Patterico's Pontifications

This is why I contribute to Michael Totten every month. If you don’t read his blog, you don’t know what is going on.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:22 pm

Sorry Patrick but you have a day time job.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:22 pm

Hey, you know what’s going on here, too! Uh, or you will . . . tomorrow.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:31 pm

Ditto Dr. K., though I don’t contribute to Totten monthly. It looks like I should.

As for Hitchens, there are many things he writes and says with which I disagree. But he has the strength of his convictions. And a couple of brass ones, from this story.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:35 pm

I love this line: “One must take a stand. One simply must.”

Yowza!

Since I don’t drink anymore, that’s the guy I wanna party with!

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:49 pm

EW, no worries: Hitch will drink for you!

And you watch. The Left will make fun of his bravery, belittle it…and yet those folks natter on about Q’uran’s being flushed (though that never happened) and waterboarding.

I don’t see any of them taking on genuine fascists. Hitch did.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:55 pm

#6 Eric Blair:

I don’t see any of them taking on genuine fascists. Hitch did.

Ah, you know what they say. About discretion & valor and all.

And I admit, I’m usually more discreet. Most of the time.

Well, sometimes.

Once in a while, anyway.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/26/2009 @ 9:59 pm

Nice one…

“The SSNP, according to the Atlantic in a civil war era analysis, “is a party whose leaders, men approaching their seventies, send pregnant teenagers on suicide missions in booby-trapped cars. And it is a party whose members, mostly Christians from churchgoing families, dream of resuming the war of the ancient Canaanites against Joshua and the Children of Israel. They greet their leaders with a Hitlerian salute; sing their Arabic anthem, ‘Greetings to You, Syria,’ to the strains of ‘Deutschland, Deutschland über alles’; and throng to the symbol of the red hurricane, a swastika in circular motion.”

When is a swatstika not a swatstika?

When it’s not a swatstika.

Never let THAT get in the way of a first-person tale of bravery…

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:02 pm

Oh, that is funny.

“swatstika”

But it is sure cheap for a “journalist” who didn’t even know that Patterico was mocking him last night to claim all this geopolitical acumen.

And the attack on Hitchens from this kind of person occurred right on schedule.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:05 pm

When is a swatstika not a swatstika?

When it’s not a swatstika.

You’re right: it’s definitely not a swatstika.

That’s what SWAT teams use to beat drug dealers, right?

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:06 pm

I would not party with Mr Hitchens.

I would not buy a drink for Mr Hitchens.

I would buy that man an entire BAR.

Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:09 pm

The best part was the correct spelling was in the quoted text in the same post.

PWI, I hope.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:09 pm

The actions of Christopher Hitchens makes the posturing of those on the Left seem very small.
He has nothing to apologize for, and they have much.

AD - RtR/OS (02b895) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:14 pm

Oh, and you have to read about the history of the SSNP. This is a good place to start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Social_Nationalist_Party

Of course, it is clearly written to Zionist liars. Funny thing. I couldn’t find any reference to a swatstika in the article.

Heh.

But then, the TdJ was just asking questions. And sneering at someone who…well…actually did something about genuine despots personally, instead to taking cheap shots from a position of safety and comfort.

Why I am not surprised, on all counts?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:20 pm

Right. Not a swatstika.

But the vicious car bombers/fascists are Christians, so there are indeed parallels with the Nazis. Wonder how they get along with the Phalangists?

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:23 pm

Oh, Hox. Did you make a mistake?

And are you now claiming that the Nazi party in Germany during World War II supported the Christian faith?

Just asking.

Better get some sleep or quit drinking.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:29 pm

Sorry Hux. Maybe you meant the Nizis.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:30 pm

It is well known that Adolf Hitler did everything for Christ, in whom he put his complete faith and trust. (Rolls eyes.)

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:32 pm

Patterico, Hix (sounds likely, given the nature of that post) was just trying to change the subject, yet again. Heck, the founder of the SSNP was an open admirer of Adolph Hitler and modeled his organization on the Nazi Party.

Hex is just trying to be annoying. And an anti-semite. But what else is new?

This time, he beclowned himself. And he gets paid to write?

Maybe so, but not to spellcheck, apparently.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:38 pm

What makes those Syrians christians?

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:38 pm

How do I make an umlaut?

Anyway, John, don’t get Hux (okay, imagine the umlaut there) started.

Just laugh at him. He is pretty silly, after all.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:41 pm

Oh, and I apologize in advance to everyone for the Wall of Text that Høx will no doubt cut and paste sometime tonight.

At least the quoted material will be spelled correctly.

See Hüx? Repetitious jokes are funny.

Okay, you think they are when you try to repeat them.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:47 pm

The “journalist” doesn’t get it yet. Not a huge surprise there. Gotta love the quotation marks without saying where the quote is from or giving a link. Consistently stupid and dishonest is still being consistent, so at least he has that going for him.

Gutsy thing for Hitchens to do anywhere, but especially considering the locale. Of course, our “journalist” points out how this is really an evil Christian/Nazi group that happens to sing an Arabic anthem. I guess it’s really all the West’s fault for cultishly following that Bible/Torah heresy and not the enlightened and peaceful true faith of the Koran. At least until President Obama’s next book.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:48 pm

Stash, this scribbler (since I refuse to list him with journalists like, for example, Bradley Fikes) is just a Wally Cox type, who thinks he is Percy Dovetonsils on the Internet.

He is just a beer ring on the Algonquin Table of discourse.

Trying to be all snide about Hitchens was over the top, and he deserves nothing but derision. He will attempt to threadjack into all kinds of places—were any Christians Nazis (sure), and then off to Nasty Christianity, misunderstood Muslims, “just asking questions,” and tossing off insults.

But his faux-superior remarks about Hitchens said it all.

Poseur. Hopefully he will go away soon.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 10:57 pm

And of course when we read the gospels we see that not only did Christ kill Jews himself and all other non-believers but he also commanded Christians being those who follow Christ to do like he did.

And thus we have Hitler who kills Jews while quoting the “B” attitudes?

What a strange world Hax’s lives in, I really feel bad for such a twisted person, all those voices in his head must be maddening.

ML (14488c) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:02 pm

Love love Hitchens. (…and He does, no matter what Hitchens says!) What a great example of one living their convictions. I’d guess not many would have the courage to do so. It’s easier to talk about it.

The Left will make fun of his bravery, belittle it.

Most likely they’ll just ignore it. Safer that way.

Dana (137151) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:03 pm

Meant to say, Lord love Hitchens…

Dana (137151) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:04 pm

This Hax character reminds me so much of Timb, perhaps this is that professor that liked him so much?
It would make sense as to why Timb is also so anti-Christian and anti-Semitic and lacks even a tiny bit of common sense or logic.

But then again its difficult to tell illiberal trolls apart, the always spew the same pretentious nonsense.

ML (14488c) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:16 pm

That’s why he’s a “journalist” while Brother Bradley and the others are journalists. He’s not going to go away though. He wants to get banned, but only after seeing exactly how far he can push it.

He has to be snide and superior when talking about Hitchens though… it’s reflexive. Unable to raise his own behavior to acceptable levels of decency, he has to tear down those who shame him with their existence. He knows how truly vile he behaves, can no longer help himself, and loathes himself as much as we loathe him.

Ignore him. He’ll cross the line soon enough. When people were finally refraining from feeding him, he started to become desperate and began to troll Patterico just to get some kind of attention. He’ll do it again as soon as he stops getting fed. Taunting him directly just feeds him. Talking with others about his stupidity and dishonesty without ever addressing him directly is better. He really begins to panic and becomes more outrageous to try and provoke any kind of response. It’s also fun to watch.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:21 pm

Stash, you are correct. But I was struck by the hypocrisy and sneer at Hitchens.

And after watching Patterico beat him like Buddy Rich playing drums, I though ridicule was the way to go.

I just wish he would go away. The Hitchens thing put it over the top, for me.

