web analytics

Satan Speaks

By Patrick Van Roy On November 18th, 2020

Jack Dorsey and Twitter came under attack by conservatives and free speech advocates for censoring the New York Post‘s coverage of stories emerging from Hunter Biden’s laptop. And finally, Dorsey admitted that he and the platform were wrong to censor the New York Post‘s bombshell.

Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee today, Dorsey said unequivocally that the platform was wrong to censor the Post‘s stories in the first place, and wrong again when they demanded the Post delete their stories and then repost. Throughout the process, Twitter adjusted and changed its methods, and it turns out, Dorsey now knows they should have let the stories stand without interference.

210 Responses to “Satan Speaks”

  1. You seem to have a major problem with online censorship, which is ironic given that you ban people for disagreeing with you.

  2. Seamus so what do you think that Zuckerberg admitted under oath today that Twitter, Facebook, and Google have an internal program that they coordinate with each other with?

  3. You seem, probably deliberately, to have left out that Zuckerberg admitted such coordination only exists to respond to events like a terrorist attack or to tackle child porn.

    So are you saying that online companies shouldn’t coordinate to tackle child porn?

  4. It doesn’t matter such coordination is a violation of America’s oldest anti-trust laws.

    Child porn, calls to violence, etc can be dealt with by each company individually and Law Enforcement.

    Coordination on their own is against the Law whatever excuse they are giving.

  5. Which law says that coordinating against child porn is illegal and an anti-trust violation?

    And why are you supporting that law? You hate these people so much that you are going pro-paedo.

  6. Coordination by separate companies of the same industry is verboten…..

    Child porn is a crime, they don’t need to coordinate with each other they need to give the info to Law Enforcement, failure to do so is also a crime.

    You seem to be under some delusion that violations of the Law is some sort of internal corporate matter. It is not, it’s a criminal matter.

    They have no authority to do anything about anything criminal, and using a crime as an excuse opens them up to criminal charges. Knowledge of Criminal activity and not turning it over makes them vulnerable to a whole set of criminal charges.

    They can’t use the excuse of sharing info about illegal activity to commit a crime themselves.

  7. Firstly, you have no evidence that they haven’t turned it over to the authorities. That is just something you made up.

    Secondly you still haven’t shown what law makes it illegal for companies to combat child porn together.

  8. Show me the Law that empowers ANY corporation to enforce, investigate, or share info regarding criminal activity.

    Private corporations are not empowered by any Law I’ve heard of to conduct criminal investigations, please enlighten me on it I’d love to read it.

  9. If they have turned the info over to police and then shared the information with another company that’s interference in a criminal investigation. It is illegal to share information about an active investigation. It’s actually a criminal act against the suspect.

  10. In a common law system the law prevents you from doing something, rather than empowering you to do it. So the law that empowers them to do so is the absence of any law preventing it.

  11. “It is illegal to share information about an active investigation”

    No it isn’t. Show any law making it illegal to do so.

  12. The purpose of anti-trust / competition law is to prevent monopoly power or collusion by firms that would unfairly restrict competition

    This ain’t that

    Competitors in the same industry communicate with one another every day for legitimate purposes.

  13. There are multiple Laws that prevent private companies from investigating and sharing information of criminal acts.

    Fine twitter says your looking at kiddie porn, the share that info with facebook and twitter, who then block your access to the internet, monitor your activity, and dox you as person that views/collects kiddie porn. The police investigate and find that it was his son/daughter….

    They’ve committed multiple crimes by their activity and destroyed the life of some man or woman.

    Seamus using criminal activity as an excuse to gather information and share information doesn’t cut it. It’s illegal and a violation of civil rights. It’s called denial of due process, harassment and multiple other violations of protections granted Americans under the Law.

    3 Communications companies coordinating denial of service is a violation of the Anti-Trust Laws and in spite of however many hoops you throw trying to excuse such behavior in the name of criminal activity doesn’t work. They are not Law Enforcement.

  14. The purpose of anti-trust / competition law is to prevent monopoly power or collusion by firms that would unfairly restrict competition

    This ain’t that

    The coordination of the 3 largest communications companies to deny the free flow of speech is EXACTLY that.

  15. No one has any right to trade child pornography etc

  16. “There are multiple Laws that prevent private companies from investigating and sharing information of criminal acts.”

    Name one.

    “The coordination of the 3 largest communications companies to deny the free flow of speech is EXACTLY that.”

    Child pornography isn’t speech. This is just sad. You hate these people because the people who think for you tell you to hate them. And yet you don’t even know and can’t come up with a single reasonable argument for hating them. So you are actually going with the protecting the ability of paedophiles to share child porn as a reason for hating Twitter.

  17. Seamus this is not about child porn, these 3 companies are communicating to deny the free flow of political speech.

    Child Porn is a criminal matter PERIOD, this has nothing to do with that. There are whole state and Federal agencies that deal exclusively with child porn and I can guarantee you not one of these companies doesn’t cooperate with them.

    You can throw all the cannards on the table you want this is 3 communication companies coordinating attacks on political speech they disagree with.

  18. “Seamus this is not about child porn, these 3 companies are communicating to deny the free flow of political speech.”

    Prove it. Because Zuckerberg, under oath, denied that.

  19. If Trump wins, when the Anti-Trust case starts we’ll see the evidence. If Biden wins you’ll see it by the disappearance of “wrong speech”.

  20. So you have no evidence. Just random conspiracy theories.

  21. If Trump wins

    Funny guy

  22. careful now seamus , Pat will hire Rudy and he’s a highly skilled lawyer
    who like Trunk tweets in CAPS , so watch out 😉

  23. They are organizing a press conference at the four seasons

  24. So today under oath Zuckerberg said the big three coordinate information, but only about child porn traffickers.

    Who gave them the Authority to conduct Criminal investigations between Google, Twitter, and FaceBook ?

    And if they are sharing info on child pornographers has the FBI served them with a Subpoena for that info?

    If that is true and they are doing what Zuckerberg said they are with holding Criminal evidence and engaging in a criminal conspiracy by not immediately turning it over to the Law.

    So where’s the Subpoena ? Where is the List of Child Pornographers they’ve turned over to the FBI ?

  25. You have no evidence that they are withholding it. You are simply making that up.

  26. I’m not making up anything, I’m saying they are. Prove me wrong.

    Show me the list of child pornographers they’ve turned in. Show me one story about such action.

    Google, Twitter, Facebook bring down child porn ring.

    Zuckerberg owns a News Paper, if one branch of his company did something as good as nailing kiddie porn traffickers what he’d eschew the positive publicity ? I think not.

    Keep spinning though.

    This is the coordination of 3 communication companies in an attack on free POLITICAL speech.

    It has nothing to do with porn, or ANY kind of criminal activity.

  27. Sure.

  28. The purpose of anti-trust / competition law is to prevent monopoly power or collusion by firms that would unfairly restrict competition […]

    These 3 companies are communicating to deny the free flow of political speech.

    What you allege in the first comment is a different scenario entirely from what you allege in the second comment. Unfair restriction of competition in economic trade has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with allegedly denying the free flow of political speech on a communications platform.

  29. Patrick Van Roy,

    I’m not making up anything, I’m saying they are. Prove me wrong.

    Once again Patrick makes something up, fails to provide evidence for his assertion, and then asks someone else to prove that what he’s making up is wrong. Essentially asking them to prove a negative. Basically the same as saying God exists unless you can prove he doesn’t. It’s like trying to reason with a petulant child.

  30. Argument ad ignorantium, Dave:

    https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Argument-from-Ignorance

  31. I’m not making up anything, I’m saying they are. Prove me wrong.

    You’ve gone full Trump, Patrick. NEVER go full Trump.

  32. no, these 3 tech companies need to be broken up.

  33. Maybe they do.

    There are more than a few Democrats who will agree with you on that.

    But the devil is in the details, I don’t know of any good way to do it.

    And besides, ” everyone “‘s going to parler, at the behest of the master, so why worry about facebook anymore?

  34. They faced the same nightmare with Ma Bell.

    It won’t be easy, and I don’t think the Politicians have the backbone.

    Going to Parler is a short term option, but these 3 companies are violating civil rights. It needs to be stopped.

    They are no different then the Robber Barons of old.

  35. Patrick

    They are not violating civil rights regardless of what restrictions they place on content or members. They aren’t Government bodies and they aren’t monopolies. It is not a ‘civil right’ nor is it in any part of the Constitution or Federal law that an American citizen must be allowed to join or use Facebook, Instagram or Twitter !

  36. There was no practical alternative to the land line phone company for many decades.

    There are loads of alternatives to facebook and twitter and to the google search engine.

    I don’t see evidence of where anyone’s ” civil rights ” are being violated.

    Alex Jones has other ways of getting his message out, and has worldwide and near universal distribution for his site ; child rapists, organized crime and terrorists have no right to get their ” messages ” out.

  37. They are monopolies.

  38. They are the biggest and most successful online organizations of their types but that does not make them monopolies. Plus, no matter how big they are the First Amendment doesn’t apply to them or any other online or media organization. It only applies to the criminalization of speech in law. not access to forums for your speech.

  39. wrong…..

  40. “I’m not making up anything, I’m saying they are. Prove me wrong.”

    You have provided no evidence. And what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So I have just proved you wrong.

  41. “wrong…..”

    Patrick has now fully embraced the constitution as a living document. Because apparently “Congress shall make no law” now reads “Congress and online media companies shall make no law or policy”.

  42. It is not a ‘civil right’ nor is it in any part of the Constitution or Federal law that an American citizen must be allowed to join or use Facebook, Instagram or Twitter !

    The same can be said for, oh a bakery, but you said that any business which opens its doors must serve any customer who walks in.

  43. The disputes on bakeries never ( in my viewing ) had anything to do with serving or not serving any customer who walked into a store.

  44. Pete

    No I didn’t, but if a law is on the statute books they must. By the same token if the US govt. passes a law requiring specific Internet organisations to guarantee unrestricted access they would have to abide by the law, but the US govt hasn’t yet done so.

  45. This thread is unbelievably embarrassing for Patrick.
    He makes so many false claims I don’t know where to begin.

    First of all, as have already pointed out, when you make a claim it’s up to the person making the claim to provide evidence not other people to provide evidence that you’re wrong.
    how many times does this have to be explained to Patrick?

