Saturday, January 10, 2009

Expectations

We all have expectations, don't we? We have expectations of governments, corporations, religions, even sports teams. Perhaps we hold our highest and lowest expectations for specific people. We expect certain things from people we know and people we've never met. Of course what we hold them to, has entirely to do with us, not them, yet we blame them or at the very least they become diminished in our eyes when they fail to meet our imaginings of what they should be.

That said, I expected more from Michael Ignatieff as it relates to the horror we are seeing in Gaza. I of course expected him to denounce Hamas and their tactics just as I fully expected him to state that Israel has the right to defend herself. Given his background though, especially as it relates to human rights, I expected that he would tactfully comment on what we have seen in Gaza, if only to mention the claims made by the UN and to be more forceful in calling for a ceasefire. I had also hoped that he would ask that journalists be allowed into Gaza, given his past exploits. I expected the quintessential Canadian quip by the honest broker. A statement of fact but one that also articulated more balance. My expectations were not met and I think Ignatieff was wrong.

It's my impression that the reason he did not do so was at least in part due to the drubbing he received when he last spoke on these issues. His comments were condemned as ill-considered and worse and of course there was a backlash in some communities, for him and for the party. I don't think that is a compelling enough reason to not expand on his thinking about current events. The response he gave was facile and what we sadly have come to expect of politicians. No depth, no thought, no nuance, just a dumbed down, typical political response. He gets no points from me with that reaction because I expected more.

I'm not entirely convinced that he doesn't have more to say on the issue though. My hope (expectation) is that he does, based on his past. We shall see.

I had other expectations too. I expected that belonging to an aggregator that purports to be made up of a group of bloggers that support the Liberal party would be a place where a wide range of diverse opinions would be welcome. Of course in such an environment, not everyone will agree and that in itself makes such a group interesting. Rather than reading blog after blog, saying exactly the same thing, such an aggregator should be a place that would conceivably incite debate. Apparently my expectations on this count were also wrong. Debate appears to have ensued, but it seems that it was not entirely welcome.

It's my understanding that a couple of bloggers either asked to be removed from the site, or were removed by the administrators, (I'm still unclear to the actual facts). To the best of my knowledge, the only rationale for these bloggers leaving was that they disagreed politically with the administrators. Now, there continue to be bloggers who disagree that have not been removed, so why some and not others is a bit of a mystery and not one that sits well. It seems that some posts were also removed at the whim of those who run the site. Odd that when the 'about us' section states:

It is important to note that the only "editing" is to ensure that Libloggers are not either members of other political party blog lists or clearly misusing the list to mislead readers. There is no guarantee that Libloggers are actually Liberals and there is no editing of their comments.

If bloggers are going to be held hostage to the opinions of the site owners, what is the point of having the aggregator in the first place? Isn't it enough that we have a political party running this country that demands everyone sing from the same song sheet? Haven't we dumbed down every argument in society today to the point that it is often futile to even engage on an issue? Hasn't a good portion of the media replaced insight and fact with simplicity and trivia?

Differences of opinion, should be championed, not choked. That is both my opinion and my expectation.

56 comments:

Cherniak_WTF said...

knb, thank you for this thoughtful post.

You seem to to be tackling two issues here.

One is Iggy's response to the present conflict in Gaza.
You are correct when you state:
The response he gave was facile and what we sadly have come to expect of politicians. No depth, no thought, no nuance, just a dumbed down, typical political response.
For years, Liberal bloggers have condemned the conservatives for doing that, yet Libloggers excuse it when "our" party does it.
I once said that Iggy was the best chance for Liberals against Harper - and still think that - but I expected so much more from Iggy.
I can only assume that a certain coterie is cocooning him or that Iggy is truly a clueless leader. He's shown imperialist and bonehead tendencies in the past with his support of the invasion of Iraq, defence of torture and vote to continue the farce in Afghanistan...


