# December: Blog Spotter Extraordinaire & Tireless Informer on Sins of Liberals, etc **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 8, 2003, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899 "2003-05-08T14:33:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/221 "2003-05-12T13:17:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TwistofFate \* > \*\*Jack, are you saying that it is impossible for the owners and investors in a newspaper to influence the slant that the paper takes on reporting news? \*\* Of course it’s not impossible. The question is whether it’s actually done. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/222 "2003-05-12T13:19:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > In ‘now’ way? What was that about elementary school learning? Obviously something you’re lacking as it’s pretty clearly a typo for “no.” > [@](#): > > Which would seem to imply that you **were** aiming the ‘idjit’ remark at **december**. Since you opened this thread to advocate the idea, which you seemed to implying in your earlier response. Implying only to a sub-literate retard desperately searching for a hook to hang his conclusion on. The point of this thread is not that december is an idjit - which not only not being news, is actually quite pedestrian – but that particular line of argumentation, if we can call it that, was really astoundingly stupid. And not worthy of a GD thread, but perhaps some silly IMHO maundering. > [@](#): > > Sorry, too many big words for me. > > Possibly my reading and comprehension skills might be below par. Possibly also, there might be just one or two teeny-weeny little issues with someone else’s writing and expression skills. Given your record so far it is fairly clear the evidence is towards the former, my dear moron. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/223 "2003-05-12T13:28:22Z")
It happens all the time Neurotik. For one example, British Newspapers which are owned by News International or one of it’s subsiduaries (sp?) waste no oppertunity to lambast the BBC over the television licence funding, purely because Rupert Murdoch owns Sky Broadcasting, the competitor with the BBC in the Digital Television market. I don’t think that L\_C suggested that there is definite Pro-Israeli bias in the American media, but that there is a possible reasoning that could be assumed if it were ever shown that the media took a bias in its reporting. Remember, in the Media, Bias isn’t always a bad thing, but something that should be presented fairly. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/224 "2003-05-12T13:44:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TwistofFate \* > \*\*Jack, are you saying that it is impossible for the owners and investors in a newspaper to influence the slant that the paper takes on reporting news? \*\* No. But if someone is making a suggestion that this is a systemic practice, in a manner calculated to invoke anti-Semitic feeling (again, a knowledge of the history of bigotry toward Jews helps), _the onus is on that person_ to make the case that such influence is occurring. I suspect that **LC** regrets that he ever allowed himself to be drawn out to expand on his initial insinuations (to the extent of harping on names of Jews involved in the media etc.). He’s the type that prefers making smarmy hints, rather than going into overt expressions of hatred like some of the other bigots who’ve spread excrement over this board from time to time. In this, he’s sort of like a one-time peripatetic U.S. presidential candidate, Lyndon LaRouche. LaRouche specialized in naming prominent politicians as communist “agents of influence”, successfully remaining just out of the reach of libel laws (he ultimately was jailed for one or more acts of sleazebaggery, the details of which I forget). A comical but repellent figure. ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/225 "2003-05-12T13:49:06Z")
FTR, I am also Jewish and I am fairly certain that I’m not the only Jewish poster on this board (I can think of two others right off the top of my head) who has consistently opposed the Bush administration’s Iraq policy, as well as Sharon’s policy with respect to the Palestinians. The editorial management of the _Nation_ also figures many Jews and there has been many a Nation column/editorial on the subject of how Jewish does not = being pro any specific Israeli policy (including the overarching idea of Zionism). The problem with the term “pro-Israeli lobby” in relation to the list of pubications **London** has provided isn’t that it’s racist–I think London deserves far too much credit to be tarred with that brush in the absence of other evidence (and there isn’t any other evidence). The problem is that the term implies a more monolithic political stance than can be justified in relation to those examples. It’s well known that non-Jewish and Jewish neoconservative hawks have collaborated in influencing and shaping Bush’s Middle East policy. But to compare, say, the editorial position of the Times to the Wolfowitz party line makes no sense at all. There are, in other