    Secondly, Patrick yet again fails to understand the definition of a word in this case the definition of the word ‘Monopoly’.

    monopoly
    /məˈnɒp(ə)li/
    noun
    1.
    The exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

    Pay particular attention to the word ‘exclusive’.

    As has been pointed out multiple times, Twitter, Facebook and Google are not the only platforms of their type. Being the most popular does not make you a monopoly. There are multiple alternatives for search engines and social media sites, as well as video streaming.
    Our own David Vance uses other versions of these platforms.
    How many times does this have to be pointed out to Patrick?

  46. Patty said that everyone was migrating to echo chamber sites like parler, she said that months ago.

    You mean that was not true?

  47. Our own David Vance uses other versions of these platforms.

    He has to, since he was purged by Twitter as an anti-commie agitator.

    Patty said that everyone was migrating to echo chamber sites like parler ..

    I think she said “Twitter is becoming a lefty echo chamber as free-thinkers move to the fresh air of Parler. And don’t let Phantom put words in my mouth when he mentions it.”

  48. Twitter has millions of Conservative voices on its platform.

  49. But these 3 companies are violating civil rights. It needs to be stopped

    What ‘civil rights’ are these three companies allegedly violating? Is ATW also ‘violating civil rights’ and needs to be broken up? Fair play though, after recent events here it takes a special kind of Nelsonian eye/memory lapse to bemoan censorship and restrictions on speech.

    The ridiculous claims that unfair restriction of competition in economic trade laws apply to these privately owned communications platforms which incur revenue through freely subscribed advertising and which are free to use upon agreeing to terms and conditions is also folly. However, no many how many times this nonsense is explained no doubt the fallacy will continue to be repeated.

    Want to know what the problem is with these communication platforms is? They’re incredibly successful in what they do and the ‘alternate facts’ guys don’t like the fact that they can’t spout whatever they like on them without being challanged so, natuarally they have to go.

    It’s good to see those who supposedly swear by the free market encouraging government restricting successful private business enterprise though.

  50. I think that ATW is violating kurt’s civil rights by not granting him complete editorial control.

  51. If you can’t differentiate between someone being suspended for a week and the invasion of Privacy and the systematic denial of an individuals right to speak across the whole internet there really isn’t any reason to discuss it with you.

  52. “If you can’t differentiate between someone being suspended for a week and the invasion of Privacy and the systematic denial of an individuals right to speak across the whole internet there really isn’t any reason to discuss it with you.”

    All it shows is that your bitching and moaning about free speech is nothing but a bad coat of paint. You only support free speech when you agree with the speech. You have shown a willingness to ban people for disagreeing with you, yet you bitch and moan at Facebook and Twitter for not allowing people to say stuff on their property that Facebook and Twitter don’t want to be said.

    You are nothing but a massive hypocrite.

  53. If you can’t differentiate between someone being suspended for a week and the invasion of Privacy and the systematic denial of an individuals right to speak across the whole internet there really isn’t any reason to discuss it with you

    So, it’s the length of alleged restricting of speech rather than the actual principle of restricting speech you object to?

    I doubt there is anyone in the world who is denied the ‘right to speak across the whole internet’

    ‘Invasion of privacy’ is also another invented complaint.

  54. Pete Moore

    He has to, since he was purged by Twitter as an anti-commie agitator.

    Yes, and as I’ve said multiple times, I disagree with David being banned on Twitter.
    However, Twitter is entitled to ban whoever it wants, based on its own terms and conditions.

  55. Phantom,

    I think that ATW is violating kurt’s civil rights by not granting him complete editorial control.

    That statement is a beautiful work of art.

  56. Phantom, on November 18th, 2020 at 7:22 PM Said: Edit Comment
    I think that ATW is violating kurt’s civil rights by not granting him complete editorial control.

    LMAO….. gotta love it

  57. If you can’t differentiate between someone being suspended for a week and the invasion of Privacy and the systematic denial of an individuals right to speak across the whole internet there really isn’t any reason to discuss it with you.

    But I wasn’t originally ‘suspended for a week.’ I was banned, indefinitely. Stop trying to twist what you actually did. A suspension wasn’t mentioned until 5 days after the incident. Up until then, it was a ban.

    Seamus is 100% correct here. You are a massive hypocrite. If your honesty and integrity are your currency here and on other sites/platforms, you must be stony broke.

  58. Dave,

    re monoplies

    “The exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service”

    Yes it’s true that none of these companies (yet) meet the definition of a monopoly. They all have competitors. And some of them (e.g. Apple) don’t even have the market share to be a monopoly. But they are all arguably getting too close for comfort. Similarly “censorship” is an overblown claim, but it’s still reasonable for people to be concerned at the level of control they have. And we can all think of governments that would slaver to have that level of control.

    No they are not there yet but not too many more things need to happen before they would be there.

  59. Sensible comment as ever by Frank. It is legitimate to be concerned by the size and influence these huge internet giants have but it’s ludicrous to claim being denied membership of one of these social networks is a violation of civil rights.

  60. “No they are not there yet but not too many more things need to happen before they would be there.”

    I think there are definetly issues with Facebook, Twitter etc… and their level of market dominance etc… They have also engaged in predatory behaviour against competitors and as you say don’t need to change much to be in a monopoly or cartel like situation.

    However that is not Patrick (and his handler’s) problems with Facebook and Twitter. If Facebook and Twitter allowed white supremacists to be as racist as they want to be on Facebook and Twitter, if they allowed people to share deliberate attempts at misinformation around key issues of importance (such as the COVID-19 pandemic), if they allowed pro-Trump foreign interference in elections, if they did all of that, then Patrick (and his handler’s) wouldn’t have a problem with Facebook and Twitter.

  61. waaah waaahh…..

  62. Patrick

    waaah waaahh…..

    LOL. What did I say earlier about a petulant child.

  63. waaah waaahh…..

    Truly pathetic. Petulant child doesn’t begin to cover it.

  64. aaahhh boo hoo….. stop whining you pathetic child.

  65. “aaahhh boo hoo….. stop whining you pathetic child.”

    Undoubtedly Troll thinks he’s being a funny cunt. But in reality he’s just being a cunt.

  66. Now now girls, stop the spitting and scratching or I’ll bend yous over my knee 🙄

  67. Satan used to play ice hockey, for Moscow Dynamo and later the NHL

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_%C5%A0atan

    Because Šatan’s name so closely resembles (in English) that of Satan, many devil-related jokes have been made at his expense. During his career, many sports-data sites (including Fox Sports, Sports Illustrated, ESPN and Yahoo) used the number 666 in the URL of Šatan’s page.[18] A popular April Fool’s joke had Šatan traded to the New Jersey Devils and been made captain of his new team, making Šatan the “leader” of the Devils. After Šatan announced his retirement in 2014, the Yahoo headline read: “Satan be gone!”[19]

  68. It’s not whining to point out when someone has wronged you and then repeatedly lied about doing so. It’s not whining to expect that other person to do the right thing and apologise. It’s not whining to point out the blatant hypocrisy of someone who puts up posts about free speech, but bans someone for asking a question.

    You don’t have the balls to debate this with me. You were happy to do it after you banned me, but now, all you can do is either ignore my comments, or behave like a fucking childish prick. And the reason you won’t debate it with me is because you know you are 100% wrong.

    I would say that this incident damaged your reputation, Troll, but on ATW, I don’t think that’s possible.

  69. The Devil went down to Georgia….. and tried to fix the recount 😉

  70. If Facebook and Twitter allowed white supremacists to be as racist as they want to be on Facebook and Twitter, if they allowed people to share deliberate attempts at misinformation around key issues of importance (such as the COVID-19 pandemic), if they allowed pro-Trump foreign interference in elections, if they did all of that, then Patrick (and his handler’s) wouldn’t have a problem with Facebook and Twitter.

    But they absolutely allow all of this back the other way. They should either let everything go or censor equally, but they only act one way.

  71. “But they absolutely allow all of this back the other way. They should either let everything go or censor equally, but they only act one way.”

    Such as? What do they allow to go back the other way?

  72. It would be a healthy change if we could comment on subjects and not each other. Talking about other people inevitably ends in trouble and is always boring.

  73. It would be morally politically and socially wrong to ” let everything go ” as well as being bad business.

    Not even close to being possible, or in any way desirable.

    Social media is not the same as the traditional mail or telephone service. In it’s very nature, conversations are not usually person to person, they are typically widely shared.

    Social media is perhaps more akin to call in radio than anything else but over the air radio stations are subject to regulation, and even radio was not regulated by government, the owners would tend to have some rules.

  74. We are commenting on subjects. We’re talking about free speech and how Troll pisses on the idea, whilst saying he supports it.

  75. Seamus –

    Those sites are full of Covid misinformation from government and WHO sources. They’re full of anto-white racism. They’re full of incitements to attack conservatives and patriots. The cendorship and bans only go one way, however, and it’s often for a lot less than others are allowed to get away with.

  76. Seimi

    I understand your continuing anger and annoyance over what happened but is it worth pursuing what will sadly prove to be just an increasingly bitter and fruitless pursuit of some sort of ‘mea culpa’ from Patrick. You undeniably were vindicated by everyone here and you should hold on to that in lieu of the unrealisable aim of an apology from Pat.

  77. “Those sites are full of Covid misinformation from government and WHO sources.”

    Can you give examples of misinformation (not where disagreed information but actual misinformation) from government and WHO sources)?

    “They’re full of anto-white racism.”

    I don’t believe they are for what it is worth. And have you evidence to suggest that when someone is reported on Twitter etc… for racism against white people that action is not taken?

    “They’re full of incitements to attack conservatives and patriots.”

    Again examples please. These are often stated but rarely proved arguments.

  78. Waaaaaaahhhhhh!

    Gentleman…. let it go.

    You can call me a child an a cunt, all you want oh boo hoo….

    It is over, but like most children when you’ve been spanked it stings…. and you have to hide your tears with anger…. oh my heart bleeds for you… boo hoo. Get over it.

    If you can’t you should seriously think about leaving, but if you choose to stay which is totally your choice others here want you to, I couldn’t careless one way or another.

    The only response you will get from me is ridicule.

    I can’t be reasoned with, bargained with, or threatened. I simply don’t care how you feel.

