Berkeley is so left-wing…


…that it’s perfectly commonplace for kids’ stores sell to clothing with communist icons.

Because even five-year-olds need to look chic for the Revolution.

300 Responses to “In Berkeley. . .the children’s clothing boutique features Che shirts for kids”

  1. 1Starless on Sep 27, 2009 at 6:56 am:

    Because five-year-olds need to look chic while reporting their parents to the secret police for counter-revolutionary agitation.

  2. 2zombie on Sep 27, 2009 at 7:03 am:

    Starless: Because five-year-olds need to look chic while reporting their parents to the secret police for counter-revolutionary agitation.

    Actually: In Berkeley, it’s the parents who are buying toddler-sized Che shirts in the first place, in order to show off their cute Little Revolutionaries to their radical friends. Because what five-year-old can grasp who Che even was?

    The only person guilty of counter-revolutionary agitation is, well, me.

  3. 3Rose on Sep 27, 2009 at 9:16 am:

    Too-oo-oo funny!

  4. 4Anonymous on Sep 27, 2009 at 9:39 am:

    Zombie: When are you going to leave Little Green Footballs? Charles has went left now.

  5. 5Fenris on Sep 27, 2009 at 10:35 am:

    That’s almost as cute as the vaguely Castro-esque hats on top of the shirts. After all, why stop at one Cuban communist leader when you can collect the whole set?

  6. 6Starless on Sep 27, 2009 at 11:09 am:

    zombie:
    Actually: In Berkeley, it’s the parents who are buying toddler-sized Che shirts in the first place, in order to show off their cute Little Revolutionaries to their radical friends. Because what five-year-old can grasp who Che even was?The only person guilty of counter-revolutionary agitation is, well, me.

    LOL. Well, it’s all a question of how Left is Left. “Mommy, if you go into that Whole Foods again, I’m going to have to the neighborhood cadre.”

  7. 7pat on Sep 27, 2009 at 11:38 am:

    Why not a picture of Che executing a 15 year old right after he executed the father? For the crime of being middle class. Seems an easier way to cut to the chase

  8. 8Guy Average on Sep 27, 2009 at 1:58 pm:

    Fashion trends start in California. Remember the Keffiyeh?

    Quote from the linked page: “This symbol-of-solidarity-turned-fashion-fad brings to mind the image of Che Guevara, which was used as a symbol of revolution. Today, his face has become so overused on t-shirts and bags that online retailers sell Che t-shirts with the captions: “Viva la merchandise!” and “I don’t know who this guy is but he sure sells a lot of t-shirts!” The kaffiyeh is at risk of having the same fate of becoming a passé fashion trend, its symbolism diluted by youth ignorant of the deep emotions a kaffiyeh stirs in the heart of a Palestinian. It loses its political meaning as it becomes more mainstream among hipsters and celebrities. But among Arabs and pro-Palestinian activists, the kaffiyeh will never lose meaning.”

  9. 9zombie on Sep 27, 2009 at 3:16 pm:

    Guy Average: Fashion trends start in California.Remember the Keffiyeh?

    I certainly do!

    From past zombietime reports:

    Kaffiyehs as Fashion

    The Al-Aqsa Kaffiyeh Brigade

    Arabian Nights Costume Party

    Captions from past reports:

    “Fashion statement.”

    “Kaffiyehs are hip. Don’t miss out on the trend!”

    Etc. etc. etc.!

  10. 10buckykat on Sep 27, 2009 at 3:38 pm:

    I saw a Che shirt on a toddler who was skateboarding with his cool Dad in Venice (CA). Dad had the requisite number of piercings and tattoos to establish his punk rock cred. While the Che fashion business is appalling, the folks wearing the stuff usually seem clueless. Unless they’re at one of the demonstrations documented by Zombie.

  11. 11Adrenalyn on Sep 27, 2009 at 3:59 pm:

    ok, uncle Che has one star
    is there any clothing with revered leader Obama with say, two stars, or more ?

  12. 12Anonymous on Sep 27, 2009 at 3:59 pm:

    Here’s whar Berkeley Liberalism get you. Here’s what goes on at Chicago Public School dismissals. Maybe the community organizer can come back and bring the army with him. http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/video_derrion_albert

  13. 13stuiec on Sep 27, 2009 at 4:20 pm:

    #4: not cool. CJ is the one who demands total conformity — it’s not incumbent on zombie to dislike or shun the people we don’t like.

  14. 14stuiec on Sep 27, 2009 at 4:46 pm:

    Wonder if these would sell as well on Telegraph Ave….

    Murdered by Che

    All I got was this lousy T-shirt

    No idea who this guy is

    In the name of Che

  15. 15Ken on Sep 27, 2009 at 5:19 pm:

    I’m sure Che wouldn’t have many good things to say about the way his image has been endlessly whored out by people he would have loathed.

    That having been said: I wouldn’t mind my kid wearing a shirt like that, provided she actually KNEW something about Che, that is, and wasn’t just doing it “to be cool.”

  16. 16stuiec on Sep 27, 2009 at 6:37 pm:

    Ken #15: hey, now THAT’S funny!

    Makes me want to buy my daughter a Ted Bundy T-shirt. Because she actually knows something about him.

  17. 17Ringo the Gringo on Sep 27, 2009 at 6:42 pm:

    Reminds me of this shot I snapped at a protest in LA a couple of years ago:
    http://www.ringospictures.com/photos/20071027/86.jpg

  18. 18Dave Surls on Sep 27, 2009 at 7:01 pm:

    “In Berkeley. . .the children’s clothing boutique features Che shirts for kids”

    My home town sure is a wacky place.

  19. 19stuiec on Sep 27, 2009 at 7:33 pm:

    Ringo #17: doesn’t that mom understand that when the revolution comes, parents who own strollers like that one will be among the first lined up against the wall by Che Guevara’s spiritual heirs?

  20. 20Throbert McGee on Sep 27, 2009 at 11:49 pm:

    stuiec: #4: not cool. CJ is the one who demands total conformity

    [Flouncing into the thread]

    CJ who?

  21. 21Ken on Sep 27, 2009 at 11:51 pm:

    Makes me want to buy my daughter a Ted Bundy T-shirt

    As if the two were the same at all…

  22. 22Starless on Sep 28, 2009 at 3:27 am:

    Throbert McGee:
    [Flouncing into the thread]CJ who?

    I think stuiec is talking about Chuck Jones. Great animator, maybe the best ever.

    Never thought of him as a small-time dictator, though. Or even a jazz guitarist.

    “I knew I shouldn’ah took that left turn at Albuquerque!”

    Ken: Makes me want to buy my daughter a Ted Bundy T-shirtAs if the two were the same at all…

    Potato/po-tah-toe…whatever.

  23. 23Dave Surls on Sep 28, 2009 at 7:35 am:

    “As if the two were the same at all…”

    Yeah, one was a cold-blooded mass murderer while the other was a cold-blooded mass-murderer.

    No salient similarities other than that.

  24. 24Shortylion on Sep 28, 2009 at 7:36 am:

    Charles has not gone left, unless you think going left means being for creationism, anti-vaccination nonsense and for religious nuts of all stripes.

  25. 25Sherab Zangpo on Sep 28, 2009 at 8:14 am:

    Excellent fashion statement !
    The best shirt for the kiddo singing “Barak Hussein Obama MMMHH MMMHH MMMHH”

    Congrats to Zombie for the always-very-interesting blog !

  26. 26CattusMagnus on Sep 28, 2009 at 9:22 am:

    Because a child is just a canvas for you to project your political beliefs onto. Gotta get the indoctrination under way early! Does this store also sell Marx plush toys or a Lenin action figure?

  27. 27zombie on Sep 28, 2009 at 10:09 am:

    Ken:

    Makes me want to buy my daughter a Ted Bundy T-shirt

    As if the two were the same at all…

    True. It’s an unfair comparison. Ted Bundy only killed 35 people, whereas Che Guevara killed hundreds while enslaving an entire country.

  28. 28zombie on Sep 28, 2009 at 10:14 am:

    CattusMagnus: Because a child is just a canvas for you to project your political beliefs onto.Gotta get the indoctrination under way early!Does this store also sell Marx plush toys or a Lenin action figure?

    No, but a store just a block away does sell a Lenin action figure! (Seriously.) It’s part of a set of revolutionary action figures, including Malcolm X, Mao, etc. They’re supposed to be tongue-in-cheek novelties, but I think the folks of Berkeley take it quite seriously.

  29. 29zombie on Sep 28, 2009 at 10:20 am:

    Ah, here they are:

    Lord Crumwell’s Oddfellows Revolutionaries Mini Figures

    Includes Lenin, Malcolm X, Mao, Che and (inappropriately) Gandhi. (Inappropriate because while the other four were all communists not adverse to violence, Gandhi was a non-communist into non-violence.)

    These little leftie action figures can be found in several Berkeley novelty-type shops.

  30. 30Fenris on Sep 28, 2009 at 10:34 am:

    zombie: Ah, here they are:Lord Crumwell’s Oddfellows Revolutionaries Mini FiguresIncludes Lenin, Malcolm X, Mao, Che and (inappropriately) Gandhi. (Inappropriate because while the other four were all communists not adverse to violence, Gandhi was a non-communist into non-violence.)These little leftie action figures can be found in several Berkeley novelty-type shops.

    I fail to see the “action” part of all this.

  31. 31CattusMagnus on Sep 28, 2009 at 11:17 am:

    zombie: Ah, here they are:Lord Crumwell’s Oddfellows Revolutionaries Mini FiguresIncludes Lenin, Malcolm X, Mao, Che and (inappropriately) Gandhi. (Inappropriate because while the other four were all communists not adverse to violence, Gandhi was a non-communist into non-violence.)These little leftie action figures can be found in several Berkeley novelty-type shops.

    I wonder if they’re non-toxic? I’d like to give Che to my German Shepherd to gnaw on.

  32. 32neocon hippie on Sep 28, 2009 at 11:43 am:

    What store is this?

  33. 33zombie on Sep 28, 2009 at 11:46 am:

    neocon hippie: What store is this?

    I don’t know the name. It’s on Shattuck Ave, just north of University Ave.

    The photo is actually from a couple weeks ago, so the window display has probably changed by now.

  34. 34experiencedtraveller on Sep 28, 2009 at 12:19 pm:

    An interest in ‘fashion’ generally makes one a target for a real revolutionary.

  35. 35Throbert McGee on Sep 28, 2009 at 1:03 pm:

    I don’t have any particular grudge against Charles regarding his “totalitarian” policies — on this point I give him massive benefit of the doubt because (a) he runs a high-profile and extremely high-traffic blog; and (b) LGF has always been a troll magnet; and (c) his real name and face are publicly associated with the blog. So for these reasons I see his ultra-strict rules as rationally defensible.

    Having said that — his “won’t someone please think of the CHILDREN?!” histrionics over Beck’s rubber-frog stunt were just kee-razy; and his “here, flouncers, c’mon get it!” goading was repulsively unclassy.

    And having said THAT — the main reason I’m glad to be banned is not about Charles, but more because all the smurf and weasel dander was wreaking havoc on my sinuses.

  36. 36CattusMagnus on Sep 28, 2009 at 1:14 pm:

    #34 Throbert McGee,

    I’m really curious to know what you said that got you banned.

  37. 37Adam on Sep 28, 2009 at 1:22 pm:

    “Because what five-year-old can grasp who Che even was?”
    Their parents usually don’t know who Che really was, either. They just think of him as “That cool revolutionary dude who, like, fought the Establishment, maaaaan!”

    “True. It’s an unfair comparison. Ted Bundy only killed 35 people, whereas Che Guevara killed hundreds while enslaving an entire country.”
    Indeed. Two more differences:
    1. With Ted Bundy, enough factual information has spread about him that the public recognizes him for the monster that he was. Not so for Che, as a combination of his handsome face, a romantically orchestrated fairy- tale of what his life was supposedly like, and general ignorance on the part of the American public cause Che to be viewed by many as some kind of hero, in spite of the equally barbaric things he did.
    2. Hideous though Ted Bundy’s actions of course were, I understand he reformed in prison, found Christ, and while he of course knew none of his victims’ families would forgive him for the unspeakable things he did (Nor should they), he at least came to grips with what he did, and accepted his fate of the electric chair as being what what the law required and what he knew he deserved.
    In contrast, Che never in his life felt any remorse for the literally hundreds of people he killed (Many of whom he personally aided in executing; If the firing squad failed to kill their prisoner with the initial volley of bullets, good old Che would finish the job by blowing the prisoner’s brains out at point- blank range with a cranked- up pistol he kept with him). He wrote repeatedly of how much he loved killing people in his diary and personal letters, and died from being shot execution- style (Ironically, similar to how he killed so many of his victims in La Cabana prison) in the mud after having pathetically begged for his life like the repulsive, sniveling coward he really was.
    Ted Bundy was a schoolyard bully compared to Ernesto “Che” Guevara (Or, as the Cuban refugees in places like Miami know him, “The Butcher of La Cabana”).

  38. 38stuiec on Sep 28, 2009 at 3:15 pm:

    zombie: No, but a store just a block away does sell a Lenin action figure! (Seriously.) It’s part of a set of revolutionary action figures, including Malcolm X, Mao, etc. They’re supposed to be tongue-in-cheek novelties, but I think the folks of Berkeley take it quite seriously.

    I am sure that they are used as kitchen gods in a multitude of Berkeley Progressive households.

  39. 39stuiec on Sep 28, 2009 at 3:18 pm:

    Adam #37: I am not sure how sincere Bundy was in his jailhouse conversion. He never acted like he was ready to meet his Maker. In fact, to the very last minute, he tried to bargain for additional time in this life by offering to give more information about other victims in other states. Fortunately, the State of Florida put an end to the cruelty he was putting victims’ families through, and then put an end to him.

  40. 40ArmyWife on Sep 28, 2009 at 3:57 pm:

    I would love to ask some of the parents what they know about Che – or heck, let’s ask the clerks in the stores and/or the manufacturers of these things. My guess is they have not one clue as to who Che was beyond the cool sounding word “Revolutionary”.

  41. 41Throbert McGee on Sep 28, 2009 at 5:06 pm:

    CattusMagnus: #34 Throbert McGee, I’m really curious to know what you said that got you banned.

    Cattus — the official reason I got banned seems to have been a technical infraction (updinging TWO comments by a recently banned person on a thread that was 7-10 days old). However, I’d already annoyed CJ at least mildly with stuff I’d said, and Charlie’s Angels were of course in an absolute rage, so they were ready to see me banned on the slightest pretext. I’ll be posting a summary of that on my own blog (throbert.blogspot.com), including a screenshot of Rugby the Clovrfield Momster’s very last post (now deleted, of course) on LGF — but it probably won’t be up till tomorrow afternoon or evening. Stay tuned!

  42. 42jeff on Sep 28, 2009 at 5:08 pm:

    going back to the kaffiyeh for just one minute, exactly what emotions is it supposed to stir up? to the arabs its just an article of clothing. imagine if there was a movement among arab youth to rebel against their strict, islamic upbringing. if they thought a tie was a powerful symbol of resistance we would just think of that as silly.

  43. 43Shortylion on Sep 28, 2009 at 8:19 pm:

    Shortylion: Charles has not gone left, unless you think going left means being against creationism, anti-vaccination nonsense and against religious nuts of all stripes.

    `

  44. 44Shortylion on Sep 28, 2009 at 8:20 pm:

    sorry, I meant to say against, not for, obviously no one would ever accuse Charles of being for creationism, my bad!!

    PIMF

  45. 45Ken on Sep 28, 2009 at 8:30 pm:

    “Includes Lenin, Malcolm X, Mao, Che…”

    Gotta hand it to them for going the whole nine yards and including Mao’s famous facial wart (or whatever the hell that thing was) on his figure. It does kind of surprise me how it was depicted so prominently in all of his official portraits and on all the old Mao pins. That’s in contrast to, say, Kim Il Sung who supposedly had three bodyguards to stand behind him all the time so as to obscure his huge neck goiter from view. According to Dae Sook Suh they even had a codename for the goiter. Seriously.

    No word on whether or not the Lenin action figure has syphillis?

    (I have a sense of humor. I can mock the mythical founders of my political ideology.)

  46. 46Ken on Sep 28, 2009 at 8:43 pm:

    Also, regarding Gandhi I think George Orwell said it best (I may have quoted it before):

    “Gandhi and all his followers should admit that they can only preach non-violence because other people are willing to die instead of him.”

    True enough. Those who think non-violence in the face of overwhelming violence will change much are woefully naive. Dare I say that Netaji, even as a puppet of the Japanese, was more effective than Gandhi.

  47. 47stuiec on Sep 28, 2009 at 10:51 pm:

    jeff: going back to the kaffiyeh for just one minute, exactly what emotions is it supposed to stir up? to the arabs its just an article of clothing. imagine if there was a movement among arab youth to rebel against their strict, islamic upbringing. if they thought a tie was a powerful symbol of resistance we would just think of that as silly.

    Yes, as a matter of fact, Israelis wear keffiyehs fairly often. The keffiyeh is only political in two contexts:

    1) Arafat carefully ensuring that his keffiyeh always had a folded area in the shape of “Palestine,” and

    2) Ignorant Westerners who think the keffiyeh itself is some kind of symbol of solidarity with the oppressed Palestinians. The reductio ad absurdam of this kind of thinking is QUIT – Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism. I’ve never understood why QUIT hasn’t ever sent a delegation to the Gay Pride Parades in Damascus, Cairo, Gaza City, Jenin, Mecca…

  48. 48Ken on Sep 29, 2009 at 2:07 am:

    “imagine if there was a movement among arab youth to rebel against their strict, islamic upbringing. if they thought a tie was a powerful symbol of resistance we would just think of that as silly”

    Not exactly the same but Reggie Nadelson mentioned that wearing jeans was seen as an act of rebellion in the old USSR and that smoking Kents was also seen as such in Communist Romania. Any of you want to step up and mock that?

  49. 49Starless on Sep 29, 2009 at 4:23 am:

    #36 Adam

    There is no circumstance in which anyone should ever make any sort of defense or comparative minimization of how much of a monster Ted Bundy was. He found Jesus in prison? BFD. Finding Jesus or Allah in prison is like joining an extracurricular activity in high school.

    No word on whether or not the Lenin action figure has syphillis?

    #44 Ken

    Or the Mao action figure. The Mao action figure spreading a panoply of STDs while out swimming would be appropriate.

  50. 50John R. McFarlan on Sep 29, 2009 at 6:16 am:

    #23 #43 Shortylion

    Being against creationism per say isn’t lefty, but being obsessed with fighting creationism, to the point of thinking it’s threat to the country is on a par with the Islamists, sure is.

    I used to be an avid reader of LGF back when it provided a steady and reliable stream of news on the Islamist threat. I gave up on it when it turned out clear it had changed into a shrine to CJ’s self-righteous ego.

  51. 51stuiec on Sep 29, 2009 at 7:21 am:

    Ken: “imagine if there was a movement among arab youth to rebel against their strict, islamic upbringing. if they thought a tie was a powerful symbol of resistance we would just think of that as silly”Not exactly the same but Reggie Nadelson mentioned that wearing jeans was seen as an act of rebellion in the old USSR and that smoking Kents was also seen as such in Communist Romania. Any of you want to step up and mock that?

    Actually, at one point, Kents in the international gold-foil pack became an underground currency in Romania. They were far too valuable to smoke, because they were considered more stable and intrinsically valuable than the Romanian currency. That underground capitalist rebellion against the madness of communism was far more potent than the materialist act of smoking a forbidden Western brand.

  52. 52jeff on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:47 am:

    Not exactly the same but Reggie Nadelson mentioned that wearing jeans was seen as an act of rebellion in the old USSR and that smoking Kents was also seen as such in Communist Romania. Any of you want to step up and mock that?

    true. my dad was born and raised in the soviet union and he told me all about the jeans and rock n’ roll and what those things symbolized to young people growing up in communist countries. the difference between that and western kids who wear kaffiyehs are that
    1: the kids in communist countries who saw wearing jeans as a form of rebellion were practicing the right to wear what they wanted to in a country with a very oppressive government and expressing their desire to live in a free society
    2: the majority of the kids who wear the kaffiyehs as a fashion statement are completely ignorant of the fact that arab terrorist groups in gaza and the west bank want to establish a brutal, islamic dictatorship

    also, just to go back to ties for a moment, i remember reading somewhere that after the islamic revolution in iran ayatollah khomeini banned ties because he saw them as western and decadent (which is why you never see ahmadinejad wearing one). so i guess in iran the tie could be used as a symbol of anti-islamic resistance.

  53. 53Anonymous on Sep 29, 2009 at 1:30 pm:

    jeff: true. my dad was born and raised in the soviet union and he told me all about the jeans and rock n’ roll and what those things symbolized to young people growing up in communist countries. the difference between that and western kids who wear kaffiyehs are that1: the kids in communist countries who saw wearing jeans as a form of rebellion were practicing the right to wear what they wanted to in a country with a very oppressive government and expressing their desire to live in a free society2: the majority of the kids who wear the kaffiyehs as a fashion statement are completely ignorant of the fact that arab terrorist groups in gaza and the west bank want to establish a brutal, islamic dictatorship

    Yep, this is what the Berkeley kids in keffiyehs are helping to achieve:

    A slow introduction of Islamic norms and practices into society began immediately following the Hamas victory in PLC elections in January 2006. This process was accelerated following Hamas’s seizure of exclusive control of Gaza in 2007.

    However, there are clear internal differences in the movement regarding the pace of change. Hamas’s current leadership has tended to favor a slow encouragement of Islamic practices and rules, without straying too far from the desires of the broader public.

    More hardline and Salafi elements within the movement want a stricter and more formal introduction of Islamic norms. Events over the last 18 months indicate that the latter camp is now making the running, with Hamas’s leadership under pressure from extreme forces both within the movement and beyond it.

    This change is being felt in the very fabric of daily life in Gaza. A transition of the status of Islamic observance from social norm to legal compulsion is under way.

    The most obvious sign of this is the creation of the new “Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice” security force, which operates under the command of the Ministry of the Waqf (Islamic Endowment).

