pretext of freedom of expression and on the ground of representing the sect she pretends to belong to. She pretends to speak for the Sunnis who are an essential part of the Arab world while she represents the Israeli point of view and NOT the Sunni . If one were to hear the Sunni point of view one would have to choose some one else who is representative of it and speaks in its name . What we hear from Laura is neither Sunni nor Muslim , this is the point of view of Israel .
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 5:39 pm
I could have just said nothing and been a good boy like she wanted me to be, opted for an easy life and not risked any trouble or upsetting anyone.
But that is not me, Truth is more important than beauty.
Barb Weir
August 4, 2012 at 6:25 pm
None of us has the truth.
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 7:34 pm
BW
None of us has the truth.
is that an evidence-based assertion, or an a priori judgement?
it worries me a tad because it sounds like Chaom Nomsky’s assertion that we can never really know what happened on 911, and what does it really matter?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 10:45 am
I never said I had the truth, but it concerns me more than anything, more than pleasing people or maintaining a professional veneer. Truth is what counts to me.
Alex
August 4, 2012 at 7:21 pm
“she was whispering in Jonathon’s ears about myself and Alex which is a sin in Islam called Ghiba and which Laura would have known had she been Muslim”
I would call it FITNA
happeh
August 4, 2012 at 4:54 pm
“Jonathon published an email which was about him. He broke no-ones confidence as the author was at pains to stress that they weren’t going behind anyone’s backs and had nothing to hide.”
Laura is right and all of you are wrong.
It has been standard practice to never post emails publicly since the internet started. Yes people do it but they are almost always attacked for it.
I received an email threatening violence against me from someone at a forums I participated in. I posted that email in the public forums to show others what kind of violent person this poster was, because in public the poster was a nice sweet woman who was always polite.
I was banned for posting that email. A warning to others that someone pretending to be nice would send personal emails threatening violence.
All of you are wrong and Laura is right.
It is not and has never been acceptable to publicly post personal emails.
Roy Bard
August 4, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Quite. That’s why Assange is facing a long stretch. Making the secret machinations of power public will always extract retribution.
Etiquette – another form of coercion.
Alex
August 4, 2012 at 5:06 pm
Who is fanning sectarianism?
Unfortunately, they are the people calling for the unity, they are the dictators “rebbeling” against dictatorships.
My first post was on July 19, after joining deLib on July 15.
Checking Dainal Mabsout’s account, I found that he joined on June 2, 2012
The first post of KA was on May 22, 2012
Please check his forth post dated May 31, 2012
I joined deLib on that very day,
Below two quotes of KA forth post written before Mansout and Alex having accounts.
In her complain dated Jun2 25, Laura accused Jonathan of: “allowing sectarian hatred to be propagated on deLiberation, perhaps you don’t relalise it, but you need to stop it.”
She ignore that her KA started the ’sectarian hatred to be propagated on deLiberation,” 10 days before Mabsout joining deLiberation. Perhaps Mabsout’ post (Losers out) on June 11th, 2012 , was a responce to KA calling “Gulf states to unite before its too late.
Moreover, until his post (A New Army Of Activists For Promoting The System) on June 24th, 2012 Laura ignored Mabsout’s posts, she posted two silly comments and rushed to complain to Jonathan and Gilad on the same day.
Laura’s battle with Danial started on June 30th, 2012 after his post “Farewell Sectarian Sheikh”
On 29 Jun 2012, Laura complained after Danial’s post From palestine to arab lands turn the page and keep the cause
Concerning Alex:
On July 15th, Laura declared her “respect” for Alex, 4 day before his first post!!! RATS (Mabsout and Me) she described us, and 4 days later the “respected Muslim” dared to complain to Gilad and Jonathan on personal insults.
Laura Stuart 20/07/2012:
My conclusion:
In my previous commet I said that since my first comments I felt that my presence in deLib is not welcomed by both Laura and KA. I would add that I doubted that she stands behind censoring my comments and deletion of one of my posts.
Now after checking the account of Danial Mansout, comparing dates of his posts with the dates of Laura’s complains, I am certain, the “problem”of Laura with Jonathan has nothing to do with his comments. The real problem is Mabsout and Alex, the pain in her sectarian neck. She wants us out. Having failed to achieve her goal, she wants Jonathan out.
BTW, if you vist my Blog you will find more than 30 posts for Laura taken from Delib.
Blake
August 4, 2012 at 6:14 pm
Whats your blog Alex?
Alex
August 4, 2012 at 6:46 pm
Uprooted Palestinians
http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.com/
Jonathon Blakeley
August 4, 2012 at 5:41 pm
exactly right my brother.
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 7:32 pm
Assassination of Syrian journalist Mohammad Said who works for Syrian Channel Al Ikhbariyya and was abducted from his house in Damascus Suburbs two weeks ago.The assassination took place early today by the Al Qa’ida people who decided to execute the journalist after investigating with him hoping that this will teach a lesson to all the journalists who work for the Syrian regime.
http://www.syriandays.com/index.php?page=show_det&id=32641
etominusipi
August 4, 2012 at 7:52 pm
all of this is useful for the information it affords about the peculiarities of the psychological functions.
in the type of world that we currently inhabit, Evil must always retain a slight advantage over Good – though this applies only to the human pseudo-reality, not to Nature as a whole. if by some mischance Good temporarily reversed that inbuilt bias, it would immediately begin to be transformed into Evil.
i would counsel dedication, humility, creativity, love, forgiveness, reconciliation, humour, friendliness, playfulness, inclusiveness, inquisitiveness, truthfulness, modesty, fearlessness, … but others have, no doubt, a more useful and reality-honed hierarchy of values to recommend.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 8:42 pm
those emails by laura confirm my suspicions she was working heavily behind the scenes trying to manipulate the people running the site as to who and what should be allowed on the site.
this discussion, though looking on the surface to be a distraction, is actually a very useful look into how covert zionists manipulate “unfriendly” sites. a well exposed example of how they try to do this manipulation we can learn from in order to prevent such attempts in the future. look at this exposure as a tool to use in preventing further attempts to destroy the site, or any site, in fact. catching these people early before they are able to do permanent damage is important and knowing what to look for will help in quickly recognising there is a problem so it can be addressed and corrected before their sabotage causes things to get out of hand.
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 9:31 pm
who_me , what you say is true , this is the way this should be understood
etominusipi
August 5, 2012 at 3:22 am
i agree. useful case study.
Laura Stuart
August 4, 2012 at 10:34 pm
@Jonathoneally Barb you have no idea…
“Its not a waste of time and is connected to Syria hence why it is so important. Laura has been championing the Nato backed Syrian liberation for some time and I see it as my duty to uncover what she has been upto.
Consider me deLiberation’s first whistleblower and I am blowing the whistle of Laura and Khalid for the reasons I have stated so far.”. . . . . . . . . . .
Aaah so now you want to say you are a budding Julian Assange.
You also start to show another version of “your truth” that you were exposing a perceived NATO/Zionist Agent… well well well
If you can’t silence the voices on the site that you don’t like, you expose them as you see it as agents. You already admitted you didn’t like my views or my writing but failed to get the editors to agree to stop me so you did it this way.
You really seem quite unhinged.
who_me
August 4, 2012 at 10:41 pm
http://jdstrength.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/put-a-sock-in-it.jpg
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 11:37 pm
@Laura , its too late now you have lost the war , the thugs in Syria started packing so you should do the same. Had you won the NATO war in Syria , you would have won it also on deLiberation and the others would have had to pack
Daniel Mabsout
August 4, 2012 at 11:47 pm
where is the link that disqualifies me ? it will only disqualify and expose you and your friends
Alex
August 5, 2012 at 1:04 am
“the thugs in Syria started packing”
In Aleppo, the Syrian army captured a Turkish General
etominusipi
August 5, 2012 at 3:33 am
There are increasing signs of quarrelling among rebel factions and between fighters and the population.
“The Free Syrian Army is causing us headaches now,” said Abu Ahmed, a local official who works with journalists in the Syrian town of Azaz, near the Turkish border.
“If they don’t like the actions of a person they tie him up, beat him and arrest him. Personality differences between brigade members are being settled using kidnappings and force. They are self-righteous and we are not happy about it,” he told Reuters.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 11:06 am
Idf are going through training drills and Russia is moving into place. Rumours are flying about that we could have full blown war in weeks.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 11:49 am
The ZioNazis (apologies to Jay who probably classes this as hate speech) are really fanning the flames of antagonism between the Sunni and SHia.
My reading of it is this –
the ZioNazis have hired factions within the Sunni communities to sow discord and the seeds of civil war between the Sunni and Shia. Already the Sunni are talking about Assad in ludicrous grandiose terms such as our erstwhile reporter from Palestine – mentioning no names.
Ultimately I think they, (the ZioNazis) desire the Sunni to wipe out the Shia Muslim of their behalf, and Syria is being used to invoke this war between Muslims, created by white ZioNazis for their own sick amusement.
To me it is the Shia Muslims whom seem more ethical and wise than many Sunnis who seem to have bought totally into the NGO corruption trap. The Shia seem more willing to form effectove resistance. The Sunnis seem often to resort to childish name calling and abuse, it is sad indeed.
Sunnis and Shia should wise up to the fact that they are being manipulated so, and work together to form an effective resistance….
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 12:11 pm
@Jonathon – you are only saying what I already said on deLiberation months back
http://www.deliberation.info/divide-et-impera-2/
However, the last part of your comment means you fail to notice that the Sunnis are the ones who have lived under dictatorship for so long. Until the dictators are got rid of nothing can change.
