This is my second article on genre editor and publisher of Dybbuk Press Tim Lieder, and his ridiculous fever-brained attacks on my blog (relating in the main to my series on Nick Mamatas, but not exclusively by any means).
Here is Lieder’s third blog response to me, where he mistakes crude expletives and the same old base misrepresentations, gross fabrications, incoherent ranting, ‘how many names can he call me?’ ad hominems and pure projection for some kind of refutation of the points I raise. He also does worse than this, mucho worse.
Here is Lieder’s chosen title for his blog post, not holding anything back…
Motherfucker motherfucker Paranoid Jew Motherfucker motherfucker
You keep it classy Lieder.
So, I went to the https://seasonoftheredwolf.wordpress.com/ curious as to what he was going to say about homosexuality and Apex. And now I want to hurt him. Actually I even hate Nick just a little for linking to this guy. I think if I wasn’t a zionist, I would greet the entire thing with a giant meh because I’m sure that yuki_onna can deal with some asshole being diminutive and call her Cathy because he wants to infantilize her in his mind, Jawad’s poem is a solid poem (he was published in the Muslim issue of Apex that came out of the Elizabeth Moon shitstorm) and Nick is Nick and he actually likes people trying to fly poop at him from various blogs and chat rooms in the internet.
Yeah man you are really hurting me with your laughably ridiculous zingers. I call Catherynne Cathy because I want to infantilize her in my mind?!? I have a friend Lisa, whose real name is Elizabeth, do I and others (including herself) infantilize her by calling her Lisa? I have a relative Samantha, we all call her Sam. Didn’t know she was being infantilized. That’s because she isn’t. Maybe any William who is called Bill, any Nicholas who is called Nick, is being infantilized? No I don’t think so. Some people call me Larry in person rather than Lawrence, am I being infantilized? Wow I never looked at it that way, maybe because I’m not an idiot.
As far as the Arab/Muslim issue of Apex is concerned, I personally commended one of the stories there and thought the cover art was great (I did this on the Asimov’s forum before it shut down. That thread is no longer accessible because it was in the political/religious section). However it was the motive for the issue, the catalyst for it (the Elizabeth Moon affair), that I thought and still think pathetic. Nothing wrong with having a special Arab/Muslim issue per se.
But I AM a zionist (in my snarkier moods I state that Israel is our only hope that the Israelis will go back to Israel) and nothing is worse than reading some fucking idiot arguing on behalf of things that you generally agree with in such a horribly stupid way that it colors everything through shit brown lenses.
This ‘Zionist’ quacks and waddles like an anti-Zionist (at least when it comes to his screeds against me). Just check with the anti-Zionists. They would give you a big cheer Lieder, at least when it comes to your ridiculous defense (that he would later deny a defense!) of the radical and vocal left-winger/communist anti-Zionist Mamatas and your pathetic puffball attacks on my person. With Zionists like Lieder, who needs enemies? I agree with you though Lieder that there is nothing worse than having some idiot argue on behalf of things (Zionism and related in this case) that you generally agree with, in such a warped stupid horrible way that it filters everything through through a skein of offal. You are projecting Lieder, I know you don’t get it. I hope some readers do at least. No Lieder not your sycophants at your blog, and others like-mindless.
To spare you the experience, the fucker continues his multi-part series that we can call “Nick Mamatas hurt my feelings when he called my blog unintentionally hilarious and I’m going to prove that he’s an anti-semite” series, which follows closely on the heels of “Some guy said that he knew James Hogan and liked him and didn’t want to piss on his corpse for being a holocaust deniers so that means that fansom is full of anti-semites” series, with a long harangue against Mamatas for hating Israel – and being gay – and being a hypocrite for being a gay hater of Israel.
