« my final comments on "gates of vienna" as arbitrator of the content of the counter-jihad in europe .... | Main | a short time line of the posts at atlas shrugs w/ regard to the english defense league ... »

July 03, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I believe I'm right in saying that GoV provided links to Lawrence Auster's analysis. This took the position that Tommy Robinson's statement did not validate Pamela Geller's claims at all.

So to say that GoV and the other bloggers who put together and signed that open letter did not address Tommy Robinson's remarks is not true.

Pamela Geller stated categorically that the EDL was a spent force. Done. Overwhelmed by the forces of evil. Finito.

Pamela Geller stated that in her OPINION anyone in the United Kingdom who was currently a member of the English Defence League should leave the organisation altogether, and follow Roberta Moore instead.

Pamela Geller envisioned an all-new British counter-jihad group. With the person she trusted most in the EDL, Roberta Moore, at its head.

""gates of vienna" has still to mention tommy robinson's missive to the e.d.l. facebook. now, why do you suppose that is? well, i will give you my opinion. - john"

You can have your own opinion. But you can't have your own facts.


ps. just to clarify. I'm heading off shortly to start a 12 hr overnight shift. The first of 3 in a row. So the chances of having any time, or of having the inclination, go get online in the next while is very slim. I just thought I'd post away while I'm off this afternoon then, and you can read these comments at your leisure.

And with that I really must go and get myself sorted out; I have to be out the door in an hour & I have things to do ..

I'll probably pop back some time next week & have a look & see what you have made of Pamela's original statement.

Just remember to use Pamela's own yardstick to measure what she said.

john jay


two words for you.

"recently." "meanwhile." both denoting past tense.

both in tommy robinson's letter to the e.d.l. facebook, in reply to pamela geller's original post. both words acknowledging past deficiencies with e.d.l., both words meaning that tommy robinson did not refute or repudiate pamela geller's contentions.

both deleted from larry auster's analysis of the tommy robinson letter, to support auster's/ned may's contention that he was not acknowledging past problems, but speaking of future remedies.

an act of deceit by auster/may.

you can huff and puff till you think you've blown the house down, but those two little words negate your efforts.

you'll not put me off track, and you'll not "get rid" of those two little words, no matter how histrionic you get.

simply put.

but, thanks for the letters. keep trying, you are always welcome here. you have a nice writing style, you press your points, ... , but, you are flogging a dead horse as far as i am concerned.

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa

john jay

p.s. with regard to 12 hour shifts.--

used to do that myself, driving corn picker during sweet corn harvest here in the northwest. the pickers were kind of old fashioned, two row devices slung over the axles of two wheel tractors, stood on the transmission deck to drive 'em.

also, worked 12-16 hour shifts butchering crab & the like in the aleutians. butchered 'em, on & off-loaded 'em, operated marine deck cranes to take on supplies, and the like.

a man's work.

always enjoyed it.

more power to you.

actually, as to this. i am just like the bulldog who has the bull by the nose with a good grip ... pound me around all you want, it avails you nothing. i won't let loose.

because i have ned may/larry auster caught red-handed in deceit. they phonied tommy robinson's letter so as to be able to mischaracterize it.

nothing you can say changes what baron bodissey and auster did and said.

simple as that.

that's the note of the drum i am playing, and i am beating on it.

have fun on the shift.

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa

john jay


i have a wonderful idea.--

why don't you write baron bodissey of "gates of vienna" and larry auster, and you can ask them, ... , what did they mean to accomplish when they excised the words "recently" and "meanwhile" from tommy robinson's post to the e.d.l. facebook.

why did they crib his letter? eh?

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa


Well that's the first shift done. The guy I'm working back-to-back with came in a little early, so I skedaddled off home.

I see you've worked in the fishing industry; I actually served an apprenticeship (a long time ago now) as a marine engineer. Sadly the fishing industry here has changed a lot from what it used to be.

All the men in my family went to sea, right back through the generations. Until this one. None of us went to the sea.

It's a real shame. There's more to going to sea than just earning a living, as I'm sure you know. You had fathers and sons going to sea together, young men learning not just a trade or a way to make money, but a way of life, from their own dads and uncles. Sadly, that's all gone.

I don't know what it's like up in the NW of America. I hope things have gone better than they have over on this side of the pond.


The thing is john, I've got no real personal investment in any of this. No more than I would have if for example, I went down into a boat's engine to try to find out what that strange knocking sound was ...

It's just something to look at as impersonally and as logically (hopefully) as you would when you were stripping down a diesel engine. Know what I mean?