If sunni and shia would unite against the enemy Israel is something I have asked many times in comments and I do not know the answer.
Most sunnis had huge respect for NasrAllah until he gave his support to a dictator.
The fact that some NATO countries are backing the FSA is well known. However, many fail to see that there is no shared vision for the future between the west and muslims. The west may support getting rid of Assad but they will be sweating over how to stop Islamic governments taking control.
To say that shia are more willing to resist is only due to the fact that the sunnis have not been allowed to be politically active in the countries they live in, the people have to free themselves first.
The belief that you stand for only the truth is dangerous as we see when you find you can’t get rid of those voices you don’t want to hear so start a public smear campaign against them.
Rather than turning the people who read my articles against me you will only confirm their belief there is a massive war on Islam and that you are part of it.
Roy Bard
August 5, 2012 at 2:03 pm
“The west may support getting rid of Assad but they will be sweating over how to stop Islamic governments taking control.”
Fortunately for them, they have the well Funded SNC with its Washington stooges already in place to ensure that isn’t too much of a problem. And in any case they don’t seem averse to the Somaliaisation of Syria.
“Rather than turning the people who read my articles against me you will only confirm their belief there is a massive war on Islam and that you are part of it.”
I bet they also share your view that deLiberation has become “a propaganda outlet for a one sided view on Syria” – which suggests that they may not be the most objective of readers.
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 2:25 pm
@Roy indeed it is easy to come to that conclusion since the two other writers other than myself have apparently left deLiberation one being Redress and the other being KA who we don’t know if he is still with us or not. Then you have myself who has not actually written much about Syria except in the comments but who according to Jonathon’s comments yesterday been “outed” by him who is now a whistle blower on those who hold views which he doesn’t agree with.
So in reality deLiberation articles on Syria are all from one side.
fool me once...
August 5, 2012 at 5:13 pm
@Laura
“So in reality deLiberation articles on Syria are all from one side.”
I don’t get that impression Laura. It’s not that people support Assad’s dictatorship or any for that matter. I think it’s more that they are against the West/israel interfering by a bloody take over for selfish reasons and as usual leaving those people who survive, recovering for generations.
These so called freedom fighters appear to be nothing more than mercenary thugs as shown by contributors. Even the MSM has had to admit that.
Rabble rousers will get a hard time on deLib, as the idea of an innocent, being on the roused rabble’s pitchfork or the end of a rope etc is abhorrent to the majority here.
If you were seen to be wrongly accused of something heavy on here, even people who didn’t agree with you prior to the accusation would defend you, but also you have to come clean when caught out to maintain that “respect”.
Maybe it was, on the surface, a bit uncool to post your emails, but you have to admit you were slying about in the shadows stirring the sh*t, up to no good. You were caught with spoon in hand and therefore JB is vindicated.
Ask yourself, what had JB personally to gain by exposing your craftiness? He did it, I believe out of a sense of honesty and fairness and a belief in reducing the suffering of innocents caught up in the crossfire of war.
You used friendship to put him in a corner and he selflessly did the right thing, not even knowing he had a majority of support – not an easy call to make.
Think about it.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 8:38 pm
@ Laura – We that is patently not true as we have the legendary KA and his masterpieces of journalism on the subject.
etominusipi
August 5, 2012 at 3:24 pm
“The west may support getting rid of Assad…”
may?
support getting rid of?
sorry that i once again feel compeled by my OCD to apply a metaphorical magnifying glass to the minutiae of syntactical construction. may i plead in mitigation that i feel quite strongly that the English compound transitive verb to support getting rid of can easily be over-used in discussions of this kind.
support is a word with a relatively sophisticated semantic spectrum. getting rid of, whilst narrower in its range of permissible meanings, is far from wholly unambiguous. when the two are concertinaed into a clumsy portmanteau, we are in danger of a lack of clarity which adherents of the less generous-minded school of criticism might judge a tad dissimulatory.
since i am sure that was not the writer’s intention, is it reasonable to ask this writer to specify her meaning with greater precision, for the benefit of those like myself, whose factual knowledge of this conflict is far from fully developed?
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 4:53 pm
Ask yourself why the west was perfectly happy with all of the Arab dictators for the last few decades.
Alex
August 5, 2012 at 3:46 pm
“Most sunnis had huge respect for NasrAllah until he gave his support to a dictator.”
Changing your tone will not help making-up the damage you did to your self and your image, after you claimed that”Success will never come from deviant”
Real Sunnis still respect increased because Nasrallah gave his full support to that “Dictator”
That “Dictator” united (Hizbollah)and Hamas and Jihad (Sunni) and Seculars, nationalist, leftists in other resistance factions. It is your Shaytanhood who broke that unity, and calling Sinni puppet regimes to unite and defend Mecca. How you dare to talk about unity?
That “Dictator” refused to bow to Collin Pawell and the so-called Tribunal for Lebanon. That “Dictator” refused the offered carrots (bribe) and refused to compromise about Arab and Palestinian rights. Your International Shaitabhood compromised, and undertook to break syria the corner stone of Resistance Axis.
In your “Lectures” on Islam you wrote:
Use your “intellect” and ask yourself: When Muslims were free from Dictatorship??
Muslims lived under dictatorship all the time except the first 12 years (Abu Bakr 2years, Omar 10 year.)
Dictatorship (Devine Dictatorship) started with Caliph Othman, since he ignored that he was elected by the six-members committee formed by OMAR, and claimed the divine right to rule until last breath. When people put him in front of three choices:
1- To be tried for his deeds
2- To resign
3- or get killed.
He refused to be tried, refused to resign, claimed God appointed by GOD.
The rebels killed him and with his killing Muslims failed to unite,
Dictatorship continued and reinforced with Moawiya and his successors (Except the 2 year of the second Omar who was killed like the first but with poison).
Moawiya and his scholars abused Quran in claiming that history is pre-written in the “Preserved Tablet”, and based on that Claim he said that God selected him, and those who oppose him are opposing the will of Allah.
Later 40 scholars met and “decided”, the Caliph is not responsible for his deeds. ليس على الخليفة من حساب
Moawiya the Scholar re-defined Al-Qadaa wal Qadar (القضاء والقدر): Al-Qadaa is pre-written, Al-Qadar: The pre-written is doomed. In other words, human is not free.
According to people, who dared to use their brains in reading Quran, Al-qadar is the universe, its physical laws, such as Gravity, Death etc.
Al-qadaa, is the human decision, to make it easy, having a hand is (Qadar), how you use your is Qadaa. You could use your hands to help, and could use it to kill, you could use your tongue to tell the truth or use it to lie and spread Zionist propaganda. Therefore, you are accountable for you deeds.
Once, I asked a scholar from Al-Jamaaah Al-islamiya in Lebanon: Is Al-Qadaa doomed.
He said: Off course.
But, Mawlana, God told us in Holly Quran: وَقَضَى رَبُّكَ أَلاَّ تَعْبُدُوا إِلاَّ إِيَّاهُ وَبِالْوَالِدَيْنِ إِحْسَاناً (Thy Lord hath decreed that ye worship none but Him, and that ye be kind to parents)
If you look around you will find many people don’t believe, and many are not kind with their parent.
Do you know what he answered?
He said, the Arabic Language is so wide..
Dictatorship continued after the fall of Amaweyades with Abu Al-Abbas AL-Saffah (Saffah= Mass murderer), continued till this very moment.
With Bukhari’s so-called 5 pillar of Islam, where he excluded Shura, dictatorship has become the sixth pillar of Islam.
Read the following verses and use your “intellect” and ask yourself: Verses 38 includes Salah, Zakat, and Shura. How come Zakat, Salal are 2 pillars of Islam, and Shura is not??
42:38 And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by]
consultation(Shura=democracy) among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend.Now read the next Vreses connected to the previous.
strikes(OPPRESS)them, theydefend themselves(fight and defeat the tyranny)International Saythan Brothers, out off all Arabs and Muslim dictators, they chosed to fight and defeat the only Arab-Muslim Resisiting-refomer.
Use your “intellect” and you will find why the enemy is Bashar not Abdullah who have the longest borders with Israel, But Jordan is still since Black September a RED LINE.
Nowadays Muslims, despite the great contribution of Muslims in human civilization until the Moatazala’s Nakba, are the outcome of centuries of dictatorships, especially during the ages of darkness, that formed
The first step for Muslim Liberation is to desert the Scholars of the Sultan, the front defence line of all dictatorships, and return to the deserted Quran.
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 4:54 pm
@Alex I have never said other than that the Sunnis had respect for NasrAllah, I said it on here many times. But not now.
Alex
August 5, 2012 at 5:27 pm
I am taking about the so-called “Dictator” and the root of dictatorship in the History of muslim.
I am taking about the real dictators, the scholars instaling the sectarian of sectarian in Muslim brains.
Daniel Mabsout
August 5, 2012 at 4:57 pm
Sectarianism is Zionism and has nothing to do with Islam. The Palestinian cause or any cause does not belong to a sect or a religion , it belongs to man . The thugs hired to operate in Syria in huge numbers trained by CIA and funded by corrupt Gulf countries will not bring freedom and democracy to Syria , so stop this delirium about people and Muslims that should become free , this is utter delirium , and nothing else , and you are sharing in the crimes of the armed thugs and partaking in the violence happening there , you can call this Islam if you want but Islam is not killing against a pay . Stop this delirium and stop staining the image of Islam because by doing so you are exposing Islam and exposing yourself as an enemy to the religion . If you are a true Muslim you should stop supporting the hired criminal thugs and if you support the criminal thugs then you should stop claiming to be Muslim. The two don’t go together and Islam has nothing to do with this crap.