Dana, I liked your comment about God loving Hitch, even if Hitch denies Him.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:25 pm

-ens 😉

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:27 pm

John, Hitchens is often called “Hitch.” But perhaps I shouldn’t, after he got into a fight with genuine fascists.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:31 pm

I should call him “Mr. Hitchens,” I mean, out of respect for a person who genuinely puts his money where his mouth is.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/26/2009 @ 11:32 pm

hah!,my turn.I’m glad he got his but kicked.I don’t like hitchens,because he hates Christians and Christianity.which would explain why he did what he did.because he was attacking those evil 70 year old Christians.for dastardly reads.

all you lovers of hitchens,answer me this.if Farrakhan is ridiculed and dismissed because of his anti-semitism,why does anything that hitchens has to say have merit.he should be dismissed just like Farrakhan,nothing more than a joke.he got what he deserved for his arrogance.

mr. falcone (eed2b3) — 2/27/2009 @ 12:41 am

Whatever, dude. Hope you feel better.

I guess the space bar isn’t working. Ditto spellcheck, again.

But just a suggestion: read Totten’s article so you know what you are condemning. If nothing else, the facts.

SSNP is no laughing matter; you should read about it.

PWI, clearly. That or another sock puppet drawer is empty.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 1:34 am

mental note:never invite EB over to house.he might deface my property,then call himself a hero for it.why don’t you go into the nearest gang infested neighborhood and cross out some of their names off the wall,and see what happens to you.would that be a smart or stupid thing to do?.I did read the article,I never comment on anything I do not read or see,or verify first.what he did was not brave,courageous,or heroic.it was stupid.what bush did was brave,courageous,and heroic.

and my spacebar works perfectly fine.what you see is a paragraph,you do know what those are,don’t you.

mr. falcone (eed2b3) — 2/27/2009 @ 2:21 am

Totten isn’t very precise.

He starts of by including himself among the victims:

“Hitchens and I were attacked in Beirut … a half dozen members of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party jumped us on Hamra Street when he defaced one of their signs.’’
But that’s just not accurate in several details. Later, Totten makes clear that he wasn’t attacked:
In fact, Totten’s first move was:
““Let go of him!” I said, and shoved him without result. He clamped onto Christopher like a steel trap. From there, he admits contemplating attacking Hitchens’ “attacker,” who is in a 1 versus three situation. That’s not exactly what I’d call being “jumped.”

Then: “One of the toughs clawed at my arm and left me with a bleeding scratch and a bruise. I expected a punch in the face, but I wasn’t the target.’’
Indeed. Totten was never “jumped.” Nor really, was Hitchens. At least not in any meaningful sense of the word.
There’s a lot in Totten’s tale that doesn’t withstand scrutiny.
How does the fracas end?
Right. After the toughs refused to let them escape by cab in the first place, mysteriously, they now let Hitchens jump into a cab, mid-beatdown, with one of the thugs landing a final blow through the window.
There are some laughers too: Totten quotes Hitchens as asking what the bar girls said while he was getting beaten and “bleeding from the fingers and elbow.’’
I loved this line:
“The young man said something sinister-sounding in Arabic.’’
Yeah. Sinister “sounding.” Now that’s fly-on-the-wall, you-are-there journalism! In the midst of being jumped/not jumped amid a bunch of swatstikas that aren’t swatstikas and a party of murderous terrorists en route to a beatdown something “sinister sounding” is said.

Totten’s no Damon Runyon, no question about that. I’m guessing he’s a lot more of a Jayson Blair. But, hey, that’s just a guess. I’m sure the Whine Club will call me a lying Satanist liberal for that, but there you have it.

I seriously doubt Totten made this incident up wholecloth, but I just as seriously doubt that it went down exactly as he claims it did, if only because it couldn’t have, since his own claims contradict each other. Can’t wait to see how Hitchens plays it, if at all. If he doesn’t even write it up, I’d consider that a sign that maybe things weren’t as Totten says they were.
I suspect Totten would say any erroneous details are superfluous, given that we’re talking about Fascists, Swarthy Fascists. But that’s just one of the many subjects on which he and I would disagree. The guy needs an editor bad. It could have actually been a compelling vignette, had Totten the common sense to stick to essential facts.

There is also some confusion at Wikipedia as to who the SSNP actually are. At one point, the entry says they want to kill all non-Muslims in Greater Syria. At another, it says the movement is Christian and at yet another, says it is secular. I’m sure this will prompt the Whine Club to say I love fascists, hate Christians and want citizens deported, but there you have it.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:21 am

My grandfather’s brother and his two sons, the younger only sixteen, were arrested by the Germans during WWII for having a shotgun and a pistol in their house. It may have been an aggravating circumstance that the pistol was a Colt M1911, the then U.S. Army service pistol. The two boys were ordered summarily executed. As the detail was taking them away, my great-uncle joined his children. The German officer told him he could go. He said no, he wanted to be executed with them. He was.

nk (da8e61) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:40 am

Well, now that we’ve gotten that cleared up…*YAWN*.

The guy needs an editor bad.

OK, now that’s funny.

Pablo (99243e) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:46 am

#38 nk:

He was.

nk, words escape me~but I have a pretty good idea you know where I stand.

Which is why I have no tolerance for apologist scum like the one above.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:11 am

This Hax character reminds me so much of Timb, perhaps this is that professor that liked him so much?
It would make sense as to why Timb is also so anti-Christian and anti-Semitic and lacks even a tiny bit of common sense or logic.

ML continues the slander! Nice work. Question: Which one of us, ML, believes Jews are going to Hell and wrote it on this blog?

Hint: Not me.

Now, I’m not real sure about your views about living Jews, but it’s pretty obvious imagining eternal damnation for the dead ones isn’t exactly loving them.

Then again, conservatives are the masters of logic.

citizen: We have a budget deficit.
Conservative: I need a tax cut
citizen: We have a budget surplus.
Conservative: I need a tax cut.
citizen: We have great economic times.
Conservative: I need a tax cut
citizen: We have a terrible economic crisis.
Conservative: I need a biggertax cut

The height of logic, Con style.

You know what would solve the Islamist problem? A tax cut.

timb (a83d56) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:15 am

Now that’s fly-on-the-wall, you-are-there journalism! In the midst of being jumped/not jumped amid a bunch of swatstikas that aren’t swatstikas and a party of murderous terrorists en route to a beatdown something “sinister sounding” is said.

Heh. Totten and Hitchens didn’t really get attacked. They just IMAGINED it because they were so scared that a SWARTHY ARAB would come and beat them with a SWATSTIKA.

Indeed. Totten was never “jumped.” Nor really, was Hitchens. At least not in any meaningful sense of the word.

May I please, please fail to beat you in the same way that the nonracist swarthy men failed to beat Hitchens?

If he doesn’t even write it up, I’d consider that a sign that maybe things weren’t as Totten says they were.

Of course you would! Of course, there are several far more logical interpretations, but you wouldn’t go with those.

Hahahahaha. Your post is so funny because it is so stupid. Thank you for a good laugh.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:27 am

Tim, I was about to defend you. Thanks for relieving me of that responsibility.

Your straw man arguments would be better if you knew a little economics. Of course, your comment has nothing to do with the topic.

Hitler was a sort of Aryan mystic type about religion, being more into teutonic mythology. Many German Christians did become Nazis but Christian pastors were also sent to concentration camps for opposing the Nazis. The Nazi party was NOT a Christian movement.

In Lebanon, the Christians are one third of the civil war with Sunnis and Shia the other two thirds with a fourth side being the the Druze, a sect that keeps their religious dogma secret. They are a sort of Islamic heresy a bit like the Alawite sect in Syria.

If you are going to opine about a place, it helps to know something.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:31 am

Patrick, he is your pet troll so you can read his scrawl. I scroll right by it. To imagine a Mittyish self-described “journalist” disdaining real journalists like Totten and Hitchens makes me slightly nauseated.

It’s a bit like someone in 1991 writing something like that about David Hackworth. I remember Hack being interviewed on the radio one morning during Desert Shield. The night before Hackworth, in his late 60s at the time, had been in a restaurant in Kuwait where a bunch of French journalists (or whatever they were) were smoking. Hackworth didn’t like smoking so he asked them to stop. They gave a rude reply so he threw the lot of them out. Apparently it was quite a scene. Too bad Hack isn’t around to deal with twerps like the troll.

No doubt he is a legend in his own mind.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:39 am

Patrick, he is your pet troll so you can read his scrawl. I scroll right by it. To imagine a Mittyish self-described “journalist” disdaining real journalists like Totten and Hitchens makes me slightly nauseated.