I see that last October Pamela laid the smacketh down on someone who had suggested there were neo-Nazis involved with the EDL. Pamela criticized them, saying that the EDL supported Israel, waved the Israeli flag everywhere etc, and they had an ongoing problem with infiltrators trying to discredit them by making Nazi-like statements. That's last October.


Now we have Pamela stating that there are neo-Nazis inside the EDL, that the forces of good within the EDL have been defeated, etc. And Tommy Robinson saying hold on a minute, the EDL supports Israel, flies the Israeli flag everywhere, and have always had a problem with infiltrators trying to discredit them by making Nazi statements and so forth. That's not news. Everyone knows that when we catch those Bs at it, we kick them out of the EDL.

Funny that, eh?

The thing is, as I said none of this is exactly breaking news. Everybody who supports what the EDL are trying to do knows all this already. (Especially anyone who actually lives in the UK.) And they support the EDL in their efforts to a)stand with Israel and b)chuck out any rotten apples in the EDL barrel.

That includes the many bloggers who signed off on that open letter. After all, they were clearly sticking up for the EDL after Pamela had written them off as a forlorn hope.

So it's not that Pamela merely expressed a concern about unsavoury people infiltrating the EDL. That's ongoing, and has been a problem in the EDL since day one. It probably always will be. That's common knowledge.

Without running off to don a tinfoil hat here, it is not exactly impossible that either the state or certain other organisations within the UK sponsor some of these infiltrator types. (Something Pamela herself alludes to in that Oct 10 article.)

This recent contretemps between CJ bloggers only arose, I suggest, because Pamela 'over egged the pudding' and went beyond all that. Pamela even said that she wanted 'genuine anti-jihadists' living in Britain to leave the EDL altogether, and follow Roberta Moore.

This is the same Roberta Moore who'd tried to link the EDL up with Victor Vancier, he of the criminal record for racketeering charges, including acts of bombing, arson, extortion & fraud.


You'll note in that record of Mr. Vancier being sent down for those charges, that his partner in crime had ended up OD-ing in a hotel room somewhere, and popping his clogs. Mr. Vancier is quoted in the NY Times as saying he felt responsible for this chap's death.

This is hardly going to make anyone else want to team up with Mr. Vancier.

Certainly not the EDL, especially given the legal and political context they find themselves operating in here in the UK. You no doubt know about the legal problems some of the EDL lads have had, the restrictions placed upon their movements, what they can and cannot do etc. Linking up with someone like Mr. Vancier could easily lead to more problems in that regard. A fairly minor point in the grand scheme of things, but worth mentioning.


And I don't know if you have faith yourself John, but there does appear to be some highly offensive material linked to the Hebrew language forum at the jay-tee-eff site.



I hope that made sense, I'm so sleep deprived just now it's not even funny, lol ... right off to what my granda used to call the best piece of land in the farm ... my bed! Man I'm getting too old for these o/night shifts ...


And here's me going on about the NW when you talked about the Aleutians; I do apologise for that, I just had a flashback to someone I talked to years ago who'd been working at the fishing up in that neck of the woods, and had somehow found himself over here in mine years later.

I just connected the two conversations in my sleep-deprived brain there for a moment, lol..

As to this: it's interesting to think in terms of a timeline here. Because Pamela Geller's original post came first, and nothing anyone says, or has said since, can change what Pamela Geller wrote.

The unavoidable fact is, Pamela did not merely air some concerns about infiltrators in the EDL. She said much more than that.

So, when Pamela herself, and bloggers such as you, try to portray Pamela's original post as nothing more than her giving voice to a concern, or writing about a troubling issue, that's both misleading and inaccurate.

Pamela over-egged the pudding in her original article when she talked about the EDL morphing into something unrecognisable, going down a terrible path and the forces of good having been defeated by the adversary. And Pamela definitely went too far when she recommended that EDL members leave the group and sign up with Roberta Moore in an all-new British organisation instead.

Don't you agree?



thought you might like that ..

john jay


you can bloviate all you want, and characterize pamela geller's remarks in her first post any way your fertile imagination can scheme it, ... , but, my position remains the same.

all of this was settled quite amiably between tommy robinson and ms. geller by the submission of his letter in reply to the e.d.l. facebook, which was published in ms. geller's post several hours later.

and, you can huff & puff all you want, but robinson's letter neither refutes nor repudiates ms. geller's remarks, and, as a matter of fact, is an acknowledgement of the substance of her remarks.

as i have mentioned in the blog posts, if robinson had wanted to refute or repudiate, he could have done so directly.

he did not.

he acknowledged and accepted her remarks, and promised to rectify the situation presented e.d.l. by infiltration of anti-semitic and neofascist elements.

that is my position.

i am comfortable with it, not going to retract it, and i am not going to re-phrase or re-voice it, and you can write until your fingers bleed, and that's it.

ned may and larry auster got caught with their pants down trying to dummy up and doctor tommy robinson's letter, so doing in order to miscast what he said.

so, you can visit here all you want, and say all you want.

the facts remain immutable. the words and language in tommy robinson's letter remains immutable. he wrote what he wrote, and the words mean what they mean.

and, ned may and ned auster tried to change that, and they were caught out.