  79. No one is complaining, no one is whining. Just pointing out your dishonesty, your lies, your hypocrisy. That isn’t complaining or whining. Simply the facts.

  80. I can’t be reasoned with, bargained with, or threatened.

    Perhaps. But everytime you spuriously wax lyrical about extolling freedom of speech you can be reminded?

  81. Those sites are full of Covid misinformation from government and WHO sources. They’re full of anto-white racism. They’re full of incitements to attack conservatives and patriots.

    Well, that comment is certainly full of something anyway.

  82. Perhaps. But everytime you spuriously wax lyrical about extolling freedom of speech you can be reminded?

    If you don’t know the difference (which none of you do) between Free Speech and Slander that’s not my fault.

    Your ignorance and your attitudes are the products of the way you were raised and the societies you are from. As are mine.

    There is not one of you I dislike.

    I’ve enjoyed arguing and sometimes even agreeing with all of you.

    You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to like me. As you’ve said I’m a cunt…..

    It is what it is.

  83. slander:
    the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation.

    make false and damaging statements about

    Me thinks you doth protest too much

  84. slander:
    the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation.

    make false and damaging statements about

    Me thinks you doth protest too much

  85. ahhh but I do so love to hear myself talk EP

  86. Patrick

    Slander is unacceptable, but honestly acknowledging error is also a sign of good manners and morality. On that infamous thread Seimi did not slander you. He only questioned and asked for verification about your claims on election observers from the Republican side being shut out. You overreacted with anger and were unjust in banning him. You know deep down that you did and it would be a really graceful way of drawing a line under this if you admitted that.

  87. Colm it was a situation that had to end. Period.

    This was not a mistake, a miscalculation, an act of bullying or me just being a dick.

    There is a group here that continued a nonstop stream of slandering me calling me a Liar.

    I have never deceived anyone here, I have never written anything I did not believe. The Slander will stop.

    Seimi was just the example. In your view, a view I respect I was wrong in making an example of him. There was no forethought, premeditation, or malice in my action. It was a simple enough is enough and I pulled the trigger.

    I believe my seriousness on the matter has finally been heard and understood. I write and produce material for multiple platforms, THIS is my home. I will not be slandered in my house.

    If I Lie I will personally give you the Nails to drive threw me and the cross to put me on.

    Other than that they can call me a cunt, (real class by the way) bully, dick, fuckwad, asshole, stupid, or even just wrong, whatever they can think of. They can all pack their bags and leave if that’s what they choose.

    It is what it is

  88. Colm

    I said right at the start that Troll would not apologise, because to do so would be an admission of guilt, as well as an admission of lying about the reason why I was banned, and as we all know, Troll likes to claim that he never lies. Which we all know is a lie, but anyway. Troll has painted himself into a corner here and doesn’t have the mental or moral faculties to get himself out of it.
    Of course the correct and right thing to do would be to apologise and move on. Instead, the incident will drag on and on. Troll will try to cover himself for this dragging on and on by making childish ‘waah waah’ comments and by calling me a pathetic child, but everyone else knows that the reason it is dragging on and on, is because of his behaviour and his inability to see that acknowledging and apologising for what he did is the only way to resolve this. For gods sake – the man doesn’t even know the difference between slander and libel, and here we are, expecting him to know the difference between right and wrong??

  89. Troll,

    Well let’s deal with a few things. Firstly, as Seimi points out, it is 100% impossible for anyone to slander anyone here. If you are going to throw out these terms then it would be best to have even a basic understanding of what you are writing about, something you clearly do not have. Slander refers to verbal statements, not written statements. Written defamatory statements would be libel. The irony being that not even understanding the basic facts of the system isn’t even the dumbest things you’ve alleged here. Though at least it is consistent. It doesn’t matter the topic – economics, politics, the law, the constitution, Brexit, any topic and you can pretty much count on Troll being the least informed in the conversation.

    Two, it is not defamatory to call you a liar. You are a liar. You continue to lie about Seimi. You have repeatedly accused him of something he didn’t do. So to call you a liar is simply the truth. You are dishonest. You are a liar. You are a petty, vindictive, poor excuse for a man. I can only conclude that it was an act of divine intervention that prevented you from becoming a police officer. Because if you are this petty and vindictive with the tiny, insignificant power that you have God only knows the sorts of abuses you would have carried out with actual power.

    Three, you have no problem with people making defamatory statements. When New Yorker made defamatory statements (actual defamatory statements – rather than your dishonest, fictional ones) about Seimi you supported New Yorker, and attacked people on here for criticising New Yorker for it. So like your support for free speech your opposition to defematory statements is nothing but a lie as well.

    Four, while it would not be defamatory to call you a liar (because you are a liar) Seimi didn’t even call you a liar. For you to continue to say that Seimi did is nothing short of a lie. You ironically are making defamatory comments about Seimi by accusing him of making them against you.

    Five, Seimi was the example. The example being that you are a sad, pathetic old man, with no power in your actual life, driven so impotent by real events, that you had to try and reassert dominance through an online blog. That is how pathetic you are. Seimi disagreed with you, pointed out that your nonsense was opinion rather than facts. He didn’t call you a liar. And because your pride was wounded because the dear glorious leader that you had spent the last four years fellating on these pages had got the pasting he so richly deserved you had to take that out on someone. And Seimi was the example.

    Six, if you want people to stop calling you a liar then you have the most simple of solutions. Stop lying. You complain that you write and produce material for other platforms, and it is potentially hurting you by being called a liar. If that is the case then that is unfortunate. But it is also what should happen. Because you are a liar. It isn’t defamatory to point that out. And if it hurts your ability to write and produce material for other platforms then frankly that is your own fault, and something that can be rectified by you ceasing your lies.

  90. Ok let me try this a different way, Can we all appreciate the difference between believing something a person said is untrue and having the right to say that, and stating that someone is lying intentionally which I agree we should avoid.

    If for example Peter claims that Trump colluded intentionally with the Putin regime to fix the 2016 election, you Patrick would honestly regard that as a lie and would state that, even if Peter genuinely believes it. By the same token if you claim Democrats rigged election counts Seimi would and should have the right to believe that is a lie and to say so openly. That is different from Seimi saying that you KNOW it’s a lie and are spreading things you know to be lies ( and the same for Peters Russia claims).

    The best way forward is for us all to agree that people are entitled to believe that another commenters claims are untrue while respecting the fact that the commenter genuinely believes in what he claims.

  91. “The best way forward is for us all to agree that people are entitled to believe that another commenters claims are untrue while respecting the fact that the commenter genuinely believes in what he claims.”

    Which, in isolation would be fine, but doesn’t address the major issue here. Seimi didn’t call Troll a liar. He disagreed with him and asked him to produce evidence.

    Isn’t this just an opinion? Can you provide any evidence that poll watchers were physically locked out? I’m asking because I haven’t seen a single news site which is claiming it. Not even the Trump campaign was claiming this, only saying that they wanted ‘meaningful’ access in several locations, and the ability to view processed ballots.

    So to appease Troll you can’t even ask him to provide evidence to back up his claims. You can’t even point out that his claims are not fact but are opinion.

  92. Colm

    It would be great if people behaved the way you describe above, but as you know, ATW is no Utopia of polite and reasoned debate. For the most part, it is made up of people who not only hold strong opinions – they are deeply entrenched in those beliefs and opinions. Coupled with this is the fact that we all ‘know’ each other very well, as in, we know each others’ online personas so well, that we know how most individuals will react in most debates on here.

    I sometimes wonder if Troll might actually be playing a very clever game here. By appearing much – MUCH – more ignorant, belligerent, stubborn and ill-informed than anyone could possibly be, he generates the comments and debate necessary to keep a small blog site like this going. If true, it’s a hell of an act!

    Seriously though, everybody here – and I do mean everybody, because not a single person has said otherwise – knows that Troll was 100% wrong when he banned me and in his dishonest bluster afterwards. Even now, by calling it a ‘suspension’, he is being disingenuous, in an attempt to minimise the seriousness of his actions. This is why he so desperately wants people to ‘move on.’ He wants people to stop commenting on this, because he really screwed the pooch over this one.

    He can no longer talk about his support of free speech, or the latitude he gives posters here, or his honesty or his integrity, or any of that other stuff that he would write entire posts about. He screwed all of that up with one action, and now he can only hope that an ATW-wide amnesia attack occurs. Barring that, he only has two options:

    1. Man up. Admit he was wrong, but, like I said, this will mean he will be admitting to lying about the reason I was banned, which will wreck his, “I never throw the first punch, I never lie” mantra. But at least he might get a bit of respect back.

    2. Double down on the lie. Keep saying that I called him a liar and that I ‘slandered’ him. Ask people to ‘move on’ and call me a ‘pathetic child’ for being annoyed. Zero respect from anyone, but Troll’s fragile ego pats him on the back and says, “A real man never backs down. Feel like shit? Here, write a post about who you are. That’ll fix it.”

    We can all see which option Troll went with.

    Seamus

    In an attempt to be fair here – During that shit with New Yorker (who hasn’t been on here since the site crashed. Hope he’s okay), Troll was actually one of the only other people on the site, apart from yourself and Paul, who told New Yorker that he should apologise. He also contacted me privately about it.

  93. my take is esoteric on this
    Pat lives under a rock in philly, its a trolls life , thats what it says on his blog/twitter
    Now several things follow
    1) Pat is deceived about reality – he gets that from limbaugh and others
    2) therefore when he thinks he speaks the truth , everyone else reads it as a LIE
    3)for pat to admit to lying , he’s have to first recognize he’s deceived
    4) he’s not in the mental state place to free himself – yet
    5) so he’s holding onto those lies
    6) you’re not gonna break it as there are millions who think just like him
    7) I wrote a while back that a great deception has occurred in USA
    8) this is part of the evidence .

  94. “In an attempt to be fair here – During that shit with New Yorker (who hasn’t been on here since the site crashed. Hope he’s okay), Troll was actually one of the only other people on the site, apart from yourself and Paul, who told New Yorker that he should apologise. He also contacted me privately about it.”

    Fair enough, and credit where credit is due.

  95. So to appease Troll you can’t even ask him to provide evidence to back up his claims. You can’t even point out that his claims are not fact but are opinion.