So much loopy nonsense and inadvertently revealing and laughably misrepresentative gibberish in the above screed. The Zionist (apparently) Tim Lieder doesn’t stop to ask himself – why would anybody pour scorn on a blog that admits upfront it is about exposing anti-Semitism, as not intentionally hilarious? What are the motives of such a person here (Mamatas in this case), even if largely if not entirely subconscious? Lieder doesn’t even pose this question, never mind answer it. Yes I am repeating this point, which I made in my previous article. Lieder doesn’t even acknowledge Mamatas’s bad timing here – dismissing my blog when he did and how he did, the self-same day I had finished publishing the last article in an extensive series on Holocaust Revisionism. The uh ‘Zionist’ Lieder doesn’t even see anything wrong with Mamatas pouring scorn on a blog that up to that point, had 81% of its featured articles being a series about Holocaust Revisionism from within the genre community. Au contraire Lieder defends Mamatas (no matter how obtusely, even as he denies he is defending Mamatas in a further response to me! Lieder is simply delusional) and attacks the Jew who exposes Holocaust Revisionism from within the genre community.
Lieder adds to his nonsense with an outrageous and disgustingly cretinous foul-up that means Lieder has zero credibility on anything remotely political. In fact anything at all. He does a Pontin. Lieder goes off into hardcore ‘full retard’ witlessness from which no man can return…
‘follows closely on the heels of “Some guy said that he knew James Hogan and liked him and didn’t want to piss on his corpse for being a holocaust deniers so that means that fansom is full of anti-semites” series..’
Lieder doesn’t appear to get it at all, really it is frankly almost unbelievable. I have had the liberal anti-Zionist Jew Mark Pontin attack me and dismiss me over my series on Holocaust Revisionism which he failed to comprehend utterly. Now the supposed pro-Israel Zionist Jewish convert Tim Lieder attacks and dismisses me over the same series.. ON HOLOCAUST REVISIONISM!! Have you ever?? WTF?? It is super chilling, and so extremely super-idiotic of Lieder that he *even in his way* outdoes Pontin (which frankly I thought impossible) for ‘full retard’ status. I don’t think I have ever heard of such a thing, it may well be unprecedented – a ‘Zionist’ and a ‘Jew’ (convert or not) scornfully and unknowingly dismissing an extensively and heavily detailed series – with all the evidence – of unambiguous Holocaust Revisionism.
In this respect of course from within the genre community (Tangent editor Dave Truesdale and SF short story writer Marian Powell in this case, and what of SF editor Sam Hidaka’s odious commentary? An Asimov’s Forum goon squad and a Forum admin, that inadvertently or not, sugarcoated Holocaust Revisionism and attacked me personally for speaking out against it. Admin threatened me with a banning). Did Lieder even read the series? I hope for his sake he didn’t. If he did, he failed very basic English reading comprehension (well he appears to do so all over the place). Either way he can’t be taken remotely seriously and like Pontin blows his head off with a shotgun and declares victory. At least Pontin’s foul-up was consistent with his anti-Zionism and anti-Israelism. Lieder’s foul-up is even less excusable, since he is ostensibly a pro-Israel Zionist! Although he ain’t. He just thinks he is. Lieder takes self-deception to the max. Really he doesn’t even appear to be reading what he is dismissing with such expletive laden humbug. If he is actually reading it, he does not appear capable of comprehending any of it at all, not even vaguely; even though I explicate on all this in nitty-gritty detail in my thirteen article series. The very titles of many of the chapters in the Holocaust Revisionism series of mine are very clear-cut and allude explicitly to Holocaust Revisionism. Lieder like Pontin before him, appears incapable of comprehending the meanings of the very titles of the chapters to this series. Lieder unlike Pontin though, claims to be “rabidly Zionist”.
IT GETS EVEN MORE HAREBRAINED. Lieder goes beyond the Pontin barrier (the barrier set for supreme witlessness in the SF community). Lieder’s later reply to me here (in response to my own article where I allude to Lieder’s gaffe, in an article that is in the main a response to Mark Pontin) sees Lieder deny having fouled up so outrageously (to HIMSELF! and his readership), as if he never wrote this at all:
‘follows closely on the heels of “Some guy said that he knew James Hogan and liked him and didn’t want to piss on his corpse for being a holocaust deniers so that means that fansom is full of anti-semites” series..’
Can Lieder inform us who the “some guy” is? Can he give us the name? Let’s hear the actual identity of this “some guy” from Lieder himself. After all we are not talking about some alien or ghost, a John Doe. Give us the name Lieder. Let’s hear you say it out loud and out proud. Lieder could not do so of course, without digging himself ever deeper into the black hole he has already dug for himself in this regard.