As for the Libloggers aggregator, part of the backlash started when Jason Cherniak hijacked the announcement section twice to "influence" (or bully) others to echo the Liberal stance. It was rather transparent as to what and why he was doing it. Jason Cherniak still has his blog active and could have posted there....
Also, some bloggers that have questioned Israel's actions have been particularly savaged.

Jason Cherniak has been the rather busy apologist for Israel and showed his utter lack of humanity when his comments on the driver of a U.N. truck being killed by Isreali force by first denying it and then stating: "so that's that, I suppose".
http://whatdoiknowgrit.blogspot.com/2009/01/israel-blows-up-un-truck-kills-driver.html
I'm sure that if an Israeli had died, his concern would have been quite different had would have vilified "the terrorists"...

What Jason does not understand, it that Liblogs are successful because of the independent bloggers.

Certain post critical of Israel started to go "poof" from the aggregator. Certain bloggers went "poof"...
Then images for LeDaro went "poof".... Funny how other images are permitted. Heck, even an image of the Vatican went "poof"... It all seems based on the whim of Jason Cherniak....

I'm not seeing much difference between Liberals and Conservatives lately. Even ideas for the economic stimulus seem to echo the same line...

As it stands, it seems that Bob Rae would have been the best leader for the progressive Liberals (yes, it seems we are a sub-group).

I no longer support Liberals and will be critical until they get their act together (one can hope).

Hugger said...

Very good post. As a wandering centrist nomad, I can only hope for thoughtful responses from our major political figures in order to represent the views of Canadians. Neither Lib nor Con has spoken on my behalf on the situation in Gaza.

The issues related to your Liblogs appears very much in keeping with the Parties position on Gaza, and that is unfortunate as well. Perhaps our failing is having illusions that principles and politics have some relationship.

A BCer in Toronto said...

To the best of my knowledge, the only rationale for these bloggers leaving was that they disagreed politically with the administrators. Now, there continue to be bloggers who disagree that have not been removed, so why some and not others is a bit of a mystery and not one that sits well. It seems that some posts were also removed at the whim of those who run the site.

As one of the admins, allow me to shed some light.

Mound asked to be removed in a post on their own blog. There was no decision made to remove Mound because of anything they wrote, we were merely honouring Mounds's request. Given that Mound later claimed to have been unwillingly removed, we asked Mound to clarify: do you want off, or not? Mound declined to clarify. So that's that.

Le Daro was not removed because of their opinion on any issue. One of the few lines we've drawn on Liblogs is libel. Le Daro made several statements that we felt raised a question of libel, and that is the only reason why Le Daro was removed. We have been consistent on this issue over the past year, and I don't think this is an unreasonable line to draw.

There are 5 admins at Liblogs, and 3/5 are required to be in favour before a blogger is removed. No one has been removed from the roll because of their opinions on Gaza or any other issue. You mention yourself the great deal of commentary critical of Liberal policy that is on Liblogs. I think that speaks to the liberal view on free speech taken by the admins.

Cherniak_WTF said...

Mound asked to be removed in a post on their own blog. There was no decision made to remove Mound because of anything they wrote, we were merely honouring Mounds's request.
How come Red Tory has not been removed yet - he's asked on many occasions.... even blogged about it.

But when it comes to the subject of Israel/Gaza...

And you are not exactly echoing what seems to be have happened.

As for Jason pushing the "official" position of the Liblogs twice and emailing many members....

LeDaro complained about images being removed.
One of them was of the Vatican for fucks sakes...


Sorry this does not pass the "smell test"...

So yes, Jeff I'm calling the you a liar.

Cherniak_WTF said...

small correction - calling you a liar or extremely disingenuous...

A BCer in Toronto said...

How come Red Tory has not been removed yet - he's asked on many occasions.... even blogged about it.

We talked with Red, and he clarified his desire and what he wanted. He was satisfied with the resolution.

And you are not exactly echoing what seems to be have happened.

How, specifically?

As for Jason pushing the "official" position of the Liblogs twice and emailing many members....

He sent an e-mail to various people as a private citizen. As a citizen is Jason not free to e-mail anyone he wants, or because he is involved in running a blog roll does he lose his right to free speech? Given that you're attacking him for censorship, that's an odd position to take.

