Just when you think “Comment is Free” couldn’t get any worse, it now emerges that below the line commenter, William Bapthorpe, is back with what appears to be the explicit approval of Guardian management.
For readers that are new to CiF Watch, William Bapthorpe made the following comment last month:
While this comment was deleted and Bapthorpe eventually banned, Matt Seaton, editor of “Comment is Free” went to great lengths to try and prevent his banning.
Well it now turns out that William Bapthorpe has been posting since January 20th under a new moniker, LavartisProdeo, and he is unashamedly admitting that he is indeed William Bapthorpe.
Two weeks later, it appears that its common knowledge that LavartisProdeo is Bapthorpe, even among Guardian contributors!
If we dig a little deeper, we discover that William Bapthorpe is pumping out Jew-hatred of the most insidious kind under his new moniker.
“[T]he uncomfortable intellectual kinship between Zionism and anti-Semitism”. What Bapthorpe is referring to is the claim by many in the anti-Zionist movement that the Zionists conspired with the Nazis to murder 6 million Jews. This line of thinking has its ideological roots in Soviet propaganda against the Jewish state and is virulently antisemitic. Of course this is all lost upon the Guardian moderators who are so entrenched in their anti-Zionism that this comment remains undeleted.
Notice also how Bapthorpe feels kinship with anti-Zionist commenter, Matzpen. Yes the same Matzpen who thinks that Shimon Peres should be put up against the wall and shot.
And the manner in which Bapthorpe makes the Zionism-racism connection is further revealed in this undeleted comment:
So where are the mods in all of this? They fail to ban antisemitic comments made by LavartisProdeo. And worse than that, they fail to ban LavartisProdeo who on more than one occasion admits that he and William Bapthorpe are one and the same.
Well in case you’re wondering what the reason for this is, all is revealed with this telling admission from LavartisProdeo/William Bapthorpe:
So there you have it, William Bapthorpe has been allowed back and can even resume the use of his former moniker – yet another example of the seriousness with which Matt Seaton takes antisemtism. As I said previously this sends an unequivocal message to the Jewish community that anti-Jewish bigots like Bapthorpe are acceptable members of the CiF community and at the same time communicates to anti-Jewish bigots like Bapthorpe that they can continue to engage in antisemitic discourse with impunity.
“Comment is Free” not only reeks of antisemitism it stinks to high heaven.
If you feel as outraged about this as I do, I urge you to write to Matt Seaton at matt.seaton@guardian.co.uk and give him a piece of your mind.
UPDATE
As a result of this post, LavartisProdeo has been banned although the two antisemitic comments above remain undeleted.
Hawkeye
Omar2
WellofSense
Medusa
The Alchemist
Louise
Tosca
Maimon
Telling the Truth
Israelinurse
Adam Levick
Margie in Tel Aviv
Guest/Cross Post
Hadar Sela
93 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 21, 2010 at 10:38 am
NapoleonKaramazov
wearenotblind
“Yet, I believe everybody would agree that had someone made a comment about slaughtering every single Muslim, man woman and child, there would be a very different reaction from the Guardian editors/moderators than the one Bapthorpe experienced. ”
Yes, their would be. But Bapthorpe does not speak of murdering every single Jew. He speaks about slaughtering ‘every last one’ in the geographical confines of the West Bank
That is still obviously repulsive, but the analogy with slaughtering all muslims cannot be made, because Bapthorpe is not advocating slaughtering every Jew.
You may call this needle picking or clutching straws, but the debate cannot continue until this is acknowledged.
As I said in my above post, I will not be making any more comments on here as I do not take kindly to being called a ‘Jew hater’.
February 21, 2010 at 10:58 am
Kvetch
Well, good for you, NapoleonK – you read books by Jews so you’re not an anti-Semite. Eichmann did, too – he even learned Hebrew. Also, until he changed his mind and wanted to do his bit to murder millions of Jews – probably he considered some of his best friends were Jews. Think about it.
