Banning of Balerion

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't know the details, but if he said "Islam is poison", or words to that effect, he broke the rules of the forum.
I suppose that he was banned for it.
Why refer back to it?
The killings were on 22nd July 2011.
Breivik will be out of prison before you have forgiven Balerion.

Maybe this will goad Balerion into saying something else inflammatory about Muslims.
Then you can ban him for good.
Perhaps this is an old score you want to settle.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

First of all, you really think members of the KKK have black friends? You're so bloody desperate to defame me that you reached for the most ludicrous analogy you could think of.

And, again, alluding that I'm like a member of the KKK--which in itself is a pretty huge step up from regular, run of the mill racism--is totally fine, apparently. That's totally reasonable.

To the point, you slapped no one down. Outside of your partner in crime Tiassa, and your enabler James, I've never met a member of this forum who takes you seriously. You very plainly misrepresented my posts and made obscene accusations about my character. I doubt many people were on board with your claim that the only thing separating me from Anders Breivik was access gun and some explosives.

Which was an untrue statement for a start, and nowhere near the only thing you said. I sincerely doubt it needs to be explained to you how "fundamentalist Islam is poison to society" is not akin to "There are a lot of Muslims in Europe, therefore I must kill them to stop its spread." My suspicion all along is that you know full well that I'm not "spouting" anything like what Breivik believes, but because you're so emotionally stunted, you had no way to control your impulse to spaz out. For instance, you couldn't possibly believe that calling Islam poison is an anti-Muslim comment, anymore than you could believe that saying Evangelical Christianity is intolerant is an anti-Evangelical Christian comment, or that saying war is evil amounts to calling soldiers evil. You're never going to bridge that gap.

Far less often than you accuse people of being terrible human beings.

Whether or not people are offended by the criticism of an object or ideology is irrelevant. Chicago Bulls fans might take offense when I say their team sucks, but in no way can that be construed as an attack on the fans themselves. But again, I'm wasting my time explaining this to someone who obviously already knows this, and is simply making a desperate attempt to weasel out of making an apology. In fact, I don't doubt that you're horrified by your own behavior. I just think your embarrassment outweighs your guilt, hence this pathetic attempt at justification. Of course, Tiassa blindly aiding you doesn't help.

For one, it isn't like that at all. Calling Catholicism a religion of child molesters is an implication about the character of the people who believe in Catholicism, whereas my comment was a criticism of the doctrine of fundamentalist Islam, not the followers themselves. Secondly, (and for the second time) whether or not someone might take offense to the comment is irrelevant to the question of who or what the comment was directed at.

Saying that Islam is a poison is not a generalization. It's a critique of a philosophy, of a belief system. It says nothing of the adherents to that system.

Yes. You used that tragedy to irresponsibly generalize an entire group of people as bigots simply because they have a negative opinion of Islam, as if that's all it takes to do what Anders Breivik did. What is it about you and Tiassa that you get so indignant when people challenge your baseless accusations? You act like that's even worse than what you perceived to be the original bigoted comment.

No. You called me a bigot because you're a miserable, socially-retarded bully who gets a measure of satisfaction from harassing people on the internet. I've never questioned your motives.

Since I was being called a bigot for no good reason, absolutely. Read the comment again. It wasn't a comment about Islam, it was a comment about the generalizations being made in the thread.

I don't see how the two are related. The reason I bring up the Breivik incident now is to help establish a pattern of your behavior.

If we're leaving things out, make sure not to mention the part where he made a threatening and abusive post to Geoff to get the whole mess started.

If you're going to keep making an unmitigated asshole out of yourself at every opportunity, what do you expect? Do you think they'll just forget your transgressions?

Give me an example of me quoting things out of context.

Secondly, I did not make an abusive post, nor was I warned for any such thing. I was warned for making an "off-topic" post. See, this is what I mean. It's like you can't help yourself from lying.

Explain to me how making a negative comment about Islam equates to making a negative comment about Muslims.

And you did lie. You always lie. I've given numerous examples of it.

I doubt that. Then again, your ability to sneak into power here at sciforums despite being the single-most disruptive and abusive poster on the site is impressive, and probably means you happen to speak whatever douchebag language the bullies who tend to become forum moderators speak. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that you do this same thing on several forums.

So this is acceptable? Good to know. I'd call you a slut, or something similarly asinine in retort, but I've heard you're not exactly popular with the fellas, so...

 

You'd better hope he shares your difficulty reading, Bells, because there's no other way he could possibly construe you as being in the right on this.

And for the record, saying Islam is poison is not against the site rules. Unless Tiassa or Bells has a problem with it, of course. Then, I guess anything goes.

 

OK I'll see who mentioned the word Breivik first.

Added later.
Sorry, you are right. Balerion brought up the subject.