On the admin notes, the first one was merely an appeal for calm to all. The second was inappropriate, was his personal view and not that of Liblogs, and it was removed. I disagreed with his decision to post that note, and told him so. It won't happen again. In the future, such notes will need 3/5 admin approval.

LeDaro complained about images being removed.
One of them was of the Vatican for fucks sakes...


The first was graphic and gruesome photos of dead bodies. The second post removed wasn't because of the image, it was because of the concentration camp headline.

Frankly, I disagreed with both decisions. Rarely is a post deleted, but the procedure is that because of time constraints, Jason can exercise his judgment, but can later be over-ruled by the admins. By the time we were able to weigh-in, the posts would have fallen off the roll naturally so it was moot. But I agree, we need to get this procedure better.

calling you a liar or extremely disingenuous...

And I'll defend your right to be wrong and insulting at the same time.

Cherniak_WTF said...

The first was graphic and gruesome photos of dead bodies. The second post removed wasn't because of the image, it was because of the concentration camp headline.
The headline was "Gaza: "Big Concentration Camp" - this can be insulting but to many it's not far from the truth. So much for free speech then... How is this Libel?



gruesome photos of dead bodies
Gruesome, maybe - but not as cold as JC comment on a dead UN truck drive (so that's that)....


The first note by Jason had Iggy the bloody's text and inferred that this should be the position taken by Libloggers...


And I'll defend your right to be wrong and insulting at the same time.
uhmm thanks ? : >

A BCer in Toronto said...

The headline was "Gaza: "Big Concentration Camp" - this can be insulting but to many it's not far from the truth. So much for free speech then... How is this Libel?

It's not. I never said it was. And I said I disagreed with the decision to remove that post based on that headline.

The first note by Jason had Iggy the bloody's text and inferred that this should be the position taken by Libloggers...

No, it said FYI this is the position that has been taken by the party (interim) leader. People are free to disagree, and a great many have. I don't think replicating a statement by the Liberal leader on a Liberal blogroll is all that crazy.

Cherniak_WTF said...

I don't think replicating a statement by the Liberal leader on a Liberal blogroll is all that crazy.

But it was only done one the subject of Israel and Gaza - Liblogs never reproduce the statement normally.
It reproduces the Liberal party RSS feed like any other blog.

It seems it was reproduced because it echoed Cherniak's view (and to a lesser extend yours).

Isn't it enough that we have a political party running this country that demands everyone sing from the same song sheet?
That was the message that many Liberals took away and commented on....

Steve V said...

One question on the "board", which seems to be a great diversion as to ultimate hierarchy- who chose the admins, and further was there inclusion contingent on some perceived affinity and/or relationship? Maybe if we all want to claim some egalitarian component, you could defer to the membership. I must say, one of things I'm entirely sick of is this notion of "blog fathers" and some structural reality for eternity. This medium doesn't need leaders or insider structure, and it certainly doesn't need disporportionate distractions, based on single points of view. It's all just crap frankly, and the drama is entirely self-inflicted. I vote for "anonymous", as it should be, rather than some set up that resembles what we all bitch about concerning the party itself. When you have people leaving a blogroll, and others who refuse to join said blogroll, despite being Liberals who donate to the party, something doesn't quite jive, or you must ask yourself, is this maximum potential?

Anyways, the drraama :)

penlan said...

Jeff,

"The second post removed wasn't because of the image, it was because of the concentration camp headline."

I do see that you disagree with the fact that that post was removed. What LeDaro had done was copy the title from a media release from the Vatican.

And I have seen many posts with headlines from articles in the MSM, so why should this one be any different.

Just pointing that out.

penlan said...

knb, Thankyou for this post. You echo my thoughts exactly. A clear, calm post I might add. Level-headed - something we all need.

I am very disturbed by MI's statements on the I/P conflict & do hope there is more he will say that is more fair & balanced. If not then I am not sure I will stay with the Liberals.