    This force is tasked with enforcing Islamic codes of behavior. Its members patrol beaches, parks and public areas, ensuring proper Islamic modesty.

    One source describes how a man wearing shorts while sitting on his own balcony in southern Gaza was spotted and advised that this must not happen again. Rules banning men from bathing topless, and women (who may still bathe separately from men and fully covered) from laughing or smiling while bathing, are also in the process of enforcement.

  54. 54Anonymous on Sep 29, 2009 at 3:30 pm:

    BTW: Berkeley City Council Voting to Become Subservient to the UN: Would be First City in the World to Sign Onto UN Treaties….

    Berkeley would become the first city in the United States to independently try to comply with U.N. treaties on torture, civil rights and racial discrimination, if the City Council passes a measure on the issue tonight.

    The measure would require the city to file biennial reports to the United Nations on how – or whether – the city meets international human rights standards. In Berkeley, that could include its record on homelessness, the achievement gap among different racial groups at Berkeley High and the presence of John Yoo, a UC Berkeley School of Law professor and Berkeley resident who authored the Bush administration’s justification for torture.

  55. 55Dave Surls on Sep 29, 2009 at 4:05 pm:

    Re: U.N. foolishness

    “They expect each town and hamlet to report back? That seems kind of excessive,” said City Councilman Gordon Wozniak. “And is it really helpful to the international body if Berkeley, one isolated city, does this?”

    Someone in Berkeley actually has a functioning brain?

    Who knew?

  56. 56Throbert McGee on Sep 29, 2009 at 4:54 pm:

    John R. McFarlan: #23 #43 ShortylionBeing against creationism per say isn’t lefty, but being obsessed with fighting creationism, to the point of thinking it’s threat to the country is on a par with the Islamists, sure is.

    Apart from any question of being “lefty,” fighting creationism in the way that CJ has chosen to do is counterproductive.

    My feeling is: if you’re a scientific-minded and openly atheist person who is sincerely concerned that religious creationists are weakening science-curriculum standards in public high schools, then your best strategy is — counterintuitive as it may seem — to publicly and repeatedly endorse the basic reasonableness of “theistic evolution” as a respectable alternative to your preferred position of naturalistic evolution.

    I’m not saying that an atheist must personally believe that theistic evolution is just as rational as naturalism; I’m just saying that there is a lot of pragmatic wisdom in treating theistic evolution with a degree of intellectual courtesy that ought not be given to outright creationists who completely deny speciation from common ancestors. To put it more bluntly, I’d go so far as to say that at the high-school biology level, there’s simply no need to be so strictly naturalistic as to exclude “Deistic evolution” (i.e., G-d pushed the Big-Bang button and then let stellar, planetary, and biological evolution occur without interference). And being open to this possibility — or at the very least treating it respectfully — takes a lot of wind out of the sails of the creationist/ID crowd.

    And of course, CJ has endorsed Theistic Evolution as intellectually respectable and distinguishable from “Intelligent Design” (though I assume he personally favors strict naturalism), and has recommended such writers as Ken Miller — I just think that CJ could’ve done an even better job in that direction.

  57. 57Ken on Sep 29, 2009 at 5:54 pm:

    2: the majority of the kids who wear the kaffiyehs as a fashion statement are completely ignorant of the fact that arab terrorist groups in gaza and the west bank want to establish a brutal, islamic dictatorship

    I disagree. I don’t think they’re ignorant of it, I think they’re aware of it but they’ve convinced themselves that the Islamic theocracies in those countries “aren’t as bad as everyone says they are.” Talk about naive to the Nth degree. I could never understand why someone would call themselves a Socialist or Marxist and support something like Hezbollah. Am I the only Marxist who can see that we shouldn’t support every group of idiots who claims to be an “anti-Imperialist” or “liberation” group? I doubt Engels or Lenin would have supported Hamas.

  58. 58stuiec on Sep 29, 2009 at 6:57 pm:

    Ken: I disagree. I don’t think they’re ignorant of it, I think they’re aware of it but they’ve convinced themselves that the Islamic theocracies in those countries “aren’t as bad as everyone says they are.” Talk about naive to the Nth degree. I could never understand why someone would call themselves a Socialist or Marxist and support something like Hezbollah. Am I the only Marxist who can see that we shouldn’t support every group of idiots who claims to be an “anti-Imperialist” or “liberation” group? I doubt Engels or Lenin would have supported Hamas.

    But what groups can a Marxist support in this day and age?

  59. 59Ken on Sep 29, 2009 at 7:22 pm:

    Communist Parties? Social-Democratic Parties?

    That was an easy one.

  60. 60Dave Surls on Sep 29, 2009 at 8:18 pm:

    Loons in New York celebrate 60 years of communist rule in the PRC.

    http://www.julescrittenden.com/2009/09/29/happy-birthday-prc/#comments

    Makes Ernesto Guevara tee-shirts look pretty tame.

  61. 61Ken on Sep 29, 2009 at 9:21 pm:

    Dave,

    It really is a bit more nuanced than that. I mean, there are MANY people in this country who are staunch anti-Communists but are still proud of China and are supporting its 60th anniversary. I know many, many of them personally. You have to understand that Chinese view themselves as Chinese regardless of who is in charge and what system is leading everything and will celebrate any important milestone in Chinese history. Can you really fault them for just being happy that it’s their country’s birthday? Shit, I always celebrated the 4th back home even though I was, and am, opposed to America’s rotten, immoral system. I didn’t see anything mutually exclusive about that at all. I still don’t.

    The simplistic views of this country that so many Westerners have is one of the most irritating things. China is so complex…do you guys really think it’s just labor camps and “post-Marxist autocracies” (or whatever that article said)? All it seemed to be to me was nothing more than snide condescenion. Who is that going to win over? Nobody.

    My invitation to come visit me in China, made during our enmity, still stands. You’d have your eyes opened about this place, for sure.

  62. 62stuiec on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:58 pm:

    Ken: Communist Parties? Social-Democratic Parties?
    That was an easy one.

    But so many of the Communist Parties have no hope of ever gaining power in their countries, and are merely social clubs for those nostalgic for the days when Communism seemed poised to sweep the world.

    And where Communist Parties are ascendant, they seem to bear little resemblance to the advertisements. Cuba has managed to figure out how not even to produce its basic necessities. China has become stratified between high-living people in Hong Kong and Shanghai and Beijing on the one hand and exploited workers and peasants and oppressed ethnic minorities on the other. The Chinese pay close attention to preserving pandas because they provide good public relations images, but think little of causing ecological devastation and human suffering with industrial projects ranging from the Three Gorges Dam to lead battery plants to tainted milk products. Why, China has all of the exploitation of the masses of capitalism with none of the political rights of Western democracy: a virtual best of both worlds, if one happens to be a member of its ruling class.

    As for Social Democrats, so many of them are finding they’ve worn out their electoral welcomes after creating unsustainably bloated welfare states. Even in Scandinavia, you see calls for tax cuts – weird, huh?

    So I guess my question was, where can a Marxist turn to find a party worth supporting that has a chance of creating a workers’ paradise on Earth?

  63. 63Starless on Sep 30, 2009 at 4:22 am:

    #60 Ken

    I think I just saw a flying pig because you’ve said something I can (mostly) agree with regarding China. While it will probably take more than flying pigs to convince me that in the end CCP rule will have been a net plus for the Chinese people, there’s an argument to be made for it bringing some positives compared to imperial and brutal Japanese rule. That being said, the old men sitting in Beijing are still sons-of-bitches.

  64. 64Starless on Sep 30, 2009 at 4:32 am:

    #55 Throbert McGee

    What you’re missing is that creationists (whether they make claims to Intelligent Design or “theistic evolution”) are using complaints about how evolution is taught in public schools as a wedge issue with the ultimate goal of completely usurping what they call “naturalism” (science). They’re not in it for a compromise solution, they’re in it to win — they’re in it to give science in public schools the same treatment they’ve given abortion. Science isn’t about compromising and coming to politically acceptable solutions, it’s about understanding the reality of the natural world. Theism is about the super-natural world and therefore outside of science. The two just do not mix.

    The trouble with CJ, IMO, is not that he’s making the wrong argument but that he sounds like a hyperventilating hysteric.

  65. 65Emmie on Sep 30, 2009 at 7:38 am:

    zombie: Ah, here they are:Lord Crumwell’s Oddfellows Revolutionaries Mini FiguresIncludes Lenin, Malcolm X, Mao, Che and (inappropriately) Gandhi. (Inappropriate because while the other four were all communists not adverse to violence, Gandhi was a non-communist into non-violence.)These little leftie action figures can be found in several Berkeley novelty-type shops.

    Hmmm…two of these things are not like the others. Ghandi is totally misplaced, and Malcolm X never killed anyone. The others? Butchers. You can’t make them cute no matter how hard you try.

  66. 66Emmie on Sep 30, 2009 at 7:41 am:

    I guess I’m not hip enough. My son doesn’t wear an expensive Che t-shirt from a cool boutique store. He wears Sesame street, mass produced, bought from Costco.

    I must be a bad mother.

  67. 67zombie on Sep 30, 2009 at 7:52 am:

    Ooooh. The New York Times just noticed and ran a piece about my previous zomblog post (on John “Ice Age” Holdren):

    The New York Times: Holdren’s Ice Age Tidal Wave

    As a long-time student of John P. Holdren’s gloomy visions of the future, like his warnings about global famines and resource shortages, I can’t resist passing along another one that has just been dug up. This one was made in 1971, long before Dr. Holdren came President Obama’s science adviser, in an essay just unearthed by zombietime (a blog that has been republishing excerpts of his past writings). In the 1971 essay, “Overpopulation and the Potential for Ecocide,” Dr. Holdren and his co-author, the ecologist Paul Ehrlich, warned of a coming ice age.

    They certainly weren’t the only scientists in the 1970s to warn of a coming ice age, but I can’t think of any others who were so creative in their catastrophizing.

    I personally scoff at the NY Times, but East Coast liberals still treat it like the Source of All Knowledge, so maybe this will stir things up a bit.

  68. 68Thomas von der Trave on Sep 30, 2009 at 9:53 am:

    Well, golly. Che on a shirt for kids.

    Little kids holding up signs at tea parties calling Obama “Montana roadkill”? Nothing wrong with that.

  69. 69Guy Average on Sep 30, 2009 at 10:12 am:

    zombie: Ooooh. The New York Times just noticed and ran a piece about my previous zomblog post (on John “Ice Age” Holdren):The New York Times: Holdren’s Ice Age Tidal WaveI personally scoff at the NY Times, but East Coast liberals still treat it like the Source of All Knowledge, so maybe this will stir things up a bit.

    I don’t know if you would call yourself a journalist or not, but let me pay you a compliment: In my understanding of what a journalist should be, you are clearly a top-notch journalist. I guess that some editors agree with me.

    Congrats and continued success.

  70. 70Guy Average on Sep 30, 2009 at 10:17 am:

    Thomas von der Trave: Well, golly. Che on a shirt for kids.Little kids holding up signs at tea parties calling Obama “Montana roadkill”? Nothing wrong with that.

    Apples to oranges comparison there. Maybe the children with the “Montana roadkill” shirts are doing it as a science project.

  71. 71Thomas von der Trave on Sep 30, 2009 at 10:22 am:

    Cute, Guy. Real cute.

  72. 72Formercorpsman on Sep 30, 2009 at 11:03 am:

    He murdered Cuban children.

  73. 73Emmie on Sep 30, 2009 at 11:31 am:

    Formercorpsman: He murdered Cuban children.

    Why are you allowing facts to get in the way of a good vibe?

  74. 74Starless on Sep 30, 2009 at 11:43 am:

    Thomas von der Trave: Well, golly. Che on a shirt for kids.Little kids holding up signs at tea parties calling Obama “Montana roadkill”? Nothing wrong with that.

    So, lemme get this straight: Zombie points to one thing and calls it ridiculous but doesn’t point to another thing and call it ridiculous, so by omission that means Zombie approves of the latter?

    Impeccable logic.

  75. 75Anonymous on Sep 30, 2009 at 12:12 pm:

    Buy me one of those shirts zombie dude, and mail it to me. I could use a little Che now and then.

  76. 76ZZMike on Sep 30, 2009 at 1:19 pm:

    Adam (#37): “Their parents usually don’t know who Che really was, either. ” I was talking to someone earlier in the year – just after the movie “Che” came out. She insisted that Che was killed by the CIA.

  77. 77Dave Surls on Sep 30, 2009 at 2:13 pm:

    #61

    Enmity?

    It ain’t my fault you flew into a rage every time I slagged off communists and communism.

    Communists have brought tyranny, poverty and death whenever they’ve taken power. And, the PRC is no exception.

    Nothing to celebrate there.

  78. 78Dave Surls on Sep 30, 2009 at 3:22 pm:

    Capitalist systems can produce this:

    United States Per Capita GDP(PPP): $46,716

    Communist systems,OTOH, ALWAYS produce poverty, and in the case of the PRC they’ve done in it a resource rich nation. China should be one of the richest countries on earth…instead China is what it is:

    PRC Per Capita GDP(PPP): $5,962

    Source: World Bank figures for 2008.

    And, that’s IF you believe the commies are telling the truth about their economic situation, which they don’t have a very good track record of doing.

    In addition to being a poverty stricken hellhole, the PRC is one of the most tyrannical nations on earth (big shock, the place is run by commies).

    Freedom House current ratings…

    http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/fiw09/FIW09_Tables&GraphsForWeb.pdf

    In addition, the commies got China to where it is by slaughtering millions of people (mostly by starving them to death a la the Nazis or Stalinists). Professor R.J. Rummel: “The total for the communist democide before and after Mao took over the mainland is thus 3,446,000 + 35,226,000 + 38,000,000 = 76,692,000, or to round off, 77,000,000 murdered. This is now in line with the 65 million toll estimated for China in the Black Book of Communism, and Chang and Halliday’s estimate of “well over 70 million.”–Rummel, Hawaii Reporter, 12/1/2005

    Thanks, but I’ll take a pass on celebrating 60 years of brutal and oppressive communist rule in the PRC.

  79. 79Shug on Sep 30, 2009 at 3:37 pm:

    Zombie,
    I think you do an amazing job. You put in so much hard work.
    I stuck up for you last week. You deserve it. It’s sad so many others didn’t. Their loss. They’ve gone insane in my opinion.

    Keep up the fantastic work!
    -a loyal zombietime fan

    S

  80. 80Anonymous on Sep 30, 2009 at 4:58 pm:

    Starless: #55 Throbert McGeeWhat you’re missing is that creationists (whether they make claims to Intelligent Design or “theistic evolution”) are using complaints about how evolution is taught in public schools as a wedge issue with the ultimate goal of completely usurping what they call “naturalism” (science). They’re not in it for a compromise solution, they’re in it to win — they’re in it to give science in public schools the same treatment they’ve given abortion. Science isn’t about compromising and coming to politically acceptable solutions, it’s about understanding the reality of the natural world. Theism is about the super-natural world and therefore outside of science. The two just do not mix.The trouble with CJ, IMO, is not that he’s making the wrong argument but that he sounds like a hyperventilating hysteric.

    Indeed. He transitioned at some point from objecting to Creationism and ID in the schools to objecting to anyone having the temerity to hold those beliefs, period. He became a religious bigot — at about the same time that he went off on Geert Wilders for being a religious bigot… you know, for objecting to the Koran on the basis of its exhortations to violence and genocide.

  81. 81Anonymous on Sep 30, 2009 at 4:59 pm:

    I personally scoff at the NY Times, but East Coast liberals still treat it like the Source of All Knowledge, so maybe this will stir things up a bit.

    Nice! I hope that some folks will come by here and get their knowledge on.

  82. 82stuiec on Sep 30, 2009 at 5:02 pm:

    Starless: #60 KenI think I just saw a flying pig because you’ve said something I can (mostly) agree with regarding China. While it will probably take more than flying pigs to convince me that in the end CCP rule will have been a net plus for the Chinese people, there’s an argument to be made for it bringing some positives compared to imperial and brutal Japanese rule. That being said, the old men sitting in Beijing are still sons-of-bitches.

    Yes, if it hadn’t been for that misstep with the Great Leap Forward… and that pesky Cultural Revolution… which were as imperial and brutal as the Japanese occupation but much deadlier.

  83. 83stuiec on Sep 30, 2009 at 5:06 pm:

    And have we also noted Holdren’s recommendation that unwed mothers who refuse abortions be forcibly stripped of their children? Weasel Zippers has it.

    Obama Science Czar Advocated Seizing Babies Born to Unwed Women if They Refuse to Get an Abortion in 1970′s Textbook….

    Obama science czar John Holdren stated in a college textbook that “illegitimate children” born to unwed mothers could be taken by the government and put up for adoption if the mother refused to have an abortion.

    Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, argued that “illegitimate childbearing could be strongly discouraged” as a socioeconomic measure imposed to control population growth.

    ….On page 786, the authors wrote that one way to discourage illegitimate childbearing “might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption – especially those born to minors who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone.”

    Alternatively, the authors suggested unwed mothers might place their babies up for adoption, writing: “If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it.”

  84. 84Formercorpsman on Sep 30, 2009 at 6:16 pm:

    Emmie:
    Why are you allowing facts to get in the way of a good vibe?

    Its only facts, and facts are all I have, to take your Che away…

  85. 85Don-Quixote on Sep 30, 2009 at 7:26 pm:

    Ken,
    The problem is however that while China is multi-faceted the idea of turning the Empire state building red on the day that marks the Communist revolution speaks of acceptance. No one should forget the Mao killed more people in his own country than the number killed in all of WWII.
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_did_Chairman_Mao_kill

    People were talking about Bundy earlier or Che? Think minnow and shark.

  86. 86Josephine on Sep 30, 2009 at 8:12 pm:

    Re. #47. In Canada, we have “Queers Against Israeli Apartheid”. I videotaped their group — including one guy with his face covered by a keffiyeh — at this summer’s Pride Parade in Toronto and they harassed me and tried to stop me from taping.

    Here’s a link to my video: http://www.vimeo.com/5385309

    I was also denounced as a Zionist and harassed at the recent Dead Sea Scrolls protest and Al Quds Day (photos, reports and video on my blog, if anyone’s interested).

    Zombie, I often think of you and I’m impressed by your ability to remain incognito. Stay safe.

  87. 87Ken on Sep 30, 2009 at 8:52 pm:

    The problem is however that while China is multi-faceted the idea of turning the Empire state building red on the day that marks the Communist revolution speaks of acceptance.

    The Chinese consul will be there. It’s not “acceptance,” it’s a diplomatic overture to mark China’s “4th of July.” Or are you experiencing discomfort at it turning red, automatically associating “red” with “Communist?” Well, if it’s the latter you can rest easy because red has been China’s lucky color for thousands of years before Communism was ever even thought up. Peng Dehuai once said that it was a “happy coincidence” that China’s color was the same color as the Communist trademark. And, if that’s not good enough, there’s always that old silver bullet that can solve anything: if you don’t like it, don’t look at it.

    That picture in that article is slightly humourous: I didn’t know the Wall Street Journal published articles about Lin Biao (the rolled up paper beneath the guy’s arm)

  88. 88Ken on Sep 30, 2009 at 9:01 pm:

    which were as imperial and brutal as the Japanese occupation but much deadlier.

    And yet the Chinese hate their Japanese invaders, with a burning passion, but still dearly love Mao, the architect of the Cultural Revolution. I wonder why.

    It’s so funny to see Westerners getting angry on behalf of Chinese people over things that the Chinese don’t even care about. “Ohhh, Mao murdered millions of people!” Yeah? Try to find a Chinese who cares. “Ohhhh, the Chinese government oppresses its poor, defenseless people” I’ll give you 200 bucks if you can find anyone who gives a shit about that in this country. The Western stereotype about the “poor, oppressed Chinese people yearning for Liberty” is soooOOoOoOOOOOOo trite and hilarious. And self-important.

    If you really want to take your life into your own hands, do as the above says and tell a Chinese guy that Mao was as “imperial and brutal” as the Japanese. He wont be happy, believe me.

  89. 89stuiec on Sep 30, 2009 at 10:16 pm:

    Ken: which were as imperial and brutal as the Japanese occupation but much deadlier.And yet the Chinese hate their Japanese invaders, with a burning passion, but still dearly love Mao, the architect of the Cultural Revolution. I wonder why.It’s so funny to see Westerners getting angry on behalf of Chinese people over things that the Chinese don’t even care about. “Ohhh, Mao murdered millions of people!” Yeah? Try to find a Chinese who cares. “Ohhhh, the Chinese government oppresses its poor, defenseless people” I’ll give you 200 bucks if you can find anyone who gives a shit about that in this country. The Western stereotype about the “poor, oppressed Chinese people yearning for Liberty” is soooOOoOoOOOOOOo trite and hilarious. And self-important.If you really want to take your life into your own hands, do as the above says and tell a Chinese guy that Mao was as “imperial and brutal” as the Japanese. He wont be happy, believe me.

    Can I tell that to a “Chinese guy” in Tibet? Or a Chinese Uighur guy?

    And how do the other Chinese guys feel about Jiang Qing?

  90. 90Dave Surls on Oct 1, 2009 at 12:16 am:

    ‘“Ohhhh, the Chinese government oppresses its poor, defenseless people” I’ll give you 200 bucks if you can find anyone who gives a shit about that in this country.’

    Okay.

    ‘Chinese human rights activist Hu Jia has been convicted of “inciting subversion of state power” and sentenced to three and a half years inprison.’

    ‘After months under house arrest, Hu Jia was detained on 27 December 2007. He was formally charged on 28 January 2008 and went on trial on18 March at the Beijing Municipal No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court.’

    ‘”This verdict is punishment for Hu Jia’s public critiques of human rights violations in China and a warning to any other activists in China who dare to raise human rights concerns publicly,” said Amnesty International.’

    http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/chinese-activist-gets-jail-sentence-20080403

    Send my 200 bucks to Zombie, and he/she can donate it to a charity of his/her choice.

  91. 91Ken on Oct 1, 2009 at 12:51 am:

    Can I tell that to a “Chinese guy” in Tibet? Or a Chinese Uighur guy?