Daniel Mabsout
August 5, 2012 at 5:05 pm
“@Alex I have never said other than that the Sunnis had respect for NasrAllah, I said it on here many times. But not now.”
you only can speak for yourself and KA , Laura
you do not represent Sunnis though everybody here seem to have accepted that you are Muslim and Sunni
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Fool me Once, Jonathon can’t make his mind up what his motivation for publishing the email was. Firstly he said it was I was trying to get him kicked off deLiberation. Last night he said it is because he is a whistle blower exposing what he sees as the truth and seemingly impying KA and I are agents.
Either way it was a very unhinged thing to do. There are many emails that have gone between the orginal people involved in the group, between myself and the editors and between myself and Jonathon, I however am not the kind of person who would publish such emails.
Jonathon seems to have wanted to get me off the site for some time as he didn’t like my writing, he claims I was bringing the site down and he also claims I was trying to silence him. I know Jonathon didn’t like the Islamic element of my writing and we had already thrashed that out. Since Jonathon keeps changing and adding to his reasons for why he did what he did, we don’t really know however, one thing is clear it was a spiteful act. You can resolve issues by discussion where there are any but if you don’t mention them never mind discuss them just try and do some hatchet job, it doesn’t become an editor to behave so.
So, I am still here, evidently Jonathon has failed to get the editors to agree previously to kick me out and he has failed to intimidate me to leave. So i guess he is left with trying to convince people I am a zionist agent which is cool by me since no one who matters to me will believe it for one minute.
I am concerned about the repercussions of the action he took on the future of the site though.
No, I cannot agree about balance on Syria, because Jonathon believes only one side, the other authors have decided to leave or who knows about KA.
Alex
August 5, 2012 at 6:05 pm
“he claims I was bringing the site down and he also claims I was trying to silence him”
despit you intention, I would say you succeeded in one thing, bringing youself down to the very, very bottom. If you have the min. self respect you would leave.
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 6:25 pm
We have to agree to differ on many things.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 7:56 pm
Good news peeps traffic is up… busiest day ever at deliberation was yesterday.
who_me
August 5, 2012 at 8:54 pm
not seeing all that looney tunes spam from ka probably helped raise traffic.
Barb Weir
August 6, 2012 at 7:50 am
Good news! Any thoughts as to why?
Laura Stuart
August 5, 2012 at 8:18 pm
@Jonathon – fantastic viewing figures – well you will just have to keep outing zionists then, follow in Wikileaks footsteps.
What sensational revelations have you got prepared in case figures drop?
Better create another major scandal so you can compete with the Daily Star for quality reporting.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Well now we have exposed you for the gatekeeper you are people who were not coming because the felt unwelcome are likely coming back. We have testimony of this in the threads about how people felt hostility from you. So yes traffic is picking up no thanks to you and you stirring ways.
You wanted to turn deliberation into a some weird Wahhabist based Islamic site and that failed. You wanted to drive off all the Shia Muslims and suppress their views and limit the amount they posted and how often and that failed.
I personally would like to welcome all Sunni and Shia and all religions of all types and all political beliefs to deliberation. we need to pull together not pull apart and we need not be aware of those who sow discord and division around us.
Truth Justice Peace
Alex
August 5, 2012 at 8:51 pm
“You wanted to drive off all the Shia Muslims and suppress their views and limit the amount they posted and how often and that failed.”
ONE POST EVERY TWO DAYS, right Laura?
Alex
August 5, 2012 at 8:19 pm
Congratulations, Jonathan
Laura
Your scandel is enough
Blake
August 5, 2012 at 9:08 pm
I have nothing against Laura per se but hopes she learns from her mistakes. A little tactfulness will go a long way. We can all learn from each other.
Daniel Mabsout
August 5, 2012 at 9:18 pm
We have helped in normalising and opening up to sectarians -who want to divide the country in front of the enemy – instead of exposing them as zionists . we have condescended – out of internal complacency and weakness- to consider this as a regular internal symptom-which it is not- and to deal with it as such.
etominusipi
August 5, 2012 at 9:18 pm
LA spiteful act
from my experience, i really do not think Jonathon is a spiteful person.
but i have always found that a thief believes others are also thieves, just less successful ones.
a hypocrite is usually the first to rush forward accusing others of hypocrisy.
and many mask a deficiency of faith behind a carefully constructed mask of outward observance and piety.
Daniel Mabsout
August 5, 2012 at 9:22 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4H3dQM7g90&feature=youtu.be
Zionists are monitoring and organizing campaigns and training sessions of interference on line on Internet sites to impose the Zionist point of view and Zionist version of things and deal with what they call antizionism and antisemitism on the internet . There is no doubt that some of the trained activists to act on line have been initiated into the meanings of Islam and the aspects of the religion in order to be able to deal with questions relevant to this religion . We have come across many of these people on fb who posed as Muslim converts . The Litmus paper for these is sectarianism. They have become sectarian over night drectly after converting to Islam while the Muslim sectarians have spent hundreds of years accumulated so much heritage to become sectarians that they are. How can a convert become sectarian overlooking the Koran and the spiritual seeking which was his motive for conversion if such a conversion happened?
etominusipi
August 5, 2012 at 10:00 pm
quite right.
perhsps unfortunately, thougth hardly unexpectedly, the Muslim world offers many role-models for hypocritical piety – these behaviours can easily be mimicked by agents whose real motive is to sow seeds of dissension and fan the flames of controversies.
sometimes one apparently insignificant symptom can present a key to the diagnosis of an entire disease. as i have already pointed out, LA’s peculiar introduction of the notion of Palestinians hanging Jews from lamp-posts marks her out as an Israeli sympathiser and trained agent of hasbara. who else would ever even dream of such an idea?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 5, 2012 at 10:36 pm
As you so right say, the devil is in the details, in the little seemingly insignificant things. Its seems a very odd thing to say.
Khalid Amayreh
August 5, 2012 at 11:46 pm
Good news for all of you: Deliberation will soon undergo a reshuffling process. Sectarianism will be eliminated, especially at the “moderation” level.
Brashly sectarian moderators who deliberately suppress and censor some writers because of their “non-conformist” view will be eliminated.
Also, contributions supportive of sectarian entities will be scrutinized or rejected.
This is all that I can say now in light of intensive contacts with those concerned.
The time when people will be called “gay” and “Jew” and “Zionist quislings” because of their views will soon be over.
Deliberation will soon be free again from the clutches of blind sectarianism.
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 3:20 am
“Good news for all of you: Deliberation will soon undergo a reshuffling process. Sectarianism will be eliminated, especially at the “moderation” level.”
Yeah – it would be interesting if you were being told this without consultation with the people who’ve done the bulk of the work on the site.
You and Laura are both good at appealing to authority aren’t you, and stirring up a hornets nest to impose your own sectarian views.
Khalid Amayreh
August 5, 2012 at 11:51 pm
Deliberation has effectively become a mouthpiece for fanatical Shiite radicals embracing tyrannical regimes in Damascus and Tehran.
Deliberation Should not have reached this point. This is the views of the founders of the site.
Khalid Amayreh
August 5, 2012 at 11:58 pm
Deliberation was designed to be an outlet for various thoughtful and educated views.
It should have never allowed to become a a dump for ignorant and fanatical advocacy for hateful regimes in the Middle East.
Hateful Sectarianism must not be allowed to raise it ugly head under the disguise of liberalism.
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 12:05 am
Deliberation was originally meant to be a liberal oulet for thoughtful and educated views on various matters.
It was never intended to become a dump for sectarian Shiite propaganda.
And what propaganda?
A propaganda justifying the real holocaust being carried out by the tyrant of Syria, the clerical regime in Tehran, and the sectarian Shiite group, known as Hezbullah.
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 4:27 am
You really don’t understand what a site without censorship is about, do you?
The worst and most hateful sectarian posts I have seen are by you Khalid, you who are such a slavish devotee of the divide and rule mentatality of the Israelis and Western powers.
Why don’t you read all your comments from this evening and see if you think they qualify as “thoughtful and educated views on various matters.”?
Or if perhaps they’re just a new set of attacks on people who keep the site running.
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 12:10 am
I will brief the founders of Deliberation on every bit of bias, impartiality, and favoritism by the the sectarian moderators who are trying to eliminate serious writers who dare call the spase a spade.
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 4:17 am
You are am informer? That’s nice dear!
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 12:15 am
Why is it for example that contributions by people like Khalid Amayreh are left to wait 48 or 72 hours bedore being posted on the site, while idiotic screeds by the sectarian rabbles are posted immediately?
Is this what you call honest moderation??
Somoe
August 6, 2012 at 8:42 am
Because your track record speaks for itself. Your comments are pretty standard, sectarian babel. You prattle on about others being sectarian but it is you that reduces comment threads to sectarian nonsense and personal attacks consistently. You have been put in moderation as a result of your bad behaviour but sadly like Laura, you lack the ability to reflect on your short-comings and find everyone else to be at fault instead. It is hard to know what to say to someone like you… you appear to be beyond reason!
Your agenda seems to be to take over Deliberation by dividing the editors and destroying the community readership that has grown around it. I think you over-estimate the importance of your point of view. It’s not very original and one can read it in any of the MSM outlets if we want more lies to feed on. If you bothered to take in anything in the comments, you would have gathered that by now that very few people here take you very seriously and many are rapidly losing any respect they might have had for you. Its a shame you couldn’t take the advice you were given!