It’s a bit like someone in 1991 writing something like that about David Hackworth. I remember Hack being interviewed on the radio one morning during Desert Shield. The night before Hackworth, in his late 60s at the time, had been in a restaurant in Kuwait where a bunch of French journalists (or whatever they were) were smoking. Hackworth didn’t like smoking so he asked them to stop. They gave a rude reply so he threw the lot of them out. Apparently it was quite a scene. Too bad Hack isn’t around to deal with twerps like the troll.

No doubt he is a legend in his own mind.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:39 am

I took a Hax this morning. Not all of the Vobiscum went down, so I had flush twice.

carlitos (1653ac) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:44 am

The troll can’t stand honest reporting that challenges its beliefs. It probably worships mealy-mouthed hacks like Robert Scheer and Alexander Cockburn.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:50 am

“Had to”

“If you are going to opine about a place, it helps to know something.” –very true, mike k

carlitos (1653ac) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:54 am

It’d be funny if it weren’t so sad.

Techie (6b5d8d) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:55 am

Hax,

Do you know anything about Michael Totten? The guy has spent a lot of time in Lebanon and Iraq. While he does not speak Arabic fluently, I am pretty sure he knows enough to pick up on a threat.

Additionally, your claim that the SSNP cyclone is not a swastika wannabe is hilarious. It is not the German Swastika of course, but the group is a group of self-declared fascists modeled on the National Socialists of Germany (NSDAP). You might want to look up the symbolism of the colors red, black, and white for fascist movements.

Falcone,
Hitchens is an anti-Christian bigot, but standing up to wannabe Nazis is admirable regardless of the person involved. I’d buy him a beer, but only a cheap one.

OmegaPaladin (3468f5) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:59 am

EB – I apologize in advance for hux’ wall o’text

Hux – wall o’text

Mr falcone
and my spacebar works perfectly fine.what you see is a paragraph,you do know what those are,don’t you.

Pure. Comedy. Gold.

carlitos (1653ac) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:00 am

timb,

When the size of the government is so large that they’re even able to ~~collect~~ confiscate the amounts of money they already do, to even have a deficit is shameful. No matter what the problem is, the government having more money is only going to make it worse (no matter which party is in charge). Yes, we need tax cuts across the board, but not to increase revenue.

Cutting the taxes that support Islamist[sic] fanatics (especially things like no-strings bribe money to Gaza, money to regimes like Pakistan and Yemen that pretend to be allies and work against us as much as possible, money for CAIR… etc) would be especially beneficial. A “journalist” on another thread mentioned cutting the tax rate to zero as an example of how tax cuts cannot always increase revenue (possibly the one true item that particular “journalist” has ever written), but that’s a great idea. Cut the rate to zero and let the government run off donations. (that’s partially sarcasm… how big a part is less important than the sentiment. I would say that we need government, but not one so large they no longer need us.)

I know a lot of people here have a problem with you and I can understand why, but I don’t think I’ve ever responded to your writing before and tried to keep that in mind. I’m not trying to snark at you or anything. Just articulating (however poorly) one conservative’s view for you to consider. Republican, conservative, and religious are not synonyms… just like Democrat, liberal, and atheist are different.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:05 am

How can you not love the guy.

Joe (17aeff) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:08 am

Of course, your comment has nothing to do with the topic.
Comment by Mike K — 2/27/2009 @ 6:31 am

Wait, this isn’t the budget thread? Carp! (Mea culpa folks, I didn’t pay attention to which tab I was on and foolishly assumed that wasn’t a thread-jacking. No excuse. timb, forget every bit of reasonable tone in my response to you because you won’t ever see it again.)

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:10 am

Hax defends Nazis and mocks those who resist them.

Even if he thinks this is a funny shtick, that action will be a part of what he is judged for, if we are judged at all. He’s a member of the most awful tradition in human history, and nothing will take that back.

Joco (4cdfb7) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:16 am

timb compares run of the mill Christianity with nazism, because the Christians, like all other religions, have a theory that you should be Christian.

Apparently, his hatred is so intense, that the truism of agreeing with themselves is the same thing as being a Nazi, and the long understood wisdom of minimizing government interference, in good times and bad, is somehow relevant. He hates conservatism and christianity, and has a hard time making sense of it all, but he knows he hates them. He has no idea why we’d take special offense at Nazi gangs people up innocent people in the streets as police watch over it all, when we don’t take offense at reducing government taxation or Christianity having the audacity to think people should be Christian.

What a loser.

Joco (4cdfb7) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:22 am

Well, the Syrian SSNP thug situation is serious.

What isn’t serious is a snide, precious sounding hairsplitter of a so-called journalist, who dumps endlessly on others regarding precision…who then:

1. Continues to misspell a word (which again, was spelled correctly in the quoted text).

2. And then suggests that someone else needs an editor.

What a…well, huxster!

There is not enough scorn in the world to be heaped upon this character.

Mr. Peepers is the image that occurs to me. But again, the persona of Percy Dovetonsils seems appropriate.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:27 am

Stash, you were just trying to be polite to timb.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:28 am

Stash, this scribbler (since I refuse to list him with journalists like, for example, Bradley Fikes) is just a Wally Cox type, who thinks he is Percy Dovetonsils on the Internet.

My take on this is that the modern press has a self-image of a pack of Woodward and Bernsteins, speaking truth to power and taking on the establishment. Sadly, their reality is much closer to a herd of Ted Baxters…

Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:39 am

Good old Ted doesn’t have the precious tone, Rob.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:41 am

Eric,
I also noticed that the troll has a habit of misspelling certain words, even when the correct one is given elsewhere. That helped me find some of its bunkerbuster posts, because of its habitual misspelling of “chauvanists” (sic).

On the previous comment thread, Bunk whined on and on about how people — “chauvanist” people — said mean things about him and his surrenderist ilk.

The name changes, but the ignorant style remains the same. The troll constantly misspells and suggests others need an editor. It is spanked for whining and says others have a “whine club”.

Projection, thy name is Hax/bunkertroll.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:43 am

Patrick, he is your pet troll so you can read his scrawl.

That’s the best part of this site. As long as it’s within the bounds of decency, Patterico allows (and I think sometimes even encourages) stupid comments. He likes discussion and argument and not just the echo of his own voice from his reflection in the mirror.

nk (da8e61) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:49 am

The trick is not to take the character seriously…even when he posts on serious topics.

Bradley, the other posts really were pretty repetitive. Even when he criticizes others for…being repetitive.

Nk, I like the “budgie in the mirror” image. Very apt.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:58 am

Rob, the Woodward and Bernstein image as master reporters is a bit tarnished since the facts about Mark Felt came out. In fact, they were kids who were used by Felt to retaliate against Nixon for not making him FBI chief after Hoover died. They were used. A lot of Washington is like that.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:01 am

I just hat swat-sticka’s for lunch at PF chang. mmm…swatstickas

carlitos (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:25 am

carlitos, if that wasn’t so damn funny you would deserve a heapin’ of verbal abuse, like that wasted on the TdJ©s!

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:31 am

Too much upper case for the whole effect, carlitos. Nice use of the “non space bar.”

But yes, what a crop of doofuses. Doofusi?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:39 am

Besides, those were paragraphs, right?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:39 am

While i have never enjoyed some of the more derisive name-calling towards our resident writers of obtusity, I am coming to realize that, when a clown presents himself, one must point and laugh. One simply must.

carlitos (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:44 am

Rob, the Woodward and Bernstein image as master reporters is a bit tarnished since the facts about Mark Felt came out.

Oh, certainly, for people who care about the facts. We were talking about “journalists”, though.

Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:51 am

Well, I can promise you that none of us will get beaten up as a result, carlitos. Right? Though Mr. Peepers certainly talks tough, I doubt he has needed to follow through since middle school. I could be wrong, of course.

I’m just asking questions.

Besides, his language is sure sign of Muslim racialist hatred, don’t you think?

Anyway, I do like Hitchens’ phrase: “one simply must,” indeed. It’s like “let’s roll,” in all seriousness: a few words that speak volumes about the character of the person.