Can I make a comment to those who run this site, please?
The number of those supporting CiF on your blog is rising. All kudos to you for allowing them to post unimpeded, and I must add that they are treated with far more respect here than any of us were treated on CiF. It’s all well holding the moral high ground, and you’ve proved you do – but when do the gloves come off? The CiF overflow is taking the p*ss now. Why not at least relegate them to the naughty step until they learn their lesson? How about some serious premoderation as a cover for banning – and when they write asking for reasons spin them some guff about them being outside the circle of trust (copyright Matt Seaton)? That should learn ‘em!
Did I read this right – Berchmans: “Like Chomsky I’m a Zionist.”?????? Eeee, I’ve never laughed so much in all me life!!!! Time for your MoT, Berchmans you’re certainly not roadworthy. Don’t forget your meds either.
February 21, 2010 at 10:59 am
JerusalemMite
NapoleonKaramazov
I will not accept such statements. Of that is the level of intellectual critique on this site then I will leave you to stew in your own pot
I want to stew in my own pot.
Yes. Please do.
Go away and take Berchmans with you.
February 21, 2010 at 11:09 am
JerusalemMite
Kvetch
Why not at least relegate them to the naughty step until they learn their lesson? How about some serious premoderation as a cover for banning – and when they write asking for reasons spin them some guff about them being outside the circle of trust (copyright Matt Seaton)? That should learn ‘em!
I’d second that CiFWatch except that if they write to complain, don’t answer specifically and just return them Matt’s or Porgina’s email address.
Or.
A standard text referring them to The Guardian’s community standards.
What a hoot.
February 21, 2010 at 11:16 am
SilverTrees
Napoleon (and my goodness, doesn’t THAT give away what you think of yourself???)
Firstly, read Bapthorpe’s post again. He referred to the “religious maniacs”/ settlers on the West Bank. He did not refer to Muslims and the settlers are Jewish. He wanted them slaughtered if they did not agree to leave.
This means that he is a Jew-hater (although he claims to be a Christian) and one who is inciting murder which also means that he has an unhealthy obsession with bloodletting. For myself I believe that if he got his wish and the Jewish settlers were slaughtered, he would not want the slaughter to stop there. With me so far? Good.
So let’s agree about what he said. There remains the not so little matter that you are minimising the ramifications of it in the context of your previous posts.
Is needle-picking the same as nit-picking? You seem to be almost as accomplished at it as our resident nitpicker, pretzeberg, given your “the analogy is not complete, etc etc” And a word to the wise – debate can always continue, provided that BOTH parties are mature enough to try to reason their way around bones of contention and neither “needle-picks.”
Your doing the equivalent of taking all your toys home proves that you are not yet mature enough to do that.
And as for “…I would however advise many on this site to seek out a local mental health professional as you clearly seem to be suffering from some kind of paranoia…” well, after you my dear fellow.
There’s a sub-section in DSM IV I believe which deals with personality disorders such as narcissistic personality disorder, which includes among its manifestations lack of insight and overweening grandiosity. (One look at the moniker you chose and another at your manner of leaving us would be cause for concern to any discerning mental health professional). You seem to think that the intelligent among us would give a damn that you are leaving.
February 21, 2010 at 11:18 am
Vatik
NapoleonK – are you sure you did not come from the same cloning batch as ExiledLondoner or Pretzelberg? I can’t remember which one of them said in Bapthorpe’s defence words to the effect that he didn’t mean all Jews, just a few in a manner of speaking. So…. that makes it OK, does it? Are we allowed to be marginally less insulted by it?
Well, let’s reword what wearenotblind said. Theoretically if we, as Jews, were to say that the whole Muslim population of, say, Blackburn should be slaughtered, to every last one – then immediately say we didn’t mean ALL Muslims, would this be acceptable? ExiledLondoner would go straight round to the cop shop and the rest of you would be gnashing your teeth and flapping your gums in indignation.
Don’t assume we’re all as stupid as you are.