words, many Jews (and other Americans) who may wish Israel well but don’t believe that Bush is doing it any favors with this kind of foreign policy–in fact there are many Israelis who feel that way. The United States has historically been Israel’s close ally and that historical bond has led to a particular relationship–just as the “special relationship” between Britain and the United States has sometimes involved those countries judging each other and acting towards each other somewhat differently than they would any other ally. Loosely speaking I’d say that the New York Times–quite apart from its mamagement and the fact that it’s located in a city with a large Jewish population–is influenced by that special relationship and its history. But it’s a testimony to the limits of that influence that the New York Times did not cheerlead for this war and has maintained a fairly consistently moderate and often critical position with respect to it and its aftermath. (I do agree though that the NYT’s coverage of events in Israel could be more stringent than it is though I think it has improved somewhat over the years as Sharon’s policies have become harsher–though that’s just an impression.) Conversely, there are also a lot of Jews living in London–more than in all of Israel if I’m not mistaken, and yet Blair’s support for the war in Iraq seems to have had very little to do with that fact. In sum: Complicated though it can be, I think it’s necessary to back off from any assumption about what kind of political position Jewish lineage might be thought to imply and, more important, to recognize signficant differences _within_ a United States spectrum that might, in a very loose way, be construed as favorable to Israel’s thriving. ---
**Author:** ![Mojo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Mojo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mojo)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/226 "2003-05-12T13:53:01Z")
I guess I can’t rely on any of these news sources to report on women’s issues fairly, cus they’re “controlled” by men. Or stories about kids for that matter- all of 'em are over 30. The rolleyes icon doesn’t do this justice. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/227 "2003-05-12T13:54:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Apos \* > I think it’s more the fact that the administration seems to be following their longtime suggestions, and buying into their ideology, very closely, having nothing to do with them being Jewish. Right or wrong, they represent one of the most vibrant schools of foriegn policy thought in conservative circles, and their ideas are getting their day in court. There’s a fundamental difference between the administration following their long-time suggestions and them (Perle & Wolfowitz) controlling the government. If someone founds a school of thought that others find compelling and chose to follow it of their own free will, this does not carry the implication that the former is manipulating or can manipulate the latter for his own ends. The suggestion that the Jewish control of the US government is a factor in influencing the direction of US foreign policy assumes that the actual leaders are stooges who are acting against their own self interest, due to the sinister influence of those who are manipulating them. Otherwise, their Jewishness is irrelevent. (This is all even assuming that Perle & Wolfowitz have in fact been prominent all this time for making these suggestions. I recall Perle as a prominent anti-communist cold warrior, but not as being prominent in Middle-East debates, and Wolfowitz not at all. But I don’t follow these matters closely at that level, so you could well be right.) > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > My point was that, having read quite a few posts by december, I believe “If someone says the government of the USA is too favorable to Israel then that is racism but if you say the EU is too favorable to the Palestinians then that is not racism but just a statement of fact.” is an accurate reflection of his position and I think that position is very slanted to one side. Sounds like you’re saying that in this particular instance your remarks were unjustified, but that you are relying on other unspecified remarks that he’s made to attribute to him that sentiment. I’ve seen this type of thing before, and in debates about december too, no less. Not a proper technique, IMHO. (Let’s see what you think if december tries something like this). > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by London\_Calling \* > I thought that was a rather helpful exchange, M’lord, the conclusion of which(between you and I) was: > > \ > > Seemed reasonably civil to me. What’s the story ? Not sure what you mean here. You seem to be implying that there is some inconsistency between my posts to that thread and those here. I don’t see any. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > re: **Ace** - I don’t believe that his banning had anything specifically to do w/ **Joe\_Cool’s** conservative bent, but rather both of their tempers, both (especially **Joe** ) when he felt angry, or that his wife had been insulted/attacked, would come out w/both barrels blazing on a personal basis, beyond what’s normally allowed, even in the pit. Well, I am not saying it was a _direct_ result of JC’s conservative bent, I think it contributed indirectly, as described above. IOW, Joe’s positions created a situation where the vast majority of posters to these threads were guaranteed to oppose him and anyone who chose to defend him. This in turn was not helpful to his case. My point here was that you cannot focus on the overall label of the poster, but rather on the position he was trashed for defending. (In a similar vein, Danielinthewolvesden was firmly liberal politically, but got in trouble mostly by trying to defend biblical literalism). But again, this is just my subjective opinion - I don’t think any of this is provable - we seem to agree about this. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TwistofFate \* > I don’t think that L\_C suggested that there is definite Pro-Israeli bias in the American media, but that there is a possible reasoning that could be assumed if it were ever shown that the media took a bias in its reporting. It does not appear that you’ve read the linked threads. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/228 "2003-05-12T14:00:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jackmannii \* > And speaking of mad dashes off to weekend larks, I notice that you did the same right after being asked for a comment. On a point _you are still failing to address_. Good lord, what are you gibbering about? I tend to take my weekends from Friday 5pm till Monday 8am, GMT. If this surprises you may I gently suggest you get a fucking life? > [@](#): > > See, **Gary** , I’ve run into this with you before. You’re very insistent that other posters answer all your points _immediately_, in the exact way you want, and you’re hell on wheels until you get your way. Then, however, if an uncomfortable question comes _your_ way, you’re suddenly missing in action. Oh really? When I read that I was surprised, as I can’t actually recall having any dealings with you in the past. A quick search for our names, all forums, any dates, gives only 3 results, this one, [a thread on posting stats](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=80538), and [another thread on post stats](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=78920). So where exactly have you run into me before? Or would you by any chance be talking complete shite. May I also point out that after my weekends I do reply to threads as soon as possible, as you’ll note in this case. In short, > [@](#): > > I would still like a response. To what? I’ve already replied to your question on your reference to London\_Calling from that previous thread. Please enlighten me on anything I’ve managed to miss, or failing that read my previous bloody response. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/229 "2003-05-12T15:28:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gary Kumquat \* > \*\* So where exactly have you run into me before? Or would you by any chance be talking complete shite. \*\* Perchance not. You might remember a thread I started in GD awhile back (the hamsters seem to have devoured it, or at least it doesn’t pop up in a search) questioning a whining German newspaper editorial about how Europeans were “helpless” to counter U.S. influence. You were quite insistent in that thread about how I respond in a particular way to every permutation of questions _you_ had. But when I asked you if Europeans had an obligation to put pressure on Palestinians in a similar manner to the U.S. having an obligation to pressure Israel towards peace, there was total silence on your part. Since the thread was, I believe, more than a year ago, it’s been a very very long weekend on your part. \*\* > [@](#): > > I’ve already replied to your question on your reference to London\_Calling from that previous thread. Please enlighten me on anything I’ve managed to miss.\*\* No, you have not addressed the point. This was what I asked you: _Gary, please comment on this reference to LC: …“the smear of “Jewish media control” is the stock in trade of tinfoil-hatted anti-Semitic bigots everywhere, and by parroting it continually, you’ve put yourself into their company.”_ I’ll help you by rephrasing the question. Should undocumented accusations be made that feed into a common strain of bigotry (other examples might include insinuations that Catholics want the world to be dominated by the Pope, or that blacks lust after white women) without being challenged as such? Is it necessary in your world that to be labeled anti-Semites, people have to commit overt acts like burning synagogues or raving about kikes? Or are you capable of recognizing that demonizing a group of people through references to “Jewish media control”, “international bankers” and the like are anti-Semitic as well? As I said before, proposing such theories is only remotely acceptable when one provides solid documentation to back them up. Failing that, one is merely a bigot. By the way, in attempting previously to lump me with posters like **december** whom you feel can be readily marginalized, you conspicuously left out **Izzy** , who also has said that **London\_Calling** ’s remarks smacked of bigotry. And others have since expressed their disdain. Is it just a little too difficult to marginalize _all_ of us? ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/230 "2003-05-12T17:42:36Z")