    Of course. I know plenty of them and I’ve heard no one complain about any of the “atrocities of the day” that you all shed your crocdile tears over. The Uyghur and Tibetan sepratist movement is actually a quite small section of their societies. And, yes, I have been to both places and talked with plenty of people about it. Interesting to note, though, how quickly Westerners, specifically Americans, have started to feel so sympathetic towards the Uyghur sepratist movement even though it’s run and funded single-handedly by Al Qaeda. No one finds that a little bit hypocritical? No conflict of interest there, eh? How many Uyghur sepratists would YOU want living in America? Oh, that’s right, it was safer to send them all to Albania or Palau instead. I wonder why…couldn’t be because they’re violent Islamists could it?

    And how do the other Chinese guys feel about Jiang Qing?

    Mention her name and you get a “meh.” Press further and you might get a “She was bad.” Bottom line: no one cares.

    Send my 200 bucks to Zombie, and he/she can donate it to a charity of his/her choice

    I meant normal Chinese people, not convicted felons and pathological liars trying to destroy their own countries. But, anyway, the check’s in the mail.

    Or is it?

  92. 92Dave Surls on Oct 1, 2009 at 1:00 am:

    I met the terms of your offer. Whether or not you honor your part is up to you.

  93. 93Starless on Oct 1, 2009 at 5:09 am:

    stuiec:
    Yes, if it hadn’t been for that misstep with the Great Leap Forward… and that pesky Cultural Revolution… which were as imperial and brutal as the Japanese occupation but much deadlier.

    Ha! I wasn’t trying to gloss over any of the horrible things the CCP has perpetrated over the last 60 years. But, at the point when the KMT and the CCP were trying to realize Sun Yat Sen’s dream, the Chinese empire had completely crumbled after a very long period of corruption and the Chinese people were being horribly brutalized by the Japanese. The best I will say about the CCP is that they brought a form of self-rule and stability to a completely chaotic situation. I personally think that the Chinese people would have been far, far better off with a form of democratic capitalism (as has been proven in microcosm over the last 20 years on the island of Formosa). If nothing else, the pile of bodies would be smaller.

    So, yeah, you can make a comparative brutality analysis between empire/Japanese occupation/CCP rule, but I think in the end you have to decide whether you agree if a people have the right to choose for themselves what form of gov’t they get to have. IMO the Chinese have just replace one form of imperial rule with another and I criticize that decision, but it’s their country and that seems to be what they want. We can fight against that but I think we have to show some level of respect for their decision.

    A lot of Americans were pissed off over world criticism of our decision to elect GWB, and rightly so, but that street runs both ways.

  94. 94Starless on Oct 1, 2009 at 5:17 am:

    Anonymous:
    Indeed.He transitioned at some point from objecting to Creationism and ID in the schools to objecting to anyone having the temerity to hold those beliefs, period.He became a religious bigot — at about the same time that he went off on Geert Wilders for being a religious bigot… you know, for objecting to the Koran on the basis of its exhortations to violence and genocide.

    I don’t understand how people can believe in something as ridiculous as ID but I’m not about to go around calling them all idiots. I prefer to try to get them to understand that they’ve been suckered by charlatans. CJ would be better off saving the vitriol for the perpetrators of this hoax and not spread it around indiscriminately onto everyone.

    The only things I know about Geert Wilders is that he has a hilarious name (almost as hilarious as “Hans Blix”) and that CJ has a total hard-on for him.

  95. 95billhedrick on Oct 1, 2009 at 9:53 am:

    I wish to the Heavens above that people would stop using the tu quoque argument….If I position has merit, argue for it. If it doesn’t don’t give me the “well XXX is just as bad and you never condemned that!” To begin with:

    1) You don’t know I never argued against it
    2) my possible hypocrisy does not justify the thing I am condemning.

    If we can avoid weaseling we have a chance to get somewhere, if not then we are doomed.

  96. 96CattusMagnus on Oct 1, 2009 at 1:05 pm:

    Ken: which were as imperial and brutal as the Japanese occupation but much deadlier.And yet the Chinese hate their Japanese invaders, with a burning passion, but still dearly love Mao, the architect of the Cultural Revolution. I wonder why.It’s so funny to see Westerners getting angry on behalf of Chinese people over things that the Chinese don’t even care about. “Ohhh, Mao murdered millions of people!” Yeah? Try to find a Chinese who cares. “Ohhhh, the Chinese government oppresses its poor, defenseless people” I’ll give you 200 bucks if you can find anyone who gives a shit about that in this country. The Western stereotype about the “poor, oppressed Chinese people yearning for Liberty” is soooOOoOoOOOOOOo trite and hilarious. And self-important.If you really want to take your life into your own hands, do as the above says and tell a Chinese guy that Mao was as “imperial and brutal” as the Japanese. He wont be happy, believe me.

    Well I don’t know about Chinese in China, but I am very close to two Chinese women in the US, both born and raised in China, who care quite a bit that Mao killed millions of people, are critical of the Cultural Revolution and did yearn for liberty/opportunity/freedom which is why they left China and would not dream of going back. They also have many Chinese friends living in the US, Canada and Europe who would not go back to China as well. These people do exist. And they’re not buying Mao bobbleheads in Berkeley.

  97. 97billhedrick on Oct 1, 2009 at 1:12 pm:

    Well, the idea that in a totalitarian society, where people are re-educated (if they are lucky) would not have a lot of dissent is not a huge surprise.

  98. 98stuiec on Oct 1, 2009 at 8:33 pm:

    Starless:
    Ha! I wasn’t trying to gloss over any of the horrible things the CCP has perpetrated over the last 60 years. But, at the point when the KMT and the CCP were trying to realize Sun Yat Sen’s dream, the Chinese empire had completely crumbled after a very long period of corruption and the Chinese people were being horribly brutalized by the Japanese. The best I will say about the CCP is that they brought a form of self-rule and stability to a completely chaotic situation. I personally think that the Chinese people would have been far, far better off with a form of democratic capitalism (as has been proven in microcosm over the last 20 years on the island of Formosa). If nothing else, the pile of bodies would be smaller.So, yeah, you can make a comparative brutality analysis between empire/Japanese occupation/CCP rule, but I think in the end you have to decide whether you agree if a people have the right to choose for themselves what form of gov’t they get to have. IMO the Chinese have just replace one form of imperial rule with another and I criticize that decision, but it’s their country and that seems to be what they want. We can fight against that but I think we have to show some level of respect for their decision.A lot of Americans were pissed off over world criticism of our decision to elect GWB, and rightly so, but that street runs both ways.

    I can’t speak for whether the Han Chinese want something other than rule by the Chinese Communist Party. It’s pretty clear that Tibetans aren’t crazy about it and yet haven’t much say in the matter.

    I have no idea whether the people of North Korea have any democratic aspirations or have been so thoroughly isolated and indoctrinated that they don’t have any concept of life outside or beyond the PRK. However, the people of South Korea suffered under a brutal Japanese occupation, then under an authoritarian regime, and ultimately gained the chance to choose their form of government. As you noted, the folks who fled to Formosa went through the same metamorphosis.

    One question is whether prosperity, which catalyzed the desire of the people in Taiwan and South Korea to cast off authoritarianism, will have the same effect in the People’s Republic of China. There seem to be isolated pockets of resentment against the authoritarian government at various times — for example, when the government seems to be incompetent or uncaring in the wake of an earthquake, or when an official abuses his power to exploit one or more ordinary citizens. Are they truly isolated random pockets, or a leading edge of a wider swell of unrest?

  99. 99Davin Valkri on Oct 1, 2009 at 8:45 pm:

    What’s everybody complaining about Mr. Johnson for? He hasn’t “gone left”–remember that he always self-identified as “anti-idiotarian”. Certain modern strains of rightist protest have the same strains of irrationality as the leftist protests of the last eight years. It’s GOOD that he’s bringing these out–we can clear out the irrational elements and leave lunatic death threats on picket signs to ultra-lefty types of the sort who would live in Berkeley and buy this shirt without shame.

  100. 100Ken on Oct 1, 2009 at 10:13 pm:

    I met the terms of your offer. Whether or not you honor your part is up to you.

    My conscience was nagging me so I donated 200 RMB in your name this morning to CHAIN (http://www.chain.net.cn). You have my word as a gentleman on that (though that probably means nothing to do you). My wife was furious, BTW.

    which is why they left China and would not dream of going back.

    Let them go, I say. I hope they have good lives there in the West. I sincerely do wish them well.

    We can fight against that but I think we have to show some level of respect for their decision.

    Well said, indeed

    It’s pretty clear that Tibetans aren’t crazy about it

    You’re judging hundreds of millions of Tibetans by the actions of a few religious extremists? That hardly seems fair or accurate. I don’t think the Chinese would be judging all Americans by the actions of, say, the KKK. “Tibet” is such a misleading issue. I used to believe the disinformation about it sown by the Pro-Tibet camp in the West. Once I had a chance to actually GO to Tibet, though, and speak to people there (without a guide or translator, so don’t bother trying to bring that up) my eyes were opened quite a bit.

    Well, the idea that in a totalitarian society, where people are re-educated (if they are lucky) would not have a lot of dissent is not a huge surprise.

    Hannah Arendt would like a world with you…

    There seem to be isolated pockets of resentment against the authoritarian government at various times — for example, when the government seems to be incompetent or uncaring in the wake of an earthquake, or when an official abuses his power to exploit one or more ordinary citizens.

    Most of the grief aimed at the Chinese government from Chinese comes from their interaction with petty officials at the local level and their corruption in some cases, not at the Central Government. Take your example about the earthquake. Local residents were furious with shoddily-constructed buildings and let local officials know how they felt about it. Their feelings towards national leaders, like Wen Jiabao, was completely different. The outpouring of support for the government at that time was evident everywhere. Anyway, resentment at local pencil pushers is hardly something unique to China. The government is trying to rectify this with direct local elections…I don’t recall hearing about that on CNN or FOX, though

  101. 101Ken on Oct 1, 2009 at 10:14 pm:

  102. 102Starless on Oct 2, 2009 at 5:17 am:

    stuiec:
    I can’t speak for whether the Han Chinese want something other than rule by the Chinese Communist Party. It’s pretty clear that Tibetans aren’t crazy about it and yet haven’t much say in the matter.

    I was speaking in really, really (really) general terms. In the sense that the “Chinese” tend to be thought of as an overwhelmingly huge, seething, anonymous mass. Which is an understandable way to see them but ignores the fact that they are individuals with personal aspirations and opinions. If you start talking about ethnic minorities, then the question of whether they had the opportunity to make a choice about self-rule becomes stickier. So I guess what I was getting at was that in relative terms and the circumstances of the times, when confronted with the alternatives of rule by a supposedly divinely-appointed autocrat, a foreign invader, or a homegrown, at least nominally populist, political party (the KMT or CCP), the Chinese people (whoever they are) “chose” the latter.

    One question is whether prosperity, which catalyzed the desire of the people in Taiwan and South Korea to cast off authoritarianism, will have the same effect in the People’s Republic of China.There seem to be isolated pockets of resentment against the authoritarian government at various times — for example, when the government seems to be incompetent or uncaring in the wake of an earthquake, or when an official abuses his power to exploit one or more ordinary citizens.Are they truly isolated random pockets, or a leading edge of a wider swell of unrest?

    It depends on whether the central gov’t can successfully feed them, provide them with clean water, and keep brutality toward non-Han to a minimum. In the end, I don’t think it can, but we’ll see. I think the old men in Peking are pretty aware of the dangers of the mob but there are signs that some of their successors are becoming too far removed from understanding the power of the mob and may start to make some serious mistakes.

    In the case of Taiwan, while Chiang Kai Shek was a brutal son-of-a-bitch, his son Chiang Ching Kuo was an arguably “benevolent” dictator who set the stage for real democracy to take hold after his death. Short of a modern day Mao, I think it would be next to impossible for a single man to do the same thing on the mainland.

  103. 103Whatzit on Oct 2, 2009 at 10:38 am:

    Real fucking nice, zombie. Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him. Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

  104. 104buzzsawmonkey on Oct 2, 2009 at 1:01 pm:

    zombie:
    Actually: In Berkeley, it’s the parents who are buying toddler-sized Che shirts in the first place, in order to show off their cute Little Revolutionaries to their radical friends. Because what five-year-old can grasp who Che even was?The only person guilty of counter-revolutionary agitation is, well, me.

    People who buy Che T-shirts are over-the-counter revolutionaries.

  105. 105Kun on Oct 2, 2009 at 1:34 pm:

    Ken once again is a failure at Marxism.

    You see, Ken, we support anti-imperialist movements because they weaken imperialism. As Lenin said, imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism inasmuch as all capitalist countries are either imperialist (this being quite a small minority) or comprador in character, with a few national-bourgeois states which resist imperialism and try to build up their own bourgeoisie whose profits aren’t based on being compradors to the imperialists. Now you can go and support the Revolutionary Non-Dogmatic Anti-Religious Pseudo-Anti-Imperialist Brigade of Marxist-Dengists of Lebanon or whatever (right up there with Luxemburgists who essentially deny imperialism), but the rest of the Communist movement will be supporting popular anti-imperialist movements like Hezbollah.

    “Communist Parties? Social-Democratic Parties?”

    Yes, Ken, Communists can support the glorious CPUSA, which is basically an appendage of the Democrats, or a social-democratic party! (Of which there are effectively none in the US) Social-Democracy sounds great, Ken, I sure would enjoy throwing my support behind people that started off by bastardizing Marx (“We don’t need revolution!”) and then simply abandoning him and becoming firm petty-bourgeois parties of the right. Of course I can call the CPUSA this too, it has done an admirable job of being a social-democratic party since the 1930′s, Browder was just a natural step for them.

    The rest of your posts are just praising glorious socialist China over and over. You’re a lame Communist, Ken.

  106. 106Dave Surls on Oct 2, 2009 at 3:21 pm:

    “My conscience was nagging me so I donated 200 RMB in your name this morning to CHAIN…”

    Thank you. Stamping out AIDS is a good thing.

  107. 107stuiec on Oct 2, 2009 at 3:49 pm:

    Whatzit #103: apparently you never got the memo: Loyalty is a two-way street.

    When zombie posted on LGF that s/he had personally seen Van Jones engage in some shocking behavior at hard-Left rallies, Charles the LunGFish said:

    991 Charles
    Thu, Sep 3, 2009 9:22:32pm replyquote 2downupreport

    re: #981 USCMSNE

    Post 293

    OK. And if I said I saw Van Jones at George W. Bush rallies, cheering wildly, but I couldn’t prove it because my life would be in danger, you’d believe that too?

    The roster of people honored by a Charles Johnson limited-edition dagger between the shoulder blades is long and reads like an Honor Roll of the anti-jihadist, anti-idiotarian Right. Their main crime in the LunGFish’s highly-evolved eyes was that they refused to follow his lemming-horde over the particular cliffs he deemed politically correct.

  108. 108stuiec on Oct 2, 2009 at 3:53 pm:

    Davin Valkri: What’s everybody complaining about Mr. Johnson for? He hasn’t “gone left”–remember that he always self-identified as “anti-idiotarian”. Certain modern strains of rightist protest have the same strains of irrationality as the leftist protests of the last eight years. It’s GOOD that he’s bringing these out–we can clear out the irrational elements and leave lunatic death threats on picket signs to ultra-lefty types of the sort who would live in Berkeley and buy this shirt without shame.

    The problem is that he’s become as dogmatic and “idiotarian” as those he once lambasted. Case in point: anyone who uses the term “climate denier” should drop all pretense of intellectual honesty.

    Read the short story “Four O’Clock” by Price Day. It captures Charles to a T.

  109. 109stuiec on Oct 2, 2009 at 3:57 pm:

    Kun #105: it’s sort of refreshing to encounter someone with your honesty. What is your opinion of, for example, the Shining Path? Are they sufficiently revolutionary?

    There is a tinge of irony, however, in your characterizing Hezbollah as anti-imperialist, when it’s an arm of Iran’s ongoing campaign to turn Lebanon into a satrapy of the New Persian Empire.

  110. 110CattusMagnus on Oct 2, 2009 at 4:15 pm:

    Whatzit: Real fucking nice, zombie. Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him. Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

    Zombie is not a comment Nazi like Chuck who throws an insecure toddler’s temper tantrum every time somebody posts a comment he doesn’t like. Why don’t you go back to LGF and tattle on the big neo-con meanies who so viciously slandered your hero and relate how you gallantly defended him in the most civil language. I’m sure Mr. Johnson is bursting with pride to have such a faithful little kiss-ass vigilantly patrolling the internet defending his honor.

  111. 111Ringo the Gringo on Oct 2, 2009 at 6:05 pm:

    Unfortunate to see people trying to drag zombie and Charles into a fight.

  112. 112Ken on Oct 2, 2009 at 7:08 pm:

    You see, Ken, we support anti-imperialist movements because they weaken imperialism.

    You’re apparently short-sighted enough to not take into consideration what’s going to happen if that movement succeeds. What’s the point of supporting a purported “anti-imperialist” movement if the end result is just as bad or worse than what you’re fighting against? Hezbollah is an armed religious group:

    this Lebanon-based radical Shia group takes its ideological inspiration from the Iranian revolution and the teachings of the late Ayatollah Khomeini…one of legitimacy that is based on religious ideals

    They seek to establish an Islamic state, not replace capitalism with socialism, therefore they shouldn’t be supported. A theocratic state is just as bad as capitalism, if not worse. I don’t support the latter, I don’t support the former. I don’t particularly believe that Marxists would have it all that good under Hezbollah, would we, Kun? Khomeini certainly didn’t have many good things to say about us. Why, then, should I support his ideological heirs or any of the other assorted Hezbollah wannabe groups? Fatah ok, PFLP ok, but not any group whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a state different than what I want.

    You’re a lame Communist, Ken.

    ::shrug:: You’re entitled to give your two cents. Thanks for doing so.

  113. 113Guy Average on Oct 2, 2009 at 7:32 pm:

    Whatzit: Real fucking nice, zombie. Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him. Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

    LGF posts bureau reports and YouTube videos of music and open threads with pictures of tankers. Charles whacks his comment posters on the knuckles if they say something verboten or he just bans them if they blink the “wrong” way, after first threatening to ban them while whipping up the derison of lizard minions on the thread toward the offending party.

    Zombie obviously spends hours researching and photographing and compiling original reports. If Zombie replies to a comment it ends up being something that adds insight to the topic at hand, a witty comeback, or even a humble thanks to someone for contributing to the thread, sometimes even asking for a link so it can be added to the report. This is accomplished while clearly respecting points of view that Zombie has stated differ from Zombie’s own.

    Maybe its just me, but I see a contrast of sorts in there somewhere…and I’m only replying to your comment, not initiating anything on this topic myself.

  114. 114Guy Average on Oct 2, 2009 at 7:35 pm:

    Ringo the Gringo: Unfortunate to see people trying to drag zombie and Charles into a fight.

    Agreed; you are most correct that this is unfortunate.

    I felt compelled to reply to the poster above, but it wasn’t to try to stir up the pot; I just couldn’t hold my tongue on that one.

  115. 115Kun on Oct 3, 2009 at 2:06 am:

    @stuiec:

    “What is your opinion of, for example, the Shining Path? Are they sufficiently revolutionary?”

    The Shining Path are ultra-leftists who undermined and condemned far better groups such as the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement. While Maoism in Latin America is generally stagnating, Hoxhaist groups (such as the MLCPE in Ecuador) are rising, having engaged in genuine guerrilla warfare and now securing popular support. The MLCPE’s electoral front, the MPD, has 5 seats in the legislature, for example. It isn’t a matter of being “sufficiently revolutionary or not” so much as it’s a matter of not being infantile and alienating in approach. Anarchists throw bombs and engage in pettiness, Marxist-Leninists parties build up vanguards and mass movements.

    “There is a tinge of irony, however, in your characterizing Hezbollah as anti-imperialist, when it’s an arm of Iran’s ongoing campaign to turn Lebanon into a satrapy of the New Persian Empire.”

    While you are correct that a victory for Hezbollah is a victory for Iran inasmuch as Hezbollah is pro-Iran, the Iranian state itself could do relatively little compared to the US (or China) to further its imperialist aims. Exploitation is noted, however, and if Hezbollah becomes comprador bourgeoisie to the Iranians, and if the Lebanese Communists and such are sufficiently mobilized and have people realize that capitalism will ultimately always produce such a system for Lebanon, then successes can be made that way simply due to the fact that a genuinely revolutionary movement exists and that Hezbollah is discredited in the eyes of the people.

    @Ken:

    “You’re apparently short-sighted enough to not take into consideration what’s going to happen if that movement succeeds. What’s the point of supporting a purported ‘anti-imperialist’ movement if the end result is just as bad or worse than what you’re fighting against?”

    I fail to see how US imperialism is better. You see, Ken, Marxists base things on historical materialism. Objectively, Hezbollah, which is a popular movement that will undermine US imperialism, is preferable to both comprador bourgeois governments or Christian Falangists.

    And you quote: “this Lebanon-based radical Shia group takes its ideological inspiration from the Iranian revolution and the teachings of the late Ayatollah Khomeini…one of legitimacy that is based on religious ideals”

    Now, this is what Hoxha said in 1979: “On the contrary, the facts show that people like Khomeini know how to make proper use of the existing movement of these peoples, which, in essence and in fact, is a progressive bourgeois-democratic and anti-imperialist movement… In regard to Khomeini, he is a religious leader, a dedicated believer and an idealist philosopher. He may even be a fanatic, but we see that, at the same time, he is in accord and united with the revolutionary spirit of the Iranian people. Khomeini has taken the side of the opponents of the monarchy… the fact is that the anti-imperialist, anti-colonialist and anti-feudal liberation movement in Iran is in the ascendancy and Khomeini still maintains a good stand in regard to this movement.