I have NEVER HEARD of a such a thing – that is a ‘rabid Zionist’ and a ‘Jew’ dismissing an extensive written documentation of Holocaust Revisionsim (whether from a blog, website, book, monograph etc.) with snide ridicule – as if the series of mine is not actually about Holocaust Revisionism at all, as if I am exaggerating or fabricating false charges. As if I accuse anybody in this series of anti-Semitism when they are not so clearly guilty. I thought the ‘Jew’ Mark Pontin had set the bar here as low and as deranged as it could go – however given the fact that Lieder claims to be a Zionist and supportive of Israel (whereas Pontin is explicitly anti-Israel and anti-Zionist), Lieder has gone even lower into ineffable derangement and obscene stupidity. He then having gone as low as one thinks remotely possible, proceeds to go even lower into ineffable off-the-charts imbecility (going beyond the Pontin barrier). He fools himself that he made no such obscene blunder at all after I allude to it and censure him for it. He really does. I address this oblivious and blithe self-deception and denial in my next article in reply to the pertinent blog post of Lieder’s.
This blog of mine is really drawing out a lot of extreme and bizarro loopiness from out of the woodwork, and from the um ‘Jews’ no less. Naturally I am the one who gets accused of being crazy. Riiiiiiight.
In other words Lieder is something of a simpleton. (and I know I could be accused of an ad hominem here myself but really what else can I say?) And I initially thought my very detailed series on Holocaust Revisionism was a little too long and extraneous in parts! Makes no difference. Some people still don’t get it. And um two Jews most notably, both an anti-Zionist one and a Zionist!! Who would have believed it? I mean it is truly surreal.
As such Lieder has no credibility on political matters, prejudice, anti-Semitism whatsoever – none at all – given his complete foul-up and obscene and woefully stupid misrepresentation of the facts re my series on Holocaust Revisionism ALONE (never mind his later DENIAL AND SELF-DECEPTION that he ever did so). Even what Lieder writes *ostensibly* in support of Israel (I shudder to think about it even) as a “rabid Zionist” cannot be taken seriously at all, because that’s what having no credibility means.
Fandom is certainly full of anti-Semites btw. If the ‘James Hogan has passed away thread’ from the Asimov’s Forum doesn’t tell you that, what else would? The wider world is full of anti-Semites as a whole, and the genre community couldn’t be expected to be any different.
with a long harangue against Mamatas for hating Israel – and being gay – and being a hypocrite for being a gay hater of Israel.
If one is gay and pro-Palestinian and/or anti-Israel, then one is clearly being a hypocrite for the reasons I already laid out in the pertinent article. Lieder, the ‘Zionist pro-Israel Jew’ – apparently – truly can’t seem to recognise this at all! Lieder acknowledges none of the pertinent content here, nothing I mentioned, nothing from the Gil Troy article, nothing from the Phyllis Chesler piece, nada. Well Lieder is certainly consistent in his incomprehension.
Now if you’ve read Mamatas recently, you will be forgiven for going “huh?” so let’s get the logic –
1. Mamatas hurt this dumbshit’s feelings.
Okkkaaay Lieder, although calling me a dumbshit doesn’t change the actual facts here detailed in my first article on Mamatas and in my reply to him, and yourself.
2. This dumbshit babbles on about Holocaust Denial
Lieder, I swear on my life, that for a ‘Zionist Jew’, you have one heck of a way of showing it. Can you give me the name of any other ‘Zionist Jew’ who would be so offensively deluded and supremely idiotic as to dismiss an entirely original series on Holocaust Revisionism from within the genre community (um what is my blog about Lieder?) as ‘babbling’. If ‘babbling on about Holocaust Denial’ is greeted by you with such a dismissive shrug at best, one wonders what Lieder would make of less extreme and offensive anti-Semitism from the genre community, disingenuous new anti-Semitism included?
3. Therefore Mamatas is a Holocaust Denier
Is Lieder just brazenly lying here or is he just being very obtuse? To repeat myself somewhat – I think it the latter. Note how Lieder ignores *what I actually wrote* in my pertinent first article on Mamatas and my reply to Mamatas on this score – when Mamatas made the same pathetic and bogus charge against me – that I was in all seriousness accusing Mamatas of Holocaust Denial.