Sure, Hitchens is an aggressive atheist. Absolutely, he has said some nasty things. But he stepped up to genuine fascists.

That’s a lot more character than snidely dismissing his actions while petting an ocelot, I think. And not running spellcheck on tough words commonly used in high school history courses.

Hey, with the space bar stuff, I am wondering if that particular TdJ had a browser issue? I mean, he couldn’t have confused spaces with paragraphs! Right?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:52 am

mr. Blair,am I to presume that you are the professor in this stream of comments?.lecturing all is “doofi” on the proper usage of grammar,space,punctuation,and spelling?.

we all know and recognize that you are not really that intelligent.if it were not for “spellcheck” you would show yourself to be,the king of all “doofi”.

does it make you feel big and important inside when you attemt to put down someone else because of the text alone.some fat,balding,with a comb over giving a big fat F in red to a student just because they’re better looking.is it jealousy that drives and motivates you.or is it just a penis contest,and you just want to be the biggest penis in the room.

mr. falcone (eed2b3) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:26 am

Well, I guess it ain’t a browser issue! 🙂

carlitos (eb120d) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:31 am

i guess mr falcone has mpd since he has all those voices in his head he sure is interested in phallic objects and hair i think he might be one of those san fransisco male prostitutes you since he is all interested in hair and phallic obects and he doesnt ever make much sense otherwise and hes always angry and hateful so it might be possible hes criminally insane or a threat to become criminal in his insanity but if he gets back on his meds he might be able to get it back under control i dont know (and it’s really difficult to throw all the punctuation to the wind.)

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 12:46 pm

#74 John Hitchcock:

(and it’s really difficult to throw all the punctuation to the wind.)

Which is why I never try it. Some things, one simply must.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 12:55 pm

omega,yes he is a bigot,which was why I asked the farrakhan question.why do his words still hold power?.that was my sole reasoning for my comment,period.pure emotion.likewise,those who support him,support him out of emotion.but because I hold a different view than the majority here,I must be sympathizing with the enemy.it’s one thing to be atheistic and another to spew out hate against Christians and christianty.whether in his books or on talk radio.what,is he Obama before Obama was Obama,above critisism?.

carlitos,thanks,I thought it was rather funny myself.apparently he didn’t,and others like him.they change the point of a thread by misdirection and name calling,and when the thead gets so frayed they complain about it.isn’t that right john.

mr. falcone (287327) — 2/27/2009 @ 1:17 pm

#8 is really the perfect example of a troll self-describing himself as meeting the definition of a troll. You don’t need to add to it. It stands alone.

SPQR (72771e) — 2/27/2009 @ 1:21 pm

Falcone, those rotten eggs you smell in that dark room should be enough to tell you your head is too far up your butt. Since you have no typing skill whatsoever, I have no desire to struggle through all the bovine byproduct you post. Learn to type, lose your hate and phallic desires and I might actually try to read another of your comments. I might not, but you could try. Just sayin’.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 1:47 pm

john admit it,you love this stuff!.you’re Pavlov’s dog,you can’t help it.once you start salivating,it becomes second nature to you.all this hate comes from you,you started the name calling.not me.eric is big enough tofend for himself,he doesn’t need your help.and for what?,spelling?.all this is just playfull banter on the blacktop during recess.you said,I said.read why you write,all this drama because of spelling.what does that have to do with the original thread?.

mr. falcone (817b61) — 2/27/2009 @ 2:30 pm

buz.z.offf.jakass

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 2:38 pm

Patterico might want to check if “mr. falcone” is the latest iteration of bunkertroll. Its lack of logic and facts, along with antagonism toward its intellectual betters, suggest they might be the same. They certainly drink from the same ideological cesspool.

Bradley J. Fikes, C. O.R. (a18ddc) — 2/27/2009 @ 3:07 pm

“this drama because of spelling.what does that have to do with the original thread?.”

i!*@@@don^t:kno@@!!w,may*((be)(it___s+++bec%au***se///he?!?@finds*it(((((dist&r!!act~ing.

Sean P (e57269) — 2/27/2009 @ 3:23 pm

never argue with a fool or in this case fools,people won’t be able to tell the difference.truer words were never spoken.so ew1(at) *saluting* yes sir,thank you sir,is that all sir,I will buzz off now sir! Bradley maybe you should read all my posts,I made it clear from the start that I don’t like hitchens because of his hatred for Christians and for that reason and that reason alone I was glad that he got punched out.it. ouldnt have happened to a nicer guy.as for my ideology clink the link you will find it is the same cesspool as yours.

mr. falcone (5eba30) — 2/27/2009 @ 3:31 pm

#81 Bradley J. Fikes:

They certainly drink from the same ideological cesspool.

It’s like they share the same brain.

Gimme it!
No, it’s my turn!
I gotta finish this really cutting remark, dude!
I din’t get a turn yet!
Careful, you’re gonna drop it!
Hey, you’re gonna pull it in two!

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 3:35 pm

yadayadayada,i cant find the shift key,i dont know how to space after punctuation marks,i support viciously attacking anyone who doesnt like a belief that says turn the other cheek.thats just for i dont know what thats for,i still want anyone who says bad things about love first religions to get their heads kicked in.yadayadayada.please learn how to use shift keys and proper spacing techniques after punctuation marks and paragraph structure and do us real christians a favor and dont call yourself one.you are the one athiests point to when they say were all like everyone else.thank you and go away now and quit thinking about those phallic sculptures strewn throughout your studio apartment.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 3:39 pm

you just want to be the biggest penis in the room.

Comment by mr. falcone

Well, at least we know who it isn’t.

Mike K (f89cb3) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:04 pm

The post does have a familiar ring to it, Bradley. Simple words misspelled, and more complex ones correctly spelled.

I’m thinking Gleenitis.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:31 pm

Totten may be as honest an straight-shooting as George W. Bush himself, but there are at least two gaping holes in his report. Given that he’s the eyewitness, that’s even more inexcusable.

1. Three healthy adults forcibly detained by one, unarmed man.

Sure, Totten offers a desultory narrative on why they were unable to either scare the “assailant” off or, for example, drive off in the cab with him in it. Not saying this means he’s lying, but, again, it just doesn’t pass the smell test.
My guess is that it was more like an argument between with the wannabe thug that escalated, Hitchens was shitfaced and no one remembers very clearly what happened. At least that would explain the inability to get into a cab or to figure out the driving away in one was the thing to do, even if the wannabe lone thug was in the passenger’s seat.

2. “Six or seven” thugs allied with the most insane, malicious, violent, psychopathic group in the Middle East gang up on a single, pudgy, pasty-faced alcoholic.
The “well-refreshed” 50-something writer walks away with “bleeding fingers and elbow.” No broken bones, facial lacerations or, even, serious bruises, apparently.

Not saying Totten’s a liar. Not saying he’s a bad person. Not saying anything, other than that his report of this incident has a couple of big holes in it.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:47 pm

Hey, tough guy! Let’s see some evidence of you, personally, standing up to thugs who kill people.

Then we can attack your honesty (not having been present), and call you a liar…then say that we never actually called you a liar. No, we just had some questions.

And found gaping holes in your story.

Put up or shut up.

Or at least move to another thread. You really aren’t helping your reputation on this one.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:53 pm

And this was my favorite:

“..Not saying anything…”

For a person not saying anything, you sure did emit a lot of greenhouse gas on this topic.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 4:54 pm

“Just asking questions” Eric.

One time I was in beijing and the only available bathroom was one of those sloping-trough-into-a-gutter things. I really had to Hax, so I went anyway, but it was just disgusting, squatting where other people’ Vobiscum was still evident.

carlitos (bb9729) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:31 pm

Thanks Carlitos! Always good to exercise your imagination. It gives us a window into your soul.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:36 pm

A James Wolcott impersonator wrote, about carlitos:

“…It gives us a window into your soul….”

As did the Wolcott impersonator’s entire post on Hitchens and Totten.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:40 pm

Hey, everyone! You have to see this!

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:41 pm

One has to wonder why Hacks molests underage goats.

I am just asking questions.

JD (37536f) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:51 pm

Too many of these threads, lately, degenerate into five regualars *responding* to a troll and the solution is not banning the troll.

nk (da8e61) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:55 pm

#95 JD:

I am just asking questions.