    Seamus, that’s not at all what I said. Of course you can and should ask someone to back up their claims. Patrick does it all the time with the Russian collusion claims . You can and should be allowed to say that you believe what another person says is untrue and they should accept that. However I think its good manners to also accept that the commenter genuinely believes in what they are claiming as oppose to suggesting they are intentionally lying to deceive readers.

    We all sometimes tell lies or untruths or whatever you want to call them because we are not perfect and we cannot and do not have full knowledge of exactly how each and every political or newsworthy event happened. There is a difference between believing that what someone says is untrue (which we should all be free to say) and believing that the person saying it is an intentional liar. They are not the same things.

  96. “Seamus, that’s not at all what I said.”

    I know it isn’t what you said. But it is what Troll banned Seimi for. Troll didn’t ban Seimi for calling him a liar. He banned him for asking for evidence, and for pointing out that his insane rantings were not fact but opinion.

    “There is a difference between believing that what someone says is untrue (which we should all be free to say) and believing that the person saying it is an intentional liar. They are not the same things.”

    That is true. It also isn’t applicable in this case. There is no reasonable argument that can be put forward to suggest that Seimi called Troll a liar. Thus for Troll to continually repeat it isn’t someone believing something that is untrue, it is a lie, and intentional one at that.

  97. The fact of the matter was a long time commentator here asked Pat to support his claims with evidence and a a result was falsely accused of calling Pat a liar and banned from the site because of it.

    Those are the bare facts of what happened.

    Perhaps the analogy here is the ATW citizens rising up against the tyranny and injustice of the ATW central authority heavy handedly exercising excessive power?

    Other than that they can call me a cunt, (real class by the way) bully, dick, fuckwad, asshole, stupid, or even just wrong, whatever they can think of

    Which the exception of wrong I’ve never called you any of those.

  98. “Truth” itself is an enemy for Trump and his enablers and followers
    we see evidence of that every single fucking day in his tweets
    his labelling of fake news, his war on the press
    pat is simply an extension of that policy
    that’s what’s going on here at a deeper level

    so pat will continue to lie for his master and
    he will continue to be called out upon those lies

    There’s no “nice” way of getting around that colm
    though your diplomacy is appreciated ..

  99. 1) Hell will freeze over before I apologize about this.

    2) You all have gone off for the last two weeks Oh so upset…. Why because I said Seimi called me a Liar and that was wrong because he Never did and your all aggravated because it’s a FALSE statement in your eyes…. Yet not one of you care that several of you falsely call and infer that I am a Liar.

    You’ve all bitched now for two weeks how aggrieved you are, how offended you are, how dare I call Seimi a Liar…… He didn’t do this…. Well you’ve been saying the same thing about me for years. How’s it feel? Does it feel good ?

    I spent the last year stating it would stop, but none of you listened, none of you cared. The last 3 months at least once every 2 or 3 days one of you would call me a Liar but I’m not supposed to be aggrieved…. well it’s just good sport.

    Yet you demand I apologize…….

    I said it will stop, I will not be falsely accused of Lying as a general point of reference.

    The anger and resentment you feel and the others feel Seimi is exactly how you and the others have made me feel everytime you call me a Liar or Infer that I am a liar. None of you care.

    I’ve let this self pity and whining continue, I haven’t shut down any conversations, nor will I. In my world calling a person a Cunt, is the same as calling a black person the N word…. did I ban Seamus for it ? You’ve all argued with me over the past 2 weeks has anyone been suspended? Has any comment been deleted? Has anyone been doxed or harassed ?

    The answer is NO, so this bullshit that I can’t be criticized or argued with is just that bullshit.

    I will not be FALSELY called a Liar, I will not be inferred to FALSELY as a Liar.

    It is a very simple and reasonable rule, and I have been very patient, and very reasonable. I repeatedly asked for it to stop. None of you cared, I warned that there would be consequences none of you cared. I suspended one of you over it now all of a sudden you care.

    As I have said I care about, and I like all of you. I don’t care if you like me, I don’t care if you think everything I say is wrong. I don’t care if you behave like an animal and call me a Cunt.

    I care about being Slandered.

    Hopefully this episode will finally get you to understand that and you will stop, or just leave. It will be one or the other. I prefer it would just stop, I don’t want any of you to leave, but if you can not stop please than leave.

  100. The last 3 months at least once every 2 or 3 days one of you would call me a Liar

    Who specifically has called you a liar every two or three days?

    When in the original comment in question did Seimi specifically call you a liar?

    You seem to be shifting from ‘Seimi called me a liar’ and ‘suspending’ him to ‘falsely accused of Lying as a general point of reference’ Of course you won’t point out where in the comment in question Seimi called you a liar as it didn’t happen.

  101. I haven’t shifted anything. I have said this action was taken as a culmination of events.

    Paul don’t act like this has not been building to this point. Don’t act like this was something that has just come out of the blue.

    And don’t act naive because you are not.

  102. “Well you’ve been saying the same thing about me for years.”

    No we haven’t. When people call you a liar it is because you are a liar. You are petty, you are vindictive and you lie constantly. No one has falsely called you a liar. People have accurately called you a liar.

    “I suspended one of you over it now all of a sudden you care.”

    Yet another lie. You banned Seimi because he disagreed with you when you were in a bad mood. That is all. For you to try and dress it up as anything else is yet another lie. If you keep lying people are going to keep calling you a liar. It isn’t complicated. The best way to stop people from calling you a liar is to stop lying.

    “Hopefully this episode will finally get you to understand that and you will stop, or just leave.”

    And now we come to the crux of the matter. You want your far-right, white supremacist, anti-semitic echo chamber. You and Allan bouncing conspiracy theories off each other. You don’t want challenge. You don’t want disagreement. And have shown that you are willing to ban people for it.

    But you want to pretend to support free speech (yet another lie). So you want us to leave instead of kicking us out. Well frankly you can go fuck yourself. As long as I am here I will continue to call you out on your shit. If you continue to lie then I will continue to call you a liar. If you continue to act like a cunt I will call you a cunt.

  103. I’ve let this self pity and whining continue,

    He said, in a whining, self-pitying tone…

    Couple of things here.

    1. You were called a liar when you told lies, for example when you said you could show literally hundreds of articles from certain newspapers alleging Russian collusion or whatever. You didn’t produce even one, despite multiple requests from multiple posters. Another, more recent example of you lying was when you banned me for calling you a liar, specifically in one comment. I didn’t, but you lied – over and over – by saying I did. You’re still saying it, therefore you’re still lying.

    2. No, I don’t know how you feel, because I have never lied on ATW, whereas you have. The only way you and I could understand a shared feeling would be if someone banned you for nothing and then lied about it for the following couple of weeks.

    3. I agree that being falsely accused of something is annoying. As you can see above, I was falsely accused of something, and it really annoyed me. You, however, haven’t been falsely accused of anything. You have been correctly called out and you don’t like it.

    4. I wasn’t suspended. I was banned. Please stop pretending that I was only ever suspended.

    5. Slander still does not mean what you think it means.

    6. This ‘episode’ will not be over until I feel satisfied that you have admitted to wrongfully banning me. I know you won’t apologise because, as I have stated a number of times now, an apology would also be an admission that you lied, which would nullify all your past, present and future pity-party speeches like the one above. If you did it just to prove a point, and I was in charge of the site, I would rule it as a gross over-stepping of the mark, and you yourself would find yourself suspended for a set period of time (see, that’s how a suspension works) and you would be told in no uncertain terms not to abuse your power on the site again. But it’s not my site. It’s not yours either, but you currently hold the keys.

  104. Paul don’t act like this has not been building to this point. Don’t act like this was something that has just come out of the blue.

    And don’t act naive because you are not

    So Seimi didn’t call you a liar on the comment in question?

  105. I haven’t shifted anything. I have said this action was taken as a culmination of events.

    This is now the third reason given for my being banned.

    1. I called you a liar. I didn’t.

    2. It was to prove a point. The only point proven was how petty and vindictive you really are.

    3. It was a culmination of events. You mean you were called a liar by a number of people? Stop telling lies, they’ll stop calling you a liar. Simple.

    Three reasons, none of them correct or fair. Perhaps you should add the fourth, pretty obvious one:

    4. You are an attention-whore, and being talked about, for good or for bad, is better than not being talked about.

  106. I’ve just noticed the above shit and believe it’s time that someone set things straight, because apparently even the brighter among you seem unable to recognise the plainest of facts, and exchanges like these are boring, stupid and frankly should be beneath people like Seamus at least.

    I don’t mean any of this personally against anyone and I’ve no intention of knocking anyone here, but I really have to say it because this kind of nonsense is killing the site and you guys are too blind to see it.

    OK:
    Patrick is not like other commenters on this or similar sites that most of us may be familiar with. He does not have the mind needed for debate.

    He obviously has a massive problem with language and thinking – everything from spelling to structure and the basic meaning carried by a sentence. He often totally misunderstands the clearest comments. Instead he shows only a behaviourist reaction to certain key words, which stimulate him to derive some “meaning” from them.
    As is frequent in such people, he fails to see how or why others should fix on certain formulations or concrete meaning, which for him is pure pedantry. Language, statements, opinions are simply things that you throw out as the mood takes you.

    All this talk of him being a liar etc is thus getting nowhere. He simply doesn’t see the relation between language and reality and truth that normal speakers do.
    The attempts by people like Colm and Paul to treat him as a normal interlocutor are pathetic and totally wrong-headed (“Could I have your thoughts on that, Pat?”, or “ATW’s attorney for Trump”, for God’s sake). This just continues the same old threads that would embarrass a child and that are IMO the main reason this site has gone to the dogs and more and more good people are leaving.

    A lot of you seem to get some satisfaction from finding him out on a point of fact, or a new bout of hypocrisy or a lie etc. I used to do this myself, but now it seems more like the wannabe toughie picking on little kids just to show his strength.
    One ATW colleague believes Patrick has some genuine mental illness, I’ve heard. At any rate, there is absolutely no point in continuing interaction that we all know regularly leads to these meltdowns. His mind works in different ways and – the only positive from threads like this – it’s genuinely slapstick watching all of you chase it round the site and getting nowhere

    As I’ve been saying and practising for some time now, the only hope is that you don’t interact with him at all. Ignore him and deal with some of the other guys who you think are on your level. He then won’t come after you in the ways that seem to upset you so much.
    Otherwise ATW will probably soon be gone, and it will be the fault of all those who encourage Patrick by “discussing” things with him.