Also I don't like his responses on the economic crisis either. "It's not my job" a refrain he keeps repeating when asked about the upcoming budget. I feel that instead of doing his job & working for the best for all Canadians he is shoving it all onto the Cons plate, who are a hopeless bunch & need help (in many ways). Responsibity is key here & he (MI) is having none of it. ALL party's are responsible for the well-being of this country & if they don't work together then WE are the ones who are screwed.

In terms of Cherniak I'm extremely distressed as well. I was one of those who received that "personal" email from him. It was all a "cut & paste" job with supposed "facts" from the Israeli side. And he did not link or give any info as to where he got them from. Ridiculous. Crude. He knows better but his emotions & bias have gotten in the way of true discourse. And his heavy-handed ways on Liblogs is insane. Even though Jeff has explained I am not comfortable with any of this.

RuralSandi said...

I think people need to settle down. I just read where Bush ordered Condi Rice NOT to vote on the UN resolution, for example. Bush is playing games here.

Bush will be gone in a few days and Obama said he will have plenty to say on the conflict once he takes oath.

No matter what any politician says, especially Canadians, will influence absolutely nothing at this point.

People are getting so emotional about this - perhaps Ignatieff, Rae and even Layton are trying to keep it low key, for now - do you want riots on the streets of Canada?

Also, the reports about Gaza have been absolutely conflicting - we really need some truths.

I know LeDaro, Cherniak_WTF feel strongly about it, but being so combative and personal attacks just to express views is not the way to go. It solves nothing.

RuralSandi said...

I think people need to settle down. I just read where Bush ordered Condi Rice NOT to vote on the UN resolution, for example. Bush is playing games here.

Bush will be gone in a few days and Obama said he will have plenty to say on the conflict once he takes oath.

No matter what any politician says, especially Canadians, will influence absolutely nothing at this point.

People are getting so emotional about this - perhaps Ignatieff, Rae and even Layton are trying to keep it low key, for now - do you want riots on the streets of Canada?

Also, the reports about Gaza have been absolutely conflicting - we really need some truths.

I know LeDaro, Cherniak_WTF feel strongly about it, but being so combative and personal attacks just to express views is not the way to go. It solves nothing.

Cherniak_WTF said...

I was one of those who received that "personal" email from him. It was all a "cut & paste" job with supposed "facts" from the Israeli side. And he did not link or give any info as to where he got them from. Ridiculous. Crude.
The reason that there was no source is because he did not know where it came from.

As a lawyer or even a half cognitive blogger, you'd think that he would know where it comes from... (He thanked James Curran for the source later).

Jason will easily propagate what maybe half-truths or entire fabrications not knowing the source, he's used Liblogs to push "his" official views. He's tried to stifle discussion twice on Liblogs by posting Iggy's statement (and reminding that this is the Liberal position), then the "official" Liblog position.

Someone commented that Jason was acting as censor and official propagandist of the IDF - it surely seems that way.

Any Liberal blogger that actually called for an balanced view was called either a terrorist lover or anti-Semite.

I'd expect this behaviour from the blogging Tories.

As for influence, Iggy has toed the line with the official Israeli position. Is that really what the grassroots Liberals think? If responses to the marches this weekend are any indication, I don't think so.
One blogger wrote that MPs were told not to march for peace at these rallies. Could it be muzzling by the party higher ups?

Jason just echoed this "heavy-hand". Let's also be clear here, Jason is active in Jewish community. How much of that taints or influences his actions - it seems he went overboard with the Liblogs.

We also have in Iggy's inner circle Warren K. who does work closely with a pro-Israel lobby. The 'official' Liberal position seems to have cozied up to Israel lately. It's a legitimate question to ask how much taint we are seeing compared to a more neutral and balanced view we once had.

We saw how much truth took a back seat during the war in Iraq.... I have a feeling that the same thing is happening with the conflict in Gaza.