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 12:19 am
I believe that hezbulah is already dead in the collective conscience of most Muslims.
History will mention that the group’s fatal mistake was its siding with the cultic murderous regime of Bashar Izzefit in Damascus.
Somoe
August 6, 2012 at 8:55 am
And stop writing as if you have the rest of the muslim world behind you… because that is patently UNTRUE! Yours is a marginal, sectarian perspective and true muslims are beyond such petty ridiculous notions. They do not waste their time judging others FOR God.
How can mere mortals be judges for God – who is all-seeing and all-knowing? What if your incomplete, unenlightened view was WRONG? How would you know? Others might try to tell you but you would judge them unworthy and call them liars… You see the problem?
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 10:09 am
Its hard to believe that on August 4th, Khalid wrote:
when you think of the screeds of stuff we have learnt about the Shiites from him, such as:
“The Shiites don’t have a ingle authentic book of Hadith.
This is why they quote from Sunni books if they wanted to be believed.
But then they even call Bukhari Kafer because he did not believe in their 12 saitnts or mini gods.”
“The main problem is that lying is legal and legitimate in Shiite Islam.
This is why the Shiites don’t have a single Hadith “book” that is “Sahih” or “authentic”
We Muslim Sunnis have had Sihah hadith references for more than a thousand years.”
“As an off-shoot of the Muaatzila, Shiits originally were a people of logic, now they are conspicuously very illogical and very irrational.”
“In short, Iran supports the tyrannical regime because the regime is facilitating the spread of Shiite schools and temples to convert the People of Syria by offering them financial and sexual inducements. ”
“Shiites are willing to side with Satan against Sunni Muslims. Period.”
“It seems their 12 gods, sorry imams, are very busy or having a hard time trying to save the sob in Damascus.”
“It is really strange that some posters here think it is ok for a regime to use heavy artillery and tanks against civilian in order to remain in power? Have these people lost their humanity?
Is this the kind of human being Shiism molds????”
“You try to ally yourself with the Christians, but you failed. The Christians don’t like liars and lying is an established feature in Shiism.
So, you are a loser, a liar, a defender of murderers and child killers.
this is why you won’t have the face to expose your face.
We, Muslims, don’t behave like you. We are sure of ourselves, we don’t lie to hide our weaknesses.”
“why the Shiites are deviant:
1-because they believe the Quran is distorted, and that the true Quran is hidden with the hidden imam who is hiding in a deep cave in Iraq since 1200 years.
2- Nearly 90% of the Shiite religion evolved after Islam was perfected in the Prophet’s life.
3-A shiite follows his “Imam” not the Quran.
4-Allah orders Muslim to start fasting Ramadan upon citing the new moon. The Shiites don’t accept this, they must do the opposite of what Sunni Muslims do.
5-Shites legalize lying to opponents.
6-The Shiites legalize a form of masked prostiution known as Mutaa whereby a woman may sleep with a hundred man per day. This has caused a huge problem in Shiite socities as thousands of people don’t know their real fathers.
7-When a shiite wants to make supplication, he doesn’t make it to God, but to an intermediary, an imam.
8-Shiites hurt themselves with daggers and swords on the day od Ashura. Neither Ali nor the rophet himself did that.
9-Shiites believe in Bedaa, the belief that God makes mistakes but rectifies them later.
10-The Shiites belive that the status of an imam is greater than that of the Prophet.
11-the Shiites believe that when the hidden imam returns, he will unearth the grave of Muhammed, burn the bones of Omar and Abu Bakr and cancel Islam and rule according to Israel or Jacob.
Also, one can not be a Shiite if he or she doesn’t curse and damn Sunni Muslims. We are their ultimate enemies. All Siite activities center on underming Sunnis. They wouldn’t fight the enemies of Islam, the opposite is true, they collude with them against Muslims.
There are hundreds of other aspects that put many Shiites outside the realm of Islam.”
There are many more and indeed worse ones.
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 10:11 am
Am I alone in thinking these two statements are not compatible?
“We are not the Almighty to hold them accountable for their beliefs and practices. This is God’s business, not our business.”
“There are hundreds of other aspects that put many Shiites outside the realm of Islam.”
Alex
August 6, 2012 at 10:41 am
You are not alone. However, the first statement refelcts the real Islam, the second refects what Sectarian brothers believe.
Laura Stuart
August 6, 2012 at 10:53 am
@Roy – no they are not incompatible because on the day of reckoning Allah s.w.t. is the decider not mankind.
The second statement is based on rulings that the schlars have made.
I would add that it might be more beneficial to leave out the religious differences between the two sects, you may have noticed but I have not replied to Alex’s posts on Islamic points for days and days, not because it is not interesting for me but because I feel it is not interesting for the readers to see in depth discussion on Islamic Fiqh on issues that have not been resolved for over 1400 years so are not going to be resolved on this board.
Alex
August 6, 2012 at 11:13 am
“The second statement is based on rulings that the schlars have made.”
In other words, until judgement day Laura’s schoolars decide who is Muslim and who is not.
God granted then powers not given to his Prophet who blamed his Saheb and adopted son Zaid for killing a “doubted” Muslim saying:
Have you openned his Hart هلا شققت قلبة؟
Laura shoud be reminded about her long lecture about Islam and brainwashed muslims.
Alex responded and like her FSA when defeated they claim its a tactical withdrawal.
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 11:18 am
Ok – so somehow ““We are not the Almighty to hold them accountable for their beliefs and practices. This is God’s business, not our business.” actually means it is our business!
I did a little word cloud generation of some of Khalid’s comments from July 28th.
It picked up Shiite as his most commonly used word and came up with this list of usage:
etominusipi
August 9, 2012 at 8:50 am
thank you for that expertise, Roy. is there a freeware program easily available that would let me produce the word-clouds?
such brief summaries are sometimes amusing and always instructive.
KA is such a splendid exponent of vitriolic invective that a study based on a larger corpus of his posts might be useful to other researchers.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 9, 2012 at 1:28 pm
I have used WORDLE
I recommend cutting and pasting text from articles to analyse them. To save the images, Screenshot them and paste into a suitable program.
also http://worditout.com/ is quite good.
Hope this helps
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 11:36 am
I think the 2 sets of quotes put together are quite useful in looking at the question of who is posting sectarian screeds to the site.
What do you think someone trying to understand what is going on, and who isn’t a Muslim, might deduce from reading a days worth of Khalid’s instruction?
Now even Jonathon and myself are accused of sectarianism, and yet I am neither Shiite nor Sunni, and believe that to hate people for following the faith into which they were born is rather unfair and arbitrary.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 9, 2012 at 9:20 am
Oops!
I just posted a sectarian screed. No word cloud is needed to see it as such.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 12:42 pm
no you are not alone ROY. I agree and I would argue that some of those statements constitute ‘hate speech’ and should never have been allowed on delib.
who_me
August 6, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Roy Bard
“Am I alone in thinking these two statements are not compatible?”
you’re not alone.
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 4:48 am
Sectarianism is Zionism . We are not cheated by the colors of the chameleon or by its non conformist discourse . The Resistance will stay , chameleon will go.Long live the Resistance, Long live deLiberation!
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 6:14 am
Unlike all the other deLib commenters I am only going to point out a big positive trait I notice in K’s latest posts:
the mastery of the English language evident in his comments (or the comments of one of K’s avatars) has made a huge improvement leap. Anyone caring to compare the early ones to some of the above cannot fail to be impressed.
So after all at least one (or 2 or 3) people have seen some benefit from all the… can’t find a nice word… all … that.
etominusipi
August 6, 2012 at 9:58 am
KA “the real holocaust being carried out by the tyrant of Syria, the clerical regime in Tehran, and the sectarian Shiite group, known as Hezbullah.”
this ‘real holocaust’ brings to mind LS’s cute image of Palestinians hanging Jews from lamp-posts.
the phrase appears to intend a contrast with other non-real holocausts, presumably the various small pseudo-holocausts caused as collateral damage to the activities of the heroic armed thugs working as liberator-mercenaries for the Nato-Saudi-Qatari-Turkish-Israeli crusader alliance.
it is good that this KA identifies his enemies clearly. it turns out to be the same axis of evil that our Sunni leaders in Washington and Tel Aviv have been warning us about since PNAC and before.
KA sees holocausts and an axis of evil, and he talks of chutzpah
LS sees Palestinians hanging Jews from lamp-posts.
KA notes:
Deliberation was originally meant to be a liberal owlet for thoughtful and educated veiws on various matters.
Brashly sectarian moderators who deliberately suppress and censor some writers because of their “non-conformist” view will be eliminated.
Also, contributions supportive of sectarian entities will be scrutinized or rejected.
This is all that I can say now in light of intensive contacts with those concerned.
rather than eliminated i prefer the less emotive terms neutralised or, perhaps, liquidated. and, may i add, the foul-smelling corpses of their sectarian screeds will be bulldozed into unmarked graves,
but i agree, let’s get rid of them, all the evil Shiite propagandists who have ruined this site with their hate-filled invective in support of Rapist Regime of the of the Kandlestick-maker of Kandahar…
(surely you mean either the Butcher of Baghdad, or the Baker of Damascus? ed.)
