A knee-jerk is ALWAYS a knee-JERK

[UPDATE :: Wednesday, November 9, 2011 - Non-Apology Apology - Silence]

Is it right to gloat? Bask in the light of total redemption, total justification and total exoneration? Tell me it is, because that's what this post is about – PERSONAL VINDICATION.

By God, when you are right, YOU ARE RIGHT! In my case, after enduring more than two years of incessant public personal slanderous and threatening attacks that were NEVER rectified, I have, if anyone does, every right to flaunt the gloating.

Almighty God DOES smile upon His little children. Vindication ALWAYS comes to he who waits and let me tell you, it is so, so sweet. OKAY, enough with the gloating. Here's what happened when I picked up the Sunday Times-Standard newspaper and worked my way to reading, Next stop, Africa: American imperialism on the march – and when I got to the third paragraph, I almost couldn't believe what I saw ... What I read made my heart skip a beat, but maybe I'd better explain.

That "happy faced" picture, that one you see there on the right, is the face of a guy that goes by the name of Dave Stancliff. That innocent looking “happy face” hides the soul of a man that publicly and shamelessly castigated, denigrated, blatantly lied and viciously accused me of all kinds of filthy, obscene and malicious actions and intentions directed against him and to him, not to mention to his pug-ugly dog. What did I do to so offend his infantile sensibilities? Nothing more than make the simple observation about his "knee-jerk" reaction that he published in the Times-Standard newspaper under his Opinion column: As It Stands. His personal attacks became so extreme that he even threatened to assault my family with some sort of lawsuit or criminal action. Mind you, that was on top of his threat against me of being some sort of Internet stalker and crazy, radical terrorist. Apparently, someone convinced him that his documented abusive conduct, over-the-top threats, and constant invective, were criminal in nature if not in intent. Eventually, he stopped his campaign, at least I think he did.

The irony of what he tried to do two and one half years ago, enforce his own brand of Imperialism is exactly what he is railing against today. He did everything he could think of, used every opportunity he could conjure up to try to force me, either by tacit inference or open admission that he had the right to judge me as some sort of sub-human meaningless person that dared question him or his opinions. His definition of "Imperialism" can be applied to himself because it is exactly what he tried, and to a certain extent within the Internet blogosphere, achieved a measure of success:

"Imperialism is defined as extending a nation's (or nationalistic [someone devoted to self] person's -) authority by territorial acquisition (taking a person's reputation and personal legitimacy through forced submission to to act and be as they are as a valued individual) or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations (through deprivation of one's credibility, acceptance and recognition as an independent individual through malicious lies and accusations designed to control the minds and beliefs of others).

For anyone interested, here is the link that started all of this that proofs the above definition. Note the date: Sunday, May 31, 2009. The title of my article was:  Trolls versus The Thought Police.

Two years later he's still going at me: Title of this article and updates: Goody Two-Shoes. Do a search on the Report's WordPress Blog under Dave Stancliff, start at the bottom and work back and you'll find it's all there, Dave Stancliff in all his glory – that is if you have the stomach to go through all that crap.

Stancliff even posted a couple of his own and offered a reward to anyone that could identify the author of the Joe Blow Report. He started out with this link on his blog. - June 3, 2009. Then there were the apologists' incessant blather - one in particular: Ernie Branscomb. He wrote and posted a blog article defending Dave Stancliff's conduct, joining and supporting him with his own unjustified public invective.

So you can see, this whole episode got right down dirty, vicious and nasty mean. Dave Stancliff would make up all kinds of filthy, lying accusations then turn right around and do exactly what he was accusing me of doing. And – There he goes again! Only this time, he's admitted to being and doing exactly as observed in that "Trolls" commentary.

Here is what he said in today's Times-Standard newspaper, Sunday Edition, October 30, 2011 – As It Stands. I quote his admission:

 “Of course, I really didn't understand its full meaning and admittedly didn't go out of my way to find it out. Instead, I went with a knee-jerk reaction and put the word in my Commie file.” [Emphasis added]

Is that bald-faced admission that totally justifies my very first observations of his opinion writings in the Times-Standard newspaper NOT a thing of beauty? What makes it a thing of beauty is where it puts him and those that supported him in his bullying, servile war against me and my credibility. They owe me a public apology.

What Dave Stancliff refused to accept as well as everyone that supported him, including the Editors at the Times-Standard is that it was Dave Stancliff that lost his credibility and legitimacy, neutralizing the value of everything he subsequently said that they published. That fact is established in the quality or lack thereof in the paper's reporting as defined by his exact statement quoted above. So...

Do you see it now, Dave Stancliff? How about you, Ernie Branscomb? And you, too, Eric Kirk? What about the Times-Standard Editorial Management, Kimberly Wear – is all the personal filthy diatribe and invective still justified? Who among you has the character, moral fortitude and common decency to do what is right, dignified and honorable?