This is in great part a propaganda war and Israel is very well equipped. It's easy to scream "terrorists" or "Hamas did this" and takes longer to get the truth out. Some blogger such as Dr. Dawg are doing a good job at exposing the truth - but the damage and PR has already accomplished it's goal.
Hamas is demonized rightly or wrongly and there is no more subtlety, just slogans and cheap soundbytes...

knb said...

c_wtf, indeed I was tackling two things that have been on my mind.

I'm still supporting the Liberals over all, but I really would like to see some new language on this issue. I just saw Bob Rae though and while I would have agreed with your comment about him, his stance seems consistent with all that we have heard thus far.

Sandi may have a point in terms of how heads of state should and have reacted, however when I see the suffering that is being wrought, well I just can't deal with it in abstracts.

knb said...

BC'er, I appreciate you trying to clarify things, but even in doing so, it's seems clear that there are some problems.

That the 3/5 rule was ignored initially, I see as a problem, as I imagine do you given your stated stance. That it won't happen again is an encouraging statement, however that it did happen also says quite a bit and I dare say that is what many object to.

knb said...

Steve, I like your idea of doing away with a hierarchy and simply having the aggregator maintained by someone capable of doing so.

I understand that the domain is owned but surely that could be purchased by the collective and any ongoing fees likewise dealt with through contributions.

knb said...

penlan, I don't think Ignatieff is just throwing up his hands re' the economy. I think he has put forward in broad strokes what he expects, but he's correct when he says that it is up to the government to present the budget.

Canadians indeed want to see the opposition working with the government, but there is a limit I think as to what we should expect.

I think there is a way to put forward broad stroke expectations without compromising our position for any future negotiation or action.

Frankly Canadian said...

knb, I definitely agree with your rationale on each of the topics discussed. Mind you the part about the domain being purchased and a doing away with a hierarchy and simply having the aggregator maintained by someone capable of doing so, alarms me. You are essentially putting your trust in one person reasoning, I believe this is what got us here in the first place, people thought Mr. Cherniak was that person. I like the way Liblogs have proceeded with their corrections over the last few days. Having witnessed the evolution of this web site for a couple of years, I believe the administrators have done a fabulous job! I also agree strongly with Rural Sandi, PEOPLE NEED TO SETTLE DOWN, more is accomplished with rational debate than with heated arguments!

knb said...

Frankly Cdn...don't be alarmed, ;). I'm just tossing things around.

I perhaps didn't get it all right, but I thought what Steve proposed was an administrator, (one or more), but only with the ability to keep the aggregator going in a technical sense. The site itself would be owned by the collection of Libloggers.

I don't know. It looks like cooler heads finally prevailed here, but not without doing damage. The 'board' at one point seemed to be of one mind and one voice. I'm glad to hear Jeff say he disagreed with some of the unilateral decisions that were made, but I have read other board members chime in with that 'one voice'. That is not healthy in my view. I don't think it's healthy for a party or a forum like this.

That said, I think having an aggregator for Liberal bloggers is a real asset and I'd rather make this one work for everyone than do something rash.

Frankly Canadian said...

knb, I agree, having an aggregator or a body of aggregators would be an asset. My concern here is that for a continued forum in which we share common interests, we do need to have consideration for the administrators of such a forum. I hate to see people having to leave that forum, as I'm sure you are as well, however I can see a need for an overall constraint that needs to be adhered to. I would also hate to see the forum stifled by introducing a nominal donation system, I have seen such a system result in an elitist tier developing by those who donate more than others. I think we agree on the main fact here, we have a great group of bloggers, and I certainly appreciate people like yourself who are committed to protecting that atmosphere, thank you.

Cherniak_WTF said...

Liblogs is now poorer of a few great bloggers - how have the administrator done their job properly?

This is not the first time Jason has acted this way - hence my handle Cherniak_WTF....

knb said...

I completely agree that the role is poorer for the loss of some bloggers, c_wtf. It seems to me that catnip left last time over a similar incident.

As I said, I don't have the answers, but I will commit to not being silent. That means in general and as it relates to what goes on at Liblogs.