  107. A very reasonable comment Noel.

    One thing though, ATW will not soon be gone. Even if you all pack up and leave.

    This site will go on. You are not it’s first group of steady commenters, and you won’t be it’s last.

    but all in all, listen to Noel, he gives fair advice.

  108. I don’t mean any of this personally against anyone and I’ve no intention of knocking anyone here [….]

    The attempts by people like Colm and Paul to treat him as a normal interlocutor are pathetic and totally wrong

    Spoken with all the condescension of the truly superior, Noel. Here’s a tip, if you’ve no intention of being personal then perhaps you shouldn’t personalise things?

    I find it a bit puzzling that one minute you seem to be complaining about the animosity shown on this site and how it drags it into the gutter whilst simultaneously complaining that somme on this site are conversing civilly. But hey, as I told you before, my free spiritedness extends to deciding with whom, what, how and on what terms I will discuss issues so perhaps you shouldn’t let my personal conduct worry you too much.

    BTW,

    Could I have your thoughts on that, Pat?”, or “ATW’s attorney for Trump”, for God’s sake

    I have absolutely no idea in blind Christ what you’re talking about.

  109. on the substance though paul, Noel’s right
    you can’t interact with pat in a normal way
    “like ask for evidence or back your points up mister”
    pat is one of the crazies, truth is not the number one
    as it is for you and me and DaveA Peter for example
    here let this cartoon explain things better 😉
    lol

  110. Kurt, I’ll interact with whom I see fit on any subject I please regardless of what others deem substance or conduct.

    I rarely get into he said / she said comments that Pat’s threads more often than not descend into but made the exception with Seimigate because of the blatant unfairness however when Pat makes a blatantly invented claim I’ll decide if and when I’ll challenge him on it, no one else.

  111. lol
    paul continue flogging the dead horse , its your play
    that’s what Noel is saying in a nutshell

  112. There doesn’t seem to be much else conversation / discussion on ATW these days anyway.

  113. no cos the site is fucked
    you and the boys just stroke pat and petems ego every time you play into their horseshit threads !!

  114. And yet you’re commenting on one of the horseshit threads.

  115. slippery paul
    to you and about the mess i am

    here’s real news , we should be talking about not these fake news threads
    that you seem to enjoy so much !

    President-elect Joe Biden meets with several Republican Governors,
    as GOP begins to move on from Trump

  116. That you seem to enjoy so much !

    Eh? Have you joined tha fake news crowd as well? There are 115 coments on this thread, count how many are from me.

    The whole world and their dog know that Trump’s going down but not everything has to be about it.

  117. My god what a smug arrogant and utterly condescending “ aren’t I more superior and intelligent than the rest of you simple plebs” comment from Noel. Deeply deeply hypocritical full of faux psychological evaluation and with the laughable saintly claim that we simpletons shouldn’t be swirling in this mud fight and then he wanders down from on high to mix in the same mud while loftily pretending he is above the refrain. Utter sanctimonious crap.

  118. lol that’s what i call a good hit Noel
    when you get those kinda reactions
    I admit I’m jealous 😉

  119. When you get those kinda reactions
    I admit I’m jealous

    You shouldn’t be. All you need to do is post a thread about mad Biblical theories and you’ll be commenting along similar lines.

  120. oooh b!tchy tonite paul . lmao
    get back to your insane convos with pat/paul
    where the saying
    definition of insanity is repeating over and over expecting diff result
    goes over your head that one buddy !
    that’s what Noel is saying ..

  121. What’s wrong Kurt? Not like being laughed at?

    Bitchy?

    To paraphrase a hero of yours, let him without stone, etc.

  122. can’t explain it to you paul
    you think you’re playing your own game
    you’re not , you’re playing their game .
    nothing more to say …

  123. Noel is perfectly entitled to his opinion, it’s his arrogant belief that he is somehow on a higher plain than the rest of us with his superior pontificating that makes me laugh. A haughty bubble that needs bursting, but if you want to swoon over him Kurt, knock yourself out !

  124. If you don’t like the replies you shouldn’t make the comments.

    As I said, I decide when whom, how, and what I interact on on my terms, regardless of whose ‘game’ it is or isn’t. Those who disagree are free to mind their business.

  125. tone deaf paul , never mind, sticking out the chest is all you got
    as you have to repeat it same line .. never mind, pearls/swines
    pity !

  126. Never mind, pearls/swines

    Yeah, speaking of repeating lines…..

    You shouldn’t complain when you get a bit of derision thrown back at you. Don’t dish it and you won’t get it.

  127. lol…. now that’s rich….

  128. Noel’s comment is literally one of the most condescending, patronising and supercilious things I’ve ever read on ATW. And that’s up against some pretty stiff competition.

  129. Paul McMahon,

    There doesn’t seem to be much else conversation / discussion on ATW these days anyway.

    I have to sadly agree with you Paul. if I was only tiny minority of people left, (and I’m including you in this), that I can have a decent conversation with.

  130. I think Noel should henceforth be know as “The Blessed One” among us😉

  131. i’m not complaining paul
    Noels point has gone over yer head , and everyone else
    you gotta separate the wheat from the chaff here
    the substance is don’t feed the troll
    now dya get it ..lol
    wise up mister and the rest of ya ..

  132. Noel is pissed off at the constant distraction of these fights. I don’t blame him for feeling like that, although he did come across as more than a little condescending in that comment, as well as being a bit mixed up as to what it is he wants: complaining about some people fighting, whilst complaining about other people making an effort not to fight! When he visited Belfast, he spoke about how he enjoyed ATW as somewhere he could drop in to as a break from work, but that the constant fighting was off-putting.

    ATW has always allowed a certain freedom with personal spats, which sites like Slugger would never permit. In a way, it’s one of the attractions of the site. You can – sometimes – have some very interesting and informative debates here, while also fighting the peace out on a different post – sometimes with the same person! Most of the time, these arguments burn themselves out within a matter of days, if not hours, and it is only occasionally that anything really serious happens. This happens to be one of those times.

  133. Kurt.

    So you’re telling us not to interact with Patrick but you interact with Patrick all the time. How does that work then kurt?

  134. Seimi.

    Once again mate you’ve made a factual, fair and balanced comment.
    Noel seems to be dictating more and more how we should interact on this site. Which is fair enough, he’s entitled to his opinion, just as we’re entitled to ignore him. I agree with you one of the things that attracted me to this site was the more ‘robust’ conversations and discussions, as well as limited speech restrictions compared to other forums. But things seem to be changing for the worst I’m sad to say. And as others have pointed out, we’ve lost many good people. Perhaps this site will just end up is a platform for Patrick’s biased and factually inaccurate rants, which nobody reads.

  135. The substance is don’t feed the troll

    Spoken like a true brand new born again non troll feeder, Kurt.

    When he visited Belfast, he spoke about how he enjoyed ATW as somewhere he could drop in to as a break from work, but that the constant fighting was off-putting.

    That’s a fair enough comment but it doesn’t explain this:

    I rarely get into he said / she said comments that Pat’s threads more often than not descend into but made the exception with Seimigate because of the blatant unfairness

    Noel complains about constant fighting while simultaneously complaining about ‘slavish non-aggression pacts’ when people speak abou issues in a civil manner, both are mutually exclusive?

  136. Dave

    We have been told in recent days that the site is expanding. We have also been told that we can leave if we want. I don’t think it’s going to end up with Troll and Allan discussing conspiracy theories in an empty room. I think it’s much more likely that we’re going to see a lot more Right-wing faces around here in the near future. I think that’s what they mean when they talk about ‘expansion.’
    And if that is the case, then they really don’t give a shit whether any of us hangs around.

    Paul

    I agree with you re Noel, that’s why I said it sounded like he was a bit mixed up.

    I also agree re kurt and his recent Road to Domestos moment regarding communication with Troll.

  137. Seimi.

    You might be right mate. Perhaps there is a future plan for ATW that I am unaware of.
    I personally would not find a forum where everybody agrees with my political opinion compelling, but I realise many people do. We shall see what the future holds.

  138. Welcome back Seimi.

    Personally I would welcome more right-wing commentators to debate with, provided they debate in a civilised manner.

  139. Troll wouldn’t attract dying flies if he flung a putrid, rotting carcass as a lure. There wont be any new commenters on ATW.

  140. Thanks, Peter.

    I’m not in any way objecting to new commentators appearing, whether from the Right or the Left. It’s the fact that Troll has said several times now that the site is expanding and that he doesn’t care if the current crop of commentators stays or not that bothers me. And I’m only assuming there will be more new Right-Wing commentators, because more Left-Wing commentators would mean more people to disagree with him, and he can’t handle the current number of people who do that.

    Daphne, you’re probably right regarding the attraction, but it might not be him who is in charge of Marketing and Sales for the new, expanded platform.

  141. Welcome back Seimi. Good to see you here. There are lots of good and interesting characters on ATW and Noel is certainly one so I would hope he doesn’t vanish altogether.

    If ATW disappears or changes such that the cut and thrust of debate is broken up, I would hope some kind of forum can be created so that the regulars can carry on the discussion elsewhere.

  142. Welcome back Seimi. Good to see you here. There are lots of good and interesting characters on ATW and Noel is certainly one so I would hope he doesn’t vanish altogether.

    If ATW disappears or changes such that the cut and thrust of debate is broken up, I would hope some kind of forum can be created so that the regulars can carry on the discussion elsewhere.

  143. I too don’t want anyone to vanish. I like the presence of all our regulars – yes even Allan – I only wish everyone ,yes including Patrick, had the tolerance to go with the flow of everyone elses comments and writing styles.

  144. Thanks, Petr.

    If ATW disappears or changes such that the cut and thrust of debate is broken up, I would hope some kind of forum can be created so that the regulars can carry on the discussion elsewhere.

    This has been mentioned by a number of people. I can’t see it happening though. Although people have warned about the creation of an echo chamber here, filled with like-minded conspiracy-theorists, if everyone who was annoyed at the direction the site was taking were to leave and go someplace else, wouldn’t the same be true? We’d just be removing ourselves from elements we disagree with, and would ultimately end up just sitting in the new place, agreeing with each other!

    As much as Noel dislikes the personal arguments, they also generate debate.