> [@](#): > > _originally posted by London\_Calling_ > \*\*Talking of which - asking for about the fourth time - while you’re here Jack Klugman/mannii, would you care to dispel my ignorance – and I‘m extremely happy to be corrected if you have any facts - by clarifying which of the below sample is not controlled by pro-Israeli interests; you’d be doing a service to anyone else reading as well? > > The New York Times > The Wall Street Journal > The Washington Post > Boston Globe > International Herald Tribune > Time > Newsweek > > \*\* The NYT and the Globe are not readily viewed here as being sympathetic toward Israel. **Mandelstam** also said it: “Jewish” does not always equal “pro-Israel.” Jews are just as likely to be liberals as not, which would make them oppositional to the Christian evangelicals, business sectors, the military…all pockets of right-wing support of Israel. The NYT and the Globe are better representative of the left, which historically has the larger sympathy for the Palestinian side. [The others I don’t know enough to argue about.] Now if you happen to be a follower of Indymedia UK or something, with a strong pro-Palestinian bent and you’re viewing the US media as a whole - sure it looks biased. That might be because where you’re standing on the I-P spectrum, you may be perilously close to falling off the end of it if heaven forbid you should sneeze. No, you will not see those polar positions represented. You won’t see the editorials calling for the end of the Jewish state, nor the editorials from the other side claiming that the Palestinian state already exists but nowadays it’s called Jordan. And why should you. Bias is defined by one’s own POV. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/231 "2003-05-13T07:51:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jackmannii \* > You might remember a thread I started in GD awhile back (the hamsters seem to have devoured it, or at least it doesn’t pop up in a search) questioning a whining German newspaper editorial about how Europeans were “helpless” to counter U.S. influence. Oh go away. You produce as evidence a thread that fortunately for you has disappeared. Try harder, or admit you were talking bollocks. > [@](#): > > No, you have not addressed the point. This was what I asked you: > > _Gary, please comment on this reference to LC: > …“the smear of “Jewish media control” is the stock in trade of tinfoil-hatted anti-Semitic bigots everywhere, and by parroting it > continually, you’ve put yourself into their company.”_ As you appear to have selective reading skills, may I a direct you to my post right below your original posting of this accusation, with my answer that “your thread shows nothing of bigotry by London\_Calling. Nothing at all.” You accuse him of bigotry. I state that there is nothing in the thread you linked to that justifies the claim. How much more of an answer do you need? Rephrase your question all you like, but L\_C made no anti-semitical accusations or insinuations. Despite this, you have tried repeatedly to create a number of strawmen to attack him with. Now as you seem to think you have such a clear cut case, please quote directly the statements that you think show such bigotry. Oh, and no more examples from threads that somehow can’t be found please. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 10:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/232 "2003-05-13T10:24:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Coldfire \* > Do you honestly believe that? I can assure you it’s not the case. Or does your remark only apply to those members of staff “active in voicing opinions on the matter of banning [of **december**]”? > In any case, I’d say our staff is pretty equally spread across the political spectrum. Some I’d definitely qualify as conservative, and some I’d qualify as liberal (myself included, I suppose). I’m honestly curious how one comes to the conclusion that the SD staff is somehow predominantly conservative. I didn’t make it very clear but I meant it in regard to only **december**. My point was that in a, presumably, ad hoc discussion of any given (potential) banning, only some Mods/Admins will be available, of which only some will offer views, of whom only some will offer particularly firm views. As I said to **wring** (back in this thread), we (as posters) can only speculate but, IMHO, in the matter of banning **december** (which must surely have been discussed), it’s my humble opinion that \*\* C K Dexter Haven\*\* would; a) have been available for the discussion, b) have an opinion, and c) that it would be a firm opinion And I’m not sure I would guess many others to so be besides yourself and 2/3 others. – just my estimation of the discussion ‘situation’ in relation to one particular poster, no more than that. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Coldfire \* > Well, **Dex** is Jewish. While no one can be excused for misrepresenting facts _à la_ **december** , it’s also understandable that someone who’s Jewish in either the religious or the ethnic sense is a little more “involved”, for lack of a better word, in the Israel/Palestine debate than your average impartial bystander. This doesn’t necessarily imply malice: for some, the issue is more emotional than for others. If you have examples of **Dex** practising the same sort of tactics as we’ve come to know and loathe from our pal **december** , then please bring them forward. If you can’t, then I submit that lumping him into the **december** basket just because he happens to be pro-Israel is rather unfair. I had wondered about\*\* C K Dexter Haven’s \*\*religion / ethnicity, but only in passing and in the context of considering his motivations for having such firm opinions (see below). One only has to consider the (now) close relationship between the Christian Right (in the US), many neo-conservative groups and Jewish groups to see that the ‘pro-Israeli’ camp has moved far outside its original Jewish-only base. That he is Jewish might, as you say, increase the potential for emotional-driven interventions, whether on the board or behind the scenes. Again, I should say that is simply speculation. Nor do I see anything particularly sinister in that, rather it’s an aspect of human nature of which we all need to be aware (and ready to temper) when in positions of responsibility. Ftr, C K Dexter Haven is a very different cup of tea to our resident racist / race hate inciting / liar and, IMHO, it would be overly simplistic (to the point of being misleading) to associate one with the other – yep, emotionally involved in a similar way but, in relation to postings (“tactics”, as you say) a very different character from **december**. You ask for an [example of his style](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=181728). I, obviously, suggest reading the relevant section for context: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by C K Dexter Haven \* > Make Islam the required religion of the country, repeal any laws about equality of women, kill or expell or subjugate all Jews… that’d be good for a start. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > I hope there was a smilie intended there because otherwise it implies a view of Arabs which we might want to discuss its validity and/or its bigotry. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Collounsbury_ > Dex is simply showing off his “deep” knowledge of the Middle East, of Arabs and Islam - well balanced as it is. Glad he could share to enlighten us. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Anahita_ > Cite? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by swami \* > C K Dexter Haven that was an excellent comment on the kind of Stereotyping and Bigotry that Arabs/Muslims currently face in the USA (and elsewhere). Do you care to explain yourself? > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by istara_ > Is this a joke? I don’t want to cause offence, given you are an administrator. But I find the sentiment ignorant, bigoted and inflammatory. > > Given you appear to be generally quite a learned, sane, person, I guess it is a joke. In which case, I would recommend editing your post to add a smiley or something, or newer visitors to this thread might get the wrong impression about you (and perhaps about the boards too, given you are admin). Even in his response to this criticism (in the thread) he insists on continuing with emotionally-driven, nonsensical rhetoric. As I say, not **december** by some measure but there is a certain emotional quality evident that could, as is human nature, leak through to other areas of ones involvement with the board. IMHO. - c’mon people! I feel as if I haven’t bitten off enough in this thread – any other religious groups, ethnic groups, authorities, political nutters want to have a go ? :eek: 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/233 "2003-05-13T11:03:03Z")
Ooh! He’s having a go at the birds now! ---
**Author:** ![Coldfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@Coldfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coldfire)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/234 "2003-05-13T11:48:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by London\_Calling \* > \*\*My point was that in a, presumably, ad hoc discussion of any given (potential) banning, only some Mods/Admins will be available, of which only some will offer views, of whom only some will offer particularly firm views. As I said to wring (back in this thread), we (as posters) can only speculate but, IMHO, in the matter of banning december (which must surely have been discussed), it’s my humble opinion that C K Dexter Haven would; > > a) have been available for the discussion, > b) have an opinion, and > c) that it would be a firm opinion > > And I’m not sure I would guess many others to so be besides yourself and 2/3 others.