Spectator Reports on Bapthorpe Affair

Margie,

“The left has changed its definition. It used to stand for the rights of the underdog and the morally just. It used to stand for truth and honesty.”

Er, yes… well, maybe? Some of the left did.

“Now apparently it supports terrorists and murderers.”

Which terrorists and murderers does “the left” support?

“It advocates the rights of dictators and those who consider that might makes right.”

Which dictators? Which “left”?

“It does not condemn those who practise female genital mutilation.”

You’re saying that “the left” doesn’t condemn FGM?

“It urges the slaughter of 500 000 human beings men, women and children, just because asking them to move nicely or prodding them with a gun doesn’t work.”

So your view of “the left” is based on William Bapthorpe?

Even by your standards, this is mindless, unsubstantiated drivel – you’re better suited to the role of troll-feeding monitor…. (we’ll get you a badge if you like?).

Exiled – please don’t feed the Margie

It’s very interesting, isn’t it, that al-Grauniad’s double standards are being picked up far and wide?

I wonder why they haven’t permanently banned Bapthorpe? Perhaps he’s related to someone high up like BellaM and they daren’t. Perhaps he’s Rustbucket’s brother!

Most surprising, of course, is that Matt Seaton still has a job there after the rubbish he posted on Robin Shepherd’s blog about “circles of trust” and such-like.

Israelfirst,

“I wonder whether they have blocked him but not banned him in order to solve this dilemma, since his account has not been active since January 13.”

As many here will know, they don’t even announce bans to those concerned, let alone to the media – if they have banned him, there’s no way of knowing it for certain.

Even if William Bapthorpe returns under a different user name (presuming you can spot him), you will never know whether he was banned, or whether he unilaterally decided to duck the flack. William Bapthorpe wasn’t posting for very long – I did notice him, but it didn’t particularly register – and I have no reason to believe that he was a reincarnated previous poster.

I’m afraid that this is the CIF equivilent of Jack the Ripper – he turns up, becomes notorious, and then vanishes – you may never know any more than that.

Margie,

Have you received a reply from Bnei Akiva yet? I’ve checked their website and I don’t see anything in the way of a retraction or an apology for their attempts to link the actions of the Israeli state with Jews everywhere.

Why is this?

Can you copy and paste your email please? I take it you have sent one?

It’s odd, I think, that you choose to bash “the left” for “advocating the rights of dictators” *now* – this was surely more prevalent in the past?

You know, like when the Israeli Communist Party secured arms from the Soviet bloc and was instrumental in securing Soviet backing for partition. I presume this was “the left” that “used to stand for the rights of the underdog and the morally just [and] for truth and honesty” but not “the rights of dictators”?

Not the first, or the last, square for you to circle in your strange worldview.

So David is Khartoumi? You know I thought there was something “off” about him.

I heard that he is writing as Abu Faris (“father of Faris,” which is his son’s name) as an allegedly reformed character for Spittoon.

Well, well, well……

Ahh — “The William Bapthorpe Affair” !!!

Wot, no link? Even if I zoom as large as I’ve got, I still can’t read that bloody paragraph.

Silence in this country often is used against one in a court of law, David. I see that you are changing the subject although you replied to Mitnaged. In effect you refused to answer.

All of which means that you are indeed Khartoumi and, judging from your post to Margie, you are far from a reformed character.

Mitnaged seems to have your number – do you and he/she have some sort of history?

And how is Faris, oh Abu Faris?

Hawkeye

That’s a shame — the centre of this piece ain’t even online.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/politics/all/5704523/part_3/the-spectators-notes.thtml

Would you care to post “Moore’s take on the affair three paragraphs down”, so we can actually read it..?

Thanking you.

My apologies — here it is:

“Where did the following comment on Jewish West Bank settlements appear? ‘Sadly, there’s only one way to deal with these religiously motivated maniacs who think their superstitious beliefs trump international law. 1. We ask them to leave their squats, kindly. 2. If they don’t we force them to at gunpoint. 3. If they still refuse they must be slaughtered, every last man, woman and child.’ The answer is not some neo-Nazi or Islamist outlet, but Comment is Free, the website of the Guardian. The comment was posted there on 6 January by one ‘William Bapthorpe’. It was later removed, but apparently Bapthorpe has not been banned from the site, though others quite often are. There is something grimly revealing in his formulation that there is ‘only one way’ to deal with the settlers, before he sets out three. It shows that he does not seriously entertain the first two of his possibilities, but jumps eagerly to his final solution. Something strange has happened on the British left. Its hyper-sensitivity to racism no longer applies to Jews. And its most-read website daily attracts and often publishes this sort of virulence in a way which, so far as I know, does not happen on the websites of the Telegraph or the Times. Websites of this kind are valued by their owners because they create a conversation and a ‘community’. What community is the Guardian creating?”

What a load of bollocks — this is the proverbial mountain out of a molehill.

Yeah, it’s certainly in poor taste, but the guy (WB) is having a little joke. This is supposed to be irony — probably with reference to the slaughter by the IDF of the innocent in Gaza recently in order to weedle out the “religiously motivated maniacs who think their superstitious beliefs trump international law” — namely, Hamas.