February 21, 2010 at 11:19 am
modernityblog
NapoleonKaramazov certainly is a “live one” as his deleted comment shows:
http://tinyurl.com/yhr65ys
“NapoleonKaramazov
12 Feb 2010, 4:38PM
The Israel organs scandal seems to be true, but apparently they also harvested from dead Israeli soldiers and civilians, and foreign workers in addition to Palestinians.
So, really it is an internal issue. Like we had with the Alder Hey organs scandal.
It happened at least 10 years ago as well.
February 21, 2010 at 11:31 am
pretzelberg
@ Vatik
What a vaccuous comment that was:
NapoleonK – are you sure you did not come from the same cloning batch as ExiledLondoner or Pretzelberg? I can’t remember which one of them said in Bapthorpe’s defence words to the effect that he didn’t mean all Jews, just a few in a manner of speaking. So…. that makes it OK, does it?
I merely pointed out at the time that WB’s comment (horrible though it was) referred specifically to WB settlers.
a) This was not “in Bapthorpe’s defence”
b) Nowhere did I imply their comment was “OK”
Don’t assume we’re all as stupid as you are.
No worries – you’re far more stupid.
February 21, 2010 at 11:33 am
AKUS
Hawkeye – well done once more in getting this cretin, to borrow Georgina Henry’s description, banned once more..
The Guardian is beginning to realize that they will be held to account – just as they so often and so shrilly demand of others.
And so, I suppose, I will NOT be invited back after all ….
February 21, 2010 at 11:33 am
SilverTrees
Pretzelberg, were I you I would sue the charm school and get your money back.
You have an unfortunate manner of expressing yourself.
February 21, 2010 at 11:36 am
Mitnaged
No, that’s a shame AKUS, but you are in illustrious company
Neither will I and neither will repunzal or many other excellent debaters.
I have torn my garments and have sprinked ashes on my head to mark the occasion although observing seven days of mourning would be a bit OTT I think…. :~))
February 21, 2010 at 11:48 am
Mitnaged
PS: To AKUS. I hope you are strong stomached. Berchmans has reminded us on another thread that he tried to get you reinstated at the other place and that you are missed there….. The tone of the post made me feel sick.
But it looks a lot like he isn’t listened to as much as he says, doesn’t it?
February 21, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Snigger
Vatik, yours is a good analogy no matter how uncomfortable it makes pretzelberg. (Pay him no heed. He could have an argument with the wind because it changed direction and didn’t give him any notice).
For a start, anyone who posted such a thing at the other place would probably be permanently banned and not just placed outside Seaton’s (magic) circle of trust and then reinstated, as was Bapthorpe.
Also, if the post stayed on the page for as long as Bapthorpe’s original, that would be enough to organise a march by Muslims on the Farringdon Road office – most of them would not be from Bolton but that wouldn’t matter – all of them brandishing placards along the lines of the cartoons demonstrations.
And the Guardian would probably be prosecuted for giving a forum for hate speech against Muslims, no doubt because of the pressure put upon the Met from their leaders.
If I were being charitable towards the other place, I would say that they delete anti-Muslim argument, however much it may be justified and however evenly it may be argued, precisely because Seaton and Henry are terrified that this might happen. As it is, I don’t feel very charitable and the parsimonious explanation for banning criticism of Islam or Muslim actions is because moderation at the other place is, plainly and simply, biased.
February 21, 2010 at 12:09 pm
pretzelberg
Who is this poster Snigger? Yet another poster who seems to “know” me even though I don’t recall ever seen their moniker before.
A troll?
Either way, it’s pretty spooky.
February 21, 2010 at 12:38 pm
JerusalemMite
Snigger
If I were being charitable towards the other place, I would say that they delete anti-Muslim argument, however much it may be justified and however evenly it may be argued, precisely because Seaton and Henry are terrified that this might happen. As it is, I don’t feel very charitable and the parsimonious explanation for banning criticism of Islam or Muslim actions is because moderation at the other place is, plainly and simply, biased.