\*\* Yes, **december** is a poster who has been discussed by the staff repeatedly, and undoubtedly he will be discussed again in the future. The discussions surrounding him have indeed been about potentially banning him, at times. To clarify a few things: when we discuss the banning of a longtime poster (as opposed to, say, a run of the mill 3 post spammer), this is not something that’s decided by a few members of staff. In fact, it will usually require _all_ members of staff to chime in. Nor is it so, that any member of staff (moderator or administrator) has somewhat of a veto right with regards to banning. If the entire staff wants to ban someone, an administrator can’t just neglect that. In fact, moderators often have more “hands-on” knowledge of posters than admins do (seeing as they tend to be more involved with behind the scenes activities rather than the boards themselves), so if anything, the moderator vote with regards to bannings tends to be considerably in weight. In this example, you presume that with regard to discussing **december** ’s banning, **Dex** would have had a firm opinion. I can assure you this is not the case: in fact, I recall **Dex** explicitly reserving judgment and stating that the opinions of the mods who interact with the poster at hand the most would matter more than his. In short, your estimation of **Dex** as an administrator of this board is incorrect, certainly inasfar the **december** files are concerned. Your example of **Dex** ’s posting style in Israel/Palestine debates is duly noted. It is certainly not a point of view I’d personally subscribe to. Then again, it’s a point of view I’ve seen from plenty of Jews, from either side of the political spectrum, and indeed, from various nations, including my rather liberal country. Without shrouding the whole thing in mystique, I think it’s fair to say that the Israel/Palestine matter affects Jews more than it does you and me, **London\_Calling**. That doesn’t make them right or wrong: it’s just something to take into account when reading about someone’s world view. It differs from ours, in perhaps the same way that my point of view with regard to Northern Ireland will differ from that of the average citizen of Belfast. Less personal involvement. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/235 "2003-05-13T12:25:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Coldfire \* > I can assure you this is not the case: in fact, I recall **Dex** explicitly reserving judgment and stating that the opinions of the mods who interact with the poster at hand the most would matter more than his. Thanks for your general candor. And it’s good to know **C K Dexter Haven** is able to keep his emotions in check behind the scenes. Kudos to him. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Coldfire \* > Your example of **Dex** ’s posting style in Israel/Palestine debates is duly noted. Cheers > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Coldfire \* > It is certainly not a point of view I’d personally subscribe to. Then again, it’s a point of view I’ve seen from plenty of Jews, from either side of the political spectrum, and indeed, from various nations, including my rather liberal country. Without shrouding the whole thing in mystique, I think it’s fair to say that the Israel/Palestine matter affects Jews more than it does you and me, **London\_Calling**. That doesn’t make them right or wrong: it’s just something to take into account when reading about someone’s world view. It differs from ours, in perhaps the same way that my point of view with regard to Northern Ireland will differ from that of the average citizen of Belfast. Less personal involvement. IMHO, bigotry is bigotry is bigotry nad I don’t feel overly content accepting it from anyone - apart from anything else, by so doing, I’m implicitly accepting it’s okay. And I obviously don’t need to remind you what is this board dedicated to doing, and of which \*\*C K Dexter Haven \*\* is an Admin. Anyway, thanks for walking a couple of tricky tightropes and explaining so fully the mechanisms. Cheers. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/236 "2003-05-13T13:29:29Z")
**London\_Calling** In response to your challenge for anyone contradict the “facts” you’ve presented, I looked around a bit. I am unable to verify your assertion that Peter Kann (of Dow Jones) is Jewish. This fact appears on all sorts of racist websites, but on racist websites almost everyone is Jewish. With regards to Katherine Graham (of the Washington Post & Newsweek), your assertion is misleading at best, if not outright false. [http://www.jewishsf.com/bk010727/obp41a.shtml](http://www.jewishsf.com/bk010727/obp41a.shtml) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON – Three subjects were taboo in Katharine Graham’s childhood home: money, sex and her father’s Jewishness. > > So wrote the legendary Washington Post publisher in her 1997 memoirs, “Personal History.” Graham died July 16 at 84. > [@](#): > > “I’m sure my parents