    And for the record – I don’t want anyone to leave either, nor do I think Noel or anyone else intends to. What has happened here over the past couple of weeks has been mean-spirited and nasty, but ultimately, it only sets in concrete what peoples’ opinions were of certain individuals beforehand, and that individual’s character is further eroded and diminished. But in the eyes of the insecure, attention – even such negative attention – is all that matters.

  145. i make comment paul on pats threads, but i don’t interact as i would others
    there’s no point to it , what dya expect from a pig except an grunt
    you guys wind yourselves up about his lack of truth telling
    I regards it as a given that you won’t get any truth
    I’ve worked out its not of interest to the crazy right, as it is to us
    that again is Noel’s substance, you really should give him credit you know !

  146. You guys wind yourselves up about his lack of truth telling

    Where do you get these ridiculous notions from?

    Who are ‘you guys’ and who is getting ‘wound up about lack of truth telling?’ (as you used to do yourself, five minutes ago). Just because fakers are gonna fake it doesn’t mean the fakery shouldn’t be challenged.

  147. Oh Kurt don’t be daft. Of course you interact. You do it all the time. At least be honest.

  148. still missing it lads
    read Noel’s substance

  149. Kurt

    Take your tongue out of Noel’s backside 😁

  150. I can’t believe you ladies are still whining…..

    I’m not in any way objecting to new commentators appearing, whether from the Right or the Left. It’s the fact that Troll has said several times now that the site is expanding and that he doesn’t care if the current crop of commentators stays or not that bothers me. And I’m only assuming there will be more new Right-Wing commentators, because more Left-Wing commentators would mean more people to disagree with him, and he can’t handle the current number of people who do that.

    Seimi, I have said I care about all of you, and have enjoyed arguing and agreeing with all of you.

    If however you all leave…. oh well. The site will survive. This site has had multiple groups of commenters.

    Now you and any new people can argue with me all you want. You always have and most people that exist always will, but no one will slander me.

    Since you were suspended You, Seamus and others have gone on multiple rants still continuing to slander me. Have a retaliated?

    NO, you’re a pack of whiney little bitches, so you’ve been allowed to Slander me as you vent your frustration.

    You should never assume anything, don’t assume that I’ve changed my position on the Slander, and certainly don’t assume who any new commenters might be, whether they are left or right.

    The site is open to all, the site and me are very tolerant to all points of view, the fact that you Republicans are here on a site of a man that hates the IRA should be proof enough, but you’re a pack of whiney little bitches who can’t get past the fact that you got your bottom paddled….. boo hoo

    The site is getting greater exposure, if we get more people they will be what and who they are, no one is screening anyone.

    You guys really want to start your own site here’s the link…. go

    https://www.blogger.com/about/?bpli=1

  151. “You, Seamus and others have gone on multiple rants still continuing to slander me. Have a retaliated?”

    None of us have slandered you. Firstly you can’t slander someone in the written word. You really need to learn what words mean before you use them. Secondly, none of us have defamed you. You have continued to lie about Seimi and we have continued to accurately point out that you are a liar. That isn’t defamation. It is the truth. The simplest defence against a defamation accusation is a truth defence. We would win hands down in any court of law if you brought a case against us. Because you are a liar. Thus it is not defamatory to call you a liar.

  152. S lander is s poken

  153. The irony being is that Troll continuing to accuse all of us of “slandering” him is in fact defamatory and would constitute libel. But you can’t expect Troll to work that one out. Maybe if some far-right white supremacist magazine did an article on it he might listen. Because that’s the only sort of stuff he listens to now.

  154. Still missing it lads
    read Noel’s substance

    Kurt’s equivalent of Pat’s HERE’S THE LOGIC Tucker Carlson posts, (I wonder whatever happened to the Biden laptop and stolen documents stories? I suppose there’s no need for baseless shit flinging now the election’s over).

    But you’re a pack of whiney little bitches who can’t get past the fact that you got your bottom paddled….. boo hoo

    Pointing out that you banned someone in a fit of bad tempered pique and then invented a wholly untrue story as your reasoning for banning them isn’t getting ‘your bottom paddled’

    I can’t wait to see when this army of new ATW commentators are going to reveal themselves.

  155. Nobody is being libelled here just noses being put out of joint. Patrick, you often tell commenters here that their claims are garbage and no one stops you. You need to accept that others here can tell you your claims are garbage. That’s the cut and thrust of this site. Fair play for all !

  156. Tucker Carlson pissed off the Trumper Flynn lawyer, Sid Vicious or whatever she calls herself, when he asked her for some evidence for her wild and crazy Giulianiesque charges.

    So expect the usual suspects to say that Tucker is bad now. Because it’s what they do

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/insulting-demanding-rude-told-never-contact-sidney-powell-goes-off-tucker-carlson-video/

  157. yup they’re literally tearing each other apart, phantom
    popcorn time , way past caring about their feelings, they would have shoved our faces in the dirt and walked smugly on , in an effort to steal the election, no pity at all for them .
    Enjoy the show .. relish every minute of it !!

  158. Questions must be asked on why Carlson has suddenly become a pilgrim on the quest for evidence after the piles and piles of fake bullshit that he knowingly and willingly pushed though?

  159. He knows which way the winds blowing…

  160. ratings paul , i reckon, he wants to keep his job
    surely hannity must go down with the ship
    how he could continue on fox, is insane ?
    ( even Carlson would be insane )
    a reboot required at fox ..

  161. Breaking News:

    Oaf who constantly whines and bitches about people calling him a liar every time he lies, says other people are whiny bitches.

    The middle-aged man, who really should know better, recently abused the tiny amount of power he had by banning someone for, as he said, “calling him a liar.” He later changed his statement, claiming instead that it was, “to prove a point.” At the time of going to press, no point has so far clearly been made. The man then changed his statement a third time, this time claiming that he had not banned the other person at all, but had merely “suspended” him for a week, this last claim being made despite written evidence that it was indeed a ban, not a suspension, with no end date given until 5 days later.

    There have been widespread calls for the Oaf to “wise the fuck up,” but so far, these have only been met with childish comments.

    The case continues.

    In other news, residents of ATWland batten down the hatches and prepare for Storm NewCommentators. The small group of residents in the Irony haven of ATWland are preparing for the supposed arrival of a huge number of new commentators. Although there has been no previous warning of this, an Oaf in charge today announced that, due to “greater exposure,” a new wave of commentators could well be on the horizon. A slight panic has taken grip in the small fiefdom, as regular commentators contemplate the everloving mortification of introducing intelligent adults to the fucking childish shenanigans of the apparently self-appointed ‘manager’ of ATW. Some have even considered leaving in recent weeks, a consideration made all the more likely given the official statement from the ‘management’ – “If you leave – ah well.”

    Coming up later – despite multiple court cases and endless tweets and comments saying otherwise, it is becoming more and more apparent that Slander is still not the same as Libel.

    Up next – sport. But not football, because that one guy kneeled down that one time. Fuck football.

  162. Colm, on November 20th, 2020 at 6:33 PM Said: Edit Comment
    Nobody is being libelled here just noses being put out of joint. Patrick, you often tell commenters here that their claims are garbage and no one stops you. You need to accept that others here can tell you your claims are garbage. That’s the cut and thrust of this site. Fair play for all !

    You’re right Colm on both parts…. Anyone can say anything I say is garbage, and I have said others views are garbage. Fair Play.

    I will accept no one Slandering me as a Liar.

    It is what it is

  163. “I will accept no one Slandering me as a Liar.”

    No one is slandering you as a liar, for two reasons. Firstly, slander is for verbal defamation. Secondly, you are a liar. It isn’t defamatory to call you a liar because you are clearly, repeatedly and almost constantly intentionally dishonest.

    “It is what it is”

    It is what it is. But what it is is that you are small, petty little man, who feels the need to lie any time you dig yourself into a hole through your own stupidity. Due to your rampant stupidity that is a pretty regular occurrence.

  164. Right that’s it all sorted. Pay attention everyone. We can call each other whatever we want. Just don’t use the word liar.

    Phew that’s a relief, now we can get back to just slagging each other off with no risk of any bans 😉

  165. “Right that’s it all sorted. Pay attention everyone. We can call each other whatever we want. Just don’t use the word liar.”

    I would agree to that after he apologises to Seimi. Until then any time he lies I’m going to call Troll a liar.

  166. Seamus

    Patrick isn’t a liar. He says things that aren’t true but he believes in what he says. That isn’t a liar. If we all view each other in that light things will calm down.

  167. “Patrick isn’t a liar. He says things that aren’t true but he believes in what he says. That isn’t a liar. If we all view each other in that light things will calm down.”

    He said Seimi called him a liar. Either he is so fucking delusional that he should be sectioned or he is a liar. Personally I believe the later. I think Troll knows that Seimi didn’t call him a liar. But being the small, petty child that he is he can’t bring himself to admit that. So he lies about it. And I’m not going to sugar coat it to appease a bully. He lies, I call him a liar. And if he doesn’t like it then shit one, he can go fuck himself. I’m tired of his shit.

  168. Seamus

    Yes he should apologise to Seimi and we all know that, but sometimes you just have to accept this is a stone we ain’t gonna get blood out of.

  169. “Yes he should apologise to Seimi and we all know that, but sometimes you just have to accept this is a stone we ain’t gonna get blood out of.”

    I do accept that. But because I accept that I am also going to treat him then with the contempt he so clearly deserves.

  170. Colm

    I have said from the start that Troll wouldn’t apologise, because to do so would be to admit that he lied about me calling him a liar. He has also said that Hell will freeze over before he apologises. He possesses neither the mental nor moral faculties to understand how to do the right thing in this situation.
    You are correct – this may well be a stone from which no blood will be gotten, but does that mean that I, Seamus and everyone else who is annoyed by his behaviour should just let it go? Should all the adults in the room ignore the spoilt child yelling and breaking toys, or should we actually try and do something about it? How many times are we just going to accept, as he said himself, “it is what it is”?
    Everyone else on this site is held to a much higher standard than that. Why does he get a bye-ball? Because he’ll shout and yell and break things? Remember a few years ago, he threatened to take the whole site down? For fuck sake – how much is too much?

  171. Seimi

    I do understand your frustration. You did nothing wrong and had to accept an unfair sanction that only Patrick has the authority to perform . We don’t have the power to ban him or anyone else, so yes that does cause frustration. He has an authority the rest of us here don’t but that’s life. In the end each individual has to weigh up the balance betweeen whatever enjoyment they get being here with the negativity of how they view the behaviour of other individuals here, in this case your attitude to Patrick.