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 12:47 pm
lol very funny
etominusipi
August 6, 2012 at 10:32 am
a suggestion to the editors:
there is widely available software technology of the word-cloud variety which will perform a crude content analysis of a set of texts and display the results as a diagram with the most frequently-occurring words appearing bigger and bolder.
whatever its deficiencies, such software would be effectively impartial between different contributors.
if applied only to already-published material, there would be nothing clandestine or underhand about it.
i am quite happy to volunteer my own posts for a trial run, although sadly the results might be uselessly atypcal as my remarks are usually more facetious than informative.
these word-cloud portraits would help new readers to direct themselves quickly towards the commentators they feel most nearly reflect their own point of view, without having to wade through the endless pages of filthy diatribes vomited out by the satanic circle of nauseous scribes who have prostituted themselves to the nihilistic and Godless ’cause’ of Shiite sectarianism and their adulterous allies, those foul-mouthed jackals of Alawitism who act as running-dogs to the Demon of Damascus.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 12:49 pm
I will look into this… thanks
Laura Stuart
August 6, 2012 at 10:46 am
@Somoe I am guessing, but I think that comment by KA may have been misunderstood. I believe he meant he is representative of 90% of Muslims who are sunni against 10% who are shia.
Plainly within both sunni and shia there are sub groups, amongst sunni there are those muslims who do not pray or fast and who commit adultery and drink alcohol, many of those believe in secularism as it gives them the chance to enjoy their lives in the way they wish but not in the way that Allah s.w.t. commanded.
Some sunni muslims believe in pan arab nationalism or baathism, some shia muslims like the alevi in turkey do not fast and some like the shia Ismaeli believe the aga khan is a prophet. So yes, muslims are of many branches but still the majority of the one and a half billion are sunni.
The majority of believing sunni muslims definitely do not want a dictatorship nor in the long term a secular government.
Alex
August 6, 2012 at 11:21 am
Reading between the lines
The majority of satanhooh definitely do not want a dictatorship nor in the long term a secular government.
Democracy is tool an on the long term they want Al-Hakimiya ["Devine" dictatorship]
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Khalid stands by every remark he has made on this site.
The problem is not whether the remarks can be considered sectarian or not.
Th real problem is whether they are true or false.
I am absolutely sure thatthey are 100% correct.
Greg Felton
August 6, 2012 at 3:13 pm
This is not the language of a rational arguer. This is the language of a true believer and a dogmatist. I think Khalid Amayreh has shown himself to be more interested in flogging his own prejudices than in writing informed commentary. His gratuitously offensive digs at Shi’ites, as compiled by Roy. should call his writing into question.
For the record, I support Syria’s regime for the simple reasons that it is the legitimate government of Syria; it is being destabilized by the Isramerican insurgency; and the press does nothing but parrot official anti-Assad propaganda.
who_me
August 6, 2012 at 6:14 pm
Greg Felton
“it is being destabilized by the Isramerican insurgency”
“isramerican”, great way to put it. i’ll have to remember that term.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:15 pm
EWith that statement you spoke for me too.
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 2:47 pm
It is very dangerous to think that LS and KA are representative of the Sunni view point or of any other viewpoint- for that matter- and therefore are entitled to a space on this site where they can express their opinion . If the site needs a Sunni view or a different view they should look for one that is representative .
There are many intellectuals who will be more than happy to share their opinion . The question is not here only about the degree of tolerance unless you want to extend your tolerance to include lies . The question is neither sectarian nor religious but is of integrity and honesty . I see that some friends and contributors here are somehow intimidated regarding LS or KA thinking that- by condemning or judging them – they might be alienating a point of view or discarding some facts or data or wronging some people . This is not so .
The problem with LS and KA is not religious or sectarian, the problem with them is that they are not honest and that they disseminate false information and spread lies on the site . Is this to be allowed ? LS and KA are not journalists , they are liars . This is the simple truth and nothing else and they will not accept their lies to be checked but they will rush to complain and say that- by exposing them and their lies -it is a religion and a sect and freedom of speech that are being exposed and they will call for justice and equity which is pure black mail .
Give us break Lady and Gentleman ! Everyone is entitled to one’s own opinion but no one is allowed to lie. Saying that Nasrullah- the leader of the Resistance -is sectarian- simply because he is born as a Shi’a- not only is a big lie , but is racist as well .
Never Sayyed has taken a sectarian stand but has -in every speech he gave -warned about sectarianism and called for restraint and self control and for avoiding- by all means- the sectarian trap set by the Zionists to create discord and divide the nation.
In his last speech Sayyed complained about how the western establishment and Israelis are taking advantage of our credulousness , our naivete and our ignorance and exploiting all these to carry on their vicious schemes by spreading all kinds of sectarian slander that has no basis whatsoever.
Sayyed urged all to rise above these insignificant rumors that have no foundation whatsoever and took upon himself to check and take care of any harmful sectarian behavior showing on behalf of any one belonging to the Shi’a community- provided it truly happened-and invited all religious references and authorities- in Lebanon- to do this same checking and controlling regarding their respective communities.
This was a kind of honorable pledge to which all will have to commit themselves in order to spare the country –in these critical times-any threat of division or conflict or any escalation regarding this matter . Now ,Sayyed never lies and never uttered a falsity and even the Israelis know this very well and KA can ask them because -during the war- they will make a point to take the information from him because they know that he never lies to his people and never lied .
The religious authorities in Lebanon are now studying the honorable pledge supported by Sayyed Hassan to protect the country and the people from all schemes of division. This is the line along which Sayyed Hassan acts and behaves and along which had always acted and behaved and this is what KA labels as sectarianism , shame on the liar . Lies have no place or room in journalism and liars should be banned from sites that are committed to truth .
I challenge the liar to bring any piece of evidence that is genuine and proves his accusations .I challenge him to do so and bring evidence other wise- if he fails in doing so – I propose that he be banned from publishing here.
wW can discuss and bring up issues but lies have to be taken care off, in other terms, they have to be eradicated and liars should be shunned. There is no other way of dealing with lies and liars other than that .
..
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 2:50 pm
Telling the truth is not always sweet to the ear, it some times hurt.
but one can always says what one wants to say without indulgng in personal insults.
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 3:24 pm
If you don’t bring evidence about your saying that Sayyed is sectarian and promotes sectarianism this means you are a liar and promoting sectarianism yourself under cover . Show your evidence.
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 2:52 pm
A PLEDGE OF HONOR
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=343264625753398&set=a.127411980671998.32655.100002095913284&type=3&theater
Khalid Amayreh
August 6, 2012 at 2:57 pm
If Deliberation has to choose between closure and morphing into a propaganda dump for Hezbullah and Iran and the Syrian regime, it will choose the former choice.
Deliberation must not allow a few ill-behaving sectarian fanatics to spoil and poison its discourse.
Somoe
August 6, 2012 at 5:32 pm
Who are you to speak for Deliberation???
YOU are the very “ill-behaving sectarian fanatics” spoiling and poisoning the discourse, that you speak of!!!
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 5:57 pm
“Deliberation must not allow a few ill-behaving sectarian fanatics to spoil and poison its discourse.”
If there was a straw poll on deLiberation who do you think would win the vote as the ill-behaving sectarian fanatic spoiling and poisoning the discourse?
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 3:39 pm
i do not see what deLiberation has to do with it . are you threatening them ?
If you don’t bring evidence about your saying that Sayyed is sectarian and promotes sectarianism this means you are a liar and promoting sectarianism yourself under cover . Show your evidence.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Is it illegal to publish emails… ? I have just been accused.
answer NO.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_it_illegal_to_publish_on_the_Internet_an_email_sent_to_you
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 7:06 pm
I have been told that Gilad Atzmon and Paul Eisen are leaving deLiberation.
Apparently my un-ethical and illegal use of emails is partly to blame. LOL
Although stricly speaking it is not illegal.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:11 pm
What does “leaving” mean?
deLib may still publish their writings when it wishes to, right?
Will this upset laura so much she will leave also?
deLiberation
August 6, 2012 at 7:26 pm
Gilad Atzmon has left deLiberation
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:12 pm
I can’t believe that’s the reason.
fool me once...
August 6, 2012 at 7:28 pm
“I have been told that Gilad Atzmon and Paul Eisen are leaving deLiberation.”
There will be a statement, right? A lot of people will find that very disappointing.
who_me
August 6, 2012 at 7:39 pm
“A lot of people will find that very disappointing.”
second that.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 7:16 pm
let me see, I am not allowed to comment and I published emails and I dont do what I am told.
All bad I am afraid > You can see why
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:41 pm
deLib has been enriched by your comments, the e-mails showed that if the nefarious goings on behind the scenes would have continued unabated and with impunity deLib would have been compromised without possibility of rehab, and it is a good thing you don’t do “what you’re told” when you perceive that to be a danger to deLib.
who_me
August 6, 2012 at 7:46 pm
Ariadna Theokopoulos
i second that. it looks like “the team” managed to accomplish part of their objective. they split the people running the site. their sowing division worked in that respect.
fool me once...
August 6, 2012 at 8:15 pm
“it looks like “the team” managed to accomplish part of their objective.”
Surely P&G would have been fully aware of what was happening? Why leave now? Come on Gilad and Paul, some feedback would be useful.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 8:22 pm
I have come to find your persistent questioning of those obviously disinclined to discuss their motivations close to endearing. I am not saying it facetiously.
I recognize it now as a particularly American directness that refuses to take silence for an answer which, although ti irritates the Europeans, has a whiff of American wholesomeness about it. Europeans just don;t get it. I, as an altered European, get it only in replay.
fool me once...
August 6, 2012 at 8:55 pm
“your persistent questioning of those obviously disinclined to discuss their motivations”
” three times and if you don’t say anything then you’re expected to stfu. It’s a kind of gritty therapy where no one has to lose face – my mistake is forgetting I’m not talking to locals. 