were not denying or hiding my father’s Jewishness from us, nor were they ashamed of it. But there was enough sensitivity so that it was never explained or taken pride in,” Graham wrote, noting the family had a pew in St. John’s Episcopal Church (“mainly because the rector was a friend of the family”). She and her siblings had been baptized by their Lutheran maternal grandmother. > > Graham’s funeral service was held Monday at the Episcopal Washington National Cathedral. An estimated 4,000 mourners attended. The Post reported that Graham had no religious affiliation, but she sometimes attended the Episcopal Christ Church in Georgetown. So I am curious as to the source of your information. Or maybe not so curious. Because in looking at the language of [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=1656438#post1656438), it seemed to me that you did not seem to be writing in your own language. So I looked around a bit, and discovered that most of the post was lifted from an article by a guy named [Kevin MacDonald](http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/). One can look around at the guy’s website and decide if he is an anti-Semite by whatever definition one chooses - a quick scan says he is certainly a borderline case at best. I didn’t find his article on his website - it is attributed to him [here](http://home.earthlink.net/~hhlindner/Writings/mediagov.htm). (Interestingly, [here’s](http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1989) another guy posting that very same article - also from London). OTOH, I did not find the “Katherine Graham is Jewish” allegation in that guy’s article. But your language on that issue also appears in respectable Aryan sources, e.g. [here](http://christianparty.net/stormfront.htm). Of note is that some of the Kevin MacDonald stuff also appears on that website, so it’s hard to say for sure who was copying who. But in any event, it would appear that you’ve been posting false or misleading information, lifted - plagiarized, one might say - from racist or quasi-racist sources. Response please. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/237 "2003-05-13T13:40:05Z")
Gary, I don’t need to dig up that old thread. You’ve demonstrated amply here that you’ll weasel out of answering direct questions. You’ve addressed nothing in my last post, other than to stick your fingers in your ears and chant “Na na na no bigotry no bigotry.” Not to mention mature responses like > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gary Kumquat \* > **Oh go away.** As to why some posters here are reluctant to acknowledge **LC’s** bigotry, I think part of the reason may involved those parties’ strong disapproval of Israeli policy and a desire to protect posters with similar views, even if they start to fall out of the fringe of acceptable dialogue. One can almost hear the unspoken excuse: “Well, he does natter on about the Jews a bit, but he’s _alright_.” No, he’s not _alright_. He has a sick attitude, one that you’re not helping him to recognize and overcome. And while it’s healthier for him to fling his feces about the SDMB than to do so in real life, where important people would find him a creepy bigot\*, it’s not helping to create constructive debate on the Middle East. \*Or would they? **Tee** was furiously denounced by **Gary** for saying this: _“L\_C, speaking as someone not even remotely Jewish, I can say the same about certain Europeans. That Israel should be the focus/scapegoat/target for so many in supposedly enlightened countries is both laughable and horrific. That the UK can be both a Coalition member and a haven of anti-Semitism (to the point of exporting bombers, no less) at the same time is quite puzzling to some here in the US.”_ I thought this statement overblown and not supported by any of my experiences during brief trips to the U.K. (not that I was wearing a sandwichboard proclaiming my affiliations). If there’s a cultural attitude that makes the objectionable views we’ve seen here more acceptable than in the U.S., I have no data to support it. It _would_ help to deprive **Tee** of ammunition if there were fewer apologias for **LC** from those living in his part of the world. And lastly regarding **C K Dexter Haven**. His views are notably more pro-Israel than my own. However he employs knowledge and solid facts to make his positions, and for a bigot to insinuate that **C K** is a racist and protects racists on the board is false and disgusting. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/238 "2003-05-13T13:54:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jackmannii \* > Gary, I don’t need to dig up that old thread. You’ve demonstrated amply here that you’ll weasel out of answering direct questions. Fuck off. I’ve answered every one of your questions directly, and am more than happy to return to any you feel haven’t been addressed. That’s two accusations you’ve made now, neither of them backed up by anything - no quotes, cites or examples. I ask you one more time - provide one actual quote to back up your statements, you pathetic turd. ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/239 "2003-05-13T13:59:12Z")