    Nobody likes the threat of being banned or seeing someone behave with hypocritical intolerance which Patrick is guilty of, but to enjoy remaining a commenter you just have to work around that sometimes. For my own example, I will no longer comment on any of Mike Cunningham’s articles because of his threats and attempts to get me banned . . I know it’s a bit more difficult for you to perhaps do that re Patrick’s posts as they are far more numerous on ATW and are the lifeblood of this blog, unlike Mike’s occasional entries, but perhaps it might be easier to comment generally on the topics Patrick raises or claims without making direct reference to him to avoid the sort of blow up that happened on that infamous thread a couple of weeks ago .

  172. At least the sanctimonious platitudes regarding free speech are now worthless.

  173. So basically, I just suck it up and he gets away with it again? That’s what those two paragraphs amount to.

  174. No Seimi, you accept the things you cannot change. Patrick is the working editor of this site. What realistically are the options to “do something about it”. All you, I or anyone else can do is to continue commenting honestly and openly without the expectation that we can make other people change. I just think at some point you have to stop pressing a button that after a thousand pushes isn’t going to do what you expect.

  175. //What realistically are the options to “do something about it”.//

    // I just think at some point you have to stop pressing a button that after a thousand pushes isn’t going to do what you expect.//

    Or how about doing what I propose? Success is almost guaranteed – no squabbles, only civil debate.

    It beats me why most of you seem drawn to interact with Patrick, even though you regularly get a bloody nose, one way or another.

    (or a brown one in Colm’s case)

  176. Oh look, it’s St Noel, who likes to see himself above the fray comes down into the fray 😉

  177. Noel
    I do get what you’re saying, I really do. I have, on several occasions, just ignored Troll but, just like everyone else who has tried it, I always end up interacting with him again, as you almost certainly will, yet again. And, when that happens, will you calmly accept the advice to ‘just ignore him?’

  178. “All you, I or anyone else can do is to continue commenting honestly and openly without the expectation that we can make other people change.”

    Except what got Seimi banned in the first place was a reasonable, honest comment. So should people continue to comment here, even walking on eggshells, they will do so always at the risk that pathetic excuse for a man will take their comment the wrong way and ban them. So if that is the case then so be it. We are under that risk whether we self censor or not. So I’m not going to self censor just to appease a spoilt child, because whether I do so or not doesn’t even make any difference. Troll’s gonna troll.

  179. Seamus

    Absolutely. Nobody should censor themselves but they have to decide how to engage here. I am in no way asking people to hold back their opinions, I was referring to attempts to get Patrick to apologise or admit he was wrong. That’s all I mean by flogging a dead horse.

  180. “That’s all I mean by flogging a dead horse.”

    Absolutely. But going back to what I said early I don’t expect Troll to apologise. But because of his failure to apologise, his failure to act like a man, his failure to act with even a basic shred of decency or honesty, then I am going to treat him with the contempt he deserves. That’s not flogging a dead horse. That is dealing with the situation as it is.

  181. Seamus, fair enough, but unfortunately that does risk you being banned ( I know , you can’t allow that threat to restrict you) but I’m just sad at anyone here being banned. Each loss of a regular dims the light of this blog and I don’t want to end up stumbling around in the dark …. or with my nose up Patrick’s arse as Noel would claim 😉

  182. Colm

    This is a site for debate, apparently. That means that people of different opinions can voice those opinions and have others agree or disagree. It should be a place where people are free to make their opinions heard, or to question someone else”s opinions.
    We can only be responsible for our own words and actions, so, if I call Seamus a cunt without provocation, then it’s on me, and only me, to apologise and withdraw the comment. However, if I refuse to do it, and lie about why I called him it, then anyone and everyone else on the site is perfectly entitled to get on my case and insist that I do the right thing.
    I wouldn’t expect anyone to try and excuse my behaviour, or counsel Seamus to perhaps engage with me in a different way, in order for me not to call him a cunt again.
    You wouldn’t expect it yourself.
    So why are you suggesting it for Troll? He doesn’t have special cognitive needs (not certified, anyway), so why is he being given so much leeway and latitude in this?
    This is exactly why he has gotten away with this shit for so long.

  183. Seimi
    The point is, if you called Seamus a cunt without reason, there is an expectation from him and others here that even if you were stubborn You could eventually be persuaded to explain yourself , admit your wrong and even maybe apologise. I am not suggesting any special treatment for Patrick, only a realistic observation that sometimes you have to acknowledge that something just isn’t going to happen and it just isn’t worth wasting energy on.

    I’m not asking anyone to treat Patrick with kid gloves. Comment towards him exactly how you feel you want to. I’m just asking people to be realistic about what they might achieve in terms of expecting some ‘mea culpa’ from him.

  184. lies are the stock in trade of the GOP , why be suprised
    just as Truth is what trades in Dem circles
    Its just a fact of life
    the shame however is on the liars and that’s why pat’s so upset at the word
    but as seamus points out there is a simple remedy : stop lying yer frigging arse off.
    will this happen? not a chance !
    so I’m afraid the site is truly doomed , with only the brown-nosers who’ll remain
    the rest will be banned , inc me

  185. I love you Kurt. Me and my brown nose 😉

  186. Just for clarity, I don’t think you’re a ‘brown-noser’, Colm. I can see where you’re coming from, and I know that you do try to pour oil on troubled waters here. I do find myself wondering at times though, “Does he not get splinters in his arse from sitting on that fence??”
    I also see what you mean by pointing out the futility of expecting Troll to do the right thing. But just because someone else refuses to do the right thing should not mean that you stop trying to get them to do it. If you stop, then you become complicit in what they are doing. You’re condoning their bad behaviour through your inaction. I can’t do that.
    This isn’t even a personal thing. Yes, it was me who was wrongly banned this time. But had it been Paul, or you, or Seamus (who I would say is the bookie’s favourite at the minute), or whoever, I would complain just as much, because it was an abuse of power, it was built around a lie and it was just plain wrong.

    kurt
    Not everything in this world boils down to the Republican party in the USA. Seriously mate, you have become obsessed with this over the past few months, to the point where you could be in danger of being confused for someone else who used to post here, who got all worked up – in a very selective, one-sided way – about rape.

  187. Paul McMahon,

    At least the sanctimonious platitudes regarding free speech are now worthless.

    Correct Paul, but to be fair we found that out about Patrick many years ago.

  188. Seimi

    I don’t think it’s fair to say I am on the fence. It’s not me in the middle between Patrick and you . I along with EVERYONE else who commented on your banning 100% agree Patrick was utterly unjustified in banning you. There was no merit to it and it is churlish and pig headed of him not to admit he was wrong. He falsely accused you of calling him a liar , but it’s just a stubborn reality that a million regulars here could call him out for a million years and he will not budge an inch . Heck he wouldn’t even apologise to you if Trump himself begged him too . It’s just a waste of energy pursuing it.

  189. Ps Seimi, to lighten the mood a bit, I am convinced that Kurt has a large sexy picture of Trump on his bedroom wall and he feels so guilty about his confused obsessive feelings toward the man he hates, but just can’t help loving 😉

  190. Seeing the scumbag trunk out is the only show in town
    Been also following the other side .
    Can’t wait for the transition and never have to mention the lawless one
    The man of sin again .
    Not long now .. pack your bags concede and shut the fuck up
    Would be my diplomatic call to trunk were I the Irish ambassador

  191. Why does it have to be the Irish Ambassador ?

  192. Colm
    I know you haven’t sat on the fence in this case. I know that you have called Troll out numerous times on this.
    But look at what you are doing. You are arguing that Troll is too stubborn, churlish and pig headed to apologise, therefore I should stop expecting it. I disagree. I don’t think that his stubbornness, churlishness and pig-headedness should be offered as an excuse for him not doing the right thing.

    Look at it this way: let’s say nothing changes. Troll doesn’t apologise, he continues to double down and deny everything. Everyone on the site knows what he has done, and he can’t mention freedom of speech without multiple people bringing this up. This could go on for months and months.
    Now, imagine this weird scenario: Troll admits that he acted rashly and apologises for banning me. I accept and we enter a phase where everything is sunshine and lollipops between me and him. Everyone else is happier (even Noel 😉 ), because we’re just discussing politics, and everyone has even a tiny bit more respect for Troll because he did the right thing.

    Which scenario would be best for the site? The second, of course. But Troll, being as insecure as he is, can’t bring himself to do that. He can’t, not even for the good of ATW, bring himself to apologise, because that will be an admission that he also lied, which will do away with his claim that he never lies. The fact that nobody – not even he himself – believes that to be true, is unimportant. It’s the saying of it that matters.

    So that’s the situation we find ourselves in. Troll is caught between a rock and a hard place. What he does next could have serious repercussions for the site.

  193. Seimi

    Perhaps Patrick is just mirroring his hero Trump. Everyone knows Trump has lost the election but Trump is determined to stick to his alternate reality. Patrick is creating his own 2020 Election result here on ATW , where despite losing overwhelmingly the ATW Electoral College vote on the Seimi V Patrick battle, he is still holed up in his editorial bunker insisting to the death that he is the ‘wronged man’ 😉

    Yeah I know I am being flippant now, but I am all debated out !

    Sweet dreams Seimi, No nightmares about Patrick now !

  194. colm
    that’s exactly right , well spotted and well said

  195. got one for ya colm, now we’re getting what might be called an elevation of thinking
    after the rumble in the jungle
    link these three words together
    stranglehold stronghold chokehold

    have a go yourself guys
    here’s mine

    the stranglehold Trunk has on his minions and the fearful GOP senators, enables him to keep them wrapped in his stronghold of lies and deception, what we have to do is get the Trunk in a chokehold where he is forced to tap-out like in WWE and concede.
    this is being done by brave men and women in the states, they’re the heroes of the day, in contrast to the villains in the GOP party, the senate and the WH
    pressures produces cracks , and we’re seeing that every day , the dam is breaking ..
    FACT ( not wishful thinking )
    something like that ..

  196. // just like everyone else who has tried it, I always end up interacting with him again, as you almost certainly will, yet again. And, when that happens, will you calmly accept the advice to ‘just ignore him?’//

    Me? When did I start interacting again?