Wasn’t there a story about him in the news…something about having to marry the neighbor’s because he was caught with her?

/Jes’ askin’, ya’ know?

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 5:57 pm

Anyone watched my link, Semper Fi.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:01 pm

nk is right, i am joining others on ‘ignoring’ – will only comment if host does first. adieu, merde, adieu!

carlitos (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:01 pm

#98 John Hitchcock:

Nice link, John, and Semper Parrot’s Ass back at ya.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:12 pm

Thanks again, Carlitos. I suspect your “responses” to my posts won’t be missed. We’ve seen more than enough of your soul.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:14 pm

Did anybody notice a bad smell around here just now ?

It was about 6:14 PM. I can’t see anything. Must have been a troll passed by.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:24 pm

As Mike K. pointed out, for whatever reason bunkerbuster/Hax/whatever is this blog’s pet troll. Well, I had my pet troll over at the Festering Swamp, David Ehrenstein, so I can’t complain too much. But at least David E. sometimes made insightful and informative comments. And he posted his comments, trollish and otherwise, under his own name. The anonymous troll is rightfully regarded as the lowest form of life on the Intertubes. As witness:

To all those trolls, bunkerbuster in particular, who routinely refer to the “right-wing” blogosphere as being masterbatory or just one giant circle jerk…
I presume that you all read Daily Kos or Democratic Underground or any other left/liberal blog. I presume that you also notice how the commentators reinforce each other. One posts “Bush Lied” another posts “Right on…” and so forth. <b?How, I ask you, is this any less of a circle jerk? Because the opinions expressed there agree with your own, and therefore are not just masterbation sessions? And isnt true that there is indeed a site that calls for “Masterbation for Peace” and “Masterbation, Not War!”
In effect, who is participating in the real circle-jerk here?
Aside from which, if you find so many things disagreeable on this site, then why expend so much energy posting to it?

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:26 pm

While I choose to remain anonymous, I will discuss any issue in good faith, and post evidence and links for my positions. 2 posters in particular simply refuse to engage on this basis. Whatever ‘response’ they receive is deserved, as the right to any meaningful intellectual engagement has been forfeited due to bad faith.

carlitos (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:29 pm

carlitos,
No worries. People have legit reasons for being anonymous, and I had thought of making that point explicit. So I shall do so now. It was the trolldom I was condemning, not the anonymity. Thanks for being with us on Patterico.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:46 pm

Brad: I have no doubt that there are plenty of liberal blogs where intellectually insecure identity lefties go for mutual stroking.

Thing is, I don’t participate in those blogs. They are a waste of time for me, as I don’t feel any need to be stroked. I also know a lot of mainstream liberal blogs where that isn’t the case.

I don’t, on the other hand, know of any conservative blogs where that isn’t the order of the day. Not that I’ve searched high and low: just commenting on what my limited experience has been. If you know of any, please enlighten me, I’d love to check it out.

I’m glad, though, that at least we agree that the stroking going on here is the same stuff as that going on at the liberal Whine Clubs.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:57 pm

And Thanks JD. Bestiality is at least a variation on your theme. Good to exercise the imagination, even, or perhaps especially, when it’s so flabby and foul.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 6:59 pm

Patterico’s latest post condemned conservative errors, such as the nutbag Obama birth certificate conspiracy theory. He has also:

— Repeatedly denounced outrageous statements by Ann Coulter and her ilk.

— Disagreed with the dominant conservative views on gay marriage (he’s for it) and anthropogenic global warming (he thinks it’s real).

— Gone out of his way to open the door to dissenting posters, even when they behave abominably.

Any careful, honest reader of this blog would be aware of that.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:12 pm

Bradley – Hacks is neither careful or honest. You know that. Now excuse me. I have to go drop a deuce.

Hacks – Why do you hate gay people and why do you want to deport citizens?

JD (37536f) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:15 pm

JD, yes I know that bunkertrollHax is mendacious. That statement was more of me wanting to point out some of the specific reasons I admire this blog. It’s open-minded, but not so open-minded its brains leak out.

And it’s tolerant of differing views. That’s in sharp contrast to the lefty site Sadly, No! I was subjected to outraged attacks when I admitted originally supporting the Iraq war, and was not sufficiently repentant of that grievous sin.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:24 pm

I wonder what would happen if I commented on a leftist blog.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:25 pm

JD: it might have to do with “swatstikas,” you know?

Seriously, the guy has a good thing going here. Patterico lets him play. Some people like fighting with him. Some people will opt out until this scribbler finds something else to do with his time.

For a fellow with “his own blog,” this is certainly unusual behavior. Why not devote all that energy to that, instead of this blog?

We all know the answer to that one.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:27 pm

Bradley! You were just asking questions! Who knew that you would be treated in such a fashion by progressives?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:28 pm

EB:

🙂

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:29 pm

Oh, and Bradley, so far as your own experiences with trolls: no good deed goes unpunished.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:33 pm

“Disagreed with the dominant conservative views on gay marriage (he’s for it) and anthropogenic global warming (he thinks it’s real).”

As an aside, I’m annoyed when I see AGW skepticism as a “conservative” position. Its not. A skeptic of AGW is probably more likely to be conservative than not, but that does not make it inherently a conservative ideological plank. Far from it. I know many conservatives who are not skeptical and many skeptics who are not conservative ( indeed one of my most knowledgable acquaintances is quite liberal ).

Just a pet peeve of mine.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:34 pm

Why, SPQR!

Modern politics is about putting people into nice, neatly labeled boxes of good and evil!

As you know, there are 10 types of people: those who understand binary numbering, and those who do not.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:36 pm

Brad: what’s the sharp contrast? You were subjected to “outraged attacks?” How’s that a contrast with here? According to the Whine Club, I’m a lying, satanic child molestor with a small penis (I think that one’s your contribution, isn’t it Brad?), a penchant for bestiality, a love of Nazis, a love of communists, hatred for all that is good and bad manners.
Moreover, the Club begs daily to have me banned and Pat threatens it routinely.
Tell us how that “contrasts” with your experience at “Sadly, No.”

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:37 pm

If two is company and three is a crowd, what’s four and five?

nk (da8e61) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:39 pm

Bradley, you simply cannot debate a troll or appeal to better instincts. They don’t have any. They are interested only in attention and will do what is necessary to attract it from better men, like you.

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:41 pm

Hey, Patterico:

A certain pesky prevaricator, as always grateful for the hospitality of your “house,” writes this about his possible banning:

“…Pat threatens it routinely…”

Um. “Routinely” is one of those slippery words. Inigo Montoya has the right commentary on its use in this context.

I think you have been very patient with someone who I (and many others) believe wants to see how far he can push you. I still don’t see why he doesn’t go to his own blog and bark at the moon to his heart’s content.

Or maybe he is still smarting from the Keith Moon style drubbing you gave him the other evening.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:45 pm

BunkertrollHax has just admitted he is “a lying, satanic child molestor with a small penis … a penchant for bestiality, a love of Nazis, a love of communists, hatred for all that is good and bad manners.”

We already knew that.

BunkertrollHax also wants to put kittens and puppies in a blender. True, he didn’t say that, but my great mind-reading talent allows me to know what he would say.

Why does Hacks hate kittens and puppies?

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:46 pm

Hacks – Nobody stated that. They were just asking the tough questions.

JD (37536f) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:47 pm

Actually, Bradley, I think he just wants to deport them.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:48 pm

If two is company and three is a crowd, what’s four and five?

nein

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:48 pm

What do cats have for breakfast?

nk (da8e61) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:49 pm

This thread is dead. Let it rest in peace.

nk (da8e61) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:53 pm

Click this link to see bunkertrollHax’s favorite breakfast!

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/27/2009 @ 7:55 pm

The “journalist” can insult people and any response is automatic membership in the “Whine Club” fashioned completely from his imagination. If anyone insults the “journalist”, that’s a solid accusation (but also whining) against him which is completely shameful and proof of the evil conspiracy against him.

Strange how that works. As far as I am aware, Patterico only considered banning the one time, which the “journalist” avoided by mouthing a lame-ass pro-forma apology before immediately resuming the same behaviors and arguments a little less blatantly. This is what a “journalist” considers “routinely” threatening to ban him.

