On The Bloggers Who Have Departed The Willis Hart Echo Chamber (AKA The "Circle Jerk Society") & Their Reasons

Willis Hart, a Libertarian blogger who used to call himself "moderate", has banned a number of people from his site "Contra O'Reilly". A few others departed due to Willis' tolerance for idiocy from the resident ass-kisser, a dishonest individual known as dmarks (but whose real name is Dennis Marks).

One of these bloggers who departed the blog of Willis made the following observations before he left, never to return.

Mordechai: Oops, D marks has been exposed as not very honest, will will do something about it, or just deny it to continue to protect his small cabal of approved bloggers he NEVER seems to question, no matter what they do or say, while attacking ONLY left leaning bloggers for some strange reason. Long history of this one with many many left leaning bloggers attacked repeatedly then banned with no one from the right ever questioned let alone chastised, or ever (gasp) banned for their hate filled comments like D marks has done here. Will your moderate veil is slipping and your real ideology is showing once again (12/10/2012 AT 4:33pm).

Mordechai doesn't say specifically that he's leaving, but I don't recall him ever commenting again. In any case, he is 100 percent accurate with his remarks. Specifically the one about dmarks not being honest. Also the comment about Lefty bloggers being attacked (by dmarks, usually) and then Willis banning those people. That, or they leave. And finally, the oh-so-true closer concerning Willis not being a Moderate.

Another blogger who could not stand to stick around Willis' blog (and specifically said he was leaving) left the following comment (his last one).

John Myste: Your website was fun to watch and occasionally participate in, but alas, it is no longer. It has been dominated by the repeated assertions of a completely irrational man, who insists on making up straw men and refuting them. I can tell from his responses on other sites that he now intends to do this to any relevant comment I make, which makes all comments pointless... Without Dervish, DMarks will simply dominate the site with his straw man fiction. In other words, the site is now about the creativity of DMarks mind, which interests me not at all. Farewell... (9/5/2012 AT 8:35am).

Mordechai was still around at this juncture (the comment I opened with was made 3 months later), and his response was to write "and widdle willy loses another honest blogger to protect his circle jerk society".

What is oh-so-true about Myste's comment is that the irrational dmarks has been dominating Willis' blog. But Willis does enjoy dmarks jerking him off, so it isn't an issue. In fact, he does this on a number of blogs I know of. rAtional nAtion uSA and Libertas and Latte are two others (I'm aware of) where he dominates and sucks up to the blog host.

And due to arguments with dmarks I've been banned from all three blogs. Although Les Carpenter of rAtional nAtion is currently allowing me to comment. A situation which may or may not last. But Willis Hart hates my guts, so my banning from his echo chamber is permanent.

BTW, this "circle jerk society" Mordechai refers to is also known as the Higher Ordered Person's Society (HOPS) by others.

OST #50

On Willis Hart's Idiotic & Islamophobic Assessment of Blowback

In a 3/9/2014 post the blogger Willis Hart addresses Ron Paul and says "for Mr. Paul or anybody to think that 9/11, the Boston Marathon bombings, and Benghazi wouldn't have happened had only our troops not been placed in Saudi Arabia for a spate is a little bit silly and naive in my estimation".

In reply I must say "what a dope". 9/11 was cited by bin Laden as his rationale, but a LOT more has happened since then, like the illegal invasion of 2 countries and sustained drone strikes that have killed thousands. The Boston Marathon bombings and Benghazi were blowback for those things, you dolt!

Mr. Hart goes on to list his problems with "radical Islam", and he has very valid concerns, but, in my estimation, a large number of those who have been "radicalized" chose the "revenge" route exactly because of our response to 9/11, which was for bush to take advantage of the shock of the nation, as well as the strong feeling at the time that we needed to strike back.

bush saw an opportunity to become a "war president", get political capital, use that to push his other agenda items and get elected to a second term. And it also presented a wonderful opportunity for the bushies to loot the treasury by way of "no bid" Afghanistan and Iraq "reconstruction" contracts.

And that Mr. Hart consistently has defended bush in regards to his lying and thieving is, in my opinion, thoroughly disgusting. Ron Paul, while I may strongly disagree with MOST of what he believes, is correct when he says 9/11 "was blowback for decades of US intervention in the Middle East". And he was also correct when he say "the last thing we needed was the government's response: more wars, a stepped-up police and surveillance state, and drones".

Yes, OBL "publicly denounced Saudi dependence on the U.S. military, arguing the two holiest shrines of Islam, Mecca and Medina, the cities in which the Prophet Mohamed received and recited Allah's message, should only be defended by Muslims" and cited our military presence in that country as the motivation for the 9/11 attacks, but Al Qaeda was (prior to 9/11) an obscure Islamic movement and most likely faded from existence is not for our military response.

It was our response post-9/11 that continued the blowback (and made it worse). Another response and the blowback surely would be much less than it is today. The Boston bombers specifically stated that the motivation for their actions was our killing of Muslims in our "war on terror".

That Willis Hart only cites Saudi Arabia as the only reason for the rise of radical Islam is more than a bit silly and naive in my estimation. The main point of his commentary is to push his Islamophobic POV in which the US is blameless and all fingers should be pointed at the "rag heads" practicing a religion he is biased against. (for the record WH doesn't use the term "rag head", but reading his commentary you very much expect him to).

OST #2. See also TADM #21 and SWTD #239.