It’s how the working class community from where I’m from, get to the bottom of things. I suppose it gives permission for someone to say something against the grain or potentially upsetting, because, they where “asked to”. You get asked or “badgered
You explaining that usa/european difference makes me understand your badger comment better. cheers
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 8:27 pm
Why? Because it was an IMPASSE.
Paul Eisen
August 6, 2012 at 8:55 pm
I’m no longer an Editor because I cannot fit in with the current editorial style and practices.
BTW, I’ve only been an Editor for a total of about 4 weeks. I was an Editor for about 2 weeks at the beginning, and then I was removed. Then, about 2 weeks ago, they asked me to lend a hand with all the workload.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 9:07 pm
I guess that means we’ll miss you even though you won’t miss us.
fool me once...
August 6, 2012 at 9:26 pm
@Paul
Thank you for taking the time to explain your reasons Paul.
Alex
August 6, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Relax
fool me once...
August 6, 2012 at 9:16 pm
“Relax”
Is that to everyone?
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 8:19 pm
When Khalid said
I somehow doubt that he was expecting this to happen.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 8:25 pm
I suspect he had bought popcorn (or maybe sesame seed pastries) to watch the spectacle of flogging and hand chopping.
What’s interesting is that he had some advance notice that something would happen. Not from L, of course, because they never, ever, ever e-mail each other…
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 9:08 pm
we have lost half the ship , that is true but we were able to save the other half
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 9:17 pm
I Sailed on Half a Ship
I sailed on half a ship
on half the seven seas,
propelled by half a sail
that blew in half a breeze.
I climbed on half a mast
and sighted half a whale
that rose on half a mighty wave
and flourished half a tail.
Each day, with half a hook
and half a rod and reel,
I landed half a fish
that served as half a meal.
I ate off half a plate,
I drank from half a glass,
then mopped up half the starboard deck
and polished half the brass.
When half a year had passed,
as told by half a clock,
I entered half a port
and berthed at half a dock.
Since half my aunts were there
and half my uncles too,
I told them half this half-baked tale
that’s half entirely true.
Jack Prelutsky
who_me
August 6, 2012 at 9:22 pm
“then mopped up half the starboard deck”
but not half the larboard deck? btw, which deck is the starboard deck?
fool me once...
August 6, 2012 at 9:53 pm
^Just remember avoid the poop deck!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXiyD_d1BjA
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Its all good we will go a lot faster in the waters ahead.
deLiberation
August 6, 2012 at 7:42 pm
Gilad Atzmon
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:48 pm
That does not sound at all as something caused by Jon.
We have all had enough of IT but I guess he hoped it would go away all by itself without any changes or upset, which was not possible.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:44 pm
Perhaps they wish to spend more time with their families
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 7:52 pm
I also bet that L was constantly beseeching Gilad with her aggressive whining until he really coudn’t take it any more.
For a busy guy like him the fight or fight instinct said “Laura? FLEE!”
Roy Bard
August 6, 2012 at 9:35 pm
For some reason this reminds of that Billy Joel song:
Laura
Calls me
In the middle of the night
Passes on her
Painful information
Then these careless fingers
They get caught in her vice
Til they’re bleeding
On my coffee table
Living alone isn’t all that
It’s cracked up to be
I’m on her side
Why does she push the poison on me?
Laura
Has a very hard time
All her life has
Been one long disaster
Then she tells me
She suddenly believes she’s seen
A very good sign
She’ll be taking
Some aggressive action
I fight her wars
While she’s slamming her doors
In my face
Failure to break
Was the only mistake
That she made
Here I am
feeling like a fucking fool
Do I react the way exactly
She intends me to?
Everytime I think I’m off the hook
She makes me lose my cool
I’m her machine
And she can punch all the keys
She can push any button I was programmed through
Laura
Calls me
When she needs a good fix
All her questions
Will get sympathetic answers
I should
Be so
Immunized
To all of her tricks
She’s surviving
On her second chances
Sometimes I feel like this
Godfather deal is all wrong
How can she hold an umbilical chord
For so long?
I’ve done everything I can
What else am I supposed to do
I’m her machine
And she can punch all the keys
She can push any button I was programmed through
Laura
Loves me
Even if I don’t care
That’s my problem
That’s her sacred absolution
If she had to
She would put herself in my chair
Even though I
Faced electrocution
She always says
I’m the best friend that
She’s ever had
How do you
Hang up on someone
Who needs you that bad?
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Hang up anywy
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Yes., or keep it in answer whilst hiding in another room or playing loud music to muffle the sound of the phone.
who_me
August 6, 2012 at 10:07 pm
living in nyc, i’m sure billy joel had a lot experience with that type.
deLiberation
August 6, 2012 at 7:59 pm
Despite Eisen and Gilad jumping ship just as we getting really popular, we are not going to let that stop the deLiberation website.
We had some good times, some bad times and some ugly times…. but obviously it was not for them. But if nothing else we can all agree that we learnt a lot in the process.
Oh well.
Carry on DeLiberating.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 8:29 pm
“Carry on DeLiberating.”
What’s the saying? They would have wanted us to
pgg804
August 7, 2012 at 12:03 am
I am very disappointed. I wish Gilad and Paul had both stayed, in whatever role they wanted to play. I consider it a major loss.
I would like to know the reason(s) and see if something could be done to change their minds. If they feel there are deficiencies they may have valuable input.
I have to say I admire Deliberation’s policy of allowing anyone to submit an article and have it published as long it does not attack anyone, but I can see how allowing people with widely varying opinions on issues can cause a problem.
Alex
August 6, 2012 at 9:02 pm
Ariadna Theokopoulos
You hit the nail, I was about to say the same. According to Gilad deLib doesn’t have a party line,and supports plural and open discussion.
I wonder if you read both L & KA talking about change in Delib.
But, unfortunately they expected other changes.
I knew Brother Gilad for many years, I met him at PTT. He left PTT for different reason, and Joined UP.
If somebody to be balimed for the loss og Gilad, its Laura who wanted DelIb into salafi mouth piece,a propaganda tool against the other. As you said Gilad is a busy man, and for sure he he had enough of “it”
I ask the Editors to relax and keep delib up.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 6, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Yes, we all want that, Alex. Great call.
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 9:51 pm
the virus called sectarianism
There is a difficulty for people who are not familiar with this kind of struggle and who do not practically understand it and therefore cannot take a stand because they lack proper practical insight into the whole situation and will not act blindly and are afraid to fall into the difficulty itself .Sectarianism is difficult to be understood and dealt with by people especially by foreigners There is a feeling of powerlessness and tiredness that could overcome someone mixed in this whole thing .
Daniel Mabsout
August 6, 2012 at 10:59 pm
the greatest fear of israel is the possible cooperation between deLiberation and the like and Hizbullah and the like. they desire a conflict and an alienation instead
Jonathon Blakeley
August 6, 2012 at 11:12 pm
I started this thread because I believed there was signs of conflict that had been sown internally to weaken us. I thought I should draw it to the attention of others because I feared that our integrity was becoming compromised from within.
As a result i was labeled as un-professional, un-ethical, a rude commenter and wicked publisher of unauthorized emails.
That reminds me I must update my CV.
etominusipi
August 7, 2012 at 7:45 am
hmmm! events!
events behind the scenes
everything that is organised, even an anarchist group, has this aspect, a behind the scenes aspect.
apart from the cameraderie of the green room i don’t much like behind the scenes scenarios, even though i can see that these things must exist, i can acknowledge their necessity at some level.
let me save ink by using an abbreviation.
everybody loves an acronym. so let me define a term:
BTS = Behind The Scenes
for a few friends to meet in a pub, it takes only a few phone calls. but there is still this aspect, a minimal level of planning and concerted decision making. even such informal meetings sometimes abort. due to other commitments there may be no time-slot suitable for enough participants. or the group successfully assembles but the meeting aborts because, e.g., the venue was destroyed by fire the previous evening. in this case further hastily-convened BTS activity is required to decide whether to cancel the meeting or to adopt a new venue.
obviously the BTS realm has to do with planning and admin, but this management aspect interacts with an important but less tangible dimension that i will simply refer to as matters of policy.
______________________________________________
BTS tends to be secretive, which is one of the prime reasons i don’t like it much. however, on a practical level there may be many reasons why certain things should not be disclosed. and for psychological and political reasons there will be many other things that simply are not disclosed, whether or not they should be. what should or should not be disclosed about BTS is often a subject for BTS discussion or disputation.
________________________________________________
with that pre-amble, can someone tell me what has been going on?
who set up deLiberation? who is its steering committee? how can people resign? what are they resigning from? is there funding, so that some donor can pull strings?
perhaps there was a premonitory tremor, which had some subterranean relation to more recent seismic events. i noticed some time ago that a writer called Jonathon Azaziyah seemed to disappear without a trace. if there was any discussion of this, i missed it, as it occurred at a time when my visits to the site were less frequent.
as an aspergers-human hybrid my need to know is not casual. my psychological well-being depends on it. can someone please shed a little non-acrimonious light on the BTS aspect of the event: Paul and Gilad are ‘leaving’ deLiberation.
Roy Bard
August 7, 2012 at 11:23 am
hi etominusipi
Earlier in the thread I wrote to Laura:
Both Laura and Khalid were attempting to get views they didn’t agree with censored, and both tried to do this by appealing, behind the scenes, to figures they saw as having “authority”. The Laura emails make this clear, and we can also deduce Khalid’s actions when he crowed that:
and
indicating also that he intended to keep stirring the pot:
What Laura failed to anticipate is that the BTS wranglings would be brought out into the open.