They give their support to Muslims because Muslims are perceived by them to be anti Western and in particular, anti American. Their worst nightmare is that the anti Achmedinejad demonstrations in Iran will lead to a pro American real democracy regime. But, they are anti extremist Muslim as manifested by the Thug Regime in Iran. They want the Mullahs overthrown but are horrified by the possible results.
It is the connundrum of the loony left.
February 21, 2010 at 1:10 pm
Snigger
pretzelberg, I am glad to say that I don’t know you at all and given the tenor of what you write here and how you express yourself I am equally glad of that.
My post is “spooky” only for a person who is either inclined towards paranoia or deluded enough to believe that the world revolves around him.
Doesn’t it enter your head that many people read CiFWatch threads and the posts beneath them? I do and have come across your posts and your peculiar mixture of obsessive thinking and your determination to be oppositional.
I note, for example, that you demand to know who adds stars to contributions from posters that you disagree with, as if it matters and as if you are an important somebody here.
I hope you are not. It wouldn’t help you at all….
February 21, 2010 at 1:36 pm
pretzelberg
@ Snigger
I just find it strange that posters I’ve never noticed before seem to be intensively studying my comments while never actually attempting to converse with me. The “obsessive thinking” is yours.
And “inclined towards paranoia”? Ha ha. Ta for that laugh. “Deluded enough to believe that the world revolves around him”!?! Likewise. If either were true, I’d hardly post on this website.
I note, for example, that you demand to know who adds stars to contributions from posters that you disagree with
Your skills of perception must be very poor, then.
a) I demand nothing
b) I take issue with people posting outrageous lies about me – and I just prefer to know who my “neighbours” here (i.e. those recommending such crap) are, as it were.
If you want to discuss actual issues here with me, fine.
But let’s leave out the off-topic harrassment, eh?
February 21, 2010 at 1:58 pm
Abandon hope
Kvetch
“Don’t forget your meds either. ”
Ah yes lets make fun of folk who use medication…always good for a laugh. Google the expression “way the f*** out of your depth “.See if a picture of your good self pops up.
February 21, 2010 at 5:13 pm
heisback
Willian Bapthorpe is back,and so is MartinInEurope,he’s not a fan of Israel.And posts the usual dreck about Israel.
Cif is made for him,it has the word idiotic in it’s title.
February 21, 2010 at 5:35 pm
heisback
The berchmans was the first one to post on the latest article on Israel.His masterpiece,all 10 words of it got 74 recommendations.
After all he does keep good company.
If it’s the Berchmans,the Klowns,MiE’s,the Prompter,and Co.We need to worry,not that they are great challenge.
BTW Berchmans was praising FINKelstein,that in itself should tell us all that we need to know about these two.
February 21, 2010 at 6:49 pm
SilverTrees
Abandon Hope, you can’t blame Kvetch. He/she is trying to find some excuse for your behaviour and is behaving no less inappropriately than you do when you claim you are driven to be an antisemite. You should have more creature feeling for him/her
And you, chum, are out of your depth here. Only a card-holding twerp of the first magnitude could misconstrue the comments directed at you. And you are misconstruing them, time after time after time. I don’t think you are joking either. You really do believe you have something to offer us!
And you may well have. Every time you post your ramblings you give everyone or anyone here the pleasure of setting straight using provable facts the lies you might get away with posting on CiF.
That must really p*ss you off.
And pretzelberg you often make inappropriate demands to know things because people post things which threaten your monumental ego. You are also a “needle-picker” to quote old Napoleon, recently departed which says much about your need to have your world in order, even including posts to you on a blog! Are you like this in real life (if you have a life?) I’ll bet you are a wow at parties.
It says much that you believe Snigger is “harassing” you and is off-topic. You perceive Snigger to be “harassing” you because he/she has called you to task for your behaviour and I think that Snigger is spot on.