And let’s go onto a second syllogism –
1. Mamatas recommends several blogs, of which one is called Lenin’s Tomb.
He recommends it ahead of any other blog on planet earth – gee I wonder what that could possibly mean? It’s the most overtly political blog of very few blogs on the blogroll at Mamatas’s website. Hey don’t read anything into that, the ‘rabidly Zionist’ Tim Lieder says not to.
2. The Lenin’s Tomb blogger is a Commie Rat Bastard who may or may not hate Israel but definitely believes in Palestinian rights.
The Lenin’s Tomb blogger is a communist duh (I never call him a commie rat bastard or anything else like that ho hum, but Lieder isn’t exactly one for accuracy and factuality). He (Richard Seymour) certainly is viciously anti-Israel and rabidly anti-Semitic. I provided just a small part of the evidence in my article here. I could have provided a helluva lot more evidence but I don’t have the time to write a book on the subject at my blog; and if people don’t get that Seymour is anti-Semitic with the evidence I provide from the Lenin’s Tomb blog itself, nothing I add to that will make any difference. For those who have eyes to see…
Note how Lieder ignores the points I made completely (with the evidential links) of Seymour’s support for the HAMAS coup in Gaza in 2007, Seymour’s portrayal of HAMAS as willing to accept Israel’s right to exist, Seymour’s membership and high-profile status in the rabidly anti-Semitic UK SWP/Socialist Workers Party (there is more forthcoming on the UK SWP and their rabid anti-Semitism at this blog), Seymour’s admiration for the sinister HAMAS, Hezbollah supporter George Galloway and vice versa, etc. Naturally Seymour’s anti-Semitism is ineptly covered up and blanketed by pro-Palestinian sloganese and mantras as is the case with the UK SWP as well (and the anti-Semitic far Left as a whole). It all don’t mean a thing to Lieder, it sails right through the holes in his head. This is the self-same Tim Lieder who tell us he is “rabidly Zionist” no less. Go figure.
3. Therefore, Mamatas is an anti-semite.
Ho hum I never say anywhere that Mamatas is an anti-Semite, however Mamatas is certainly a proud rank and file soldier in the army of the far Left with all its bankrupt and absurd ideology and accompanying baggage. The baggage of the far Left is inclusive of apologetics and outright support for Islamism/radical Islam, intemperate anti-Semitism and moral and cultural relativism. What I have to say on Mamatas is detailed in the series on him, although you wouldn’t know the first thing about it coming from Lieder’s absurd re-invention of my articles, that’s Lieder the so-called ‘pro-Israel Zionist’.
The so-called “rabid Zionist” runs to the defense of Nick Mamatas (while later pretending that he doesn’t do so at all!) who himself is conspicuously part of an ideological army that is proudly, explicitly, shrilly and vocally anti-Zionist (more so than ever before). Mamatas’s favourite political blogger – that’s what it means to recommend a blog ahead of any other – is overtly and shrilly anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic and a conspicuous member of the anti-Semitic UK SWP. Lieder cannot even acknowledge any of this, never mind stop to ask this obvious question – why would a “rabid Zionist” carry water for an anti-Zionist communist who is conspicuously politically associated with anti-Semites (Lenin’s Tomb & the SWP, PM Press); even as Lieder pretends he isn’t coming to Mamatas’s defense? The self-deception with Lieder is glaring and shocking in equal measure.
Lieder why don’t you put up links to all your blog posts on ‘Season of the Red Wolf’ at any pro-Zionist blog/forum and let us know how many get back to you on this front, endorsing your gibberish (after having necessarily read my own blog and my several series on yourself, Mamatas and Holocaust Revisionism). Never mind Lieder, I know you don’t get it. You didn’t comprehend my easy to understand series on Holocaust Revisionism, so something far more subtle and nuanced would be Mandarin Chinese to you and your ilk. I’m not writing this for your benefit and your sycophants neither.
Should we go on?
For your sake one would hope not, but hey don’t let me stop you.