**London** , I dislike the word “racist” in a case like this one. Yeah, I know, **december** is a special case: he tends to come in with some howlers in Bell Curve type threads too, so the term is arguably quite justified. But to speak more in the abstract, sometimes people say things out of ignorance of the particulars of a situation. That ignorance may be largely accidental–they just happen to have heard false information about a group and to have never been edified–or it may be more endemic to that person’s environment and outlook (because the person is a member of Group X and Group X historically has troubles with Group Y, the person neither tends to see nor seeks out information on Group Y’s point of view). While either sort of ignorance may lead to beliefs and comments that could be deemed “racist” I prefer to call these things prejudice. Of course, no one wants to be called prejudiced either: but the thing is, the root meaning of that word simply points to a predisposition to judge–and one that relates particularly to ignorance. “Racist” opens a different can of worms because _some_ racists are operating from a reflexive disdain for difference itself. Their eyes or their ears discern difference (of skin color, of religion, of sexual orientation), and they leap to demonize that difference. Such people are almost always ignorant about the differences they demonize as well, but there’s also something prior to and aside from their ignorance that is motivating their behavior. Jews have strong historical reasons to feel persecuted by many others. Most growing up in the United States will tend to deal with enough gentiles to realize that Christians aren’t necessarily anti-semitic. So here knowledge triumphs over ignorance. American Jews have fewer opportunities to interact with Muslims, especially Arab Muslims. (Growing up where I did in the NYC burbs my image of Arabs was very distorted. It wasn’t until I was in college and after that I actually met a variety of South Asian and Arab people who were Muslims. Later I met a lot more by traveling abroad.) All this by of saying that a lot of American Jews don’t have the chance to overcome their ignorance about Arabs, just as some American gentiles don’t have the chance to overcome their ignorance about Jews, and some American whites don’t have the chance to overcome their ignorance about blacks, and so on. All of this certainly amounts to a lot of prejudice: but I’d like to reserve the word racism for special cases of this phenomenon where the impulse to hate people for their differences goes much deeper. I don’t think of you, **London** as a “racist” or, for that matter, as an “…ist” of any other pernicious variety. Still, your remark about the pro-Israeli lobby and the ownership of those news media was not very nuanced or informed. We all sometimes lapse into shorthand on these boards: calling things “rightwing” or “liberal” or, in this instance invoking a “pro-Israel lobby” as a way of communicating a certain kind of politics. No one wants every post to be a 800 words long (except maybe me 😉 ). I think when you made that comment you lapsed into shorthand. Knowing you from your posts, I think that’s much more likely than that you have a deep-seated ignorance on the matter, and, still less, that you’re racist or anti-semite. **Coldfire** , isn’t there any way for a moderator or administrator to ask **december** , publicly or privately, to limit his OPs to about one/week. Wouldn’t that be a good way to send him a signal and to improve his contribution without going overboard? I understand that mods don’t want to get involved in policing the content of posts: but trolling can involve content rather than decorum, as you well know. Some of **december** ’s recent OPs (and I don’t even read most of them) have, IMO, brought out the worst in him and in everyone else (including myself). His unfounded assertions about this or that (the BBC, the New York Times) and his perverse desire to compound his ignorance with more ignorance when he’s challenged, do suggest trolling rather than, say, a guy who knows less than he thinks. In other words, he’s doing it for the attention. I’m sure that’s not what the board wants. I’ve often found myself tempted to resort to–perhaps also succumbing to–conduct unbecoming when I lose patience with D. I’m sure I’m not the only one. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2003, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899/240 "2003-05-13T14:13:59Z")
**Mandelstam** - the fact that staff has openly discussed/admitted having had discussions re: **decembers** possible banning should be enough of a deterent. Sadly (since this isn’t the first time I recall seeing such an admission) it doesn’t appear to have a lasting effect. I somehow suspect that the list of current long term posters who fall into the category “folks staffs’ discussed banning” is relatively short. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/december-blog-spotter-extraordinaire-tireless-informer-on-sins-of-liberals-etc/173899.md?page=13)