This blog has no “off-topic” rules which must upset a rigid thinker like you, but by your judgement of Snigger, you yourself are off-topic by making the demands you have made to know who your neighbours are (so to speak).
You are not the centre of the universe. You have no right to “know” anything.
And no-one is forcing you to stay if you don’t like the way things are here.
February 21, 2010 at 8:01 pm
PeterParker
The Ci(not)F team are adamant that once you have broken guidelines and are banned, you are not allowed to post to CiF again, even under a different name. This is clearly stated.
If the Ci(not)F are aware of Bapthorpe posting again, he will be banned again.
Simple as….
Then again, does anybody else think it just might be someone messing around and claiming that he/she is Bapthorpe. Is there definitive proof that LavartisProdeo is actually Bapthorpe?
Live long…
PS – It is very easy for a banned CiFer to simply log in under a different name.
Still living and long and prospering.
February 21, 2010 at 9:39 pm
terry malloy
PeterParker-
By now, I’m sure CiF is aware that Bapthorpe has come back as LavartisProdeo, in which case he should be banned immediately, according to your recitation of CiF policy.
I find it less believable that someone else went to the trouble of posing as Bapthorpe/reborn as Lavartis Prodeo. Nevertheless, I suppose that if CiF was seriously interested in defusing this whole matter (which they’re probably not), they could easily identify the IP addresses of the posters in question. In any case, we all eagerly await CiF’s response to this development. Stay tuned…
February 21, 2010 at 9:53 pm
modernityblog
If CiF management banned all (or even half) of the anti-Jewish bigots found polluting Comment Is Free then the anti-Israeli threads would go quiet and then network servers at the Guardian spring to life as a burden is removed.
But that’s not going to happen CiF management are complacent, lazy, ignorant of basic anti-racism and frankly more afraid of annoying the anti-Jewish bigots than anything else.
Still, there is one potentially uplifting consequence, in years to come when future historians and social scientists want to analyse anti-Jewish racism in the late 20th/21st century then Comment is Free will provide them with an untold wealth of material.
However, I think the Guardian management and the individual’s concerned will be indicted by the judgement of history, and not too soon enough.
February 22, 2010 at 12:05 am
Abandon hope
heisback
“The berchmans was the first one to post on the latest article on Israel.His masterpiece,all 10 words of it got 74 recommendations.”
I get an idea normally on my postal round. I hone it down to minimise it I test it using Dave my pal at work.If he thinks it is funny or apt it goes in.
And you just thought I posted without thinking.
SilverTrees
“I’ll bet you are a wow at parties”
I play the Strat. Im not great.. nothing like as good as I am at anti Discrimination but I choose songs that nobody else does…a bit like CIFW!
February 22, 2010 at 8:12 am
modernity
I have never much taken account of Abandon hope/Berchmans posts on Comment is Free, but scanning that thread on the Guardian it becomes very clear to the outsider what a disturbed and bigoted individual he is:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/21/observer-editorial-israel-palestine?showallcomments=true#start-of-comments
“”Berchmans
21 Feb 2010, 1:16PM
Achilles0200
.
## the Hamas charter ..the total elimination of all Jews from the face of the earth.##
.
It is a crass use of old writings inappropriately trying to get religious support in the fight against Israel.It has been used to justify anti Semitism and must be now disclaimed by Hamas. But but by no stretch of the imagination does it call for “the total elimination of all Jews from the face of the earth”
You shouldnt have to make things up to argue a point.
B”
February 22, 2010 at 9:28 am
PeterParker
terry malloy
By now, I’m sure CiF is aware that Bapthorpe has come back as LavartisProdeo, in which case he should be banned immediately, according to your recitation of CiF policy.
BTW, I’ve done a little research and the LavartisProdeo account has been deleted.
So, nothing to see here.
Live long and prosper.
February 22, 2010 at 9:44 am
Daniel
Berchmans and the other trolls on here are side shows. Please I implore folks to ignore them. Every time you engage them you are baiting them. Let them punch themselves exhausted.