1. Nick believes in gay rights and has several gay friends
2. Therefore he is either gay or bisexual
3. Furthermore, he is a hypocrite for not being 100% in support of Israel because Israel has gay rights legislation on its books (and as long as the Haredi don’t take over parliament there it will stay)
Ho hum what a predictable warping and pathetic misrepesentation of what I actually wrote here. I have covered this further up as well. I could repeat the points, but really it is all in the linked article. Lieder your grossly misrepresentative palaver on this front – which has nothing to do with what I actually wrote at all – is the kind of thing one hears from the anti-Zionist/anti-Israel mob when confronted with their hypocrisy on gay rights, since Israel has gay rights (not only constitutionally and legally but in practice too) and the Arab Muslim Middle-East (inclusive of Gaza and the Palestinian Territories as a whole) and other parts of the world (Muslim and even Christian included eg. the West Indies) do not. Naturally the hypocrisy here and what it tells us is something the so-called ‘rabid Zionist’ Lieder appears not to comprehend at all. His loyal devotion to Mamatas is so strong, his doublethink so firm and firmly entrenched, that Lieder blindly trips up all over the place and the topic of gay rights and the Middle-East is no exception.
Of course, there’s the old syllogisms which include
1. Because of Elizabeth Moon, Catherynne called for Muslim/Arab stories in order to provide a corrective to the Islamophobia that Moon represented.
Islamophobia sigh. Here Lieder inadvertently reveals where much of his doublethink and human pretzel contortion act has its roots (aside from his ‘friendship’ with Mamatas and Valente). Here is the rub. ‘Islamophobia’ is nothing but a historically recent invention of Muslim radicals as a buzzword (racism!) to disingenuously brush off valid and legitimate criticisms of Islam, its dogma, history and the contemporary violence, brutality and bigotry of many of the faith’s extremist adherents. Naturally Lieder swallows this disingenuous charade concocted by Muslim radicals hook line and sinker.
‘Islamophobia’ is a meaningless neologism, itself a product of taqiyya and furthering taqiyya itself, adopted and pushed aggressively by the radical anti-Zionist/anti-Israel Left and even the anti-Semitic reactionary Right, furthering in the process the apologetics and mealy-mouthed excuses for Muslim radicalism. In other words people crying ‘Islamophobia’ like trained seals are nothing but the useful idiots of Muslim fundamentalists, whether they realise it or not.
The cry of ‘Islamophobia’ goes hand in hand with the odiousness and stupidity of moral relativism and its near cousin cultural relativism. Of course for daring to point out that the PC emperor is naked, that would makes me an anti-Muslim bigot in the eyes of the know-nothings crying Islamophobia mindlessly (Lieder included). There is certainly anti-Muslim bigotry (the ‘nuke Mecca’ crowd); however pointing out incontrovertible facts about Islam and its mainstream dogma, history and current state of affairs is no more bigoted than detailing the facts about the Inquisition, the Borgias, the witch hunts and the like.
Likewise documenting the facts about crony capitalism and the barbarity of Stalinism is not bigotry, and the only people who think it is are insecure ideologues of which unfortunately there is no shortage. I have gone on record as considering Moon’s remarks crudely and fecklessly put, nothing more than that, nothing less than that. To those who actually swallow this garbage on ‘Islamophobia’, what I write about will be way way over your heads; it can only read like Quantum Mechanics, largely incomprehensible. Don’t worry your tiny tiny minds over it, just save yourselves the hassle of confusion and dissonance, and call me a bigot or as Lieder puts it more or less a ‘paranoidJewmotherfuckerdipshitheadshitbag’. It will save you know-nothings having to think for yourselves and actually do real research here that will only contradict your blind ideological faith in cultural relativism, willful ignorance on Islam and related.
So Lieder is trying to hold two contradictory positions at the same time – a pro-Israel Zionist stance and a know-nothing PC stance of cultural relativism and willful ignorance on Islam that is heavily ingrained within the anti-Zionist and yes anti-Semitic Western Left and the reactionary anti-Semitic ‘paleocon’ Right. The fact that ‘Islamophobia’ is a knee-jerk ‘play the victim’ cry of Muslim radicals and naturally Jew-hating Muslim radicals at that, and the anti-Zionist Left likewise means nothing to the so-called ‘Zionist Jew’ Tim Lieder; any more than it means anything to the anti-Zionist radical Left itself that they employ knee-jerk the same empty intellectually bankrupt and obtuse mantra – Islamophobia – as right-wing Muslim extremists who invented this ‘Islamophobia’ nonsense in the first place.