As the “journalist” describes above, he’s only here for the conflict. The left-leaning blogs hold no interest for him because he can’t disrupt them. If he tried to reverse-Moby there, he’d be banned too fast for it to be any fun anyway. Disrupting everyone is his only real goal. He’s going to keep on pushing until he gets banned. Let him do it by himself. The more people talk to him directly, the more he’ll blame the eventual banning on everybody but his own disruptive, dishonest, and sometimes vile behavior. If he doesn’t get fed, he’ll quickly go back to baiting Patterico and get slapped down (again), just out of his desperate need for attention. Eventually he’ll go too far (again) and get banned (again).

Fun for the whole family.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:10 pm

Actually, Stash, it is a little sad.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:12 pm

Dana, I liked your comment about God loving Hitch, even if Hitch denies Him.
Comment by Eric Blair — 2/26/2009 @ 11:25 pm

Thanks, Eric Blair. I was really glad Patterico did a post about this. I had read about it at Totten’s place was surprised to see Hitchens had so much chutzpah and resolve. I know he’s been a loud voice against any kind of oppression, etc., but who knew he was willing to put his money where his mouth is? It’s rare.

nk @ 7:53 p.m., you may be right but it’s a shame the thread disintegrated like it did (they seem to lately) because it really was a compelling story dealing with several important issues (IMHO).

Dana (137151) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:15 pm

EB, if it wasn’t all from his own behavior which he could have controlled at any point, then I might agree. At this point however, I have real enjoyment watching Patterico rip him to shreds while the “journalist” doesn’t even realize it’s happening.

I’ll be fine with letting the “journalist” self-destruct. I won’t address him or even urge his banning… he’ll do all the work if we let him.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:22 pm

Stashiu3 (maybe calling you “Stash” is a bit familiar?): you are correct. Patterico’s dissection was great to watch. At first I didn’t see that the troll was unaware that he was being mocked. That, mixed with the troll’s drumbeat of being superior and so above it all, was hysterical.

What is sad is the energy expended on dealing with this person…and that the person in question simply doesn’t expend his own energy elsewhere.

Dana: I agree. It’s ironic how some “causes” get all kinds of attention, and others don’t seem worth Clooney or Bono’s time. The SSNP is a genuine issue…yet most people have never heard of it, or seemed to think it isn’t worth their concern.

They modeled themselves on the freakin’ Nazis!

There are many things about Hitchens with which I do not agree. But no one could ever call him a coward. And he is by no means physically tough. He truly has the strength of his own convictions.

I’ll drink a toast to him, next time I’m out on the town.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:29 pm

Stash, Stashiu, Stashiu3… just don’t call me late for dinner [ba da bamp] 😉

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:34 pm

oh, dang, I’m having a blast over on sadly, no

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/27/2009 @ 8:55 pm

the SSNP is “modeled” on the Nazis?

Inasmuch as the defining feature of Nazism is the belief in Aryan purity, there is just a little logical problem there.

Semitic Nazis? Maybe it makes sense to Totten and/or the Whine Club, but that’s no real test, is it? At least these non-Nazi Nazis are Christians, like the real thing. Or according to the Atlantic, Totten’s sole source on the matter, they are lead by Christians who were 70 years old 32 years ago.

Hmmmm…

Oh, right, I forgot: they have a swastika flag that isn’t a really a swastika.

And the explanation for that is that they don’t really want people to know it’s a swastika? But if you don’t want people to know you’re a Nazi, why have a swastika on your flag? Unless of course, its a swastika that’s not a swastika.

And then there’s that song: Deutscheland Uber Alles.

Indeed.

When you’re founding philosophy is that Syrians, being a master race, should have lots of lebensraum, the first thing you think of doing is singing a song celebrating Aryans as the master race that should have lots of lebensraum and should, therefore, kill you and your entire group, non-swastika swastikas or no non-swastika swastikas.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 9:50 pm

Semitic Nazis? Maybe it makes sense to Totten and/or the Whine Club, but that’s no real test, is it? At least these non-Nazi Nazis are Christians, like the real thing. Or according to the Atlantic, Totten’s sole source on the matter, they are lead by Christians who were 70 years old 32 years ago.

Semitic Nazis? Well, yes. It’s a tradition you know. Here is Amin Huseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem with Nazi Muslim troops.

Stu707 (7fb2e7) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:10 pm

Okay, I know that this guy is a troll. But damn it all, any basic reading about the SSNP proves that he is aggressively ignorant…or just trying to be irritating.

About freaking Nazis. To be fair, I didn’t expect him to know any European history.

It’s bad enough that this silly troll plays word games and insults folks whenever he feels like it—safely, electronically, I would add—but also makes light of Nazis. Seeing his antics on other websites, courtesy of Bradley, shows that “the song remains the same.”

But I shouldn’t expect that he actually knows anything about this kind of thing, since it took him how long to learn to spell the word “swastika“? Now that is journalistic excellence!

Mind you, from someone who complained that another writer required an editor?

It’s the lack of research from a so-called journalist that says it all. Poseur.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:32 pm

I have a map where Austria is divided into 4 occupation zones. Don’t ask me what “palestine” looks like on that map. You are going to regret engaging this dude, and not because of his superior brainpower.

carlitos (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:43 pm

EB, he’s aggressively trying to be irritating. It’s bait. He’d argue that Hitler wasn’t really a Nazi if he thought it would get somebody riled up and disrupt a thread. Talking to each other and not him about how ignorant his comments are is perfect. He’s trying to draw people into responding to him directly and will get desperate if he keeps failing.

I just wish there was a killfile function and we wouldn’t even see his dishonest nonsense. I just scroll past most of his cut&paste BS now. It’s never worth the time to read anymore.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:44 pm

(burps up his swatstika’s from earlier)

carlitos (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:48 pm

I’m kind of with Indiana Jones on this subject, Stash: “Nazis…I hate those guys.”

At least “swastika” was spelled correctly that time.

I know what you mean, carlitos. But sounding all “above it all” regarding thugs is hardly a progressive position.

Thanks for your comments, both of you. I hate the damage to this blog. True, it’s not my blog. But you know what I mean.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:49 pm

I thought it was snakes. Or employers of illegal aliens. Or peaches, maybe it was peaches. Like I said, I mostly scroll past the “journalist” now.

😉

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:53 pm

snakes? we love snakes!

/carlitos

"governors palin and jindal" (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 10:56 pm

Thanks Stash! It’s edifying and entertaining to read that you find my comments “ignorant,” while insisting that you don’t read them. Says it all, really.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:24 pm

According to the Whine Club, I’m a lying, satanic child molestor with a small penis . . .

You’re neither satanic nor a child molester.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:38 pm

Now, see? Why would I “routinely” threaten to ban someone when I can have fun like that?

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:39 pm

i resemble that remark

hacks' penis (3e7004) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:39 pm

Patterico 11:39pm – Why would I “routinely” threaten to ban someone when I can have fun like that?

Yes, but that fun is even less sporting than punching someone who’s comatose.

Apogee (f4320c) — 2/27/2009 @ 11:56 pm

I had a blast over at sadly, no, but it seems it’s over. Unfortunately, I don’t have the debate skills of most people here, but the instant devolution that occurred when I got there was a blast for quite some time. 300 posts worth.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/28/2009 @ 12:02 am

And, yes someone over there agreed anyone who is non-white and votes Republican is a race traitor.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/28/2009 @ 12:05 am

Thanks Pat. You have to be pretty obsessed with another man to concern yourself with his dick. Unless of course you’re literally interested in it, or just dumb.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/28/2009 @ 12:27 am

That is rich, coming from someone who is fixated on homoerotica.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/28/2009 @ 12:29 am

According to the Whine Club, I’m a lying, satanic child molestor with a small penis . . .

And here this whole time, I thought he was just lying.

ML (14488c) — 2/28/2009 @ 12:29 am

No one can doubt Hitchens’ physical bravery in defacing a fascist symbol in a place where the fascists may well be free to retaliate.

But his behavior, as described by Totten is a little mysterious, given his record of publicly, repeatedly defending holocaust denier and open fascist David Irving.