    “Although anti-religious in their principles, the Iranian Marxist-Leninists must not for the
    moment wage a struggle against the religious beliefs of the people who have risen in revolt against oppression and are waging a just struggle politically, but are still unformed ideologically
    and will have to go through a great school in which they will learn. The Marxist-Leninists must teach the people to assess the events that are taking place in the light of dialectical and historical materialism. However, our world outlook cannot be assimilated easily in isolation from the revolutionary drive of the masses or from the anti-imperialist trends that are trying to remain in the leadership and to manoeuvre to prevent the bourgeois-democratic reforms of the revolution. The Iranian Marxist-Leninists and working class must play a major role in those revolutionary movements, having a clear understanding of the moments they are going through; they must not let the revolution die down.

    The working class and its true Marxist-Leninist vanguard should have no illusions about the ‘deep-going’ bourgeois-democratic measures and reforms which the Shia clergy or the anti-Shah elements of the old and new national bourgeoisie might carry out. Certainly, if the working class, the poor peasantry and the progressive students, whether believers or non-believers, allow the impetus of the revolution to ebb away, which means that they do not proceed with determination and maturity towards alliances and activities conducive to successive political and socio-economic reforms, then the revolution will stop halfway, the masses will be disillusioned and the exploitation of them will continue in other forms by pseudo-democratic people linked in new alliances with the different imperialists.”

    Ken says: “They seek to establish an Islamic state, not replace capitalism with socialism, therefore they shouldn’t be supported… not any group whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a state different than what I want”

    You see Ken, that’s not how anti-imperialism works. The people of Lebanon don’t care what you want, they care what they want, and they generally have a strong anti-imperialist sentiment. Hezbollah and Co. just happen to be making use of that sentiment, so it is up to the Communists to also participate in this popular sentiment and to gain followers from within it. This is, in fact, what plenty of Communist groups within the region are doing. They aren’t saying “Down with Islam! Down with Hezbollah! Praise our glorious first-world teachers!” They are teaching Marxism and propagating genuine anti-imperialism in a way that is both acceptable and relevant to the Lebanese people.

    You should read up on Lenin’s works sometime, Ken, your party is still nominally “Marxist-Leninist” and thus it is your duty to adhere to the party’s ideological line and to uphold Marxism-Leninsim, isn’t it?

    Go start with this: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/

    FYI: theocracy is not separate from capitalism. Iran is a capitalist state, it has a bourgeoisie, petty-bourgeoisie and proletariat, while also having a peasantry. There are no feudal masters, and the clerics serve capitalism. Using this logic fascist states aren’t capitalist (when they are, look up state-capitalism; they still have the same class structure).

  116. 116Starless on Oct 3, 2009 at 4:18 am:

    Whatzit: Real fucking nice, zombie.Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him.Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

    “Fever swamp”. Oh, it is to laugh. You could probably count the number of CJ-ripping comments on this site over the last month on one hand (you might need two, but that would be pushing it)– a fever swamp that does not make. Besides which, those comments almost never lead anywhere anyway. But now that you brought up the subject: CJ is possibly the biggest crybaby with an over inflated ego currently blogging. That includes Andrew Sullivan and the entire cast and crew of Daily Kos. And jazz guitar sucks — it’s like putting Clint Eastwood in a dress — an abomination against nature.

    Nice use of the b-word, BTW. I’m sure that will convince Zombie to listen to your calm and measured advice.

    Now let’s get back to Ken and Kun’s long-winded argument over the obscure details which define what makes a “good” Commie.

  117. 117Throbert McGee on Oct 3, 2009 at 2:49 pm:

    Whatzit: Real fucking nice, zombie. Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him.Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

    Iceweasel, is that you? Or could it be Cato the Elder?

  118. 118Anonymous on Oct 3, 2009 at 5:08 pm:

    zombie just got cited at instapundit

  119. 119Ken on Oct 3, 2009 at 5:23 pm:

    The people of Lebanon don’t care what you want, they care what they want

    Weren’t we talking about if Marxists should support Hezbollah and not the Lebanese people specifically? If the Lebanese feel that Hezbollah is truly a national liberation movement, one that appeals to them, one that they want, then they should support them. I, as a Marxist and a non-Lebanese one at that, will not. For the following reasons:

    http://www.standwithus.com/pdfs/flyers/hezbollah_program.pdf

    “Our Objectives:
    a)expel the Americans, French, and their allies from Lebanon…
    b)submit Phalanges to a just power…bring them to justice
    c)permit our people…choose form of government they desire…call upon them to pick the option of islamic government”

    C is the problematic one, wouldn’t you say? While their platform does have a distinct anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist character to it, their goals are completely at odds with our goals. They want an Islamic government, we want a worker’s government. Why support something different than what we want just because there’s some overlap in our ideologies? Remember, we’re talking about who WE should support. And the end result will not be something we’d want to see.

    Is Hezbollah an “anti-imperialist” movement? Perhaps. But why? Not because Imperialism is a system of exploitation that harms the proletarian classes, but because “world imperialism is hostile to Islam” (p.3). Not something I’d care to support.

    And, finally:

    “We reject…both Capitalism and Communism, for both are incapable of laying the foundations of a just society.”

    Yeah, totally a group Marxists should support [/sarcasm]

  120. 120anti_left on Oct 3, 2009 at 7:34 pm:

    re: 103.Whatzit

    LGF is nothing more than a second grade playground with 3rd rate commentary now

    calling out the bad apples in one’s bunch is fine, perhaps noble
    but to aid and abet the enemy (you know, the ones who CHEERED the jihadis when Americans died) is not noble

    what Charles Johnson is now doing is SIDING with the enemy

    perhaps he is afraid of the Chicago thug machine
    perhaps the SEIU scared him into submission
    but he has gone full-time attacking the right in general, not just loonies
    and has LEFT all commentary about the evil of the left and jihadis for that matter, off the table

    other posters have adaeqautely commented on his paranoid ranting and childish bannings and they are right

  121. 121stuiec on Oct 3, 2009 at 8:35 pm:

    From the BBC, via Sweetness & Light:

    Maoists kill 16 Indian villagers

    Friday, 2 October 2009

    Sixteen people have been killed by suspected Maoist rebels in a village in the Indian state of Bihar, police say. The attack took place in Icharwa village in Khagaria district, 200km (124 miles) from the state capital, Patna, late on Thursday night.

    A survivor, whose son was among the dead, told the BBC that the attackers tied up 16 people and shot them. Correspondents say that this is the first major Maoist attack in the state for some time.

    More than 6,000 people have been killed during their 20-year fight for a communist state.

    The Maoists say they are fighting for the rights of the poor and landless. But the survivor of this attack told the BBC that this dispute was over the cultivation of farmland in the area.

    Paro Singh told the BBC Hindi service that about 10 people armed with automatic weapons launched an attack. “We were 17 of us. When they fired at us, I wasn’t hit, but I fell down on the ground and pretended to be dead. They shot dead all the others, including my son,” he said. Mr Singh said the attackers were rebels from nearby villages.

    The dead included five children, senior police official Neelmani told the BBC. The victims were low-caste farmers and labourers, he said.

    This is the first major attack in Bihar for a long time, the BBC Hindi’s Manikant Thakur in Patna says. The rebels were not active in this area before but have recently extended their area of operation to cover these parts, our correspondent says.

    The Maoists operate in large parts of central and eastern India and officials say they are active in a third of all Indian districts. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has called the Maoist insurgency the single biggest threat to India’s security.

    Last month, Mr Singh said India was losing the battle against the rebels.

  122. 122stuiec on Oct 3, 2009 at 10:26 pm:

    UK Telegraph:

    China anniversary: Why the Communist party still enjoys the support of its people

    The Chinese Communist Party is reviled around the world for its human rights abuses, but it still enjoys unswerving support from those Chinese old enough to remember life beforehand.

    This week, the Communist Party has been celebrating 60 years since Chairman Mao conquered Bejing and announced the beginning of a new China. In its early days, the Communist Party promised democracy, a free press and an independent judicial system. Six decades on, however, none of those exist in China.

    Instead, between 20 and 40 million Chinese starved to death during the Great Famine at the end of the 1950s and countless others suffered untold persecution during the Cultural Revolution. Nevertheless, the Communist Party continues to enjoy the mandate of the people, a fact that often surprises Western observers….

    A fascinating read.

    One interesting tidbit:

    Now, even Ms Kuai supports the Party, noting that her children have been able to move overseas, to the United States, and that they have enough to eat and enough money to get by. “Life has been much better now, much better. It is thanks to the Party, really.”

  123. 123Kun on Oct 4, 2009 at 12:39 am:

    @Ken:

    “If the Lebanese feel that Hezbollah is truly a national liberation movement, one that appeals to them, one that they want, then they should support them. I, as a Marxist and a non-Lebanese one at that, will not”

    Except I already noted that no one in Lebanon cares what you think. You’re free to not support anti-imperialist movements there, it just shows your pseudo-Communism here.

    “C is the problematic one, wouldn’t you say?”

    No, because I do not equate anti-imperialism with atheism.

    “While their platform does have a distinct anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist character to it, their goals are completely at odds with our goals.”

    Our goals are socialism, and Communists in Lebanon are working to achieve this through being anti-imperialists and supporting Hezbollah inasmuch as they are anti-imperialist. Most of Hezbollah’s following is composed of workers and peasants, that is a simple fact and to brush aside Hezbollah because they aren’t Marxists is unlike anything found in Lenin’s works.

    Tell me Ken, what is your opinion of Mustafa Kemal? Or Ismail Enver? Both were supported by the Bolsheviks against imperialism not because they were Communists (in fact, Kemal was killing Communists, see A Peace to End All Peace, pp. 429-30) but because they were objectively anti-imperialist and had the backing of the people. (Especially Atatürk)

    “Remember, we’re talking about who WE should support. And the end result will not be something we’d want to see.”

    The end result of a bourgeois-democratic revolution isn’t “something we’d want to see” either if we’re going to go the “SOCIALISM OR BUST!” route, but then you’d be a fool if you were to condemn such a popular movement; one which was used to its fullest extent by the Bolsheviks in 1917; from the bourgeois-democratic revolution and its popular movement to the victory of the Bolsheviks months later via socialist revolution.

    “Yeah, totally a group Marxists should support [/sarcasm]”

    To fight imperialism and colonialism, yes, it is something Marxists should support. Unless those Marxists would like to be known as “those guys who sat around and condemned those guys who freed us from the imperialists/colonialists” in the eyes of the proletarians of those nations.

  124. 124Starless on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:20 am:

    stuiec: UK Telegraph:
    A fascinating read.One interesting tidbit:

    What I see in that article is: stability, stability, stability. The cost of that stability was very, very high, but it was very important. You’ll note that, beyond a tangential reference in the last bit you quoted, no one ever said anything about “freedom” or “liberty”. I’ve read the same sort of statements from old Russians who suffered under Stalin like Sergei Korolev. He went to the gulag and spent years under, essentially, house arrest because he worked for someone who fell out of favor with Stalin. Yet Korolev was a staunchly loyal party man mostly because the Revolution brought stability and unity to the Russian people and worked tirelessly (worked himself to death, in fact) to bring glory to the Soviet Union.

    But, again, you won’t hear any talk of freedom or liberty from those types of old timers except when they talk about how not having either was a sacrifice they thought was worth making.

    Humans can talk themselves into accepting just about anything with the right kind of motivation.

  125. 125Irish Rose on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:00 am:

    I just spent some time reading through the vicious comments that you’re allowing here, Zombie.
    I’m so disappointed in you… I thought you were a better person than this.

    I see now that you’re just a user with an agenda – another backstabbing exploiter of Charles’ generosity and hospitality.
    Like so many other former lizards of late.

    I have no respect for people like you.

    I defended you once, Zombie.
    But after reading this? Never again.

    Irish Rose

  126. 126Formercorpsman on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:08 am:

    Real fucking nice, zombie. Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him. Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

    I have stayed away from the fray, but fuck off.

    The idea of somehow projecting such bullshit here, especially given the fact this is exactly the same Hate Ashbury culture propagated elsewhere, rich of you coming here to bellyache. Did you stand up for Zombie getting the love from over there? No, something tells me, (contrasting the aforementioned writing forensics) you were likely leading the riot over at Corcoran.

    Likewise, there are quite a few people who help others in becoming a household name. It is a 2 way street. Even better, why don’t you go undercover in the middle of the fever swamps to get the information that allowed website traffic to swell. You have the undercover, and fever swamp part down, so getting the photos should not be much of a stretch.

    Zombie, I apologize. In no means do I claim to speak for you, and if you prefer to delete my post it is no skin off my nose.

    I just a have a special place in my heart for sycophants.

  127. 127boxorox on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:33 am:

    I’m glad this is all coming out now. Zombie is a Judas and a snake in the grass. I always bit my tongue when people would praise Zombie’s amateur pix in years past on LGF, because I thought they were crap. Zombie just wants his ego stroked, it’s sickening. And now he’s attacking Charles? You shit. I expected as much. When the ego-boosts dry up, you show your true colors. Go fuck yourself.

  128. 128phoenixgirl on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:37 am:

    well the stalkers now stalk zombie…….call into question the work that was once praised…..zombie, you do great work, keep it up, where and how you post is your business, you have many supporters. to those who live and die by the guilt by association….have fun living in your itsy bitsy teeny weeny plantation that your nic master has created for you…..

  129. 129Phil. on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:40 am:

    Irish Rose, boxorox,

    If someone ever needed proof of the concept of a Cult of Personality, your posts are it. Except you’re worshipping a blogger, not even a political leader. It’s kinda sad actually. I haven’t seen Zombie say anything negative towards Charles. People are allowed to disagree with Dear Leader from time to time though.

  130. 130Earth2moonbat on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:40 am:

    And Rosie, what precisely have you done for humanity? What great feats of investigative journalism have you performed? Go dress up like a hippy (that may not require any change of clothes) and penetrate some of these subversive organizations, and write up the reports. And then when you’re done with that, go review some MSM reports, spot the obvious fraud, and write that up. And when you’re done with that, don’t take any personal credit.

    Until you can do 1/10th of what Zombie has done, get off your high horse and stop trying to impress us with how moral you are. You’re not that great.

  131. 131Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:45 am:

    The Messiah of LGF must be defended by people as smart as a box of rocks.
    Tis truly fitting.

  132. 132Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:47 am:

    Whoa Zombie be careful these charlie manson followers won’t stop at nothing.

  133. 133phoenixgirl on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:48 am:

    no doubt the child that has the che shirt also has a peace/anti war shirt…..pathetic

  134. 134Rose on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:51 am:

    Irish Rose – it is none of your business what Zombie does on Zombie’s blog. Your idea that allowing comments implies agreement is insane at best. It’s part of a free and open discussion. Stalking people who happened to have registered at LGF, hating on people because they link to the wrong site or say the wrong thing, or God forbid, comment on the wrong site is what is wrong with LGF. People are mad about it, justifiably so. It’s not a well-kept secret anymore. It has spilled over into the entire blogosphere.

    Get help.

  135. 135Ringo the Gringo on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:53 am:

    zombie has not attacked Charles anywhere that I’ve seen.

    It seems to me, by not responding to any of these comments, zombie’s trying to stay out of these useless blog quarrels.

    Some people need to get a grip.

  136. 136Crabcakes on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:59 am:

    103 Whatzit: Real fucking nice, zombie.Charles made you a household name on the right and you are going to let your comments become a fever swamp ripping on him.Are you going to stick up for him and what he’s done for you, or are you going to be like all the other two faced jerks who have stabbed him in the back, you bitch?

    Are you kidding me? Charles made zombie a household name? You’ve got it reversed. It was zombie who helped make Charles a household name. Well, not just zombie, but all of Charles’s contributors and all the homegrown independent self-made journalists that Charles featured on his site. People like Michael Yon, Ringo the Gringo, and so on, with zombie being the most notable and most frequent among them. Even the big stories for which Charles himself takes personal credit were all originally pointed out and made public by the commenters and contributors on LGF or elsewhere, such as “Mike” and “buckhead” and so on. It is these people, the zombies (including zombie herself) who made Charles what he is today, and earned his reputation for him. And now you come on zombie’s site and say that zombie needs to grovel before Charles in gratitude? Charles should be groveling to zombie (and Mike and buckhead and Ringo and Yon and all the rest of the contributors who made LGF great). Charles did almost no reporting or writing himself, he just linked to or reposted the work of others. And he did a damn fine job of it, that’s true. But the folks who do the hard work in the trenches should be the ones deserving the most praise, not the people who simply publicized the work.

    If a messenger rushes in and delivers a sealed envelope containing important secret intelligence uncovered and sent by an advance scout working behind enemy lines, and that intelligence helps you win a key battle…do you award a medal to the messenger? Or to the scout?

    Think about it.

  137. 137Macker on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:00 am:

    Hey Irish Rose…I hear you live in GR. See ya next week!

  138. 138stuiec on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:01 am:

    Irish Rose #125: Do you support and agree with the Charles Johnson comment I quoted at #107 above?

    You can’t bring yourself to be disappointed in Charles when he accuses zombie of fabricating the truth and lying about the need to preserve his/her anonymity — even though for several years, Charles posted zombie’s work at LGF precisely because that anonymity enabled zombie to get first-hand evidence of the moonbattiness of the Left.

    Who, exactly, is the person who turned his back on a friend in this situation?

    And how many friends has he turned his back on, over petty challenges to his own ego?

    And what makes you think you’re immune to the same treatment, when you put a toe out of line at LGF? Or is it precisely because you know you’re not immune, that he could turn on anyone at any moment, that makes you defend him with such ferocity?

  139. 139stuiec on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:09 am:

    Re: my recommendation at #108 of the short story “Four O’Clock” by Price Day.

    It occurs to me that a companion story that neatly describes LGF is “It’s a Good Life” by Jerome Bixby. Everyone in Charles’s version of Peeksville is terrified of letting an unapproved thought slip out, lest he be thought into the cornfield.

    The pathetic joke is that these terrified inmates reach out from their prison and try to enforce Little Charles’s powers outside of the borders of Peeksville. It will be interesting to see whether they are capable of making a simple connection, namely that the fact that Charles has no power outside of his little fiefdom means that he really has no power at all, and that they can walk away from the prison any time they want.

  140. 140MacDuff on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:23 am:

    Irish Rose,

    A word of advice, get a grip.

    There’s no future in being Charles “little helper” and enabling the group psychosis that LGF has become. The fact is (and you know it) that he would dump you as quckly as he had dumped hundred of others who have dared to stray from Charles’ dictates. If you don’t believe it, question his wisdom, just once, and you will find that he has no loyalty to you. You are merely a tool.

    As for your attack on Zombie; you are WAY out of line. He/She has the right to do whatever he/she wants to do on his/her own blog. Zombie has chosen to remain above the fray; allow him/her that right. It’s none of your business.

    There is a world beyond your Charles-dominated keyboard and more to life than “updings”.

  141. 141Macker on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:25 am:

    MacDuff: Irish Rose already has a grip. It’s just not the grip we are hoping it’d be.

  142. 142Rose on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:26 am:

    Hundreds? – fourteen hundred seventy-six banned as of today, that we know of.

  143. 143Tourmeline on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:31 am:

    If I’m not mistaken, Zombie has said exactly nothing about Charles or LGF on this site or any other site, ever.

    Whatzit and Irish Rose:

    What is Zombie’s crime? Silence? I scanned through this whole thread and can’t find a single mention by Zombie of the whole Charles-LGF topic. Not one word. And out of curiosity I just went to the previous thread, and there’s no mention by Zombie there either. And back, and back……I went all the way to August, and Zombie has never said a single thing against or even about LGF. So what the fuck is your problem?

    Have you looked at other sites recently? MOST of the right-of-center blogs have out-and-out Charles bashing on a near daily basis these days. They insult him, they laugh at him, they call him names, they try to undermine him, they attack him. And out of all the conservative blogs, which is just about the ONLY one to stay above the fray and not attack Charles? Zombietime!

    And yet you twist Zombie’s honorable stance into something akin to “backstabbing”? What planet are you on?

    Show me one comment ever on any blog where Zombie said something mean-spirited against Charles or LGF, and I’ll change my tune. (You can’t.)

    From what I can see, Zombie does not delete comments. Look at this thread: people have come on here and said some totally nasty things about Zombie. And look: those comments are still here, undeleted! In fact on this very thread, there are more nasty words spoken about Zombie than there is about Charles. And Zombie lets those comments stand too. So, should Zombie be apologizing to Zombie for allowing attacks against Zombie on Zombie’s own site? No, this is just proof that Zombie just lets all comments remain, and lets the commenters speak for themselves (or hang themselves in your cases). Zombie is not responsible for the words of others.

    If you want to vent your anger, why not do it at the innumerable other bloggers who rank on Charles nonstop? Why pick on the one blogger who has never attacked Charles? Will Zombie be the first person banned for committing the unpardonable sin of doing nothing?

    There is some kind of weird psychological illness going on with the commenters coming from LGF. They’re in constant attack mode, against their own allies even. Blog fragging, in a sense. What the hell is this?

  144. 144Tourmeline on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:34 am:

    Zombie I apologize for speaking for you but this is pissing me off.

  145. 145scottishbuzzsaw on Oct 4, 2009 at 1:04 pm:

    Well said, Tourmeline.

    Zombie, the work you’ve done is much appreciated, as is the integrity with which you do it.

  146. 146Finally on Oct 4, 2009 at 1:14 pm:

    I stuck by LGF until very recently. On average, I agreed with CJ about 80% of the time. What made me turn my back on LGF was not substance so much as style.

    I kept making excuses and rationalization for paranoid behavior and excommunications on ever flimsier evidence — until the recent mass bannings and “nukings” for such sins as violating secondary and tertiary boycotts, “warming denial”, “creationism”,… forced me to face reality. Rather than go through the “flounce” rigmarole and grant certain individuals the satisfaction of deleting and reporting, I locked up my account and threw away the key.

    And the saddest part of it is: I felt relieved.

    The old LGF is dead. Something survived, with its name, and its face. Something that has become like that which it used to fight.

  147. 147Finally Free on Oct 4, 2009 at 1:33 pm:

    PS: I have never seem Zombie utter a single word of criticism of CJ or LGF anywhere. In fact, the behavior of some “emissaries” over here basically speaks for itself.