The disturbing coincidence here is way over their heads, along with a lot else. Of course moderate (real and imagined) Muslims may cry ‘Islamophobia’ too – to even legitimate and valid criticisms of Islam and the Islamic world – this begs the question: why do they do so? Naturally a combination of reasons, oversensitivity, lack of introspection and the taboo of facing up to mainstream Muslim dogma and history is also foremost here, all too human traits. There is also the uncomfortable fact that many ‘moderate’ Muslims are not so moderate when you look beneath the shiny surface. Of course pointing this out makes me a bigot too in the eyes of the useful dhimmi idiots. If you have to ask what a dhimmi is, chances are you are one.
To the mindless Lieder (and others), what I write above (which Lieder is incapable of understanding at all. Then again Lieder understands nothing much) would only be further confirmation that I am a bigot.
2. Catherynne has never decided to make an all Jewish issue of Apex.
Catherynne has never decided to make an all Jewish issue of Apex, even though there is rampant anti-Semitism both in the genre community and in the wider Western world (at levels not seen since the 1930s and World War 2 with all its chilling connotations). In the genre community that includes explicit Holocaust Revisionism from genre professionals (note the plural) no less, all on public record (remember Lieder brushes aside my series on Holocaust Revisionism, failing utterly to get what it is about at all).
3. Therefore Catherynne is an anti-semite
This is ridiculously stupid. Nowhere do I say or imply that Valente is an anti-Semite merely because she falls prey to the pathetic PC zeitgeist of our times. Valente is guilty of pandering to this cultural namby-pamby nonsense just like you Lieder (with your claptrap of ‘Islamophobia’), nothing more than that.
Even better –
1. Children are usually named with a diminutive “y” at the end of their names to connote that they are juvenile and cute (billy, bobby, jimmy, etc., etc.)
2. Sometimes that ee sound suggests mental retardation
3. Catherynne Valente is a woman
4. THerefore, it’s perfectly acceptable to call her Cathy Valente (this is especially true when Nick is never referred to as Nicky anywhere in the blog post)
I had to read the above twice to double check that Lieder wasn’t joking. He isn’t. Even by Lieder’s very dumb standards this is absurd. It is way beyond ridiculously stupid. I call Catherynne Cathy therefore I am suggesting by doing so, that Catherynne is juvenile and mentally subnormal?!? Really Lieder, for sheer unvarnished superdumbness this is arguably only beat by your obscenely stupid commentary on my Holocaust Revisionism series which you didn’t comprehend at all (God alone knows if he ever will).
I have known a few Katherines, Catherines, Catalinas (however they spell it) who call themselves Cathy, Kate, even Katey. Do they consider themselves subnormal and little children? Do their friends and family likewise for calling them by the diminutive? Are they all sexist and misogynistic likewise? Do all women who use the name Kate and Cathy for the longer proper versions of their name filled with self-loathing, inferiority complexes and contempt for their own gender? Or is it only people who use it without the requisite permission from women called Catherine and similar? If women with the name Nicole choose the diminutive Nicky and women with the name Elizabeth and similar choose the name Lisa or Eliza, Samantha Sam and their friends and family call them by the diminutives likewise, are they also being sexist and demeaning to said women? Or is it once again only if their friends and family use the diminutives without the requisite approval, that they qualify as being sexist, condescending and demeaning? Cue all the female names you can think of that have diminutives..
I guess then if one calls a William Bill, a Nicholas Nick, and similar diminutives of birth given male names one is being a man-hater (misandrist) and insulting them. A fair few people call me Larry, not Lawrence, even gasp without my permission. I guess they are being insulting and demeaning because like Cathy, Larry ends with an ee sound that suggests mental retardation. Wow I guess they were being offensive and insulting to me and I didn’t even know it! Thanks Lieder for helping me realize that I was being insulted and mocked and I didn’t even know it till you came along and explained it all so clearly to poor me. I was blind but now I see.