As always, Hitchens strikes a principled pose in the Irving case, arguing that, while he many no agree with Irving, he nonetheless shouldn’t be harrassed for denying the Holocaust.

Confronted with the unabashed bigotry, fascism and anti-Semitism of Irving, Hitchens counsels free speech and tolerance.

Scott and pals want to toast the guy and buy him drinks…

Confronted with a sign on a public street in Beirut, Hitchens suddenly loses even the small regard for free speech it would take to leave the sign be and defaces it, yet again claiming to be acting on principle.

Hitchens is smart, interesting and often right, but he’s also an unprincipled moral narcissist who doesn’t appear to be able to control himself when he drinks.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:12 am

Hmmmm…

“…an unprincipled moral narcissist who doesn’t appear to be able to control himself ..”

The unexamined life, Exhibit #32A.

Comedy. Gold.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:56 am

#152: oh, this will be good, too.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:57 am

Wow, the Projection is strong in this one, Yoda.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:33 am

Yeah, and then trying to accuse Patterico of being gay, in a disparaging fashion. But I thought being gay was a fine lifestyle choice to the Left.

Right after that, suggesting that Patterico was “dumb.”

An odd internal life, SPQR.

But yeah, I think that there is more projection going on there than in a supermultiplex.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:47 am

Eric, certainly the festering anger overriding all principle, all logic, certainly clearly manifests itself.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:53 am

Sounds like envy, I would imagine.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:53 am

Yep, if Hitchens defends the free speech of nazi sympathizers then he’s a nazi sympathizer himself.

Glad to see how easy a principle that was for the hack to abandon.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:54 am

So when a certain troll defends the free speech of bad people….?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:55 am

One time I was in beijing and the only available bathroom was one of those sloping-trough-into-a-gutter things

Hey, just like in Wrigley Field!

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/28/2009 @ 8:01 am

Hacks molests underage goats.

JD (9e1dca) — 2/28/2009 @ 8:17 am

I don’t think underage goats would lower themselves to that level of buggering – I was thinking more along the lines of miniature ponies.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/28/2009 @ 8:53 am

Some serious problems here in a lack of ability to ignore trolls.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 9:01 am

AD, you are right. I was angry at trolls defending fascists and disparaging people who stand up to them.

But yes, heaping scorn on a hypocritical projective clown could indeed be seen as yet more attention. I have small children, and indeed “bad attention” is sometimes better than no attention at all.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 9:09 am

Though I cannot support many of the positions taken by Hitchens, I find his deouncements of Fascism morally uplifting (even if, as an atheist, one has severed the connection to the morals known in a Judeo-Christian World) and his actions courageous.
We are better having him around to look over our shoulders, and would lose a valuable voice in his absence.
I would think that Mr. Hitchens would be someone I would want to uncork a bottle with.
A fascinating conjecture would be to sit between Christopher Hitchens and William F. Buckley at a dinner-party.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 9:19 am

If two is company and three is a crowd, what’s four and five?

nein

Comment by John Hitchcock

I like that one. Mind if I save it ?

Mike K (2cf494) — 2/28/2009 @ 10:18 am

AD, I would love to have sees the debate/discussion between Hitchens and WFB.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 11:07 am

“seen,” of course.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 11:07 am

When it comes to supporting the free speech of Holocaust deniers, Hitchens position is “One must, one simply must,” apparently…

But when it comes to defending the free speech rights of Syrian fascists with non-swastika swastikas, the brave Hitchens answers: One must not, one simply must not.”

And what about the Pope? What’s position on the Pope’s initial decision to welcome a priest who denies the Holocaust?

Outrage, of course. How dare the Pope tolerate a Holocaust denier in his own Church. I guess Hitchens switched back again to the “One must, one simply must” position on fascism.

Or maybe Hitchens just likes moral preening and counts on his fans to not pay too much attention to details.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/28/2009 @ 1:50 pm

Would the one who just passed-gas please excuse themselves.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:05 pm

Sorry, AD, it’s all them spuds I been eating lately. That or the sour cream I pile on them.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:14 pm

OK, John. But try to get on a better diet, could you?

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:20 pm

I don’t know, AD. I think that we need to focus on “swatstikas” and people who spell the word that way and then sniff that other writers need editors.

What would be pseudo-intellectual Latin for “Beano”?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:24 pm

This is quite a performance from Hax. He’s laying you guys to waste, day after day, and doing it with style. The abuse he’s made to undergo (with nary a word of warning to anyone about that from Pat), is proof positive.

The main strategy here Hax is to break you down on the most immature of abuses, wait until you respond in kind, and then of course they’ll all crow and become indignant and demand you be put in moderation or banned outright. and depending on how Pat’s feeling about the presence of a real alternative voice, and how much your upsetting the sensitive-souls here he’ll either listen to them or not.

I don’t feel so bad about being in moderation with you around to shine a light on the twisted inbred intellectually bankrupt and ideologically blinkered rot round here that passes for commentary.

So bravo, bravo. Well done sir. The more abuse they heap on you, the more you’re hitting the target and upsetting their right-wing fantasies in Never-Neverland.

Peter (e70d1c) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:33 pm

Troof to powder!

Sock drawer check. Gleens are afoot!

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:34 pm

EB, never very good at Latin, but ASS-HOLE would fit!

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:37 pm

Oh, you aren’t the only one who isn’t good at Latin!

Grin.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:39 pm

Peter: Inotice that you don’t mention that you were put in moderation for talking about how Rush Limbaugh should go to the guillotine. I don’t tolerate that kind of talk from anyone from either side.

You can whine and moan all you like but that don’t change the facts.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:45 pm

Oh, Patterico, no fair! Using facts to dismiss victimhood?

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:52 pm

To tell the truth, Hax is not obviously as hot for Juggy as the Obamaphiles I have to associate with every day.

nk (502275) — 2/28/2009 @ 2:59 pm

Which, nk, reminds me of the eternal question: which is better, horse poop or chicken poop? You might prefer one over the other, but both remain…

Well, you know.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:04 pm

Comment by nk — 2/28/2009 @ 2:59 pm

Well, he must not be from Chi-town then; and you must be surrounded by a group of “homers”?

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:04 pm

I’ve got some in Arizona, too, AD.

nk (502275) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:07 pm

BTW, AD, you’re not this guy, are you? Because I’ll be going there some time in May.

nk (502275) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:11 pm

Comment by nk — 2/28/2009 @ 3:11 pm

No, Sorry!
But if you ever get out here in Patterico’s ‘hood, we can all get together sometime.
Maybe go to the range and release some frustrations.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:18 pm

By the way, AD, did you see Taurus’ “The Judge”?

Now, I have fired a Desert Eagle in .50AE.

I’m still looking at .45ACPs, by the way. I appreciated your suggestions.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:27 pm

We’re not allowed to have The Judge, here in the Peoples Republik, but the write-ups on it have been most favorable.
A Desert Eagle in 50AE? It is big, and clunky, and not IMHO all that practical.
Would rather have one of the small versions of a Smith&Wesson 460 or 500.
With a round that powerful, magazine capacity is not a primary concern.
If you can hit it with the first, and/or follow-up, round, you’ll end the threat.
Still, those types of handguns have nothing to do with “needs”, just “wants”.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:41 pm

EB…
An alternative for Home Defense that I just delivered to a suburban house-mom who had a .38 snubbie and wanted something with just a bit more “authority”…
The Charter Arms Bulldog in .44-Special.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 3:43 pm

I’ve had a Walther PPK in .22LR since I was sixteen (and I’m 52 now). I’ve only shot Remington Match from it and it’s never misfed. I “clean” it about once a year with a shot of discbrake cleaner and a drop of CLP. I have a skinny-butt, double action, ambidextrous safety, Beretta in .380 ACP, too, and it shoots Remington Golden Sabers just fine but the bitches cost about six times as much as the .22LR.

I don’t go around with a gun, but were I to do so, my quandary would be which gun I could hit anything I see with (the Walther) and which gun would I ditch without a second thought if I saw police (the Beretta).

nk (502275) — 2/28/2009 @ 4:05 pm

Well what do you know.

The gaping holes in Totten’s tale are leaking all across the blogosphere.

Turns out, Hitchens & Co. were on the way to a bar, not on the way to buy socks, as Totten recalls. Shocking. Just shocking.