Dave Stancliff's exposure that May day to the Joe Blow Report was, in fact, his first encounter with someone in the vanguard of the worldwide Occupy Movement. His knee-jerk reactions are completely consistent with how the Occupy Movement is held in total disgust, ridicule and disdain. Here's a good example by Rush Limbaugh:

"These protestors, who are actually few in number, have contributed nothing. They're parasites. They're pure, genuine parasites. Many of them are bored, trust-fund kids, obsessed with being something, being somebody. Meaningless lives, they want to matter." [Emphasis added]

More importantly, however, and in stark contrast to his historical attitude and actions, Dave Stancliff's As It Stands opinion article today is basically about making peace in this world by ending the American Elite's domination through brutal military or police suppression and looting everything of value. I've attached it to the end of this post and included links to the Times-Standard because it is well worth reading. Of late, Dave Stancliff has upped his game and began writing about matters of common interest, that are pertinent and timely to the local readers. Lets see if he can practice what he preaches, at least from a positive point of view. Real peace starts at home - it starts with oneself. He says he tracks my Internet activity. Let's see if he has the moral character and personal integrity to be the person he claims to possess such standing in this community, to step up to being the kind of real man he thinks he is.

Jerk: Slang. a contemptibly naive, fatuous, foolish, or inconsequential person.

--Joe

As It Stands: Next stop, Africa: American imperialism on the march

Dave Stancliff/For the Times-Standard

Posted: 10/30/2011 02:30:09 AM PDT

”The enemy aggressor is always pursuing a course of larceny, murder, rapine and barbarism. We are always moving forward with high mission, a destiny imposed by the Deity to regenerate our victims while incidentally capturing their markets, to civilize savage and senile and paranoid peoples while blundering accidentally into their oil wells.”

-- John T. Flynn, conservative American writer, 1944

By Dave Stancliff

I once thought only Communists used the word imperialism when referring to American politics. As a Vietnam veteran against the war when I came home in 1971, I was in solidarity with those protesting against it.

Still, some slogans like “Imperialistic Pigs” or “Imperialistic Puppets” vaguely troubled me. I didn't like that word for some reason. It made me uneasy.

Of course, I really didn't understand its full meaning and admittedly didn't go out of my way to find it out. Instead, I went with a knee-jerk reaction and put the word in my Commie file. After all, back in those days Commies used the word in scathing verbal attacks against America.

In fact, imperialism is defined as extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.

It's been a long and painful road since the Soviets were our mortal enemy. Along the way, America invaded

Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of national security. Ours. We extended our military presence in the world to 126 countries under the guise of protecting democracy.

President Obama announced the majority of our troops will be out of Iraq by January 2012, but what about the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan?

More alarming, Obama and his corral of Chicken Hawks recently announced the invasion of a new frontier. They sent 157 Green Berets to Uganda as military advisors in what is being described as the first phase of a military operation that will spread to other nearby African states.

The Pentagon's questionable reasoning for this mission is based upon lies designed to hide our capitalistic goals -- there's oil in Libya, and other African states have natural resources we can plunder.

We're going in -- wearing White Hats and all -- to save Uganda from some roving gang of thugs that's supposedly terrifying all the good people in southern Africa. An earlier generation of Chicken Hawks in Washington said the same thing about Vietnam.

The warmongers are ready to rip Africa apart, like the vultures they are, in order to keep the industrial complex rolling. Africa screams ... but no one hears. The ghosts of thousands of American troops who have died in dirty little imperialistic wars/actions since Vietnam must be restless.

As long as we have influential Chicken Hawks lobbying for wars and military actions, they'll continue. Military ambitions will run rampant as long as obscene profits -- made on the back of the American taxpayer -- can be made. All under the guise of democracy and national security.

Capitalism became patriotism as politicians persuaded the public that America needed a worldwide military presence. The lies flowed with the cash. Business as usual.

Our government has created a system of proxy rule, by way of client states and dependent regimes. Few dare call it imperialism. Indeed, the most militant defenders of the policy greatly resent the term. They call it leftist propaganda.

My sentiments are the same as Mark Twain's were back on Oct. 15, 1900, when he wrote the following for the New York Herald:

”I have read carefully the treaty of Paris, and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem. It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.”

Here we are over 100 years later, still putting our talons into other countries. That's very discouraging. As much as I love America, I'm ashamed that we act like a superpower with no soul.

As It Stands, I watch Americans protesting the economy daily now, and I find myself hoping that this growing movement of outrage will add demands to pull our troops out of every country we now occupy.

Dave Stancliff is a retired newspaper editor and publisher who writes this column for the Times-Standard. Comments can be sent to richstan1@suddenlink.net or to www.davesblogcentral.com.