Or is it a different set of rules for men and women when it comes to the diminutives of their names? Wouldn’t having a different set of rules for men and women make one sexist? Isn’t equal rules for the sexes what anti-sexism is supposed to be all about? One would think so.
Seriously Lieder are you for real?
Of course, the rest of the “article” is the same tired old kneejerk defenses of Israel that come from decades of arguing with campus radicals. Of course The Furry Jew misses one of the key elements in using these arguments which is that you actually have to listen to make sure that these arguments apply. If you don’t listen to what your “opponent” is saying then you are just babbling on because you assume that that’s what is being said. WHy bother having a conversation when you can just repeat the same old shit (and of course this shithead has his comments disabled so it’s not like he can have a conversation in the first place). So in the process of being a condescending little shitbag, the fucker can’t even be bothered to argue any points.
“…same tired kneejerk defenses of Israel”
Give me a break. What did I say in defense and support of Israel that isn’t true? Name me one thing. Of course Lieder who is all bluff and bluster doesn’t do so. Why bother with any evidence when Lieder’s task is attacking the genuine Zionist and actual Israel supporter with absurd puffball fabrications, ridiculous and outrageously obtuse misrepresentations and laughable ad hominems, exactly as an anti-Zionist would. What kind of a “rabid Zionist” dismisses actual easily verifiable facts in support of Israel (you know the ones I actually give that Lieder doesn’t even pretend to acknowledge at all) and goes to bat – whether he realizes it or not – for the rabidly anti-Israel ideological mob anyhow? “..same tired knee-jerk defenses of Israel” That’s the kind of thing anti-Zionists say.
This here is a classic case of projection on Tim Lieder’s part:
Of course The Furry Jew misses one of the key elements in using these arguments which is that you actually have to listen to make sure that these arguments apply. If you don’t listen to what your “opponent” is saying then you are just babbling on because you assume that that’s what is being said.
This is coming from Lieder who falsely accuses me of calling Noam Chomsky a Holocaust Revisionist, who utterly fails to understand that my heavily detailed series on Holocaust Revisionism is actually about Holocaust Revisionism (and then denies his disgusting blunder when called out on it), who falsely accuses me of calling Nick Mamatas a Holocaust Denier (repeatedly) and Catherynne Valente an anti-Semite, misses entirely the factual points I make about Mamatas in their entirety and garbles my article on Mamatas, gay rights and the Middle-East in the way one would expect from rabid anti-Zionists. So much else besides.
For the record Lieder, calling your opponent a dipshit, shithead, dumbshit, shitbag, fucker motherfucker doesn’t actually make a case for whatever point you ‘think’ you are making, it only demeans your uh ‘argument’. Calling me a shitbag shithead dumbshit dipshit fucker motherfucker really doesn’t refute the actual points that I actually make anywhere. If one were to go by your tirades, nobody would have the vaguest clue about what I am actually writing, whether it be on Mamatas, Holocaust Revisionism or anything else.
WHy bother having a conversation when you can just repeat the same old shit
One can’t have a conversation with somebody who doesn’t listen to what one is saying, one’s ‘opponent’ does just babble on and repeats the same old shit, because he mistakenly assumes he is addressing the subjects at hand. I agree with you Lieder. It’s just that you are the one guilty of what you accuse me of. See? No of course you don’t. The irony of what you are saying here is naturally lost on you and your howler monkey fanclub.
(and of course this shithead has his comments disabled so it’s not like he can have a conversation in the first place).
As for the comments disabled, Lieder ignores the reply I give to Mamatas on this front here. Either he didn’t read it or he didn’t comprehend it. As with Mamatas, Lieder thinks having a like-mindless echo chamber applaud your respective imbecilities somehow brave and transparent. How pathetic. Lieder continues to repeat this charge in his later blog post, continuing to ignore what I had to say on this front. So look who’s the one actually guilty of non-disclosure and lack of transparency.
If I had a comments allowed policy and you were to write up your obscene rants in the comments section of my blog and I bothered to reply to you there, they would be lost in the comments section to my blog. Nothing was stopping you from writing up your ridiculous, idiotic and brain-dead rants at your own blog and making a fool of yourself there and you have done so (yes Lieder I know you and your goon squad think it’s the other way around). I now reply to you at my blog see? Not that I do it for your benefit nor Mamatas’s and your blind mice peanut galleries that you mistake for enlightening feedback. The thing is I now reply to you in articles where you have the titles to yourself, ain’t that neat? In other words my response to you is on a loudspeaker so to speak, rather than buried in comments. Never mind Lieder I know you don’t get it.
