Friday, July 9, 2010

Warmonger Writes About Peace II

Hatemonger Writes About Love

For those of you that don't know, a “warmonger” is defined as, “a person who advocates, endorses, or tries to precipitate war.” A “hatemonger” is defined as, “a person who kindles hatred, enmity, or prejudice in others.” The following comment posted on this blog Report by Dave Stancliff, one of many examples as far back as June 1, 2009, of language and intent that meets the above definitions.

It was actually May 31, 2009, that I posted some non-personal observations, "Trolls Versus the Thought Police," about a newspaper column that Dave Stancliff wrote for the Time-Standard newspaper exposing his agenda to dictate and control what and how people think about certain subjects that leads directly to war and the lawless debased state of affairs we're all forced to endure today because of people that think they can do and say to others whatever they want with impunity.

My observations over a year ago are proven justified and legitimate when Dave Stancliff changed the issue with his first ad hominem personal accusation. Ever since he's tried to make the issue between him and me and NOT about what he says, does or believes that he writes in the newspaper. Herein lies the crux of that problem, he writes for the local newspaper. Apparently they believe this kind of trash-talking garbage, racist obscenity is acceptable. That, somehow, his public actions do not reflect in anyway upon them and their newspaper. So be it. As long as they publish his so-called "opinions" the Report will publish its observations as it deems appropriate. As far as the writer(s) of this Report are conserned, Dave Stancliff was and is, as a person, irrelevant. Stancliff would like to believe someone here at the Report is angry, hates his guts, or holds a grudge, even some sort of "fan from hell," etc. that way he could become relevant.

About “paranoia” - that is the state of being wherein you are unable to distinguish between what you think and believe from who and what you are. In Dave Stancliff's case, when I wrote about his newspaper article he accused me of writing and attacking him. Stancliff's documented statements, repeated statements, define him, NOT ME! To re-state an obvious fact, that the claimed purpose of the article was a simple-minded knee-jerk response, in fact at the root of a very serious problem for the world and American society, is NOT, in and of itself, a personal attack on him. Neither do such statements of fact make someone angry nor paranoid. Not one time has Stancliff produced the “lies” he claims I said. Nor does he demonstrate what it is that supposedly makes me “angry.” I guess he thinks he can get away with making such statements because if anyone has a right to be angry it would be me. His wild and psychotic statements take on a hint of personal danger to me when he makes his veiled threats, “some kind of crazed fan from hell.” Let me remind everyone that not one time have I personally addressed or recognized Dave Stancliff other than the impersonal commentary written on this blog Report. I never go to his blog, nor do I say anything about his filthy comments about me (us) he spreads around the blogosphere.

The paranoia is demonstrated in Stancliff's self-important, elitist, god-like assertion that I am somehow a “fan” of his. That my indirect attention somehow makes him a god! Would-be gods are defined by their right to tell everyone what is and is not, but NEVER furnish any proof, i.e., “paranoia” and “hate.” In Stancliff's case, the proof they try to use is always whatever response they can use after-the-fact. His “ends” always “justify his means.”

One final thought on “offers” on the record, conflicts with Stancliff's convenient recollections. He came on this blog and offered to meet with me so we could discuss our “differences.” Before I could even begin to contemplate meeting with him I needed him to assure me he would not use that meeting to continue assaulting me with more of his accusations. He, did not stop making personal accusations even then, but did make another offer for an “interview.” Again he asserts some measure of superiority by offering to do this so I can get a wider coverage of readers. Whatever made him think that might be important to me, I don't know. Regardless, his refusal to even consider what I might need to meet demonstrates that his offers were disingenuous – made for ulterior reasons.

Remember, “Everything Is About Something Different.” I've learned in this life that people like Dave Stancliff, people that persist in making false, lying accusations, do so because they know what they say and write ARE lies. They know that if what they said was true, these people would either be in a mental institution or jail. Only idiots keep provoking someone that's really angry, maybe even psychologically deranged, with a sharp stick. The following is Dave Stancliff's latest contribution posted on the Report article: Warmonger Writes About Peace.

Included below it is the unsolicited comment from a reader that offers some worthwhile perspective about Dave Stancliff's real intentions behind his Times-Standard newspaper “As It Stands” weekly column. [Picture source]

Dave said...

You amaze me Joe.

I write about a subject that has nothing to do with you, and you still attack me.

Remind me of the offer you made me to meet. I don't recall that one. I know I made you an offer, but you refused.

All I see is an angry man who accuses me of everything in the book while reviling me, saying lies about me,and who spends his time blogging about me like some kind of crazed fan from hell.

It's obvious you have some major anger issues in life Joe, and for whatever reason you've chosen to devote your days and nights to attacking me.

I really feel sorry for you. I personally couldn't carry around as much paranoia and hate as you do. It's going to catch up to you.

Have a great day Joe and don't forget to say something nasty about me.

July 3, 2010 8:40 AM

kenny's sideshow said...

Dave, I have no dog in this little fight between you and Joe but I was intrigued by your article title so I went and read it.

It was a convoluted mess, either by ignorance or design.

Taking the false flag of 9/11 and the subsequent manufactured Islamic enemies and mixing it with some history of the Crusades is BS.

Here's how not to coexist with others on the planet and create jihad in the locals as an excuse for never ending wars and profiteering:

Invade and occupy a country based on nothing but lies, genocide and displace the population, destroy the infrastructure and historical artifacts, steal the resources,use the controlled media to cheer lead the death and destruction,install puppet leaders 'friendly' to your agenda,maybe even stimulate the opium/heroin trade and make your bankers and buddies rich while the local population suffers, etc. etc.

Dave, you're a 'journalist.' You should know these simple things by now.

July 3, 2010 3:46 PM
[Emphasis added]

1 comment:

  1. Looks like the multiple personalities are back.

    Back when I was talking to the personality that calls himself Joe, I thought there might be a chance of civil communication.

    But your osession with me, coupled with anger, has brought back the "we" - or all those voices in your head.

    Just want to let you "all" know that I'm not going to write about you, because that's what you really want; some form of

    Oh yeah, why would you have to move to Brazil if you let people know who you are(your words)?

    Could it be you fear retaliation from all of your HATE MONGERING on your blog?

    If I'm so irrevelant..why do you continue to write about me?

    Like I said, I'm not going to write about you because this appears to be your goal. Sorry, all of you will just have to suck wind and move on.