    You have to ask yourself why you can’t resist dealing with him directly in debate, when after 1000 meltdowns you know it’ll end in tears. Same for the others.
    While it’s of course outrageous that you were banned, Seimi, I feel little sympathy for anyone who keeps approaching the fire knowing that he gets burned as all the times before.
    Someone like you should be above that. You (plural) are just making yourselves miserable again and again and getting absolutely nowhere. It’s become so farcical that it’s now fun to watch.

    And my advice is not just so that each protects himself from all the BS and bother, but it’s also to protect the site. If this continues, either all the good people will leave or be banned (and if Seamus goes the site will have lost a huge chunk of its value IMO) or David will do the sensible thing and shut it down for good.

    Anyone who continues that interaction, after all these years of experience, is bringing that day closer.

    (yet another benefit of this abstention is that it somehow lets you see Patrick in a more honest light. For example, I think it’s wrong for anyone to accuse him of racism or anti-semitism, if anyone did. Everyone is racist to some extent, but Patrick must be among the least affected of all here. And while he tells deliberate lies, so does Pete Moore and several others. After all, lying is now a central part of the Trumpism ethos. You say what furthers your wretched cause or whatever sounds good to your ear, irrespective of its truth. Without lies their whole world view couldn’t be maintained)

  197. Noel

    Did you ever consider the possibility that many people interact with Patrick because they enjoy interacting with him? Despite his repeated meltdowns, insulting, condescending and childish behaviour and complete lack of knowledge on most subjects?
    Perhaps for some people, (such as Phantom and Paul), Patrick is enjoyable to interact with.

    David will do the sensible thing and shut it down for good.

    Why do you consider David shutting this site down to be the sensible thing?

  198. I see no reason not to interact with anyone here. We are all free to dip in and out of threads as we choose and to argue for as little or as long as we are content to do so. The only thing I think is futile although I accept others may feel differently is to demand someone apologies or retracts things they say. An apology is meaningless if it has to be asked for. Also if someone says something I think is false or objectionable about me I will just deny it and leave others to make up their mind who to believe. Trying to get other people to change seems to me a futile exercise on a blog designed like this one to be a debating forum. Speak, and let others speak as they choose.

  199. Perhaps for some people, (such as Phantom and Paul), Patrick is enjoyable to interact with

    I don’t think interacting with Patrick is anymore or less enjoyable than discussing anything with anything else, nor do I think I interact with him any more than anyone else here does. The difference is he makes the most outrageous claims which are blatantly incorrect and untrue and should be challenged on them.

    I choose for the most part to challenge with civility.

  200. Noel,

    I didn’t say you had started interacting again. I said that you almost certainly will, as this is what has happened with everyone else here. I guess the only way to know for sure if I am to be proved correct or incorrect is to keep watching the site until one or both of you dies. Since that is not a practical (or even a desirable!) option, I’m basing my assumption on what has transpired in the past.

    Thank you for your concern over my banning. I would, however like to point out once again, that you appear to be implying that this banning was somehow of my own doing. I am happy, once again, to correct you in this. I did nothing to warrant being banned, nothing at all. Far from approaching a fire, I was thrown into a fire! As I have said before, had I done something to deserve being banned, I would have accepted it. But I didn’t do anything and I don’t accept it.

    I also don’t accept your ‘good advice’, which ultimately amounts to doing nothing. You lambasted Paul for debating politely, and you chastise everyone else for arguing. Yet what do you do? Nothing. You ‘don’t engage.’ So Troll lies and bans people for nothing and basically pisses all over the site, and some people complain, some people try to negotiate, and you do nothing. Except complain about the people trying to do something. Who are you, and what have you done with Noel Cunningham? That guy wouldn’t have sat idly by – he’d have got stuck in, referencing ancient battles and quoting old Irish ballads! 🙂

    Look, part of the attraction of ATW is the very thing you are complaining about here. There is more freedom, more latitude, to express opinions here than on some of the other blogs. If you want serious political debate, go to Slugger. If you want the same debate, but with a load of short tempers and arguing, go to ATW. I believe its a factor for all of us being here, you included.

    But the very thing that acts as an added attraction here, is being abused by someone in a position of petty power. If you’re not going to ‘interact’ to complain about that, at least be understanding of those who do decide to ‘interact.’ They are, after all, doing it for your benefit too 😊

  201. Spot on Seimi, one of the great things about this blog is that it isn’t a narrowly compartmentalised political forum. It acts very much genuinely like a group of people in a social setting with various degrees of interaction. We can have serious political debate, and we can have silly childish spats, we can joke with and at each other, reminisce about music and cultural tastes and see threads move from the sublime to the ridiculous. Talk of dragging the the site down is daft. We don’t need a handbook of rules and parameters , we just need a lot more genuine tolerance.

  202. //You lambasted Paul for debating politely, and you chastise everyone else for arguing.//

    No, I never lambasted anyone for debating politely or arguing.

    What I do find stupid is people interacting with Patrick, especially when those same people repeatedly get bitten and are seemingly sensitive to his reactions. Unless you’re a masochist, continuing on like that is simply insane.

    Some people like Paul with his non-aggression pact and Colm with his 10-year-old ah-sure-why-can’t-we-all-get-along mantra can continue what they’ve been doing, as they massage his ego and he doesn’t hit back *. But if you aren’t prepared to do that, and you and Seamus and Dave etc aren’t, then it’s either don’t interact or do interact and continue these endless rounds of hurt pride and rows and bans and departures. That can’t be healthy either for you or for Patrick, and for the site it’s deadly. What I propose would end all that crap immediately. If it worked for me, I can’t see why it won’t work for anyone else.

    * Actually, the fact that Colm immediately rushes to Patrick’s defence while ignoring similar attacks on other commenters shows IMO a patronising (no pun) fawning over the poor vulnerable man that is worse than anything I’ve ever said to or about him.

  203. Noel

    Are you ignoring me as well as Patrick?

  204. Paul.

    My comment wasn’t a criticism of you in any way mate. I was just pointing out to Noel that certain people on here may actually enjoy interacting with Patrick, or at least his behaviour doesn’t bother them much.

  205. I may be misunderstanding the point Noel is trying to make across these multiple posts, but I think what he’s saying is that if we ignore Patrick, things will be better for everyone.

    That may be true but unfortunately, there’s no guarantee that will be the case.

  206. My comment wasn’t a criticism of you in any way mate.

    No worries Dave, No criticism taken.

    Noel, I really don’t know where you get this ‘non aggression pact’ rubbish from. You complain about the nastiness and bickering on this site and then complain when people are civil. I wish you’d make your mind up.

    They massage his ego and he doesn’t hit back

    You’re doing a great job of massaging his ego with everyone of your most recent comments being about him.

    Patrick Van Roy, on November 19th, 2020 at 5:38 PM Said:
    A very reasonable comment Noel.

    You speak about self indulgence on another thread. Glass houses and stones come to mind.

  207. Noel’s new found career as a ‘very’ amateur psychologist is as desperate an act as a Trump election lawyer in a courtroom .. His claims that I rush to Patrick’s defence only show a complete inability to read and comprehend anything I have said regarding this whole incident. I have defended absolutely nothing about Patrick’s dealing with this sorry affair.

  208. This site used to be made up of the partisans of green or orange, with a bit of red thrown in,
    now it’s still quite green but with a new kind of orange, and a bit of brown.

    Colm, I meant personal attacks.

    // I think what he’s saying is that if we ignore Patrick, things will be better for everyone.//

    Exactly. (and of course I’m not ignoring you)

    //That may be true but unfortunately, there’s no guarantee that will be the case.//

    It will work. It’s worth a try anyway, especially when the alternative is guaranteed mess. It’s worked for me, even when I – as usual – expressed very different opinions as Patrick.

    //Did you ever consider the possibility that many people interact with Patrick because they enjoy interacting with him?//

    I still can’t imagine why, to be honest. But they at any rate don’t enjoy the consequences. Is Seimi enjoying this latest spat? And surely Seamus can’t enjoy being distracted from doing what he’s so good at, and even less the prospect of being booted out. Mahons and I enjoyed it so much we stopped completely. Phantom is the only one I understand, as he rightly want to project a different, decent America.

    //Why do you consider David shutting this site down to be the sensible thing?//

    Because why should he continue with this crap? Regular flare-ups and meltdowns, some of which are probably brought to his attention and must be taxing his patience like hell. He already said years ago he was on the verge of shutting it down a few times, and now that there’s so little left and still so many blazing rows I don’t see what he has from it and why he continues.

    //Noel, I really don’t know where you get this ‘non aggression pact’ rubbish from. //

    Paul, there was a time when you were one of the many who got into regular vicious rows with yours truly, most of which in your cases involved him making certain references to Óglaigh na hÉireann. I remember one case where it was pretty rough and you were obviously, and understandably, very annoyed by these references and how you were being positioned. You requested some kind of tete-à-tete and, sure enough, after you came back it’s been nothing but pally between the two of you ever since. Anyone would suspect a kind of Molotov-Ribbentrop understanding.

  209. Thanks for the response Noel.

  210. Paul, there was a time when you were one of the many who got into regular vicious rows with yours truly, most of which in your cases involved him making certain references to Óglaigh na hÉireann. I remember one case where it was pretty rough and you were obviously, and understandably, very annoyed by these references and how you were being positioned. You requested some kind of tete-à-tete and, sure enough, after you came back it’s been nothing but pally between the two of you ever since. Anyone would suspect a kind of Molotov-Ribbentrop understanding

    I can’t recall the particular instance you’re referring to and I certainly don’t recall requesting a tete-à-tete with anyone but let me clarify something anyhow.

    My views and opinions on the Irish resistance are well known by all who regularly blog here. They are something that I wear on my sleeve, are absolutely warts and all uncoated and I’ll robustly debate my position on it with anyone. Now, my preferred option is to debate in a civil and calm manner but if someone wants to do it in a different manner I can climb into the sewer with the best of them. It’s pretty simple, be civil with me and you’ll get it back, this applies to all I interact with.

    There was no ‘non aggression pact’ no ‘ tete-à-tete’ and no ‘ Molotov-Ribbentrop understanding’ but simply the fact that if you don’t behave like Andrew McCann you won’t be treated like Andrew McCann.