In a project devoted to the liberation of discourse, I think she placed her perceived ‘authority’ figures in an impossible situation, and that is why it became obvious to me that it could only result in people leaving. The option of turning deLiberation into a ‘dump’ for propaganda that only reflected the LS/KA view was in direct contravention of the aims of the site, and virtually impossible to achieve.
In fact, if LS/KA now decide not to publish here, they will have achieved a spectacular own goal!
etominusipi
August 7, 2012 at 1:55 pm
yes, i noticed your defenestration comment, but failed to see its (almost) literal application. well spotted.
who are the founders referred to in the KAquote?
Jonathon Blakeley
August 7, 2012 at 8:00 am
Jonathon Azaziyah published an article which editors were shown and sanctioned. One of the editors now left, decided that it had to pulled and told me to tell him. He subsequently left for a variety of reasons.
Who set up delib? I don’t know. Gilad and co approached me ..>> I made the site.
Who is the steering comittee >> Roy Bard and Me.
How can people resign .. .. They give up contributing.
What are they resigning from .. One of the best papers on the Internet.
Is there funding? Intermittent random donations from kindly folks, mostly no.
etominusipi
August 7, 2012 at 11:02 am
thx Jonathon for those helpful explications.
Gilad is a busy man and hasn’t been much on delib – in any case we all know where to find his stuff. but it would be a pity to lose Paul’s thoughtful comments.
forgive me for one more deliberation about deLiberation:
your expression and co is still opaque to me – the usage suggests a (probably reasonable) assumption of some general knowledge which i, being perennially ill-informed, unfortunately lack. it is only relevant because KA expressed prior knowledge that something was afoot BTS. this made me wonder what the original BTS deal might have been. were certain parties cut in on the basis of an initial misapprehension of their credentials and motivation – their strident presence subsequently becoming an embarrassment?
whatever has gone on, the operation has the hallmarks of an (at least partly successful) sabotage, so, simply as a theoretician, i am interested to know more of the tactical side.
if you will permit a ludicrous metaphor, in this tiny microcosm of deLiberation, there are some curious echoes of the larger situation. see deLib as Syria; LS as the sectarian wing of the ‘peaceful’ internal opposition; KA as the Qatar-funded NATO mercenary-liberator, fulminating with manufactured and foul-mouthed choler; inert_bile and his pals as your local friendly mossadniks; Gilad and Paul as the assassinated generals, the editorial office as Bashar’s beleaguered palace…
as i said, a ludicrous metaphor, yet, as Heraclitos is reputed to have remarked to his drinking companions:
the way up and the way down are one and the same.
with reference to internal dissensions it is obvious that up to a certain point these are necessary and have a positive value. that does not mean it is an easy thing to handle! politics, like religion, is intrinsically fissiparous – the guiding committee, or whatever authority might be the relevant buck-terminus, must, like some editorial Odysseus steer a tricky course between the Scylla of extreme permissiveness, thus opening the site even to lies, propaganda, and bilious invective; and the Charybdis of Democratic Centralism – a system forever identified with its inventor, the great imperial administrator, Joseph Stalin.
note: this entire post is, like the famous Protocols, a plausible forgery. the true reason for its being written was a wager with a friend in the English Department of York University, who doubted that my phrase the Charybdis of Democratic Centralism could have any valid application to analysis of the contemporary geopolitical conjuncture. i hope that, if i have not entirely persuaded her, at least i may have introduced a small puncture in the steely armour of her excessive certitude.
Roy Bard
August 7, 2012 at 11:48 am
“your expression and co is still opaque to me”
The ‘and co’ was a group of about a dozen people, who met to discuss the crisis within the pro-Palestine solidarity movement, which was moving towards becoming another gate keeping institution, whereby activists who dared to think outside of the proscribed box would be ostracised – as we have seen with the expulsion of Francis from the PSC, and Ken o’ Keefe from Palestine Place.
It was at that meeting that the plan to set up this site was formulated. However, not everyone who attended the meeting was able to devote time to the running of the site, and over time the group grew smaller.
etominusipi
August 7, 2012 at 4:48 pm
thx Roy, that contextualises
Roy Bard
August 7, 2012 at 11:55 am
“it would be a pity to lose Paul’s thoughtful comments.”
Paul has a blog where he publishes his writings. His contributions would, of course, be welcome on this site too.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 12:17 pm
It is indeed a ludicrous metaphor…. No way.
I have L as Circe trying to turn deLib into a pigsty and us all into pigs, Jon as Odysseus, Roy as Tiresias and K as Poliphemus.I donpt know who Somoa is. Perhaps Penelope?
(funny thing I am in Crete right now… )
fool me once...
August 7, 2012 at 1:22 pm
@AT
“I donpt know who Somoa is. Perhaps Penelope?”
Do you mean Somoe? You’ve said Somoa twice now, was wondering if you mean someone else?
I have a metaphor for certain aspects of deLib, not very deep but entertaining, but it involves a link and I’m not too sure whether or not you dig my numerous links and would prefer more writing instead.
Anyway seen as though you’re still tripping and could run into tv viewing difficulties here’s a film clip parody/metaphor for recent events here.
The questions the same – who’s who?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzdHgF-3uVQ
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40EC8NTKYfQ&feature=relmfu
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 1:53 pm
Yes, I apologize to Somoe
I apologize abjectly for all the miserable typos I make all the time in my obstinate forgetfulness to use the spell checker
I am an unreconstructed hurrier, unable to teach myself patience, I am the personified antonym of all he qualities eto has, I am ashamed but forget even that and start hurrying all over again, as if …f I stop, pause, draw a breath I will die
I am sorry Somoe
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 7:12 pm
Apology accepted, Ariadna, I would never hold it against you
. I lost count of all the erroneous spelling of your name. JB is pretty much the same – races through comments without checking his spelling or punctuation…
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 7:22 pm
It won’t happen again (said the recidivist typo felon).
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 1:56 pm
I am on a trip but, despite all the indications visible in my postings I am not tripping
I am informally interviewing taxi drivers–a random sample of a few them on their views on national and international affairs, war, etc.
So far I have done Madrid, Bucharest and Crete… Fun.
fool me once...
August 7, 2012 at 2:02 pm
“who’s who?”
The clips, a parody of how K&L wished events to turn out, a sacrifice of the innocent.
Khalid and Laura as Lord Summerisle and Oak (fat guy with beard) trying to lead deLibers in a merry dance and officiating over who was for the chop in a zio coup. (1st clip 9.50mins)
Fortunately for us their incendiary plans were scuppered by unpredictable weather and a certain “type of British rain” that extinguished the flames.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 2:05 pm
Thanks for the abstract. Unfortunately it’s no use for me to try to see it here: the dotted circled goes round and round, I see a few seconds then round and round it goes again and then I lose the internet connection and have to log in again. Torture
fool me once...
August 7, 2012 at 2:53 pm
“I am informally interviewing taxi drivers–a random sample of a few them on their views on national and international affairs, war, etc.”
When you’ve written it all up will you let us know where you put it so that we can have a skeg? Chunky Marks latest piece is from abroad, I put a link on your olympic article.
Anyways keep up the hurrying and breathing
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 3:16 pm
Couldn’t watch that either :-<
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 7:16 pm
Thank you for your correction, fool me once. wasn’t sure it merited attention the first time – I’ve grown used to Ariadna’s frequent typos, but the second time looked like a pattern was setting in;-)
fool me once...
August 7, 2012 at 7:57 pm
@Somoe
“I’ve grown used to Ariadna’s frequent typos,…”
Ha ha, 9 times out 10 I find myself looking up words that don’t exist but sound like they should. That post to you 3 days ago from AT was one;
“I agree comoletely” had me stumped for ages wondering what it could mean, a spanish pun mix maybe?
She was probably just taking the “p”.
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 8:30 pm
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 8:51 pm
No, not Spanish, my Spanish is too rudimentary to interfere.
It’s true, “p” s right next to “o.”
ALL of then are SO close together!
And furthermore, not that it is an excuse, but it is very frustrating to lose the internet connection before I even manage to post and have to log in again. Can’t wait to get back to my 3rd world country where I don’t have this problem.
Alex
August 7, 2012 at 8:13 am
“One of the editors now left, decided that it had to pulled and told me to tell him. He subsequently left for a variety of reasons.”
I guess its Paul
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 8:34 am
It does not matter now, does it? Water under the bridge.
What counts is that the editors who remain steadfast to the mission statement of deLib are at the helm.
deLib promises to deliver journalism and ideas that are NOT in line with MSM. That kind of propaganda may and should be published only with the purpose of dissecting it and unmasking it, not to propagate it.
I agree with Barb Weir to a small extent that “no one has the truth” insofar as that may apply to what may have happened on Tuesday at 3 PM in a Syrian village from which no confirmed/plausible reports are available. But we do know the truth about the contours and configuration of the campaign against Syria by NATO (USrael) aided by its handmaidens pursuing their interests, Turkey and the Saudi, Emirates. We cannot pretend otherwise just to seem “objective” nd even-handed.
Success to the editors and all our support!
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 8:36 am
Once more, congratulations, Jon and Roy. Integrity is not yet illegal.
Daniel Mabsout
August 7, 2012 at 4:42 pm
Brothers and sisters of the common cause. We have been under attack and the enemy succeeded in achieving one of his goal and that is create division among people of the same cause. The enemy had studied closely all the elements involved and being familiar with Intelligence methods had found the weak link of the chain . We were not divided over known relevant matters but we were divided about E Mails and were unable to keep our solidarity under attack .It would have been more appropriate if no one got tired and if we had persisted in pursuing the matter to its clear ends.