  148. 148Troy on Oct 4, 2009 at 1:52 pm:

    Irtish Rose you are one arrogant harpy. What a shame that your lord and master got rid of his best posters and replaced them with mental midgets and toadies such as yourself and Andrea (Sharmuta).

  149. 149Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 2:17 pm:

    sayanara zombie
    you wont be missed
    youve had it coming for months now ever since your holdren melt down
    then you showed your “loyalty” to lgf when you sided with the climate deniers in a thread and went against charles
    see ya wouldn’t wanta be ya

  150. 150stuiec on Oct 4, 2009 at 2:35 pm:

    #149: what, exactly, is a “climate denier”?

    Is it someone who continues to consider physical evidence from the real world when “everybody knows” that anthropogenic global warming is “settled science”?

    Charles used to be a fan of The Amazing Randi and skepticism. Has he decided that it’s easier and happier to be a non-thinking cultist now, accepting global warming as his substitute religion?

    By the way, kudos on the pun: “Holdren melt down” — how appropriate in the context of Holdren’s former shilling for the New Ice Age theory.

  151. 151Finally Free on Oct 4, 2009 at 2:36 pm:

    Zombie had a meltdown? Whew, speak of projection…

    And of course, loyalty is a two-way street…

  152. 152The Osprey on Oct 4, 2009 at 2:50 pm:

    So any bets on which CJ sycophant “anonymous” at post #149 is?

    Killgore “N-Word” Trout?

    “Sharmuta”?

    “Iceweasel” the Kosling?

    “Jimmah” the Scottish Socialist?

    “Ludwig Van Quixote” the AGW windmill tilter?

  153. 153Formercorpsman on Oct 4, 2009 at 2:54 pm:

    125Irish Rose on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:00 am:

    I just spent some time reading through the vicious comments that you’re allowing here, Zombie.
    I’m so disappointed in you… I thought you were a better person than this.

    I see now that you’re just a user with an agenda – another backstabbing exploiter of Charles’ generosity and hospitality.
    Like so many other former lizards of late.

    I have no respect for people like you.

    I defended you once, Zombie.
    But after reading this? Never again.

    Irish Rose

    I did not even see this one.

    Good lord, who the hell do you think you are?

    I am ashamed you have nothing better to do, than sit around and post sanctimonious bullshit on other people’s blogs, as if you are the fucking blog monitor. Get a job.

    I can’t believe this.

    You are insane.

  154. 154iam7545 on Oct 4, 2009 at 3:06 pm:

    Osprey = my bet is that it is the cowardly ponytailed Ukulele player himself.

    Of course he will claim he has nothing to do with his drugged out minions that search the blogsphere to defend his paranoid rants.

  155. 155Troy on Oct 4, 2009 at 3:11 pm:

    153 Formercorpsman
    Bravo! Well said. What irritates the shit out of me is Irish Rose’s sanctimonious tone that she adopts to everyone who is no a member of the Church of Chaz Johnson.

  156. 156MacDuff on Oct 4, 2009 at 3:37 pm:

    Anonymous: sayanara zombieyou wont be missedyouve had it coming for months now ever since your holdren melt downthen you showed your “loyalty” to lgf when you sided with the climate deniers in a thread and went against charlessee ya wouldn’t wanta be ya

    So, in your mind Charles is the ultimate expert in whatever field he chooses to opine? You feel that anyone who anyone who sides with anyone but Charles is disloyal?

    You speak as a weak-minded fool who is incapable of independent thought; your opinions are those of another and you are no more than an echo of Charles. You are to be pitied.

    At least Zombie chose to think on his/her own, and has shown character in the process. I suggest that you try that; you may find it to be an emancipating experience.

    By the way, it’s “sayonara”; perhaps you should have consulted Charles before writing your post. Ignorance is reversable and admittance is the first step.

  157. 157Centaur on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:09 pm:

    Irish Rose’s contribution to this thread is just pitiful.

    Zombie has showed nothing but class.

  158. 158Irish Rose on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:11 pm:

    137Macker on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:00 am:
    Hey Irish Rose…I hear you live in GR. See ya next week!

    Am I supposed to be intimidated by your veiled threat, Macker?
    Piss off.

  159. 159Zimriel on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:29 pm:

    Thank you for what you do, Zombie. Don’t let anyone get you down.

    Irish Rose, I will pray for you.

  160. 160IslandLibertarian on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:31 pm:

    What can be said about cults except, “Beware”.
    ‘Glad I got disappeared from that batch.
    God Speed Zombie.

  161. 161Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:32 pm:

    My Dear Zombie, YOU ARE THE BEST ! :-)

  162. 162savage on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:33 pm:

    IrishRose,

    Go back to your master CJ and stay there, you aren’t wanted here.

  163. 163huckleberry on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:33 pm:

    IR – more like he’s making fun of your paranoid martyr complex. Face it chick, people just aren’t that into you.

  164. 164stuiec on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:39 pm:

    Irish Rose #158: I’m reminded of something a wise and good lady once said: “You have no power here. Begone!”

  165. 165Exiled on Main Street on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:54 pm:

    see ya wouldn’t wanta be ya

    That was a snappy retort when I was in 4th grade. Of course, that appears to be the emotional age of the Charles “He’s so dreamy” fan club. What self-respecting adult would want to be part of that little clique?

    If CJ wants to run his blog like a North Korean prison camp, that’s his business. But to send his flying monkeys out to demand that other blogs moderate their comments sections to conform to LGF – well, no wonder Lizard King and his toadies are now the laughingstocks of the blogosphere.

    Sorry, we just don’t like your boyfriend. And we certainly don’t consider an increasingly bitter, aging jazz guitarist to be the Ultimate Authority on Global Warning, Holdren, Robert Spencer or anything else.

  166. 166That's Mr. Anonymous to You on Oct 4, 2009 at 5:55 pm:

    Irish Rose is toast.

    She just lied through her teeth in order to get zombie banned at LGF.

    Here’s what she wrote at comment #176 of today’s “private thread” on LGF:

    176 Irish Rose Sun, Oct 4, 2009 4:59:05pm

    I went over to Zombies’ blog this morning to leave a comment about all of the posts there bashing Charles and LGF. I told her I was disappointed in her and I reminded her that Charles has been a good friend to her.

    She removed my post, and left the hate posts up.

    Seriously Zombie, if you’re reading this… wtf?

    The problem, Ms. Rose, is that your LGF comment can easily proven to be a lie. All one needs to go is come to this thread and look at comment #125 above.

    Your comment is still there!!!

    How, m’lady, are you going to explain that? And how can you explain away your blantant backstabbing lie to Charles at LGF?

    This is beyond the pale. In the old days of LGF, what you just did was itself a banworthy offense. Instead of zombie being banned from LGF, it is you who should be banned.

    Your credibility rating just dropped to zero. Permanently.

  167. 167imtoast on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:18 pm:

    Mr. Anon, Irish Rose never had any credibility.

  168. 168Lookout on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:20 pm:

    Somebody is lying about Zombie:

    176 Irish Rose 10/04/2009 4:59:05 pm PDT
    I went over to Zombies’ blog this morning to leave a comment about all of the posts there bashing Charles and LGF. I told her I was disappointed in her and I reminded her that Charles has been a good friend to her.

    She removed my post, and left the hate posts up. Seriously Zombie, if you’re reading this… wtf?

    201 Irish Rose Sun, Oct 4, 2009 5:22:03pm replyquote
    re: #190 marsl

    Where are those posts? I went to zombies blog and site (zomblog and zombietime) and I didn’t saw any posts against LGF. Can you give some examples? Just curious.

    Sorry, no link from me. Her comment section is just chock full of vile, abusive crap from the haters and stalkers and she does nothing to stop it, or remove it. Any respect that I may have had for Zombie is now gone.

    Naughty little irish rose, lying about people and trying to damage their reputation.

  169. 169Rodan on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:22 pm:

    125Irish Rose.
    Listen you trailer park loser. You support Che Guevara? You would not open your mouth and say that here in Florida. The Cubans would put your Commie ass in your place.

    Here is your hero Bitch!

    http://www.anenglishmanscastle.com/Dead%20Che.jpg

    Just like how Progressives should be.

  170. 170Rose on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:30 pm:

    Your comment was not deleted. Indeed, Irish – it is your comments that half the thread is reacting to – but it is not hate. Dismay. Disgust. Amazement. Sorrow for what once was. Sympathy for you. And a whole lot of people advising you to get help.

    Make no mistake, zombie is beloved, and respected, not just by those who frequent LGF, but by virtue of the work, the unique niche, and the good spirit involved. Attacking zombie is not helping your cause.

  171. 171Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:40 pm:

    Zombie,
    You are one of the people I respect most on the Internet. It truly takes guts to do what you do. Much more than people who sit in their homes and complain because you don’t censor your comments section to fit with their narrow view of the world. Keep fighting the good fight!

    Livefreeor die

  172. 172Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:43 pm:

    Unless I’m reading it wrong, Zombie appears to have been de-linked from LGF.

  173. 173Ringo the Gringo on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:57 pm:

    Indeed, zombie has been de-linked at LGF, leaving Wild Irish Rose as the last alphabetical link.

  174. 174Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 7:05 pm:

    My first post here. I’m amazed! Do you people at Little Red Commies have no shame? Absolutely disgusting. Don’t any of you understand that no one gives a tinkers damn what you think anymore? You’ve become so irrelevant that now you have to come to legitimate blogs to spew your bile. I suggest you all crawl back into your respective holes and stay there.
    You have lost all credibility and it probably won’t be long and you won’t be welcome ANYWHERE. Continuing to post on blogs such as this and any other credible pages proves one thing. Masochism is alive and well at LGF.

    Rides A Pale Horse

  175. 175PantyShields on Oct 4, 2009 at 7:25 pm:

    Irish Rose, why don’t you share with everyone your favorite incontinence protecting panty shield brand? You’re certainly getting your piss stained knickers in a twist these days.

  176. 176phoenixgirl on Oct 4, 2009 at 7:32 pm:

    uh oh, careful, irishrose will contact your server and have your hate site shut down! booga booga boo!

  177. 177savage on Oct 4, 2009 at 7:37 pm:

    eek phoenixgirl!

  178. 178Rides A Pale Horse on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:01 pm:

    Howdy PHX!!

    Savage!!

    RAPH

  179. 179Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:09 pm:

    Rides!

    SavagE!

    Phoenix!

    Howdy

  180. 180Birkenstock Cowboy on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:10 pm:

    Doh!

    See above.

  181. 181Jorline on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:49 pm:

    Irish Rose, I can’t say I ever enjoyed or respected anything you posted while I was at LGF. That was further exemplified by your dumb ass comment here today. Who are you to come to zombie’s blog and read he/she the riot act? I remember CJ always saying “if you don’t like LGF get your own blog”. Now you slime out of the cesspool to tell zombie how to run his/her blog…WTF??

    The problem is CJ started believing all of the smoke that was blown up his ass. First rule in business…you’re only as good as the people you surround yourself with. Charles pissed on those who made his blog. He will and is reaping the rewards of his current company. Charles, people came to LFG to read the lizard commentaries…it had nothing to do with you! Nothing personal! LGF has become a cult Irish, and you proved to be the perfect example here today.

    Irish, it’s kind of scary when you step out of the plastic bubble of LFG isn’t it.

  182. 182Jorline on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:50 pm:

    Hey zombie, you still rock!

  183. 183Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:55 pm:

    Last night on an LGF thread, Charles banned the poster “Occasional Reader”.

    The poster’s crime:

    Charles posted the comment: “Occasional Reader is now at one of the stalker blogs, and is blocked.
    This one makes me sad. But I’ll get over it.”

    This was highly disturbing. A blog owner, spying on a commenter, tracking their IP to other blogs, then blocking the commenter’s account. At what point do those who remain at the blog not begin to wonder if the owner is tracking (spying) on their IP addresses too? Have they ever stopped to consider the very salient point that this type of behavior is unethical?

    Another “disturbing” point: The above comment by “Irish Rose”, and the proof that this person went back to another blog and lied in an blatant attempt to “stir up” animosity, making false claims about the comments at this blog, plus the other “above” comments that are derogatory to the owner of this blog.

    Based on what I’ve read at numerous blogs, the site, Little Green Footballs, has become the “laughingstock” of the internet in an amazingly short period of time.

    The owner has gained the reputation, in my opinion, rightly so, that unless you’re sycophantic, you’ll get the boot.
    Even so, the behavior exhibited here in the comments of those defending the owner of Little Green Footballs was highly illuminating. Another behavior worth noting: posters who were at the site for years, and who left comments as to why they had decided to leave, are immediately deleted while the departing poster is ridiculed and then, despised. Many of the thousand plus posters who have been banned in the past year or so were rational, thoughtful, decent, intelligent, and oft times, funny. Which could be why the current crop of comments are humorless, dogmatic, and sycophantic.

    Little Green Footballs needs to be outed for keeping track (spying) on its own commenters at other blogs and then banning them. This is paranoid behavior and, if not illegal, at least highly unethical and a prime exhibition of the “need to control” beyond one’s own “boundaries”.

    One last note: These days, Little Green Footballs’ “meme” is that of “stalkers” and exposing “racists in the Republican woodpile” in order to “save” the Republican party. Even so, it’s blatantly obvious that the owner of Little Green Footballs is a dyed in the wool Progressive. Ironic isn’t it, that a progressive would be “valiantly” working to “save” the GOP by “outing” right wing conservative blogs as “racists”, white supremacists”, and the like?

    As others have noted, Zombie has stayed “above” the fray. As for the so-called comments which have been posted here that are derogatory to Little Green Footballs, people should call into question as to the “source” of those comments and the commenter’s “intent”.

  184. 184ladycatnip on Oct 4, 2009 at 9:10 pm:

    zombie,

    Your work is amazing. Thanks again for what you do. Being de-linked from the other website is a great compliment – your body of work is a testament of your independent thought and intelligence. You are appreciated!

  185. 185Ken on Oct 4, 2009 at 9:11 pm:

    This is the Internet, people. Turn your computer off and it doesn’t exist anymore! I’ve never seen people so worked up over something online before. I’m mean, c’mon, who cares?

    Zombie is a good blogger. I looked at LGF a couple time and it was good, too. Read what you like, don’t read what you don’t.

    I mean, shit, grow up, huh?

  186. 186Whippet on Oct 4, 2009 at 9:17 pm:

    #183 Anonymous

    “Even so, it’s blatantly obvious that the owner of Little Green Footballs is a dyed in the wool Progressive. Ironic isn’t it, that a progressive would be “valiantly” working to “save” the GOP by “outing” right wing conservative blogs as “racists”, white supremacists”, and the like?”

    I wouldn’t say so much that Charles of LGF is a “dyed in the wool progressive” but more one of those former Democrats who shunned his party when it moved hard left years ago. I think he’s one of the new brand of Independents who are going for broke to form a strong third party. I’ve seen it at other “moderate” blogs. They bash the Dems when the Republicans are in office and now that a Dem ( I know I’m being to kind, Marxist) is in office they’re bashing the Republicans. It’s a divide and conquer stradegy. But since he was once a Lib he learned their tactics of personal destruction which is why everyone who doesn’t agree with him is a white supremasist, nazi, right-winger, creationist violent tea-bagger. Personally, I wish he’d have the balls to fix his own party instead of trying to destroy mine.

    And there’s a sense of desperation amongst this group. They sense that their time has passed since McCain was their best shot at a moderate. They just haven’t let it sink in yet. So it’s balls to the walls and destroy anyone or anything that threatens their goal.

  187. 187Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 9:44 pm:

    Whippet,

    But since he was once a Lib he learned their tactics of personal destruction which is why everyone who doesn’t agree with him is a white supremasist, nazi, right-winger, creationist violent tea-bagger. Personally, I wish he’d have the balls to fix his own party instead of trying to destroy mine.

    I agree with you for the most part except that he was “once a Lib”. All you have to do is surf the topics of his posts excluding the “attacks” on what he refers to as the “right wing” or extremist wing of the GOP. His main thrust has been evolution, climate change, creationism, organized religion, to name a few. Hardly the type of topics a moderate would exclusively focus on.

    What he needs to be honest about is the “meme” that his “intent” is to “fix” the Republican party before the next Presidential election. I’ve read this in other “quarters” from lefitst libs and Progressives. The so-called “concern” over the “direction” of the GOP, of the “mob mentality” of the “racist” Tea Party crowd-Charles included. Charles has ratcheted it up, finding racism and “ties” to racism at other conservative blogs such as Hot Air and Michelle Malkin. (to name a few)

    Of course, this is just my opinion, based on observations and not “fact”.

    You made a valid point, that Charles is focused on the GOP and not the Dems. I wonder why?

  188. 188Finally Free on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:04 pm:

    One need look no further than the pathetic-beyond-pathetic behavior of “Irish Rose” (spare me the smell) and the subsequent delinking of even Zombie by LGF to see why LGF has died and its owner has become the laughingstock of the blogosphere.

    @172Anonymous on Oct 4, 2009 at 6:43 pm:

    Unless I’m reading it wrong, Zombie appears to have been de-linked from LGF.

    Dr. Ross to Dr. Green: “Let’s call it.”
    Dr. Green: “”Time of death: Oct. 4, 2009, at 6:43 pm”

  189. 189Poteen on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:04 pm:

    Zombie.
    I won’t presume to know what you are thinking or feeling, but my observation is that your comments are full of Don Kings and Bob Arums promoting a fight that you never signed up for. You got sucker punched. None of it is your fault.

  190. 190Whippet on Oct 4, 2009 at 10:17 pm:

    Anonymous,

    I consider Charles as a former Lib when refering to the Dem party of today. It is a mere shadow of it’s former self. I wouldn’t consider him to be a hard left radical even though he is acting as one. He contradicts many of the positions he used to take and global warming is one of them. It’s a tactic. A means to an end. I’ve seen it at other formerly moderate sites that now have appeared to take a pretty hard left slant. They were either dishonest then or they are dishonest now. Personally I think they’ve been dishonest all along in an attempt to suck as many people in as they can to achieve their goal of a viable third party to challenge the one they couldn’t fix and destroy the one that threatens them the most at that moment.

  191. 191GALACTUS on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:17 pm:

    MAN

    I AM HAVING CHICKEN KIEV FOR DINNER TONIGHT

    IT WILL BE TASTY

  192. 192Bolero on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:32 pm:

    This is a note for Irish Rose. I went to your blog and your first paragraph you said “It’s been my observation over the years that people who subscribe to a particular belief system all too often sacrifice their critical thinking skills, in order to “fit in” to their respective faith communities.”

    It seems to me you dropped your own critical thinking skills by following a certain narcissistic and angry god who runs a very tight ship and his followers are known as lizardoids. You left your fundamental Christian church to join another fundamentalism.

    You made comments here that I found to be indicative of the loss of your thinking process. You have accused Zombie of something that is totally uncalled for.I am so glad Zombie has not lost its critical thinking process and Zombie will do what is right. Zombie is after Truth and will not let any ism get in the way.

  193. 193Roger on Oct 4, 2009 at 11:49 pm:

    Just about anybody can post here at zombietimes. Thanks zombie!
    Nobody can post at lgf. No thanks, Charles.

  194. 194Rose on Oct 5, 2009 at 12:00 am:

    And those Che shirts really are stupid, LOL.

  195. 195Fezziwig on Oct 5, 2009 at 12:19 am:

    Like it was in another era, we will see the photographs of the leaders atop the tomb of Lenin scrubbed clean of those that have fallen out of favor.

    It will always be as it ever was.

  196. 196Fezziwig on Oct 5, 2009 at 12:27 am:

    Irish Rose

    Do you have no bounds?

    Are there no limits or manners that you will not abuse?

  197. 197Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 2:51 am:

    “I don’t understand how people can believe in something as ridiculous as ID but I’m not about to go around calling them all idiots. ”

    How about my step father, a very renown physicist? You’ll do very well by not calling him an idiot because otherwise you’ll look ridiculous.

  198. 198duh on Oct 5, 2009 at 5:26 am:

    How about my step father, a very renown physicist? You’ll do very well by not calling him an idiot because otherwise you’ll look ridiculous.

    Unlike people who think ‘renown’ is the word for ‘renowned’.

    Idiot.

  199. 199Anonymous LGFer on Oct 5, 2009 at 5:32 am:

    Well, it’s official. Charles just banned you zombie. I’m feeling very conflicted right now because I used to admire you both so much. And I’m even ashamed of myself: look at my user name. I’m forced to use “Anonymous LGFer” because if I used my real nick to comment here I’d be banned at LGF too. By not naming myself, I’m choosing to take sides (that is, choosing to remain at LGF), which makes me sad. Why do I have to choose?

    My head is spinning. I never, ever thought it would come to this. No, not zombie. Why? Why?????

    I need to step away from the computer because I am feeling literally sick to my stomach. I am being torn in half. I’ve scanned this thread and zombie seems blameless. Irish Rose lied to us.

    At this stage I just don’t know what to think. It’s the end of an era.

  200. 200Starless on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:14 am:

    Anonymous: “I don’t understand how people can believe in something as ridiculous as ID but I’m not about to go around calling them all idiots. ”How about my step father, a very renown physicist? You’ll do very well by not calling him an idiot because otherwise you’ll look ridiculous.

    My first reaction would be to say that he should know better–being a supposedly “very renown” physicist and all. My second reaction would be to say that even “very renown” physicists are allowed to believe in stupid shit if they like. That doesn’t make ID science, though.

    And BTW, to others participating the last nearly 100 comments I’d like to remind you of the basic discussion group maxim, “Don’t feed the troll”.

    And a question: how is it that many LGFers react to a banning as though a close family member has been diagnosed with terminal cancer? Good gravy–get a grip.

  201. 201Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:23 am:

    “Unlike people who think ‘renown’ is the word for ‘renowned’.

    Idiot.”

    English is my second language. It makes YOU look like an idiot to assume that a person who makes a mistake in writing is an idiot.

  202. 202Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:28 am:

    “A blog owner, spying on a commenter, tracking their IP to other blogs, then blocking the commenter’s account.”

    I didn’t know one could see an IP of a person who is writing on someone else’s blog. How is it possible? If everybody (other than zombie) could see my IP right now then I am not anonymous.