Now we have Bells and Tiassa expecting thanks for Geoff's continued membership at sciforums, because his comments directed at anyone else would have resulted in a ban. This, as you all know, is fucking ludicrous. Bells' own accusations of Geoff being an Assad apologist are virtually the same as Geoff's comment taken at a face value. Add context, and what Bells said was far worse. And this isn't even the first time she's said such awful and careless things about others. She once told me that I was no different than Anders Breivik, the psychopath who murdered 77 people in Norway a couple of years ago. The implication--hell, it's not even an implication, it's an outright accusation--is that if I was in Breivik's position, I would have done the same thing. And this comment went unpunished.

Did you say he was no different to Anders Breivek?

 

I might just read that thread one day.
Seems to me that you are as fond of a good row as the rest of them.

 

She also said that the only difference between me and Breivik was that Breivik actually did it, implying that I not only agreed with his actions, but that I was considering taking such an action myself. Can you see why saying such a thing might get under my skin? And can you also see why she has absolutely no moral standing to take offense to Geoff's comment, and why those who not only allowed the comments to stand but condoned them have no moral standing to moderate anyone ever again?

As I said in my response to you, I bring it up because it gives context to the clown show that is your and Tiassa's outrage at Geoff's comments. And as much as you'd like to pretend it never happened, I'm not going to allow that. You said an awful thing to me and never apologized; what's more, you're still trying to justify it. I'm not going to stop reminding you until I get some satisfaction on this. Of course, my job would be a lot harder if you and Tiassa didn't keep putting your collective feet in your mouths every couple of months...but it seems you just can't help yourselves.

 

I've got it now. The mist of confusion has disappeared.
It is alright to say that Balerion is as bad as Breivik, and like a member of the KKK,
because he IS as bad as Breivik or a member of the KKK.
But when GeoffP says that you are a bloodthirsty warmonger,
that is not alright, because you are NOT a bloodthirsty warmonger.
What's more, you get to decide who is what, because you are the moderator.

You are acting as a demagogue. A Putin.
The very thing you say you hate.

 

Captain Kremmen, careful, you may end up being threatened with pictures!

 

She said to the mirror...?

I mean, seriously. Have some self-awareness.

Again, accusation without evidence. I invite you once more to support your claim with something like a quote. Please quote me disparaging Muslims. By all means.

Another heinous lie. Where did I blame the victims? Show me even one example of it, and I'll leave the site forever.

You can't have it both ways, liar. I'm either a bigot who unabashedly disparages Muslims, or I'm a coward who doesn't say what he really means.

This is one of those "I'm rubber, you're glue" moments. Sadly, it didn't work in Kindergarten, and it certainly won't work here.

I'm not the one who throws the word "bigot" around like it's going out of style. I'm not the one who has accused others of being akin to Hitler, or Stalin, or Anders Breivik. I've never done that. I've never lied to you or about you. I've never defamed you. I've never said anything about you that I couldn't support with quotes.

No, it's a criticism of my person. You are disparaging me when you call me a bigot.

Did you not read the passage you quote directly above this question?

Saying Islam is a poison to society is a comment about an ideology.

It's really not any more complicated than that, Bells. Much as you want to paint me as a bigot, you're not going to find any satisfaction here.

Repeating my own barbs back to me isn't exactly an effective debate technique. It just shows that you don't have anything original to say.

If all you said was that I my beliefs were bigoted in nature, we wouldn't be here talking about this. Tiassa has said the same about me and countless other many times, and I'm not holding grudges over that. What you said, and what you implied and inferred, goes far beyond accusations of bigotry, and you know it.

When did I say that? I said your accusations toward me were baseless.

Seriously, pay attention.

No you didn't. You said:

In short, when you come into a thread and parrot the ideology spouted by Breivik in court and in his manifesto, don't then whine when you are lumped into his pathetic racist corner. You see, Breivik's main complaint is that he could not apparently discuss the matter, just as you are complaining about it here. Only difference between you and his ideology and beliefs about Muslims is that he went ahead and decided to murder as many of them and their children in that youth camp as he could.

[..]

Keep in mind that it was one of your own who went ahead and deliberately murdered children by shooting them in the head because of their race and political beliefs.​

Read it again, Bells. I said that in response to you accusing me of being mentally deranged. You think "slut" is worse than calling someone crazy? Really?

No, I don't adhere to your "Shock, Awe, Then Pretend I Never Said It" strategy. I'm not naive enough to think that people won't just go back and find my words and throw them back in my face. That's why I even provided a link, so you'd have no excuses when you subsequently failed to support any of your accusations against me.

And no, the comment wasn't about Islam. The comment was about the generalizations being made about those who had negative opinions of Islam. The gist of it was that anyone who didn't like Islam was being thrown in with this Breivik monster, and I took issue with that. That's what my comment was about. Again, context. Try it some time.

The behavior I'm talking about is the kind where you misrepresent people on your best days, and accuse them of being a party to mass murder on your worst. If you think I posted like a bigot in that thread, then I can only assume you don't know what the word means.

You mean like you did to me in that Breivik thread?

Why is it okay when you do it, but Tiassa has his man-period when Geoff does it?

Oh, and that's not even what he said Geoff did. He said that Geoff had accused you of committing felonies. There's a difference between accusing you of wanting to do something, and accusing you of actually doing it. And I doubt Tiassa misspoke.