On another note, I re-watched Rae's comments and do see a subtle difference in terms of how he spoke about Gaza/Israel. I don't know if it's timing, but I sure would like to see/hear more of that approach become the party line.

Cherniak_WTF said...

I re-watched Rae's comments and do see a subtle difference in terms of how he spoke about Gaza/Israel. I don't know if it's timing, but I sure would like to see/hear more of that approach become the party line.
It does seem more nuanced and subtle. Easier to accept at the very least.

The Mound of Sound said...

As for my departure, I ended a post with this:

"Cherniak might as well remove me from Liblogs. I'm just not that comfortable here any more. I wish I could switch my support left or right but that's not it. I belong where I am, I just don't belong in an Ignatieff Liberal Party of Canada."

So, yes, I guess I did ask that, even if rhetorically. When I was later contacted about whether I really wanted to be removed I went back to liblogs, noted that the offending post "Yes, They Use Human Shields" had been pulled. There was nothing for me to decide at that point.

Anyway it's no big deal. I'm somewhat relieved to be out of liblogs and, after 41 years) the LPC too.

You take care, KNB.

knb said...

Well Mound, that certainly doesn't sound like what BC'er said now does it? In fact, musing about Cherniak taking you off the roll is hardly asking to be removed.

And, to be clear, your post was also removed without any warning or dialogue?

Mound, I respect your decision, but even though Ignatieff would not be your choice as leader of this party, you are still a Liberal and one that the party needs. You're also one of the most informed out there.

I'm truly sorry to see you go and hope that this ridiculous state of affairs might change to see you return.

In the meantime, you're on my list of links...new name and all!

Stay in touch.

The Mound of Sound said...

Yes KNB it was pulled but I can't say it was entirely without dialogue. There was this comment posted by Cherniak before he pulled the post:

"This is outrageous. You are justifying the use of human sheilds? In my personal opinion, you don't belong in the Liberal Party."

Now I know that wasn't exactly "dialogue" but, coming from the founder of liblogs, it certainly was to the point.

Imagine that punk accusing me of seeking to justify the use of human shields!

So, no, it doesn't exactly sound like the account you've been given but, after that, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with Cherniak anyway.

knb said...

So BC'er, can you please explain what MoS just said and how it differs from your version?

I just saw that James Curran has left Liblogs too. Is this what you guys really want? Is this Jason's idea of an open Liberal party?

Brilliant move guys! Especially Jason. At a time when the party should be building and drawing together, you've been pretty damned successful at creating brand new discord, while pushing people away and for what? Because you overreacted to those who didn't share your ideology.

There sadly is something perversely ironic about that.

knb said...

MoS, good gawd.

I take your point, but personally I'd still rather see you here to fight the nonsense and I mean nonsense literally.

Keep fighting the good fight my friend.

penlan said...

I liked Rae's statement a lot better than Iggy's. It was more human & compassionate & left room open for more dialogue. I did not see that in Iggy's words.

Foottothefire was also removed from what I understand. Don't know if they asked or if it was just done by the "board".

I did not know that James Curran had left Liblogs. Was this of his own accord?
And when?

I also know that MoS did not ask to be removed but was expecting it anyway & I can see his point of not feeling like he belonged on Liblogs any longer. That Cherniak totally misunderstood his post & his point & spoke & acted irrationally does not look good for Liblogs.

I've read all of Jeff's (BCer) explanations & they do make sense BUT there does appear to be some disparity with some of the things said.

And I'm very unhappy with posts being removed, many WITHOUT dialogue prior to their removal, & also for bloggers being removed because of their viewpoints - because basically that IS what it comes down to. LeDaro did not say anything libelous as far as I can see.

I'm angry over this whole situation. Yes, things will calm down again, already have to some degree, but what does this hold for future postings of bloggers at Liblogs. I find myself having to second-guess myself about wanting to do certain posts & not doing them because of a possible slap-down/removal from the aggregator.

If I'm unable to speak my thoughts, facts, whatever, then what is the point, for me, of blogging here. That is a rhetorical question.

penlan said...