  203. 203Starless on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:39 am:

    Anonymous: “A blog owner, spying on a commenter, tracking their IP to other blogs, then blocking the commenter’s account.”I didn’t know one could see an IP of a person who is writing on someone else’s blog. How is it possible? If everybody (other than zombie) could see my IP right now then I am not anonymous.

    When you hit someone’s web site, your computer has to be able to talk to the server the site sits on. In order to do that, each computer needs to know who the other is (by IP address) and every hit is logged in something called a web log. It used to be common practice that IP addresses of commenters would be automatically posted in discussion groups but because everyone is very concerned about privacy, that isn’t done anymore. But a site owner may choose to have a site tracking service log each hit (including the IP address of the visitor) for traffic monitoring purposes–this is particularly important for business web sites.

    So the upshot is that I can’t see your IP address, nor can you see mine, but Zombie can see all of our IP addresses. So while you may be anonymous to other site visitors, don’t kid yourself into thinking that you are ever truly anonymous on the Internet.

  204. 204anonymonkey on Oct 5, 2009 at 7:19 am:

    291 Charles Sun, Oct 4, 2009 10:24:52pm replyquote

    I would appreciate it if people don’t discuss this in public threads, please.

    Why not?

  205. 205Irish Rose on Oct 5, 2009 at 7:34 am:

    The person who copied my comment on the LGF private thread about having my comment on this blog deleted (above) deliberately and maliciously neglected to mention to the commenters here that I also posted a correction just a few minutes later, admitting that I missed it and my comment was still here.

    Any excuse to pick a fight, apparently.

    As for my comment above to Zombie, it’s personal and has nothing to do with the rest of you. Further, she doesn’t need you to defend her.

    I posted what I did above because I’ve considered Zombie to be a friend at LGF as long as I’ve been there, and I’ve always linked her on my sites. What she is encouraging on this blog is an insult to those of us at LGF who supported her work, linked to it, defended her and called her friend for so many years. She has (sadly) shown herself to be extremely two-faced. I’m offended by her deception and duplicity, as are many others, and I’m damned well going say what I think.

    If she wants to take her posts elsewhere then she’s free to do so, and nobody is suggesting otherwise… not me, not her friends at LGF and certainly not Charles. But the fact that she allows ugly comments like the ones being made above – vicious hurtful comments from hateful people who are so poisoned with hate that they’ve lost all sense of decency – is very, very wrong. It’s nothing more than backstabbing, and I’m tired of seeing it from people that I used to think were virtuous human beings.

    I’m sorry that this is what it has come to for you, Zombie…I can only hope that with regard to your work you decide to practice intellectual integrity in the future, instead of pandering to the binkered right with visual red meat.

    Truth, moral integrity and intellectual honesty are qualities that are too important to discard for the sake of adoration, popularity, and traffic. If we’re willing to discard those qualities as bloggers, then we have no right whatsoever to criticize the mainstream media when they do it.

    I can’t say that I think much of your new friends.
    Here’s hoping that they treat you with more kindness, respect and consideration than you’ve treated Charles.

  206. 206anonymonkey on Oct 5, 2009 at 7:56 am:

    Irish Rose, I believe that you started this latest round of lying. You are the one who ran to LGF talking about being deleted and trying to start a fight. Go look at yourself in the mirror.

    And you spout off about intellectual honesty. yeah right.

  207. 207Troy on Oct 5, 2009 at 7:59 am:

    Irish Rose you sanctimonious phony witch how dare you leacture anyone on civilty! By the way zombie and countless posters such as me are what made LGF a once great blog. I’ve never seen any interesting post by you the hateful cato, the mentally derange Killgore, the Doofus Honorary Yooper, or that British beast iceweasel and her Scottish socialist lapdog Jimmah. As for Sharmuta she is the laughing stock of the blogosphere. By the way i twould have been nice if you had actually thanked realwest for organzing that trip to San Diego for you. God forbid you speak up for him after Chuckles the Stalinist banned him for daring to psot on another blog.

  208. 208loppyd on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:32 am:

    Irish Rose,

    You are the very definition of a hypocrite. You call others stalkers, yet you spend your days trolling blogs for negative comments about your cyber leader, Charles. You make threats of (baseless) legal action against others while you have a “hit list” on your own blog and raised no objection when Charles outed former LGF posters. You try to have a blog you don’t agree with shut down. Did that give you a thrill, Rosie? Have you ever had an independent thought in your life?

    How about the debate over whether to keep former LGFers on a prayer list? Because people who dared to offer a differing opinion suddenly became unworthy of your prayers?

    Please tell me how you can come here and blast zombie for not deleting comments when trashing others who don’t agree with Charles has become commonplace at LGF. Do you see what a stupid, shrill dolt you come off as? Do you have any sense of the general attitude towards LGF in the blogosphere? The place is a punch line, a laughingstock and you, Rosie, deserve much of the credit.

    Happy Dinging.

  209. 209Ed Mahmoud on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:34 am:

    Zombie has a blog? Who knew?

    Keep up the good work.

    Don’t know how many times I linked to Zombietime in discussions of Nancy Pelotox or Pete Stark’s constituents.

  210. 210Ed Mahmoud on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:45 am:

    Zombie should have self banned when Chuckles basically called her/him a liar over Van Jones.

    Chuckles the Dancing Clown has fantasies of biting the pillow for Obama. No other explanation makes sense.

  211. 211Yet Another Anonymous LGFer on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:50 am:

    205 Irish Rose

    Sit down. Get a grip on yourself and think about what you’re claiming.

    Look at the thread above. When was the last comment made actually by zombie herself?

    It was comment #67;

    67 zombie on Sep 30, 2009 at 7:52 am

    Ooooh. The New York Times just noticed and ran a piece about my previous zomblog post (on John “Ice Age” Holdren):

    The New York Times: Holdren’s Ice Age Tidal Wave

    Note the time stamp: September 30th at 7:52 in the morning!

    That was over FIVE DAYS AGO!!!!!

    It’s quite obvious, now that I pause to think clearly, that zombie has not even seen this entire thread, after comment #67. S/he is probably completely unaware any of this has happened. I’ve looked at zomblog threads in the past, and except in some cases, it’s obvious that zombie does not even monitor the comments most of the time. In earlier threads sometimes spambot comments would sneak through, and people would ask direct questions of zombie, and it would all just sit there: the spams were never deleted, the questions would go unanswered. It’s obvious that zombie was not reading old threads, and does not monitor them, obsessively or otherwise.

    The very fact that zombie has not even been on this thread for five days, and has left unanswered dozens of direct questions here, and then simply started up another new thread yesterday, means she is probably completely oblivious to what is going on. She doesn’t know people have been leaving anti-LGF comments, she doesn’t know that people have been leaving vicious anti-zombie comments, she doesn’t know there’s a big fight going on, and likely doesn’t even know she’s been banned at LGF.

    Here, let’s see if zombie reacts to this:
    zombie is a cunt! Fuck you, cunt-ass zombie! You’re a liar and a thief and a whore! You’re a backstabbing racist! You’ve faked all your photos!

    Now, if that remains undeleted, we can rest pretty much assured that zombie is not even seeing any of this thread.

    And considering all this, that zombie was banned and delinked at LGF for failing to properly delete all comments here deemed offensive by Irish Rose and crew, when zombie didn’t even know such comments existed, makes the banning even more unfair and farcical, and makes LGF seem absolutely demented.

    I still have my account at LGF,and was reading and commenting on threads just yesterday, but this is the final straw. I am not going to flounce, but I am never going back. Zombie has said and done absolutely nothing against Charles, and instead was thrown to the wolves for being passive. For all you know, zombie is out of town or doing offline work or taking care of a family crisis or anything. Meanwhile, in her absence, she’s demonized, because she is absent.

    And the way that you all tore zombie to shreds on the LGF private “Lounge” thread was nothing short of evil. Even Charles joined in. I felt dirty just reading it. It was like that scene in “The Lottery” where the townspeople stone their neighbor to death as a scapegoat.

    I can’t cope with the fact that I spent two years of my life commenting on LGF. I now want those two years back.

  212. 212Ed Mahmoud on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:03 am:

    I think a nice cathartic “flounce”, whatever the hell that means, that can be read by Chuckles Heaven’s Gate cultists before it gets deleted, it a perfectly wonderful way to bid adieu to that Chuckles sewer.

    We float, we all float down here.

  213. 213Fezziwig on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:06 am:

    Irish Rose

    There is a difference between what makes for a community and what makes for a cult.

    That other place is no longer a community.

  214. 214Chuck's Crack Dealer on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:09 am:

    For whatever reason, Charles Johnson has become a shrill, lying, paranoid, lying (I already said that, but it bears mentioning again) asshole.

    Zombie was banned. For what? A perceived disloyalty to Charles. However, when one realizes that loyalty, to Charles and his minions, is a one-way street, it begins to make sense. The pattern is clear.

    If you register to post at LGF, you are basically signing away your rights to read, post, comment, or participate at or in any othe ronline forum, blog, or site. He basically owns you. That is his thinking.

    Hell, the people over at C2, made up of ex-lizards, who took Charles’ advice to heart – “If you dont’ like it, go start your own blog!” and “Feel free to bite me!”. So, they started their own blog. Wihtout saying one single ant-charles, or anti-lfg, thing anywhere, they were called a “Stalker blog” by Charles and his flying monkeys. Charles was taking comments from C2, and reposting them on LGF, his flying monkeys are there reading all the time, and he then declared that “anyone here posting there will be blocked. Period”. Why? Because C2 didn’t link to LGF.

    Maybe they didn’t link to LGF because they are a center-right/conservative site and dont’ want to link to a left-wing hate site? That could be it. The other issue was who they have on their blog roll – since Charles has basically shit on every single conservative blog out there (or had Killgore do it in the missle of the night) who can you link to anymore who doesn’t hate Charles?

    Now his flying monkeys are here, reading this blog, for the sole purpose of reporting people’s comments back to Central Headquarters. I would expect that any current lizard posting on this blog will now have their accounts banned for “disloyalty” – but remember, folks, you owe Charles your loyalty, but from him? I wouldn’t expect much of it in return. Instead, you will be spied on, threatened, lied about, smeared, outed, or worse.

    WHO IS THE FUCKING STALKER BLOG????? Little Green Shitballs, that’s who.

  215. 215Ed Mahmoud on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:09 am:

    I was banned, when banning wasn’t cool….

  216. 216Urban Infidel on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:12 am:

    Excellent catch, zombie! Great photo.

    Irish Rose really needs to step back here.

    First off, where does she get the right to tell other people what to do with their blogs? Secondly, comparing their respective contributions to the blog world, she can’t even begin to shine zombie’s shoes.

  217. 217Chuck's Crack Dealer on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:14 am:

    Secondly, comparing their respective contributions to the blog world, she can’t even begin to shine zombie’s shoes.

    No, but if she is anywhere near zombie and has one of her “incontinent moments”, well, she could pee on Zombie’s shoes.

  218. 218Troy on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:14 am:

    Charles Johnson likes to send his little reptiels over to other blogs to psot offensive things (Killgore Trout and his racist rants at Hot Air), and now the shrieking drama queen from Michigan.

  219. 219Chuck's Crack Dealer on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:19 am:

    Yup. I couldn’t help but notice how easily and casually using the “n-word” was for Killgore Trout. Charles like to play the “guilt-by-association” game? Well, his “right-hand man” is a guy who loves to go to other websites and spout vile racist crap. That makes Charles Johnson a racist bastard.

    That is the kind of person Charles has surrounded himself with – that is now the audience he will attract. Killgore “Racist Prick” Trout, Cato “I want to rape and murder Sarah Palin” The Elder, Ice “Doing my best to turn LGF into a twisted version of KOS” Weasel, and Irish “I piss myself regularly, and take painkillers in order to sleep” Rose. Then there is Sharmuta. His very own Squeaky Fromme.

  220. 220And Another Anonymous LGFer on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:20 am:

    Yet Another Anonymous LGFer on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:50 am

    I think it’s even worse than that. Even if Zombie knew, and Charles says she did, what’s it his business or Irish Rose’s business or the business of their supporters what Zombie does on her own blog? Who gave them that right?
    Charles bans people all the time for coming to his blog and telling his how to run it.
    Why don’t the same rules apply to Zombie? She can run her blog the way she sees fit to run her blog as Charles is free to run his blog the way he sees fit.
    Charles is moaning that he paid the cost for Zombie to cover the Democratic convention. I’m sorry but no one put a gun to Charles’ head and demanded that he pay that cost. He presumably saw it was in his interest to do so. He derived a benefit from that cost, or, at least believed he did, otherwise he wouldn’t have done it. Quit your bellyaching Charles- you look small.
    There are those who believe Charles will out Zombie if he actually does know who she is. I actually believe he will too. He says he takes very seriously his responsibility to protect the privacy of posters. However, the evidence suggests just the opposite as he has outed a number of former LGF posters.
    Another LGF poster up thread mentioned that they were saddened that Charles is making them take sides in this. I feel saddened as well- actually, I feel as though I’m a collaborator in something evil.

  221. 221Chuck's Crack Dealer on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:24 am:

    I agree. I think Charles would out anyone, if he found them to be disloyal, even if it meant they would be put in danger and/or it increased the chances they would be attacked physically, financially, or in any other way. He would feel no guilt about doing so, and would instead, in typical wife-beater fashion, say that “they made him do it” and blame them.

    He only cares about himself.

    Oh, and his tip jar.

  222. 222PantyShields on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:27 am:

    What does my nickname, and Irish Rose’s panties washday have in common?
    Both begin with a “Pee”.

  223. 223redneckkahfir on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:39 am:

    Boy, you lizards who still have an account ought to be careful. If you disagree with Charles you will be banned just like I just was.

    I think this is rather funny. Its kinda like a sick experiment in social interaction. Charles, maybe running this blog all by yourself is causing you to loose sight of reality, you should maybe find someone professional to talk to about it.

    I never commented much while I was there. I always had to mentally preview my thoughts, to insure they were compliant with Charles’ dogma.

    Oh and Sharmuta, How do you breathe with your nose so far up charles’ ass?

  224. 224anti_left on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:47 am:

    205 Irish Rose (aka Charles, impersonating I.R.)

    GAZE !

  225. 225RickZ on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:48 am:

    Chuck’s Crack Dealer:

    Is that Chuck’s crack dealer as in Roman Polanski 13-year-old female cracks?

    It could be true, because by the six degrees of separation Chuck uses in his smear campaigns, Chuck lives in the LA area. So did Polanski and Chuck Manson. There’s a three degree connection right there.

    It is a strange world we live in where a true citizen journalist like zombie is lambasted for disloyalty to such a course and disgusting creature as Chuck Stalin and his ill-bred KGB froggie minions.

  226. 226Finally Free on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:53 am:

    @211: The LGF of yesteryear, which I will always remember fondly, removed stumbling blocks before the blind (Lev. 19:14).

    That which calls itself LGF today instead chooses to curse the deaf.

  227. 227Chuck's Crack Dealer on Oct 5, 2009 at 9:53 am:

    Well, Rickz. Let’s look at the evidence, shall we?

    1. His name is Charles.
    2. He has a cult.
    3. He is both God and Devil.
    4. He has several women who would die, and kill, for him.
    5. He seems intent on stirring up racial animosity.

    Charles Johnson is the Electronic Charles Manson. E-Manson.

  228. 228pat on Oct 5, 2009 at 10:43 am:

    Just wow

  229. 229Irish Rose's Welfare Case Worker on Oct 5, 2009 at 10:57 am:

    Wow. That fat cow comes over here, throws s*it around, then goes back behind the walls “over there”, and then cries about being picked on? WTF?

  230. 230b1jetmech on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:04 am:

    200Starless on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:14 am:

    My first reaction would be to say that he should know better–being a supposedly “very renown” physicist and all. My second reaction would be to say that even “very renown” physicists are allowed to believe in stupid shit if they like. That doesn’t make ID science, though.

    I didn’t know there was a separation of faith and science??? Anyways, thanks for your worthless opinion.

  231. 231b1jetmech on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:11 am:

    Well I’m a proud “banned” member of the LGF.

    Charles just seems hell-bent on exposing the creationists, racism and militants in the Republican party. Don’t hear much what’s going on in the Democrat party let along what’s going on in America. Just what’s happening in the “right”.

    LGF is a lot like Michael Jackson’s career. Had a strong beginning, rose to the top then slid down to the point of death.

    It may be a while before it happens but R.I.P. LGF.

    Zombie, sorry to contaminate this thread as a “Us” verses “them” over the LGF issue.

  232. 232Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:18 am:

    zombie keep up the excellent work and maintain the moral high ground over this BS blogwar Charles has engaged in. Your absence on this thread speaks volumes. I hope you also drop into the Correspondence Convention site and say hello to your old friends (that’s where I got wind of this link this morning).

    turn read almost every comment on this thread and to think Irish Rose gave me some stooopid “intellectual honesty” lecture over the post I got banned on just floors me. Ranting on about how some people will condone bad behavior in “friends” when they wouldn’t hesitate to confront it in strangers. Implying I was a shut-in with no grip about life outside blogs and that I couldn’t understand the difference between online relationships and real physical relationships. Droning on about shocking departures and irrational behavior and she is the one who goes back to LGF and out and out lies about what happened here? Give turn a break Irish Rose, you must be friggin nuts in real life. I contend it’s you that doesn’t know the difference between a real physical relationship and an online affair with your “boyfriend”. You even lied to show your support for him and to then tried and divert attention away from zombie. Jealous there? You’ll probably have a nervous breakdown if you get banned.

    Hahaha that reference to It’s a good life upthread was so right on

  233. 233Rose on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:19 am:

    183. #253 Charles Sun, Oct 4, 2009 9:40:21pm replyquote
    Zombie was logged in to this thread using the name ‘Chicken Kiev’. And he/she also had another sock puppet.

    They’re all blocked now.

  234. 234Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:26 am:

    Hell, the people over at C2, made up of ex-lizards, who took Charles’ advice to heart – “If you dont’ like it, go start your own blog!” and “Feel free to bite me!”. So, they started their own blog. Wihtout saying one single ant-charles, or anti-lfg, thing anywhere, they were called a “Stalker blog” by Charles and his flying monkeys. Charles was taking comments from C2, and reposting them on LGF, his flying monkeys are there reading all the time, and he then declared that “anyone here posting there will be blocked. Period”. Why? Because C2 didn’t link to LGF.

    That’s right folks, turn got banned for calling Charles banning of the C2 folks (simply because they posted there with no mention of Charles) “pre-emptive bans, unfrigginbelievable” That was all I said. I don’t want to permanently divert any traffic from zombie, but you all should at least check out Correspondence Committee. It’s on a funky blogger address right now but the real site will be up shortly.

  235. 235Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:29 am:

    205 Irish Rose

    LIAR!

    -sharmuta

  236. 236Mad King Charles on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:36 am:

    Minions,
    I, on this day October 5th in this, the year of our Lord Al Gore 2009 make the following proclamation throughout the lizard land – you knowth thou leaders rulings:
    Thou shalt not “downdingth” thine Lizard king, for I shall respond with great wrath, by bringth the automatic ban stick welded with great vengeance against thee.
    Thou shalt not post at other sites where thine Lizard king is being defamed, I will turneth my back against thee, and revoke posting privileges.

    I now add ,
    If you are allowed by your King, most merciful and exalted to runneth a “blog” you shall ensure that no negative comments are made about be, for if my most trusted minion “incontinence rose” findth your blog comments are against my will, I shall rain down on thee great vengeance in the form of “de-linking” thou, and I shall smite thee with a ban stick and all your sock-puppets too.

    So sayth I, the law is now made.

  237. 237Rose on Oct 5, 2009 at 11:54 am:

    Mad King Charles: …So sayth I, the law is now made.

    Ten Commandments of LGF
    I am the Charles, thou shalt have no strange blogs before thee.
    Thou shalt not do whatever I think is bad, even if I thought it was good yesterday.
    Thou shalt not (I get to fill in this blank at my convenience)….

    And in case you broke a commandment – Add your name to The List

  238. 238Weepy Willow on Oct 5, 2009 at 12:04 pm:

    For years, nearly every single comment by zombie at LGF was like a flash of brilliance. Above all the other commenters there, she/he was insightful, well-spoken, funny, and a great Web detective. I would actually just do searches for zombie’s nic to avoid all the dross and just read the cream of the crop. After the uppding-downding thing was introduced, zombie seemed for a while to have the highest “updings-per-comment” rating of anyone on the site (with the possible exception of buzzsawmonkey, who was even funnier but less of an essayist).

    With zombie’s banning, LGF has now become nothing more than a desolate radioactive wasteland.

    What was once a lush landscape bursting with interesting creatures and scintillating insights is now, with zombie’s absence, just a bag of half-starved rabid wolverines gnawing on each other in their claustrophobic hell.

  239. 239passionate conservative on Oct 5, 2009 at 12:36 pm:

    anti_left:
    but he has gone full-time attacking the right in general, not just loonies
    and has LEFT all commentary about the evil of the left and jihadis for that matter, off the tableother posters have adaeqautely commented on his paranoid ranting and childish bannings and they are right

    He must have acquired a Berkelyite girlfriend. or maybe he’s dating inflated scrotum man. Either way, Chuckles deserves a big “boo” for his actions against zombie.

  240. 240MikalM on Oct 5, 2009 at 2:18 pm:

    Zombie: I just gave Charles notice over this:

    109 mikalm
    Mon, Oct 5, 2009 2:16:52pm replyquote 0downupfavoritereport

    re: #37 Charles

    >Yes. The reasons are in the lounge thread from last night.

    I read the thread, as well as the comments on Zombie’s site.

    Sorry Charles, but I think you’ve finally gone too far for me. I’ve been with LGF for over five years, stuck with you through all the controversies and bannings, and ignored your increasing attacks not only on creationists and the “Christian Right,” but on religious faith itself.

    Slam-dunking a prolific and unique contributor like Zombie over a few nasty comments on his/her blog is thin-skinned pettiness at its worst, and not something I can condone with my continued presence on LGF. Feel free to remove my account.

    Best of wishes to you and the remaining Lizards. So long, and thanks for an interesting and enlightening time…while it lasted.