Again, like you accused me of wanting to do in the Breivik thread.

As I said before, not only is that a false claim, but it's not all you said. And to say that the only difference between me and Anders Breivik is that he went through with the murders is an appalling statement on its own. That's horrible, and you owe me an apology. The most I said was that Islam as a philosophy is poison. And it is. In its fundamentalist form, it is corrosive, misogynistic, and dangerous both to individuals and society. I can make that argument, and I can make it about fundamentalist Christianity as well. How you twisted that into me "parroting the same ideology" as Breivik is literally beyond comprehension, unless you really are so unsophisticated as to believe that his beliefs could be boiled down to such an innocuous sentence.

Didn't call you a slut. I said I could call you that, given your apparent disregard for the rules of the forum and libelous accusation about my mental health.

Wait...calling someone a slut automatically makes them a misogynist?

Maybe you really are simple.

I did no such thing. I've provided context to all of my comments. I said that I went off on a rant (which was not abusive by any means, nor was it moderated as such), and that it was deleted prior to Tiassa's PM to me. I also provided my original comment that lead to your obscene accusations in the Breivik thread, as well as a link to that thread per your request.

Again, you're lying.

This is the PM I received:

So, no, I was not moderated for abusive posting.

It's not. No more than saying war is immoral is a comment on the morality of the soldiers who fight them. It's a comment about a philosophy, and anyone who isn't a moron understands that someone's religion is rarely something freely chosen. I no more blame Muslims for adhering to their faith than I blame myself for being an atheist.

Now I'm a misogynist!

It's actually funny at this point. While the internet gives you anonymity and the bravery to make horrible comments about people with no consequence, it also prevents you from actually doing anything about it when someone calls you out on your bullshit. That you've now added misogyny to the list of libelous comments you've made about me is obviously your feeble attempt at scratching my eyes out through your computer monitor.

Why are you asking me? All I know is you couldn't have earned that status through responsible and quality posting.

Is that what your simple mind gleaned from my post? Really? Part of me actually wants to believe you, but nobody's that dumb. You couldn't possibly think that I implied your value was measured in your sexual popularity.

It's beyond hysterical that you're actually offended now, after what you just said about my mental state.

Big girl doesn't like equality after all.

You used your real name on this site, and then gave me a warning when I linked to the post in which you did. It's public domain now. And no, I'm not denying using your name. I'm saying that nobody could possibly follow that link and side with you. Well, Tiassa could, but we know his motives.

Can you show me where I denied using your name? Didn't think so.

Yes, but please start by attributing any comment at all I've made that fits into any of those descriptions. Please do that before you reply to this post, and do it in a separate post so I and everyone else can see. Thank you.

I've got several problems with this clumsy comment:

1. Bringing up your history is not flaming. You brought up Geoff's history, and so has Tiassa, so apparently there's nothing wrong with it at all.

2. I never alluded to you being a slut. In fact, I said you couldn't be because you're not very popular with men. From what I hear, anyway.

3. Why on earth would I believe your comment about my mental state was a joke, and what on earth makes you think it being a joke excuses it in any way whatsoever?

Nor would anyone ever let you get away with such a ridiculous statement. Of course, what you've said on the subject is of literally no relevance. In other words, I never said you said you were a good poster or mod.

Another lie. I never called you a slut. And unlike me, you do go around calling people bigots for no reason, and accuse them of being no different than despots and mass murderers. How many times have you likened Geoff to Assad in the Syria thread? Should I go tally them up?

Not only are you no saint, you're the worst offender here. You constantly misrepresent people's comments for the sake of sounding righteous when you defame them. You're the worst kind of person on the internet. Look at what you've done here: I said that your claim that I was insane was so out of line and absurd that I might as well go ahead and call you a slut, and then "twisted the knife" by saying it wasn't possible to call someone a slut who doesn't get any. Again, if you weren't so eager to misrepresent me, you'd see that mine was an attempt to match your ludicrousness with ludicrousness of my own. I even said "I could call you a slut or something similarly asinine. But you'll breeze right over that, because it's easier to call me a misogynist than to read in full.

Pretty sure it doesn't take a misogynist to mention when someone else isn't getting any.

You're really sticking to this feigning offense nonsense, aren't you? Well, I guess whatever works, right? Fuck integrity.

 

Even Kremmy has you pegged, Bells.

Now you are officially fooling no one.

Unless you can come up with some examples of me doing the things you claim I've done, I've got nothing more to say to you. You've been exposed, and I guess I can settle for that.

 

Look, Kremmen, there's a world of difference between You don't want to bomb Syrian weapons sites without better proof of responsibility because you want Muslims to die and You want to bomb Syrian weapons sites without better proof of responsibility because you want Muslims to die. There's at least four letters of difference there, okay? More if you count the contraction. Seriously. You right-wing zealots really boil my buttons.

 

What

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Would you like to read what I wrote again a couple of times?

 

He's just having fun with you, Kremmen.

 

Threatened with pictures? What does that mean?