Time to get a grip.

Margie

“The left has changed its definition. It used to stand for the rights of the underdog and the morally just. It used to stand for truth and honesty”

The left…the first up against the wall in N Germany … first to die in Soviet Russia and still the effective voice of the people. I do not buy your fake ” the left was better when summers were longer ” bull.

You just cant get that Israel is open to criticism . Some dates please …what ” left ” do you mean?

No doubt you would, Khartoumi Father of Faris, no doubt you would.

exiled – when a commenter is banned, all his/her comments are removed from the location that lists their profile.

If you go to:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/users/WilliamBapthorpe

you’ll see that either he stopped posting on Jan 13th in frustration (or adopted another moniker and is back again as someone else):

Latest comments

*
Comment on Divorced from the truth 13 Jan 10, 11:37am
*
Comment on Islam4UK: bad, but not worth banning 12 Jan 10, 11:13pm
*
Comment on What do you want to talk about? 12 Jan 10, 9:43pm
*
Comment on What do you want to talk about? 12 Jan 10, 8:14pm
*
Comment on What do you want to talk about? 12 Jan 10, 5:27pm

If he were banned, nothing would appear there.

Try, for example:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/users/dikaisyne

and you’ll see how it works.

Hi AKUS,

“exiled – when a commenter is banned, all his/her comments are removed from the location that lists their profile.”

I stand corrected.

You have more experience than me in this regard

Dopey – you really should see someone about your paranoia.

Khartoumi is several sandwiches short of the proverbial picnic, especially if anyone disagrees with his view of the world, as well you know, however “gentle” you might have thought him. Your praise of him is misplaced.

In the days when CiF actually banned people, he had to go, but he came back as ironsocks, and even slipped an article past the coven, writing as Mark Jeffries.

His appearing here as David is not surprising really, nor is his pretending to Spittoon that he is a reformed character as Abu Faris. Leopards such as he are incapable of changing their spots.

You will be Khartoumi/father of Faris, will you not?

Why are you denying your son? I thought you were proud of him. You made such a fuss about him on CiF when I used to post there although I used to get uncomfortable about the way you referred to his mother as “the wife.”

PLEASE PASS THIS ON
.January 25, 2010 at 9:48 am

SarahLeah

“you really should see someone about your paranoia. ”

“Khartoumi.. however “gentle” you might have thought him. ”

.

Im sorry you must be mistaking me for someone else although I find this peculiar as I feel I am unique. …I never said Khartoumi was “gentle”. The reason he was mobbed and threatened was because he kicked @55 .

He was able to articulate his beliefs to an English speaking CIF with power and absolute authority …because he had lived in Fife… some two miles from me …and had to go. Mobbing works ..people lose their tempers and say things that are indefencible. The ghouls that insulted his Prophet PBUH and threatened to identify him in Sudan knew what they were doing.

CIF should have stood up against these folk on his behalf but we had not started our campaign to rid CIF of the Muslim haters…although now of course …its Mission Accomplished…and such disgusting posts are deleted instantly.

Again, why are you answering, Khartoumi, if you are not Khartoumi?

Im at a loss to gather what this actual thread is about.. Whose khartumi and son of faris or father of feris, matzpen and david and dopey.very confusing…

Bapthorpe made the comment on the 6 January 2010, CIFWatch followed it up on the 11th after which a stink up ensues with Bapthorpe’s account finally falling silent on the 13th. Looks as if CIF are reactive, IsraelFirst.
Berchmans
Why would anyone go to the trouble of threatening to identify Khartoumi in Sudan when Khartoumi was commissioned to write an article for CIF under his own name after which he was hardly incognito in Sudan or anywhere else. On second thoughts, don’t trouble yourself. Safe to say SarahLeah is succinct at 11:41.

SarahLeah

“Hah hah hah! Berch and Khartoumi on a mission! The blind leading the lame!”

Thus speaketh the disingenuous one who equates Jew-hating Nazi sympathizers with commenters on CiF.

I remember singing a song when I was in the Boy Scouts way back when:

“My eyes are dim I cannot see, I have not brought my specs with me…”

Abandon hope

Is it common for non-muslims to append “pbuh” after referring to muhammad/mohammed/the prophet?

It just appears cringeworthy and patronising to me.

Charles Moore – ‘Bapthorpe has not been banned from the site, though others quite often are..’

Mitnaged is right on topic since, wasn’t the lamentable Khartoumi reinstated by Georgina Henry at one time and of course Berchman has never been banned at all, not even after ‘ a few drinks giving Anne Franks a blast,’ anyone ? If CIF does not ban for that why ban at all and exactly what are the ‘bannable offences’ again? A situation seems to reign at CIF which could indeed be described as the ugliest bitch of them all.

Well done CIFWatch.

@ VacuumCleanersSuck

“Yeah, it’s certainly in poor taste, but the guy (WB) is having a little joke. This is supposed to be irony”

I suggested on this very site that amongst various possibilities this might – might – have been the case.

But how can you be so sure?

This is absolutely great news that The Spectator has picked up on this!