Stay focused on the main issue: The Guardian.
As for that, this situation with Bapthorpe is disgusting yet in no way surprising.
February 22, 2010 at 12:42 pm
pretzelberg
@ SilverTrees
Pretzelberg, were I you I would sue the charm school and get your money back. You have an unfortunate manner of expressing yourself.
If it weren’t for the hateful tone of your comments towards me, one might think that was just a bit of banter. But it seems more malicious than that.
Or was that oh-so-witty comment intentionally schoolyard-quality, I wonder?
You might at least have said which part of my post you had in mind (presumably the last bit – but with cowardly posters like you it’s hard to tell).
And pretzelberg you often make inappropriate demands to know things because people post things which threaten your monumental ego.
What a truly pathetic thing to say!!
I said above that this a) is not about “demands” and b) is about challenging idiots who continue to post complete lies about me – but if you’re going to just cover your ears and try to shout me down, go ahead and continue making a fool of yourself.
… which says much about your need to have your world in order, even including posts to you on a blog! Are you like this in real life (if you have a life?) I’ll bet you are a wow at parties …
More evidence of that stunning wit of yours!
As I said above – schoolboy stuff.
Grow up, stop snapping at my heels and stick to the issues.
February 22, 2010 at 7:00 pm
Kvetch
Berchmans/AbandonHope(and we have,that you’ll get off this blog, but we’re hoping for a miracle)
Scuse me – who exactly is out of their depth? Just look at some of your posts, and you still haven’t got the message that spewing propaganda for Hamas/CiF will get you nowhere here. By the way, language Timothy……
February 22, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Vatik
Pretzelberg
Dear dear….. you ARE in a paddy, aren’t you? Got your underwear really knotted, haven’t you? Careful you don’t fall over…..
I don’t give a damn what you merely pointed out – you’re going for the classic best defence is attack, aren’t you? Doesn’t work – you’re outnumbered here. Not a comfortable feeling, is it?
Oooh, doesn’t Pretzelberg get huffy, when folk don’t take him seriously, and heaven forbid if he’s called stupid… diddums.Hey, Pretzelberg, we’re not Comment is Free – lots of us got called a lot worse when we posted there. Grow a backbone and roll with the punches – it’s your choice to be here, not ours.
Thanks for the headsup, Snigger. Pretzelberg/Berchmans/AbandonHope give trolls a bad name……
February 22, 2010 at 7:44 pm
pretzelberg
@ Vatik
Dear dear….. you ARE in a paddy, aren’t you? Got your underwear really knotted, haven’t you? Careful you don’t fall over…..
Yawn … more juvenile nonsense. Water off the duck’s back etc.
you’re going for the classic best defence is attack, aren’t you? Doesn’t work – you’re outnumbered here. Not a comfortable feeling, is it?
No problem being outnumbered here – it’s the childish idiots who stoop to scurrilous lies about me that I take an issue with.
Oooh, doesn’t Pretzelberg get huffy, when folk don’t take him seriously, and heaven forbid if he’s called stupid… diddums.
Yet more childish sniggering …
we’re not Comment is Free
Who is “we”?
Grow a backbone and roll with the punches
As if you had a backbone! LOL!
Punches I could take. Lies and the kind of sneaky schoolboy harrassment that you seem to excel in, however are below the belt.
it’s your choice to be here, not ours.
And it’s my site more than yours. I will not be silenced – least of all from rhetorical prepubescents like yourself.
Why not try sticking to the issues instead of trolling?
February 23, 2010 at 6:10 am
Vatik
Pretzelberg
“Water off a duck’s back” – yeah, right – but you’re still arguing the toss, aren’t you? If this was CiF, you’d be safe – and my posts would all be gone by now.