Not that he has any points.
No Lieder you don’t have any points. Unless demonstrating your utter brainlessness is a point and contradicting yourself wildly with this laughable claim of pro-Israel Zionism, when what you actually write up in your bilge reads like standard run-of-the-mill anti-Zionist screeds, could be said to be a point.
As anyone can see when slogging through Furry Jew’s long boring posts is that he has really no reason to make these fucking posts beyond a feeling of being a wounded party becasue someone (Nick) was picking on him (or dismissing him as pathetic) in a comments section of a blog post that had nothing to do with him.
Well my posts are long I admit that much. That’s why they are blog articles and not mere commentary on blogs and forums. Given the complexity and seriousness of the subject matter, long articles are certainly justifiable. You don’t appear to have comprehended a single thing in them at all though. Why does Mamatas dismiss a blog that is about exposing anti-Semitism as ‘not unintentionally very funny’ – and at the time 80% of my published articles were about Holocaust Revisionism – in the first place Lieder the pretend ‘Zionist Jew’? (by doing so he made it my business and that of all self-respecting Jewry – that’s self-respecting Lieder. What does it matter what Mamatas’s original blog post was about?) Why do you run to the defense of Mamatas, a self-admitted radical Leftist/communist (whilst pretending not to)? The political weltenschauung/ideology of the far Left in the Westen world is pervasively and deeply mired in shrill anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism (of course there are exceptions). Hang on we have been through all this. Not that Lieder gets it, he never ever will. He’s not the only one.
I wish I could be amused but since I also am a zionist (and a Jew)
You can call yourself a Zionist and a Jew all you like, you can call yourself intelligent and a lucid, unflinchingly logical rhetorician too. Some of us may beg to differ however on all these counts. Your ‘Zionism’ runs as deep as your ‘intellect’ Lieder. If one were to walk in the waters of your Zionism (as with your intellect), one would not get one’s feet wet. When you convert to Judaism Lieder you are supposed to convert in letter AND SPIRIT. You have certainly not fulfilled the latter obligation. Not even close. When you write of my series on actual Holocaust Revisionism (and later discount that you did so)
‘..follows closely on the heels of “Some guy said that he knew James Hogan and liked him and didn’t want to piss on his corpse for being a holocaust deniers so that means that fansom is full of anti-semites” series..’
you demonstrate that you’re a million light years away from Zionism, Jewishness and intelligence for that matter.
I really can’t read the ting with any feeling other than dread and spite since this asshole is happily spewing words on a keyboard in order to “defend Israel against anti-semites” in such a way that provides a de facto argument for Hamas, because if the supporters of Israel are going to be THAT stupid, it seems only rational to leave and give Hamas a shot at running things.
Your closing repartee is once again a classic projection of your twisted psyche onto myself. If all Zionists were like you, Lieder, if all ‘Jewish supporters’ of Israel are going to be as stupid as stupid gets; then I would say the best thing is for them to shut up, pack their bags and cross over into the anti-Zionist camp overtly. (because in word and screed Lieder you are *already there*) I must admit I didn’t think it was possible for a ‘Zionist Jew’ to go as low as you have Lieder. You have the dubious honour of setting the bar lower than I thought possible for a ‘Zionist Jew’ with your dismissal of an extensive series on Holocaust Revisionism just the way you did, and a lot else besides. As I detail in my next reply, Lieder would go even lower than that, pretending that he never did so relegate and scoff at my series on Holocaust Revisionism.
To even make a facetious snide joke about leaving the running of Israel to Hamas is not remotely funny, it’s obscene. Such an obscene unfunny remark, no matter how sarcastic or facetious – leave the running of Israel to those dedicated to another holocaust of Jewry – is at least consistent with the rest of your odious and supremely dense blather Lieder.
Forthcoming… A further reply to Dybbuk Press publisher Tim Lieder’s incoherent ravings on my blog Part 3