Or on their way FROM a bar. Who knew?

Or both, if you believe the more concise, but also more confused rundowns on this at Hot Air and Ace of Spades.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/283102.php

At least Ace takes the time to try and correct his first shot at third-hand first-person “journalism, ” but that bucket’s still leaking like a sieve.

What a ripe example of how sloppy and incestuous the right-wing blogosphere is. Hilarious…

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/28/2009 @ 4:07 pm

And in what way are you the real thing, troll?

nk (502275) — 2/28/2009 @ 4:15 pm

nk, you know better than that!
Sometimes, you just have to wipe off the bottom of your shoe and move on.

AD - RtR/OS (5e419c) — 2/28/2009 @ 4:20 pm

He’s laying you guys

I’m sure he’d like that; Poncey Boy is quite projection – personified in that category.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/28/2009 @ 4:23 pm

Kinda goes with your comment, Dmac:

“…sloppy and incestuous…”

Ewwww.

And…I’m thinking that there might be some remedial reading lessons necessary to go along with the spelling issues.

Eric Blair (8d54e0) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:22 pm

Yes, Pat. Because i was serious about Rushbo going to the guillotine. and you have no ability to decipher a figure of speech.

You goofball.

Peter (e70d1c) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:41 pm

It would be amusing, if it weren’t so pitiful, to see the record of bunkertrollHax being ridiculed on sites across the world.

Quote:Bunkerbuster
too many pc arse lickers!
************************************
Your PC has an arse? Oh, you mean sat in front of it (or behind it, if you’re Dutch).

And it’s no surprise that bunkertrollHax gets freaked out by Hitchens’ display of bravery and principle. The cowardly and petty hate any display of virtue.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:45 pm

Thanks Brad! I appreciate that you have so much time to devote to me. Not my quote, though.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/28/2009 @ 6:57 pm

Yes, Pat. Because i was serious about Rushbo going to the guillotine. and you have no ability to decipher a figure of speech.

No, I didn’t think you were serious. But it’s my site, and I chose not to allow that particular violent figure of speech.

You don’t have a right to comment here and I have no obligation to allow anyone to use violent language to refer to political opponents. You don’t like it, start your own site.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:08 pm

#200 Bradley J. Fikes:

freaked out by Hitchens’ display of bravery and principle.

Hell, I don’t care if it was a drunken frolic~it was a principled frolic!

Which, is totally beyond the scrollover’s comprehension.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:26 pm

“no obligation to allow anyone to use violent language to refer to political opponents.”

I’d rather you let anyone say anything, as that leads miscreants to discredit themselves, but if you’re going to disallow violent language referring to political opponents, shouldn’t you apply it equally to everyone?

Or better yet, how about calling a voluntary moratorium on personal attacks. You’ve got some smart people coming here, but I’m sure you’d agree there’s way too much being devoted to slagging–and most of it’s witless to boot.

I’m happy to start it off unilaterally. For the next 10 days, zero personal attacks from yours truly, no matter how many I receive.

Hax Vobiscum (23258e) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:29 pm

How about he is banned for the next ten days and we see if we can get back commenters like Apogee, Aphrael and WLS to name a few. And whatever happened to Anwyn and Dafydd ab Hugh?

nk (502275) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:36 pm

I’m perfectly fine with sitting on the sidelines and being moderated. You seem to have to bring up the guillotine everytime I do make a comment though as if that should discredit any opinion I might express as that of a dangerous guillotine zealot. It’s actually very funny.

I merely came on to show some appreciation for Hax’s commentary and to encourage hime not to give in to all the abuse and come down to the immature level of the usual suspects.

That is all. Carry on.

I

Peter (e70d1c) — 2/28/2009 @ 7:49 pm

You seem to have to bring up the guillotine everytime I do make a comment though . . .

I bring it up when you whine about being moderated, and falsely imply that you were moderated for your leftist opinions instead of your violent reference.

If that seems like every time you make a comment, then you must be whining about being moderated in every comment you make.

Were you to apologize and show some understanding of why it’s discourteous to leave violent language on the web site of someone with a public position like mine, I could take you out of moderation. But you show no understanding of how discourteous you were, and so, I don’t trust you not to do it again.

It’s your own doing.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/28/2009 @ 8:07 pm

I barely know anything about your public position and if that remark in some way is salient to it, then my apologies, I perhaps didn’t fully understand that and still don’t but there you go. I’ll give you the benefit of the sdoubt on that.

Alright, enough about me. Don’t you have some new Obama quote to lampoon or something?

Peter (e70d1c) — 2/28/2009 @ 8:23 pm

Well, I’m a Deputy D.A.

I don’t need people pointing at my blog and talking about how people talk about violence on it.

But you know, I should be able to decide that for myself regardless of my job.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/28/2009 @ 10:09 pm

#209 Patterico:

But you know, I should be able to decide that for myself regardless of my job.

Exactly, and Peter is demonstrating willful obtusity in his cries of “censorship!”

Up to now, I had considered that Peter, although blindly faithful to his partisan ideology with a religious fervor surpassing anything I’ve ever seen in a snake handling fundamentalist, might be a semi rational person, his “Stick it to the Man!®” “Troof to Powder©!” endorsement of the scrollover has caused me to recategorize him and stick him in a sack with the Andrews and Marios.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 3/1/2009 @ 4:05 am

I don’t need people pointing at my blog and talking about how people talk about violence on it.

I take you also don’t appreciate it when the cast here begins to wax poetic about their gun collections and make implied threats towards liberals, Because I don’t remember you ever telling anyone to cool it with the talk of guns, although I have seen you tell people to cool it, on both sides of the aisle, when the talk gets violent, and as I said I was making an absurd figure of speech, in no way was I speaking of a guillotine in real terms. You know that, I know that and the rest of the crew here knows it, so what it is, is a little fun with someone who expresses contrary opinions. Fine, this is your site and you can do what you want, I have never acted like I have a special “right” to comment here in anyway different than anyone else has a “right” to comment here. Nothing less and nothing more than that.

Now, if you’re suggesting that any talk, even metaphorical, of a device used for capital punishment, in 18th Century France, in some way puts you in a compromising position as a Deputy DA, then I’ve already apologized for that. And admit I wasn’t sensitive to that aspect and I should’ve been.

Peter (e70d1c) — 3/1/2009 @ 8:23 am

I take you also don’t appreciate it when the cast here begins to wax poetic about their gun collections and make implied threats towards liberals . . .

Implied threats towards liberals? I am unaware of any, and I won’t let you make that accusation without backing it up. So, the next comment of yours that gets approved will 1) retract the accusation or 2) back it up.

No other comment will be approved. In other words, do 1) or 2) or be banned permanently.

I suspect you’ll do 3) whine and fail to do either. Your choice, though.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 3/1/2009 @ 1:58 pm

Just talking about guns is an implied threat of course. 😉

I have never acted like I have a special “right” to comment here in anyway different than anyone else has a “right” to comment here.

Unless you count every time he has hit the “Submit Comment” button.

Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 3/1/2009 @ 2:06 pm

#212 deserves some thunderous applause!

=D> =D> =D>

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 3/1/2009 @ 2:06 pm

W/R/T #212, then there’s hope for some discipline for Nabisco Boy.

steve miller (4bda12) — 3/1/2009 @ 2:25 pm

Implied threats towards liberals? I am unaware of any, and I won’t let you make that accusation without backing it up.

Backing up that statement is not a problem, at all. The problem is who will judge it as having merit? Because I’m sorry to say, it will cause you embarrassment. There have, indeed been implied threats to liberals here that have been either a.) tolerated b.)overlooked, or best case scenario, c.) not understood as being such.

I think it was a lapse of what is usually fairly sound judgment on your part. But it’s there in the archives, for anyone to see.

My thoughts can be found in the last three paragraphs of comment #98.

If you want to take this discussion offline, you have my email. If you’re simply set on banning me, and not letting this comment through, that’s fine with me. But I’ve lived up to my part of that challenge, and backed up my words.

Peter (e70d1c) — 3/3/2009 @ 9:28 am

2/26/2009

The Real Hitchens/Nazi Story

216 Responses to “The Real Hitchens/Nazi Story”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out