    MikalM
    Member since August 2004
    2,716 posts
    1,614 Karma
    R.I.P.

  241. 241Anony McAnonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 2:30 pm:

    I can’t believe zombie was banned from LGF.

    Patently absurd.

    zombie, I always enjoyed your posts at LGF, and of course your work here. I will continue to do so in the future.

    And as for LGF, you’ve truly nuked the fridge this time. I was willing to put up with the ridiculous guilt-by-association flights of fancy where if a white supremacist buys a box of Ding Dongs both the supermarket and Hostess are therefore “supporting” white supremacists, but banning all the best contributors (Occasional Reader?!) is the end of the line. You know your blog has hit rock bottom when you actually come up with a term for people who basically demand to be banned because there’s no other way to delete their accounts with dignity. Charles’ use of “flouncing” is of course particularly hilarious given that it also characterizes 95% of his articles these days. In a totally unrelated coincidence, he’s also stopped announcing the number of new “hatchlings” after each open registration thread, probably because “closed after 36 hours, with 3 new hatchlings” doesn’t quite feel the same. You can take that one to the tip ja- er, bank.

  242. 242HardToBelieve on Oct 5, 2009 at 2:41 pm:

    Did Zombie really get banned from LGF? And if yes, why?

  243. 243Ringo the Gringo on Oct 5, 2009 at 2:57 pm:

    I’ve been posting comments at LGF for more than 7 years. This morning I stopped by and read this remark by Irish Rose:

    “I think I need to take a temporary break from blogging, folks.

    The anger and sadness that I’ve been feeling lately over the behavior of former LGF friends is starting to have a real impact on my health, and I’m just not willing to go there.”

    I responded to her comment by saying, “How pathetic”.

    A number of commenters jumped on me for my heartlessness, and so I then proceeded to call her a “skunk”. I suppose that wasn’t very nice of me, but I did succeed in getting myself banned.

    I wish no ill will towards Charles, and I will not join the chorus of people attacking him, but it really does feel good to be out that place.

  244. 244Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 2:58 pm:

    Zombie is now the most famous he/she on the internet!

  245. 245Ringo the Gringo on Oct 5, 2009 at 3:02 pm:

    Zombie was banned for not deleting comments here at Zomblog that are critical of LGF or of Charles Johnson.

    Or at least that’s how it appears.

  246. 246Don-Quixote on Oct 5, 2009 at 3:29 pm:

    Ken #87
    So just because the chinese dont care (according to you) about fifty million chinese being killed during Maos revolution were supposed to turn a blind eye to it? I am not hand wringing as you say I am calling out the facts. Mao is as evil as Stalin, Hitler, and all the rest of the psychopathic rulers of history. China’s “4th of July” celebrates the death of 50 million, a LOT more than all the rest in history. I am also quite sure that those fifty million would disagree with you, if they were still ALIVE. As a country based on individual liberty we should NOT be celebrating any 4th of July that commerates the death of countless millions, end of story.

  247. 247Shug on Oct 5, 2009 at 3:38 pm:

    To me Zombie represents everything that blogging and investigative journalism is supposed to be.
    Zombie, your work is amazing. You have guts. You have integrity.
    I’m pretty disappointed at some of the comments here against you.
    What a shame.

    Zombie, trust me : you have more supporters than you will ever know.

  248. 248Who gives a crap? on Oct 5, 2009 at 3:52 pm:

    If Zombie is as smart as I suspect, s/he doesn’t read any of the crap left in the
    comments section.

  249. 249Jim on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:02 pm:

    I’m sorry but many of you who have been banned, had no problem acting like little fascists before you were banned. You were more than happy bashing others and piling on and kissing you know who’s ass and cheering the banning of those who didn’t toe the line until you yourselves were banned. People like you scare the hell out of me. I sincerely doubt you’ve learned anything from your experience.

    That being said, the LGF sharks have been circling Zombie for quite a while now. Now that she is out, I would hope it would feel as a weight lifted.

    Good luck, Zombie, no doubt you will not only survive but thrive.

  250. 250CattusMagnus on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:05 pm:

    #243 Ringo the Gringo,

    Wow. Calling somebody a skunk will get you booted but I noticed today that comments using various four-letter curse words remain displayed. Go figure.

  251. 251Callahan23 on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm:

    Thank you Zombie for the excellent work you are doing!
    I admire you greatly, I really do. Don’t worry the shock, and I know it is one, of being banned is going away. The remaining feeling is that of being free of a burdensome, weird and frankly nasty and vituperative community.
    I myself wasn’t banned for doing anything like flouncing or disagreeing in a bad manner with Charles or one of his personal favorites. I was banned for commenting over at CORRESPONDENCE COMMITTEE. Loads of people got banned at the same time for doing the exact same thing.
    I feel no regrets, am not looking backwards and I know who is relevant and that is YOU Zombie!
    You go ahead knowing that you have a great many people supporting you!

  252. 252phoenixgirl on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:21 pm:

    ringo, what you said to irish rose was too mild.

  253. 253Exiled on Main Street on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:42 pm:

    I’m feeling very conflicted right now because I used to admire you both so much. And I’m even ashamed of myself: look at my user name. I’m forced to use “Anonymous LGFer” because if I used my real nick to comment here I’d be banned at LGF too

    Lord, grow a set. I was a regular at LGF for years too. When the blog started boring me, I left. Christ, I don’t get the drama and agony here. It’s a blog, people.

    CJ is not your savior or brother or best friend. It’s obvious he has absolutely no emotional attachment whatsoever to anybody who posts there, no matter how long they’re done so. If Irish Rose or Sharmuta or Kilgore Fish piss him off, he’ll toss them away like a soiled snot rag and he won’t feel bad for a moment. Occasional Reader was just as vicious a toady as anybody else, did that save him in the end?

    Jesus, you’d think there is only one blog in the world. There are many good ones, run by bloggers who are smarter, better read, and much more tolerant of differing views than CJ.

    CJ’s an assh*le, but many of his followers, past and present, look like morons too. They put up and participated in this Lord of the Flies atmosphere, when all they had to do to get away was – gee, click the mouse! It’s not like they’re in 3rd grade and stuck in some awful miserable clique-y private school where everyone’s a snot and the popular kids don’t like you, but you have to go because your parents want you to go there.

    Besides, LGF is hardly filled with “the popular kids” these days. They’re looking like spiteful misfits and losers more and more with every passing day.

  254. 254Roger on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:46 pm:

    Re: #253Exiled on Main Street

    You with the big brass balls. What was your nic on lgf?

  255. 255Roger on Oct 5, 2009 at 4:58 pm:

    237Rose

    I see W-Lover on there. That is sharmuta’s real nic; she switched when asked to choose it or one of her socks.

  256. 256Marooned in Marin on Oct 5, 2009 at 5:28 pm:

    Zombie: Keep up your great work and to Hell with Charles and his little sycophants. You are going to go even further and you have a friend here.

    And Irish Rose, you want to lecture about Charles “generosity?” He practically took credit on CNN for Zombie’s work uncovering the Reuter’s fauxtography. Everything he says today he was the opposite of this time last year and before. He was promoting “Nirtherism” (I have the screenshots) and the glo-BULL warming skepticism before he opposed them (kinda like John “I served in Vietnam” Kerry). And you can tell your buddy, “Icarus” how much of a bullying, abusive, overbearing @$$hole he is.

  257. 257Ken on Oct 5, 2009 at 5:34 pm:

    Christ, I don’t get the drama and agony here. It’s a blog, people.

    Exactly. Internet wars = stupid as hell

  258. 258Rose on Oct 5, 2009 at 5:48 pm:

    Ken – it’d make a fascinating thesis for a psych student – what happened there and how minds got twisted. How a sense of community – virtual community – turned toxic. What people are capable of. Amazing stuff.

    And, if you think about it – this thread is in itself a different kind of photo essay for zombie. A record of our time.

  259. 259yochanan ben avrohom on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:18 pm:

    to be banned from little green frogger at least I am in good company i for one find zombie’s pic and post to be very informative on things i really care about, frankly i am bored by things like i.d. and evolution.

  260. 260Ken on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:56 pm:

    As a country based on individual liberty we should NOT be celebrating any 4th of July that commerates the death of countless millions, end of story.

    I guess that means we Americans should stop celebrating our own 4th of July, eh? Because our nation’s founding was certainly as bloody, if not more, than China’s (proportionally speaking, taking into consideration technological and historical contexts). And, again, China became a modern nation after a world war and during a civil war. I find it hard to believe that any national founding under circumstances like that could be bloodless.

    Also, you do realize, I hope, that National Day in China doesn’t celebrate “the deaths of countless millions,” it celebrates the GOOD THINGS about China, not the bad. Can you find a single “4th of July” (which here is being used as a synonymous term for a nation’s national holiday) in any country around the globe where they celebrate their bad qualities? I’m pretty sure the Japanese don’t bring up the Rape of Nanking during their 4th of July nor do the Germans mention the Holocaust on theirs.

  261. 261Anonymous on Oct 5, 2009 at 7:51 pm:

    Fine, Ken. Let THEM celebrate National Day. I certainly don’t expect the Brits, the Swedes or the Nigerians to do anything in their country to celebrate our Independence Day, any more than I expect the US to celebrate Bastille Day.

  262. 262Ray on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:06 pm:

    Zombie has done incredible works for the betterment of all. A spirited and fair fighter, not one to try and control people, but to let them speak their peace and defend their ideas as best they can. Sure, some make fools of themselves, but that’s what having freedom means. Be thankful Zombie allows us to be intelligent or foolish on his/her blog, there are fewer of these places today than a year ago. Keep up the good fight Zombie, we support you.

  263. 263Ray on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:08 pm:

    Also, Zombie, do you have a means for us to provide this site donations? Thanks.

  264. 264Peter Larudee on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:29 pm:

    “Zombie was banned for not deleting comments here at Zomblog that are critical of LGF or of Charles Johnson.
    Or at least that’s how it appears.”

    Violated the LGF TOS with sock puppets.

  265. 265Ken on Oct 5, 2009 at 8:48 pm:

    Fine, Ken. Let THEM celebrate National Day

    Did anyone force you to celebrate China’s National Day this year? Or last year? Or the year before that?

    Ok, then.

  266. 266Starless on Oct 6, 2009 at 4:50 am:

    b1jetmech:
    I didn’t know there was a separation of faith and science??? Anyways, thanks for your worthless opinion.

    Way to purposely misrepresent what I wrote. Well done. Anyways, thanks for your worthless and inartful snark.

  267. 267Pablo on Oct 6, 2009 at 6:44 am:

    Unlike people who think ‘renown’ is the word for ‘renowned’.

    Idiot.


    re⋅nown

      /rɪˈnaʊn/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-noun] Show IPA

    –noun
    1. widespread and high repute; fame.

    Nice job, Genius.

  268. 268Anonymous on Oct 6, 2009 at 7:03 am:

    Charles Johnson? He used to be relevant, but since his rabid support of global warming, evolution he appears to have lost it.

  269. 269Pablo on Oct 6, 2009 at 7:11 am:

    Violated the LGF TOS with sock puppets.

    Sorry, but the sock puppet jihad is of recent vintage. Many commenters had socks out in the open suck as “Mike C’s Sock Puppet” and Iron Fist’s SP “Satan”. I had a “Karl Rove” sock. Charles has always known that they existed and who they belonged to. The idea that Zombie was banned for simply being logged in (not even commenting, just being logged in) under an SP account is ludicrous. Zombie was banned for failing to toe the line and defend Mad King Charles at any and all times. This is LGF’s loss.

    Zombie was by far the most valuable commenter ever to log in to LGF, and has done far more for LGF than LGF has ever done for him/her.

  270. 270Pablo on Oct 6, 2009 at 7:15 am:

    Then there was Talkin’ Kamel’s sock, which I can’t remember the name of at the moment, but it was a kooky monarch persona. Funny stuff. And there was Aussie Dave’s utterly hilarious “Aisha”. But I suppose all of the above are now banned, so whatevs…

  271. 271stuiec on Oct 6, 2009 at 8:00 am:

    Pablo:
    Sorry, but the sock puppet jihad is of recent vintage. Many commenters had socks out in the open suck as “Mike C’s Sock Puppet” and Iron Fist’s SP “Satan”. I had a “Karl Rove” sock. Charles has always known that they existed and who they belonged to. The idea that Zombie was banned for simply being logged in (not even commenting, just being logged in) under an SP account is ludicrous. Zombie was banned for failing to toe the line and defend Mad King Charles at any and all times. This is LGF’s loss.
    Zombie was by far the most valuable commenter ever to log in to LGF, and has done far more for LGF than LGF has ever done for him/her.

    “I’m shocked — shocked! — to find sock puppets here!”

  272. 272b1jetmech on Oct 6, 2009 at 8:10 am:

    Ken on Oct 5, 2009 at 6:56 pm:

    I guess that means we Americans should stop celebrating our own 4th of July, eh? Because our nation’s founding was certainly as bloody, if not more, than China’s (proportionally speaking, taking into consideration technological and historical contexts).

    How about naming some events when the new found Americans “portionedly” murdered tens of million of people? I don’t recall any. Like any nation you can find fault within it’s history of existance. In no comparison can one justly compare the US to Communist China.

    And, again, China became a modern nation after a world war and during a civil war. I find it hard to believe that any national founding under circumstances like that could be bloodless.

    It sure did, at the expense of tens of millions of Chinese’s lives. BUT…no where close to what the US has become an industrial nation until the US opened the floodgates of “free trade” to China.

    Also, you do realize, I hope, that National Day in China doesn’t celebrate “the deaths of countless millions,” it celebrates the GOOD THINGS about China, not the bad. Can you find a single “4th of July” (which here is being used as a synonymous term for a nation’s national holiday) in any country around the globe where they celebrate their bad qualities? I’m pretty sure the Japanese don’t bring up the Rape of Nanking during their 4th of July nor do the Germans mention the Holocaust on theirs.

    The difference between the US and Communist China is the US acknowledges the wrongs in the past where as Communist China doesn’t. Is there a Tiananmen square massacre remembrance day? Thousands of people were slaughtered…remember that day? Just 20 years ago. The Communist hold to power is a tight one. Communism isn’t for the people but for the leaders and tyrants who rule. That’s why the only good Communist is a dead one.

  273. 273Earth2moonbat on Oct 6, 2009 at 8:36 am:

    A year from now, Zombie will be bigger, and LGF (1.0) will be forgotten. Kinda like Amadeus. Except in that case, Salieri realized that he was a mediocrity. Queeg will never get why his strawberries vanished.

    Zombie, keep on keeping on. Not that you need a hallelujah chorus to keep you going.

  274. 274John R. McFarlan on Oct 6, 2009 at 11:13 am:

    #94 Starless

    I don’t understand how people can believe in something as ridiculous as ID

    ID is nothing more, nothing less than lifting the ban of considering teleology from science. Dawkins, representative of Orthodox Materialism, says you must always approach the facts of biology as “having the appearance of design.” Lewontin says, “We cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” ID says the possibility that the facts of biology may actually have been designed by an intelligence is worthy of serious consideration. ID doesn’t say the foot in the door is divine, or how many feet there are in the door; Biblical creationism speaks on that matter, but Biblical creationism is, to be perfectly accurate, only a subset of Intelligent Design.

    As for the question of ID being scientific or not – let’s just say if historians held their profession to the same standards modern scientists hold theirs, they’d not consider a historian anyone who wrote an history of England without strenuously avoiding all references to her monarchs. Enough said on what’s really an intractable debate, because of the vested interests involved.

    I prefer to try to get them to understand that they’ve been suckered by charlatans.

    You atheists know everything, and you have all the answers; you have come to the pinnacle of life’s examination, where it is clear that the only way to get a passing grade on the exam paper is to leave it totally blank (“What’s the meaning of life? There isn’t any. Life’s a b***, then you die.” “Why did the universe come into being from nothing in the Big Bang?” “Just because. Have you stopped beating your wife?” You get the drift). More pitiful than you holding those positions is thinking yourselves the heirs of the Greek philosophers, when this attitude is diametrically opposed to everything they stood for, not least Socrates’ call for examining life without restrictions.

    You can keep calling ID pseudoscience, in fact I encourage you to keep it up, then you’ll have achieved for the word “pseudoscience” what the Obamabots are doing for “racist.” Remove it’s meaning and with it it’s sting.

  275. 275loppyd on Oct 6, 2009 at 3:33 pm:

    A little birdie told me that not everyone at LGF is happy with Irish Rose’s one-woman crusade against the “haters” and “stalkers” on other blogs.

    In fact, one of the “elders” bitch slapped her for it. Poor Rosie. This is what she gets in return for for all of her hard work.

    Another birdie told me that Sharmuta (AKA W-Lover, Imadhimmi, Polish Infidel, Brett Favre) of all people was indignant over the use of sock puppets. She originated the art of the conversation with one’s self at LGF.

    Finally, I heard from another bird that Chaz has a super seekrit cool correlator tool to bust sock puppets.

    And no, I do not have a sock puppet.

    Booga booga!

  276. 276Don-Quixote on Oct 6, 2009 at 3:49 pm:

    Ken #260
    Why do you have to fudge the facts?

    “I guess that means we Americans should stop celebrating our own 4th of July, eh? Because our nation’s founding was certainly as bloody, if not more, than China’s (proportionally speaking, taking into consideration technological and historical contexts”

    That’s a mighty bold claim. Care to back it up with some facts?
    Secondly, as b1jetmech said the U.S. has actually acknowledged it’s mistakes. We have tried to change some of these past injustices through institutional laws. Civil rights movement mean anything? How about the Civil war and the death of slavery? Celebrating China in certain terms is fine. Honoring the Government in any way is to give callous disregard to the millions who were butchered in the name of “progress.”
    Last time I checked most people in the U.S. werent honoring moments in U.S. history that has been shall we say less than ethical. Why should we honor a disgusting moment in human history? It’s like lighting up the Empire states building green to honor the Holocaust.
    Stop playing the equivilancy game Ken. Your wrong on this one.

  277. 277Anonymous on Oct 6, 2009 at 7:25 pm:

    Hmm CJ’s reaction to some of the better known posters when they either leave or get tossed is disturbing and one should take care.

  278. 278Ken on Oct 6, 2009 at 8:54 pm:

    Celebrating China in certain terms is fine.

    Alright, fine. I’ll give you that. But why are you (presumably not Chinese?) dictating which terms the Chinese will celebrate their “4th of July” in? What’s the issue here? The Empire State Building being lit up red and yellow? Well, “red and yellow” doesn’t mean “we support communist atrocities.” It’s just a symbol of China and China constitutes more than the Cultural Revolution or the Great Leap Forward. I don’t understand why you can’t make a distinction between “China” and “bad things that have happened in China.” Or is the issue celebrating the founding of the PRC in general? If that’s the case, I’d suggest you not worry about it as it most likely has nothing to do with you and worrying about it will just bring you un-needed stress.

    Honoring the Government in any way is to give callous disregard to the millions who were butchered in the name of “progress.”

    Since when was anyone in America honoring the Chinese government? As for Chinese honoring their government: that’s up to them, not you. And, again, their national holiday is in honor of China itself, not the government. They have a different holiday for that (July 1st), one which isn’t even important enough for them to have the day off from school.

    Last time I checked most people in the U.S. werent honoring moments in U.S. history that has been shall we say less than ethical.

    For Christ’s sake, National Day in China doesn’t mean honoring 1989 or the Cultural Revolution. It means honoring the day China became a modern nation. Maybe YOU see that as something bad, but the Chinese don’t. Get over it.

    Why should we honor a disgusting moment in human history?

    Are you calling the founding of China a “disgusting moment in human history”? If so, you’re sadly mistaken…as shown in the article that was linked above, the one with elderly Chinese talking about how much they suffered before 1949 and how much better off they have been since then. It’s shocking to me that that was considered an “eye-opening” article. You mean, people would rather choose a stable government and society, albeit that are considerably restrictive, instead of the poverty, disease, and victimization that they suffered beforehand? Wow, what a shock…

    I just can’t understand this. China is a country with billions of people, all with varied experiences, and is a country that has seen many good things and many bad things. But why does “China” have to be synonymous with “bad” in the West? Why does China’s “4th of July” have to always be portrayed as some heartless celebration of the people who died in the CR or in 1989? Why can’t it be seen as a celebration of the improvement of the lives of women since 1949? Or a celebration of how China, once the “Sick Man of Asia,” has become a strong country? Why do you all seem to have such tunnel vision, only able to see the bad, when it comes to China? The bad exists, sure, but there really is alot more to China than just the bad things.

    It’s like lighting up the Empire states building green to honor the Holocaust.

    *sigh*

    The Holocaust was a fixed historical event with only one aspect: killing and the proliferation of killing. It was only bad. China is a fluid, changing nation, it is multi-faceted, and, in addition to its bad things, has good things, too! The good is what is being celebrated, not the bad. This is a very basic concept to grasp. The only conclusion that I can come to is that people in the West don’t fail to grasp it, but choose to not grasp it. I hope I’m wrong, though.

    Though if you’d prefer not to participate in celebrating the good because you fear it might also be seen as celebrating the bad, alright. It’s your choice. No one is going to force you to acknowledge it. But you do have a responsibility to be fair and honest and admit that there are good things about that country, as well.

  279. 279Starless on Oct 7, 2009 at 5:31 am:

    #275 John R. McFarlan

    LOL. Oh how pretty and erudite your words sound. Very nice.

    Dover proved conclusively that ID is a lie — a vehicle for sneaking Young Earth Creationism into science classrooms with the ultimate goal of destroying the scientific method. Something which creationists have been trying, and failing, to do since Darwin published. The immediately evident dead give away, though, is ID proponents’ attempts to make their beliefs science by browbeating credulous school boards. This is not how science is proven. Nor is it proven by continually crying about “fairness” or “equal time” when there’s no evidence to merit them.