An action is not good or bad by itself but by virtue of the purpose it is done for . Surgeons cut with their blades the stomach of the patient to operate on him , this act that might look violent is beneficial in this instance. Certainly we will not call the police overlooking the circumstance. It is wrong to leave the matter here and be divided over an E Mail and over the norms of behavior. We should be able to communicate .The matter should be followed up . We refuse such a division born of our weakness , it is like a divorce that is instigated by a third person and serves the purpose of the instigator.
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 6:54 pm
Well said, Daniel.
Gilad and Paul leaving DeLiberation is regrettable and is the result of a directed effort to divide and destroy Deliberation as we know it. Perhaps they could not adapt to the more anarchistic running of the website and felt they should have more control over what occurs. With regard to L and K that was simply to allow them free rein and we all saw where that was going.
It now appears that, not satisfied with simply leaving, there is an effort underway to pull all the authors away and collapse it entirely. It is to be hoped the authors can see through this attempt and read the truth of the matter on this thread.
who_me
August 7, 2012 at 7:01 pm
Somoe
“It now appears that, not satisfied with simply leaving, there is an effort underway to pull all the authors away and collapse it entirely. It is to be hoped the authors can see through this attempt and read the truth of the matter on this thread.”
are k&l, and perhaps others, contacting other people who have been associated with deliberation and trying to get them to “shun” the site, also?
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 7:25 pm
No comment
fool me once...
August 7, 2012 at 7:28 pm
who_me
August 7, 2012 at 7:04 pm
major, major improvement on the discourse at deliberation today over this time last week. it’s great to see the constant abuse and trolling gone. this is how the site was like back in jan or feb when i first began reading it pretty regularly.
fool me once...
August 7, 2012 at 7:33 pm
“major, major improvement on the discourse at deliberation today over this time last week. it’s great to see the constant abuse and trolling gone…”
Totally agree.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 7:47 pm
I agree also. It can be even better than back in feb
Daniel Mabsout
August 7, 2012 at 7:38 pm
i am afraid we are missing something in our overall picture of what happened . things are not as they appear to be , we have been subject to an intelligence operation. and if you believe as i believe that L and K were a team of infiltrators with a mission they have been working on for a long time,then many things have to be ruled out.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 7:45 pm
“many things have to be ruled out.”
Like what?
Daniel Mabsout
August 7, 2012 at 8:21 pm
like this is a worked up conflict like a set up . We need to know what happened exactly that caused this division and what was Laura’s role in all this .Her main work in deLiberation was not just posting and commenting.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 8:34 pm
I see K as a definite destructive mole, especially now that he has been embraced by greenstein as “sensible.” L — hard to say how much was deliberate intention to destroy and how much was a combination of character, obscurantism, ignorance, and a neophyte’s fanatical fervor that took her astray.
The main thing for deLib is to go on and get better.
Daniel Mabsout
August 7, 2012 at 9:01 pm
shouldn’t we know what happened? it is not like daniel mabsout leaving deLib ; it is the founder leaving
Jonathon Blakeley
August 7, 2012 at 9:56 pm
infiltration misinformation & sabotage
who_me
August 7, 2012 at 9:09 pm
i suspect laura’s “fanaticism of the converted” was an act, like much of the rest of her “persona”. the change in her comment style shortly before she brought khalid into the comment section confirmed to me she was an agent provocateur type and had been switched from subtle to overt disruption mode. what is interesting is the deja vu feeling i got reading lauras comment style at that point. she reminded me how linda grant used to post at the guardian talkboard when she lead the hasbara corps there as “modernmiss”. the ramping up of the attacks on syria by israeli probably is connected to the decision to go all out and attack deliberation. they probably switched on their moles at other opposition sites, as well, to do similar ops. the zionazis do not want any dissent they can not totally dominate.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Possible.
I didn’t see any overt change because to me her posts had always seemed rather lurid and creepiness-inducing but I am not sure it was she who brought Khalid. It is possible Gilad brought him.
etominusipi
August 7, 2012 at 9:00 pm
(1) posting and commenting is one thing – as far as such public activity is concerned the main lesson which needs working at is the old adage:
do not feed the trolls
however crypto-trolls require more careful treatment. their weakness, aside from the inability to think creatively, is that in the attempt to remain plausible for as long as possible, they must also progressively reveal aspects of their modus operandi. among their strengths is a trained ability to play on various weaknesses of others.
(2) insidious BTS (Behind The Scenes) activity is a different matter from public behaviour. and this takes on a more serious aspect when two or more individuals work together both BTS and as posters and commentators, reinforcing each others’ ‘credibility’ in the public arena. the latter without the former just might be the natural alliance of the like-minded. but with the BTS shenanigans, i agree with Daniel – there is a whiff of cordite in the corale.
As Ariadna convincingly argues elsewhere in today’s issue of deLiberation, we should spend a lot more time spying on each other – and, in fact, principally we should be spying on the real enemy – ourselves.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 9:12 pm
I smell cordite on my hands and I don’t remember a thing…
Daniel Mabsout
August 7, 2012 at 8:55 pm
It is very difficult for Gilad or Jonathon or any body else who are nontheless influenced by the muslim sectarian issues -though not directly familiar with them- to deal with the matter, especially when being influenced by Laura and her team .They can be easily diverted from the real issues, and the whole world is being diverted from real issues
Ariadna Theokopoulos
August 7, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Daniel, I don’t really believe one needs to be familiar with the intricacies of the sectarian issues to know a blasted propaganda lie about Syria when you see it.
I find it hard to believe Laura can influence any sentient being. Did she influence anyone here?
Daniel Mabsout
August 7, 2012 at 9:41 pm
apparently she succeeded in making a big mess , whether she did it on her own or as a part of a team
who_me
August 7, 2012 at 9:41 pm
“Did she influence anyone here?”
not me. i never took her very seriously.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 7, 2012 at 9:51 pm
As soon as K. was brought in to deliberation the site started to dive, traffic plumeted. argument broke out as he and Laura dominated all the major articles. A more suspicious person it may have look well coordinated.
But the facts speak for themselves as the emails of this thread show. Misinformation and lies was being spread about people inorder to discredit them.
The result was the effective disruption of the team. All these are things covert agents set out to achieve.
crypto-trolls are a major problem, I personally think K took adavantge of our liberal policy to push out his bile.
an example or two here/…
——————————–
Khalid Amayreh
Submitted on 2012/08/01 at 11:48 pm | In reply to Alex.
It is a duty for true Muslims to help their brothers trying to topple a criminal oppressor.
And Assad is more than a criminal oppressor, He is a Satan.
——————————————————-
A Gun for Rent VS a Gun for Liberation
177 View Post
Khalid Amayreh
Submitted on 2012/08/01 at 11:53 pm
Religiously, he is not a Muslim.
Democraticaaly, he is not a democrat.
Morally, he is a moral person.
Humanisticaaly, he is not humane because true humans don’t murder their peope by the tens of thousands.
I think he is a scum, vermin and dirty animal that ought to be crushed and exterminated.
Saddam bombed Tel Aviv, Assad is bombing Damascus and Allepo.
Jonathon Blakeley
August 7, 2012 at 9:54 pm
Yes it was amazing the amount of emails she send out. and L changed our policies by her complaints on many occasions.
etominusipi
August 7, 2012 at 9:59 pm
bit off topic, but my neural net, which performs random syntactical constructions based on a given set of inputs, just came up with this:
due to a programming error the audio file begins with a distortion which sounds like a fanfare of discordant trumpets, mingled with machine-gun fire and explosions. i have not included here the scoring of this accidental overture for brass band by a diligent colleague in the music department, but the occurrence is a curious co-incidence.
“the one who speaks the truth need pay no heed to the foul-mouthed slander of polygamous idol-worshippers (may they bathe in their own excrements!). for when the fool sees from afar the approaching ships of the crusader-liberators he remembers only the pseudo-prophetic babblings of some drink-addled whoremonger which blind him to the fact otherwise evident to the three-day dead carcase of an unbelieving hypocrite’s mutilated donkey that though the crusader may have in one hand a bloody and depleted-uranium-coated sword, yet in the other he wields a thousand million camels loaded with money, the lifeblood of the revolutionary forces, who even now, with their bare hands are heeding the peoples’ cry to free them forever from the evil and tyrannous Alawite arachnnida whose vile and poisonous web of deceit has left tens of thousands of slaughtered innocents…”
here the program crashed, and i can’t get it working again. curiously this is the only time i have noticed my laptop emitting a puff of oily black smoke. i see this as nothing more than an interesting coincidence.
deLiberation
August 7, 2012 at 10:17 pm
A fantastic grandiloquent display of high order sectarian babbling.
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 10:17 pm
LOL
Priceless!
Jonathon Blakeley
August 7, 2012 at 11:24 pm
This is strangely what I like about deLiberation, not so much the authors as the comment threads.
Its is in the co-creativity of the comment thread duly seeded by the authors are the most interesting fractal forms of deliberation, debate, dispute, downright dis-agreement and of course schisms leading to divisions and alliances.
The problems came when less scrupulous crypto trolls embedded themselves and then hijacked the comment thread to push their agendas.
But I think its been really very interesting and I think we need to work on it and refine it just so we can not be subverted and hijacked so easily.
Truth Justice PEACE
Somoe
August 7, 2012 at 11:46 pm
I completely agree!
ryan
August 7, 2012 at 11:41 pm
Its a great site and it looks like you’ve got a good bunch of people on here that are very aware of the enemies tactics. You done the right thing Jonathon.