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa

john jay


it is just this simple.--

if tommy robinson did not accept and acknowledge geller's remarks in her first post, in his post to the e.d.l. facebook, ... , then why the need for ned may/larry auster/"gates of vienna" to doctor his letter to argue the contrary?

why the need to "interpret" what he said? if in fact he had written what they put forth?

had he simply said what they interpret him as having said, there would have been no need to excise key words and add an "interpretation."

but, they did do as i have reported.-- they excise two simple little words, "recently" and "meanwhile," which placed the entire context of the letter in the past tense, as discussing history, and as discussing past events, e.g., the appearance at e.d.l. sites and chat rooms of anti-semitic and neofascist remarks.

you don't seem to want to discuss that very much, do you. you want the spot light on ms. geller's remarks, and not on tommy robinson's, because that is where the perfidy of may & auster is to be found.

my focus is on may & auster. and, so is yours, because you seek to protect them.

but, i have entertained your remarks on geller's first post, almost to the point of ad nauseum. i will continue to entertain them well past the point of ad nauseum, i would expect.

you have your task.

but, why don't you focus on what tommy robinson wrote to the e.d.l. facebook, as compared to what may & auster "interpreted" to say, and while you are at it, why don't you address the two little words missing from may & auster's remarks, and discuss the meaning of "recently" and "meanwhile."

you are adroit. let's see how adroit you are at that.

john jay

john jay


as to the youtube, i get the prompt, "the uploader has not made this video available in your country."

something to that effect.

john jay

john jay

an "open letter" to whom it may concern:

i have a clue who nicholas is.

i haven't a clue if there is another soul on earth reading these exchanges, ... , if so, it hasn't shown up as "hits" on these posts.

nor, have i counted the submissions nicholas has made on this subject.

but, one thing is striking. to me at least, and i will explain in just a bit.

in these missives, nicholas sets out what he believes pamela geller said about e.d.l., and then sets forth to explain what it all means and the implications of the same.

i haven't joined that argument, and i will tell you why. 1.)i was curious how far he would take this exercise, and 2.)i was curious why he simply didn't do as i have done in at least one of my posts, and that is to simply link to her website to the post that seems to have set the whole matter in motion.

why has nicholas simply not linked to the post, and let whoever is reading any of these exchanges simply decide for themselves what it is she said, and what the implications of those statements are.

this is what i did in my posts.

but, that is not the object of nicholas's exercise in all this.

he wants me to agree with his characterization of what pamela geller said.

why should i do that? the post that she wrote stands on its own. tommy robinson responded to it. she wrote a post in which tommy robinson's reply was quoted. and, she wrote a longer post explaining her historical position with regard to e.d.l., and explaining her long term support of that organization.

she also explained how she has come under continual fire from the american, euro and english left for doing so.

her words speak for themselves.

they do not need me "interpreting" them.

they do not need nicholas "interpreting" them.

nor, finally, do the words of pamela geller need me commenting on nicholas's interpretations and rants with regard to what they mean.

what nicholas wants is for me to back away from my accusations that ned may & laurence auster phonied tommy robinson's response. or, more precisely, what he wants from me is some sort of assent to one of his interpretations, that would weaken the foundation for my remarks concerning may, auster, "gates of vienna," and all the others who signed on to the "open letter," and its various updates.

and, that, friends, nicholas ain't gonna get. not this year, not in 10,000 years.

cuz, i caught 'em.

and, i linked all the posts involved.

nicholas wants to drive a wedge in here, and it just isn't gonna happen.

keep flailing away, nicholas, but it is not going to happen. you and your masters will just have to deal with what i have written, as it has been written.

i make no concessions to your assertions. the words as written, by the various participants in all of this, stand as they are written, and it is up for readers to decide.

not for you to dictate.

not for ned may & larry auster to have dictated. especially on phonied up and doctored versions of the documents.

where is ned may in all of this? not responsive to my arguments, that is for sure.

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa

john jay


"i have not a clue who nicholas is."





Does that one work?

john jay


you've had your say.

that's it. this has simply become silly. you've gotten your rhetorical flourishes in.

no more. at least not here.

john jay

john jay


same old crap.

same old delete button.

john jay


btw you never said, did this youtube link work ok?


What do you think?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)