    I invite everyone to look into the history of the ID movement. From its inception it was orchestrated not as an attempt to discover Truth but to generate evidence for a predetermined conclusion. The most vocal defenders of ID on the ‘net inevitably turn out to be members of the Seventh Day Adventist church. They are well-versed in the art of indefatigable bullshit and they refuse to back down in the face of any evidence contrary to what their church tells them about ID. If you look at church rules you’ll see that one of the top ones is a requirement to convert as many people as possible in their lifetime in order to gain brownie points in Heaven. ID is their newfangled 21st century way of trying to gain converts.

    I have no quarrel with religion and beyond the issue of ID I have no problem with the SDA church. People are allowed to believe what they want in the US and I think that’s a generally good thing. Just don’t lie and try to use and abuse science in order to push your beliefs. It only serves to make people dumber.

  280. 280huckleberry on Oct 7, 2009 at 9:36 am:

    Starless- ID IS ONLY USED TO SUBVERT SCIENCE! /

    yeah right, how do you explain people that believe in intelligently designed evolution? Just don’t lie and claim you have no quarrel with religion in order to push your beliefs when you obviously do. It just makes you look even more dumb.

  281. 281Incognito on Oct 7, 2009 at 3:17 pm:

    Am I the only Marxist who can see that we shouldn’t support every group of idiots who claims to be an “anti-Imperialist” or “liberation” group? I doubt Engels or Lenin would have supported Hamas.

    Wow Ken, you are a Marxist? At least you are one of the few and an intellectually honest one.

    It is interesting to observe how Marxists and leftists and progressives have joined with Islamists to bring downfall to Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. I mean, there are leftists and marxists in Israel. I don’t think there are any in Saudi Arabia, for example. At least not out openly…

  282. 282Incognito on Oct 7, 2009 at 3:52 pm:

    Dover proved conclusively that ID is a lie — a vehicle for sneaking Young Earth Creationism into science classrooms with the ultimate goal of destroying the scientific method.

    Starless, that would have been funny if it was not so serious. What makes you think it would be a vehicle for YEC as opposed to Old Earth Creationists?

    A true scientific method is one that allows all views and hypotheses and let them speak for themselves and from there, a discussion can be made as to their merits. But schoolyard bullying does not help the scientific method. One Biology journal editor was heavily attacked for allowing the publication of an ID study. The editor claimed he was neutral on the subject and he wanted a frank discussion made on the topic.

    You think that someone with a predetermined conclusion should not be allowed in scientific discussions. What would you say of the atheists that have a predetermined conclusion that there is no god and thus science “prove” their position? Richard Dawkins may be a worst example of this kind. A premier Biologist and scientist and a premier evangelist for the atheistic cause. That does not help the cause for the neutrality of science in regards that it has no comment on the existence of God. In fact, the presence of Dawkins and his activity in atheism is more harmful to science than you can imagine.

    I have a degree in Biology and I love Biology. And yet I am a creationist, one who believes that G-d created the Heaven and the Earth and all living things. And yes I do believe and accept evolution. But evolution is not causality of life. Evolution is an observation of what happens to living things. Evolutionism is a philosophy, a worldview, a prism, a rose colored glasses that interprets a finding according to this worldview.

    The challenge in Biology is the word SPECIES. We really do not have an accurate definition of what species is. Species had been used to define different kinds of E Coli according to its kinds and yet it is also used to define differentiate animals like dogs and cats and horses and humans and monkeys etc. So, a finding of a new species of bacteria is used as a claim that a totally new thing was found. But evolution has been proven ad nauseam intraspecies. So the fact that bacteria does evolve is nothing new. The challenge is finding a bacteria that evolved into something like…a tiny fish or something like that.

    And as you know, a true scientific method is one that is REPEATABLE and proveable.

    Unfortunately, evolution on macro scale (interspecies) if it happened seemed to be a one time event. All we have is micro evolution. A finch on one side of the island evolved to a different finch on the other side of the island. But a finch is still a finch. A chihuahua in Mexico is a dog and so is Lhasa Apso from Tibet. They are dogs. They are not cats or horses or anything like that. Some dogs have hair, some do not. Some dogs are vicious and some are very nice. Some are cute and some are just butt ugly. But they are dogs. We can tell easily an animal is a dog and not a cat.

    So, if we could just be honest and be able to discuss this without being attacked or called names or persecute or have a witch hunt…the world could be a much better place. So far, the scientists in ID research that I know of do not have any link to Seventh Day Adventism. What do you know about Seventh Day Adventistst?

  283. 283vanderleun on Oct 7, 2009 at 6:18 pm:

    I think we should all pause, as I have, and reflect upon Johnson’s deathless contributions to the art of photography.

    The Eternal Banality of the Photography of Charles Foster Johnson

    http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/bad_americans/the_eternal_banality_of_t.php

  284. 284Don-Quixote on Oct 7, 2009 at 6:48 pm:

    Ken, you just dont get it. China, I am saying so you can hear it. Are you listening? China in history has done many numerous goood things. That being said there current Government is directly tied to one of the top three worst human killling events in all of history.
    If China had a revolution and the current Communist thugs were thrown out I would be for the Building to be lit up for a week in Red, blue or any cultural color you want to choose. However they have never acknowledged the great evil they have done. Going on and on about the good that China is doing today is more than alot of Bunk. Huge numbers of the billion+People are unhappy, they are taken advantage of constantly and Machiavelli IMO would be proud of the bribery, the thuggery and the intimidation that is part and parcel of the average chinese citizens life. You talk about how you have lived there, your not the only one.
    So the cultural revolution was good? Fifty million later. I guess I will have to take your word on it.
    Lighting up the Empire states building to honor China gives credence to the goons in power that what they have done is O.K.
    Your whitewash cant cover up the bodies Ken.

  285. 285Ken on Oct 7, 2009 at 9:38 pm:

    I don’t think there are any in Saudi Arabia, for example. At least not out openly…

    There was once a Saudi Communist Party…until it got banned and its leaders executed or exiled. I’m sure Hezbollah would do the same thing if they ever got total control. Thus, I don’t support them just because they claim to be “anti-Imperialists.” That’s just self-defeating and naive.

    That being said there current Government is directly tied to one of the top three worst human killling events in all of history.

    I’ll make this in boldface:

    NO ONE IS CELEBRATING THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT

    No one. I haven’t seen a single thing anywhere to make me think that lighting the ESB in the colors of the Chinese flag means they’re honoring the Chinese government. Red and yellow are the colors of the Chinese flag, it’s China’s “color,” China means more than just the government. Your infatuation with these two colors being inextricably linked to the government itself is baffling and inaccurate. If they wanted to honor the government they’d just light the ESB up with a big hammer and sickle, at which point I would understand why you’d be so unhappy. As it stands now, though, “red and yellow” is a fairly benign symbol of China itself.

    However they have never acknowledged the great evil they have done

    Of course they have. The Cultural Revolution is talked about and debated endlessly, they film movies and TV shows about it, people make theme restaurants devoted to it, university students are required to take classes on it. It even spawned an entire genre of Chinese fiction, Scar Literature, that is devoted only to soul-searching and coming to terms with what happened. The government has rehabilitated almost everyone who perished during those times and compensated their next of kin and public buildings are named after people who were once struggled against. If you’d like to suggest other things for them to do, be my guest.

    Going on and on about the good that China is doing today is more than alot of Bunk. Huge numbers of the billion+People are unhappy

    A Pew Opinion Poll found last year that 86% of Chinese were satisfied with their country, making it #1 in the global ranking:

    http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/261.pdf

    The majority also found “corrupt officials” to be a “moderately big problem” rather than a “very big problem” by a healthy margin, and 65% thought the government was doing a “good job” (see above link). Personally, none of that matters to me so I don’t pay attention to it.

    So the cultural revolution was good?

    I never said that. If you felt I inferred that then you are mistaken. All I said was that I see no problem lighting the ESB up in red and yellow lights.

    Lighting up the Empire states building to honor China gives credence to the goons in power that what they have done is O.K.

    I seriously doubt that the Chinese leadership is plotting their next move based on if the US gives its approval or not, especially not if that approval comes in the form of colored lights on a building.

  286. 286Scott on Oct 8, 2009 at 2:39 pm:

    Ah, the followers of Mad King Charles. One of ‘em, a lady whose marriage I witnessed, won’t talk to me any more because Mad King Charles declared my editor a racist and a fascist. Why does Mad King Charles think my editor is a sinister goose stepper? Does it really matter, coming from someone who refers to arabs as “ragheads” and “oil ticks?” I don’t think it does. That’s sort of like Charles Schumer wagging his finger at me for being a corrupt congressman. What boggles my mind is how mentally weak people are that they will join a cult based on a blog written by a mental and moral defective.

  287. 287John R. McFarlan on Oct 11, 2009 at 5:08 am:

    #280 Starless

    > LOL. Oh how pretty and erudite your words sound. Very nice.

    I thank you for your compliments about the form of my message, but I think maybe you should pay more attention to the truth of my message. Just sayin’.

    > [ID is] a vehicle for sneaking Young Earth Creationism into
    > science classrooms

    The majority of ID theorists being old-earthers same as any evolutionist, I find that hard to believe.

    > with the ultimate goal of destroying the scientific method.

    With the ultimate goal of lifting from the science the categorical ban on considering teleology. A ban that constitute a demand of purity of thought that goes against everything science stands for. So who’s the anti-science side?

    > I invite everyone to look into the history of the ID
    > movement. [etc.]

    And I invite everyone to look into the history of Darwinism. From its inception it was part and parcel of the dominant 18th- and 19th-century ideology of progressivism, which holds that everything tends to to progress from lower to higher, from simple to complex and suchlike. And how Darwinism was birthed in the exact same period that all the sciences moved to cast-iron, come-hell-or-high-water materialism.

    > From its inception it was orchestrated not as an attempt to
    > discover Truth but to generate evidence for a predetermined
    > conclusion.

    Back atcha. Evolution in rudimentary form goes all the way back to Anaximander and Lucretius. Aristotle and Cicero believed in intelligent design. The difference is, the ancient Greeks and Romans didn’t try to ban each other’s opinion like Darwinists are doing now.

    > The most vocal defenders of ID on the ‘net inevitably turn out
    > to be members of the Seventh Day Adventist church.

    Another lie. Phillip Johnson is a Presbyterian. David Berlinski is a Jew. I could go on, but I think you, as you say of the ID theorists

    > refuse to back down in the face of any evidence contrary

    > I have no quarrel with religion

    Of course not, just so long as religion doesn’t dare to make claims about the real world. Can’t have religion challenging you on the arena of objective reality, because then people might start believing it’s factually true and not just a good feeling in you.

    > Just don’t lie and try to use and abuse science in order to push
    > your beliefs.

    I’m looking forward to you taking your own advice. No more materialistic indoctrination in class! Not even in the guise of science.

  288. 288Bolero on Oct 11, 2009 at 1:13 pm:

    Thank you John McFarlan! Well said!

    I could not understand where the 7th Day Adventist comments came from…it was a first time for me. Most of the well known IDers were from the mainline denomination including Roman Catholic.

  289. 289John R. McFarlan on Oct 12, 2009 at 7:30 am:

    # 289 Bolero

    > I could not understand where the 7th Day Adventist comments came
    > from

    I think I do. Ron Numbers, a science historian who writes about creationism, traces the source of modern young-earth creationism to George McCready Price, a SDA who wrote a book called “The New Geology” in the 1920′s. However, Numbers himself admits Price had little influence in his day, and the great watershed event in the popularization of YEC was Morris and Whitcombe’s “The Genesis Flood”, in the 1960′s. Numbers also neglects to mention the Scriptural Geologists of the 19th century, who already voiced most of the familiar YEC arguments.

    The age of the earth/universe didn’t used to be such an important topic. William Jennings Bryan, the prosecutor in the notorious Scopes Trial, was an Old-Earth Creationist holding to the Day-Age view (one Genesis creation day = millions of years). As for Catholics, it makes sense that they’re a majority in the ID movement, because Catholics in general care much more about the question of God’s involvement than more peripheral issues like chronology and cladistics. Michael Behe, for example, has expressed his readiness to agree with Darwinists about almost everything except the issue of Irreducible Complexity.

    ID is a rival school in a debate, much like Socrates’ and Plato’s schools were. That’s why the attempt to shut ID out pisses me off so much.

  290. 290beckaholic on Oct 12, 2009 at 11:59 am:

    There is only one place on this earth in which anyone is attempting to “shut out” I.D. and that is in public school science class. That’s it! You can talk about it anywhere else you want, in any other class you want, (philosphy?) with any person you want (including your own children, BTW ) anytime you want. You just cannot pretend that it is a theory on par with Evolution or that it has a single shred of evidence to back it up or that Evolution is now on shaky ground because of it, because none of that is true. It’s a farce, meant to confuse school children in order to “save their souls.” It’s prosetylizing for Christian religions in the public schools and that is not allowed, and you don’t want that allowed, by the way- because if it is, then you have to allow Muslims and Hindus and Wiccans and whoever else feels like it equal time to be able to present their own version of origins mythology in science class as pure fact, because there is exactly the same amount of evidence to back up the idea that the earth is being held up by a stack of turtles as there is to back up the idea that some supernatural force was required for a gene to mutate in a specific direction in order to create a human.
    But really, the key issue here is not primarily whether or not ID is a scientific concept, but whether or not it is religion masquarading as science, which in Dover it was declared to be (and is obvious to anybody who follows the topic and the players involved.) Remember the part about not promoting one religion over another in the constitution? Think about that. You think ID is some secular attempt to explain the universe? If you do, you are being bamboozled just like everyone else who takes it seriously. It may be an interesting topic for the dinner table with your children, but as a scientific theory with evidence to back it up, it is not ready for prime time and way beyond a 17 year old’s scope to discern political and religious manipulations and make sense of them and how they are being used as pawns in the battle.

    And that’s why the attempt to promote this idea as a scientific theory backed up by evidence when there isn’t any pisses me off so much.

  291. 291John R. McFarlan on Oct 12, 2009 at 12:34 pm:

    #291 beckaholic

    > There is only one place on this earth in which anyone is attempting
    > to “shut out” I.D. and that is in public school science class.
    > That’s it! You can talk about it anywhere else you want, in any
    > other class you want, (philosphy?) with any person you want
    > (including your own children, BTW ) anytime you want.

    Does materialistic ideology supporting itself with science belong in public school? If so, then so does intelligent design. Conversely, if intelligent design is to be forbidden because it’s ideology, so is Darwinism.

    Darwin’s theory of evolution is nothing but the world-view of materialism trying to support itself by science. Evolution and intelligent design are on an equal level, much though you wish to deny it. Keep both materialism and theism out of public school, or neither of them. But not just one of them! There’s no reason why materialism-supporting science should be given to theism-supporting science.

    > You just cannot pretend that it is a theory on par with Evolution or
    > that it has a single shred of evidence to back it up or that
    > Evolution is now on shaky ground because of it, because none of that
    > is true.

    Because you say it, it must be true.

    What evidence for intelligent design are you going to accept? For years, Darwinists complained the ID movement didn’t publish in peer-reviewed journals. So when, finally, ID theorists got a research paper published in the journal of the Biological Society of Washington, did the Darwinists rescind their accusations and accept ID as a legitimate scientific enterprise? Yeah, and I’ll be the king of Lower Slocomotia. The Darwinists forced a statement from the Biological Society of Washington that the paper was not to scientific standards. So much for peer review, and so much for any possibility of accepting ID as science!

    The game is rigged. Evidence and reason should win, should have long ago won the field for ID, but the BiolSocWash affair showed evidence and reason aren’t players here. Never were.

    Take your “Defensor Scientiae” badge and shove it down your lying, dishonest mouth, you filthy, dogmatic Materialist Inquisitor.

    > You think ID is some secular attempt to explain the universe? If you
    > do, you are being bamboozled just like everyone else who takes it
    > seriously.

    You think Evolutionism is some neutral attempt to explain the universe? If you do, you are being bamboozled just like everyone else who thinks it’s ideology-free. Darwinism is materialism seeking scientific support, not science leading to an “inevitable conclusion of materialism.” ‘Twas so in the 19th century, ’tis so now.

    > and way beyond a 17 year old’s scope to discern political and
    > religious manipulations and make sense of them and how they are
    > being used as pawns in the battle.

    And it’s not beyond a 17-year-old’s scope to discern that he’s being presented the world-view of materialism in a scientific wrapper, is it? Not beyond the capability of a teenager to see he’s being primed as a soldier in the army of Secular Humanism? Hypocrite. Flaming hypocrite.

    One day, however long it may take, education will no longer be in the exclusive hands of Progressivists, Communists, Marxists and Secular Humanists. That day it will finally be possible to debate the merits of Evolutionism and Intelligent Design in a fair and just way, just as they were (albeit in rudimentary form) in the days of the Greeks and Romans. I hope I’ll live to see that day.

  292. 292beckaholic on Oct 12, 2009 at 4:05 pm:

    Gosh, thanks, that’s the nicest thing I’ve ever been called. You’re a real teddy bear. “Filthy, dogmatic, materialist inquisitor.” Is that anything like “Damn, dirty Atheist?”, lol. Some kind of burr just got under your saddle there, fella, and I must tell you that you come across like a bug-eyed lunatic.

    Okay, show me the evidence in the one paper that was peer-reviewed. I’ll accept any that truly exists. What, in that particular paper, was proven? You say evidence should have won out, but the whole of science is just one big Godless conspiracy to keep good-folk like you and your evidence oppressed. So go ahead, show it to me. I’ll wait. I hope you are not going to tell me I have to take your word for it, lol.

    You seem to think that anyone and everyone that thinks Evolution is not an ideology, but a simple fact of biology, is a Progressive, a Communist a Marxist or a Secular Humanist. I forget, so tell me again, which one is the Pope? Or is he a filthy, materialistic, dogmatic Inquisitor, as well? Are you really willing to go there? If I deserve your spittle, then so does he. Go for it-give it your best shot. Add in to that mix as well as any other denominations/religions you care to. i want you to tell me where your dividing line is. Tell me what you really think.

    And just for the record- what do you think I’m lying about? What do you think I know that I’m not telling you as part of the grand conspiracy against you? Be specific, please. Thanks.

  293. 293Don-Quixote on Oct 13, 2009 at 5:24 pm:

    Ken, #286, with apologies to the latest National Review
    “The Empire states building, an enduring symbol of capitalism and aspiration, was defaced: lit up red and yellow in honor of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China. There are many things to celebrate about the people and history of China, but the establishment of the Communist regime in Beijing is not one of them. That government has killed millions and oppressed uncounted numbers. It is the government of Red Guard terror, the horrors of the Cultural Revolution, famine, labor camps, organ harvesting, the oppression of ethnic and religious minorities—its story is a catalogue of misery and evil. The history of China did not begin with the establishment of the Communist regime, nor will it end when Mao’s heirs join Stalin’s in the dustbin of history. Light up the Empire States Building for that.”
    Precisely my point. I might add Tianamen square. Where is the apology for that? How about the Falun Gong? A bunch of crackpots yes, but they would be laughed at in our country. In China they are rounded up, shot, imprisoned and mercilessly belittled in the news. The Whitewash isn’t working Ken. Someday when China emerges from this disgusting and immoral Government those who defended the current regime will be mocked. Much like they were in Russia until an old/new commy goon named Putin came along.

  294. 294Bolero on Oct 13, 2009 at 10:42 pm:

    beckaholic: Okay, show me the evidence in the one paper that was peer-reviewed. I’ll accept any that truly exists.

    That is the challenge, beckaholic. Mention anything about ID, no one who desires to keep in good graces with evolutionists would touch it with a ten foot pole.

    I have a friend who is pursuing Masters in Plant Physiology in a California State University who reported to me that one of his professor who was very much against ID and creationism. The subject is so toxic politically that if you want to survive the rigors of university politics, one has to keep his beliefs secret and in closet. That does not meet the scientific / university criteria of pursuing truth for its own sake.

    About the peer reviewed system…it is supposed to be self regulating and it is supposed to guarantee a good science. The case with the Korean scientist involved with cloning showed a glaring example of the failure of peer review system. His papers were peer reviewed. And yet it was proven later to have falsified data and conclusion.

  295. 295Beckaholic on Oct 14, 2009 at 5:21 pm:

    You might not be giving people enough credit for being open minded. But the ID crowd has hawked so many bogus memes, like irreducible complexity, that were easily blown out of the water, that the whole ID movement is viewed as crying wolf. Their best efforts to date have been really poor scholarship. If any real “evidence” did crop up, it would be put thru the wringer to see if there was anything there. And this could be done in any number of ways- sending the results to scientists in the field to read, posting on science blogs, giving talks about the data to the public. It’s not like the only way to get the info out there is to go through a journal. If there was anything reasonable there, it would find it’s way to a publication. The problem is, that every smidgen they’ve generated so far has not panned out and they’ve been cought lying about their methods which really puts a crimp in being taken seriously during round two, ya know?

    Can I ask you why would anybody “believe” in ID and creationism when there is no evidence for either? And if one does believe, it becomes in the realm of religion and must be taken on faith, and so how could this person expect the university to also believe in the same way and fund their efforts. I think that’s asking way too much, not surprised it doesn’t happen.

  296. 296Beckaholic on Oct 14, 2009 at 6:07 pm:

    Forgot to mention the obvious way to get the evidence out- write a book! There’s tons of them out there that have no meat in them. You have to wonder why that is if there’s all this evidence hanging around struggling to “get out.” A publishing house conspiracy, too?

  297. 297rawmuse on Oct 21, 2009 at 11:07 pm:

    Zombie, just a word of support. I have always been a huge fan of yours, and have tremendous regard for your intellectual and investigative powers.

    I stepped away from the LGF soup a while back, haven’t missed it. I will keep hitting your blog. Keep up the good work.

Trackbacks / Pingbacks:

  1. Who is the bigger Junky CJ or Irish Rose? Or are they junkies at all? « Avid Editor’s Insights

    Pingback on Oct 4, 2009 at 8:52 pm
  2. LGF “private” thread and Does Irish Rose sing like this? « Avid Editor’s Insights

    Pingback on Oct 6, 2009 at 3:49 am
  3. Paula Parker Connell Is A Lying Welfare Whore « Paula Parker Connell Is A Lying Welfare Whore

    Pingback on Oct 17, 2009 at 9:48 am