“And it’s my site more than yours. I will not be silenced – least of all from rhetorical prepubescents like yourself”
Well, if that don’t beat all – delusional and all. Get this right. You’re here to give us all entertainment and remind us what a good blog this is, and how well we’re doing. Just that. Each time you and your CiF acolytes post – CifWatch gets hits. Rhetoric? No…… just the plain unvarnished truth. I really wish you weren’t here, and that’s no secret, is it – but silence you? No. Just carry on proving to us what we already know, and give us more hits – that’s all.
Sneaky schoolboy harrassment? Sneaky???? I’m completely upfront and honest in my opinions. You have an overdeveloped “I’m the best” gland, Pretzelberg, you should seek treatment to have it reduced. Honestly, if you disappeared from this blog right now who’d miss you? Is that sneaky enough for you?
The issues have already been dealt with. I agree with BoredWithBerchmans, Mitnaged, etc. I don’t need to keep repeating myself, surely, unless there’s something wrong with you and your mates. There must be – because you just don’t deviate from the company line, do you? I hope Matt Seaton appreciates what you’re trying to do (note the “trying”) – or at least he realises that your refresher course is way overdue.
Who are “we”? We are people who are sick and tired of people like you, who have delusions of grandeur and, as has been said before – have the gall to believe that just because they make crass statements we have to fall at their feet and worship them.
No need to have the word “troll” branded on your forehead – you’re not even capable of hiding it.
February 23, 2010 at 1:20 pm
pretzelberg
Vatik
you should seek treatment to have it reduced.
Are you the alter-ego of CiF poster Papalagi? Because your juvenile “style” of debate is eerily reminiscent of him.
Honestly, if you disappeared from this blog right now who’d miss you?
More people than would miss you.
A far greater proportion of your comment is off-topic and devoted to personal attacks. If anyone’s a troll here – it’s you.
Right – how about getting back to the topics?
February 23, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Yohoho
pretzel, I think that you are confused about where you are. “Off-topic” is an excuse for pulling posts at the other place.
Get over yourself – I note the slanging match above in which you were not exactly silent – and pull yourself together. You can post sense when you want and I’d like to see some.
February 23, 2010 at 2:25 pm
Yohoho
pretzel, I think that you are confused about where you are. “Off-topic” is an excuse for pulling posts at the other place.
Get over yourself – I note the slanging match above in which you were not exactly silent – and pull yourself together. You can post sense when you want and I for one would like to see some.
February 23, 2010 at 4:16 pm
pretzelberg
@ Yohoho
I appreciate you mean well, but I do not consider the above to be simply a “slanging match”.
Please do read the development of that exchange from its outset.
I reserve the right to challenge posters who misinterpret what I have said – often before I have even said it.
February 23, 2010 at 4:29 pm
modernityblog
pretzelberg,
I do wish you get off your high horse, I even took the trouble to read some of your comments on the Guardian and they were fairly sensible.
Unlike your contributions here.
Please bear in mind that we all reserve the right to challenge you, when you can’t understand the bleeding obvious
Most of us would prefer not to, but sometimes you’re very hard work when it comes to communication.
By the way, have you apologised yet to Israelinurse?
February 23, 2010 at 5:03 pm
pretzelberg
@ modernityblog
I know I’m not here to aggravate people, and I also know your primary purpose here is not to pursue me.
Having perused my comments on CiF you will at least be aware that I am not some nasty troll here – so please in future (and forgive me if you’re not among the culprits) refrain from lumping me together with Berchmans et al.
Perhaps we can now focus on the topics.
February 24, 2010 at 2:02 pm
smtx01
I’ve just popped in for a quick look at comments and I can make no sense of anything…what exactly are these threads desending into? they seem to be getting quite hysterical.. I mean what exactly are the topics here? or on any other thread. It just looks charachter assination to me
February 24, 2010 at 3:00 pm
peter1
smtx01,
It means the Trolls are succeeding.
February 24, 2010 at 3:27 pm
smtx01
which trolls?
February 24, 2010 at 3:30 pm
PT
Trolls should be ignored.
Always.
Even if they have the same point of view as you do.