Never mind answering my question on James Curran. I just saw his "resigning from Liblogs post". He hasn't been removed yet though, as I write this.

Cherniak_WTF said...

I did not know that James Curran had left Liblogs. Was this of his own accord?
And when?

Yes of his own accord but not without a lot of unwarranted attacks from Jason Cherniak and his ilk.

Oddly James is an ally of Israel in all of this.

Jeff' explanations are close to lies if not outright distortions.

Yes this will past but Liblogs has lost some of it's most erudite writers.

Steve V said...

I'm just throwing this out there, because despite your point of view, it's factually objective. You can go back as far as Liberal Catnip leaving Liblogs, but it is interesting that all the people who have left the aggregator are critical of Israel. Despite much of this being voluntary, the fact that all share some commonality suggests anything but a free expression of ideas. For whatever reason, there is a "narrowing" of opinion on the aggregator, as people leave, and when you look at which "side" in this argument is strengthened as a result, it is entirely relevant. Sure, you can say "nobody made him/her leave", but you can't deny a certain perspective being the common trait.

penlan said...

Steve V wrote:
"For whatever reason, there is a "narrowing" of opinion on the aggregator, as people leave, and when you look at which "side" in this argument is strengthened as a result, it is entirely relevant. Sure, you can say "nobody made him/her leave", but you can't deny a certain perspective being the common trait."

Very good observation Steve. Less balanced opinions & even information/facts.

A BCer in Toronto said...

No post of MoS was removed from the aggregate. I believe that when Mos went to the aggregate and looked for the post and couldn't find it, it was because the blog, not the post itself, had by that time been removed, as I said earlier, in our view, at MoS's request. So I think that's where the confusion lies. When a blog is removed, naturally all posts from that blog currently on the aggregate would fall off.

And as I've said, we took MoS's "lament" as a request for removal. Upon reading MoS's later disagreement with that interpretation, we attempted to get some clarity: did you want off, or not? If MoS had said you're wrong, I was just lamenting, I wanted to stay on, then MoS would have been back on. Instead, MoS declined to clarify, so we respected that decision.

Did we err in acting to rashly when we misinterpreted the original post as a request for removal? It would seem so. However, we did what we could to attempt to correct the mistake, and were rebuffed. I'll respect MoS's decision, and leave it at that.

Steve V said...

Jeff

If an aggregator is truly neutral, then it does beg the question, why, over the last couple of years are the only ones to leave, those that could be classified as Israel critical? Each case is original, or more rightly, most of it is personal choice, but it is VERY relevant, that those with this point of view feel that Liblogs isn't a place for them. A strange occurence, or statistical point for sure, and one that shouldn't be ignored.

The Mound of Sound said...

KNB, I'm getting as bored of this as you are but Jeff is full of shit. When I was contacted to confirm whether I indeed wanted to leave I went back to liblogs and found the "offending" post removed. I then went down through the older posts and found my earlier stuff there. What Jeff is saying is pure crap.

And, it's curious that James, who formally announced his departure yesterday afternoon, is still listed.

Cherniak and his "board" are a gaggle of rank dissemblers. You're welcome to them.

IT World said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
A BCer in Toronto said...

MoS, if a post of yours was removed before you were removed from the blog roll, all I can say is I was not informed and have no knowledge of it. Why you're trying to impum my motives I don't know, I'm giving you the best information I have. I've tried not made this personal, and I have no reason to. I have no objection or problem with anything you'd written on your blog. If you want to consider me a liar and full of shit, that's your choice. I could care less. I'm done.

Cherniak_WTF said...

It's amusing to see Liblogs adopt tactics best suited to neo-cons and revisionists....

Maybe I'll adopt the slogan "Because they lie all the time" when speaking about the Jason and Jeffry...

Is Cherniak still squawking about Libel on the web or has he mailed out those papers yet?

penlan said...

C_WTF,

I don't think Jason & Jeff are "lying", per se. I'm not sure that Jeff is aware that Jason posted comments at 2 blogs stating he was/had removed the sticky post at the top BECAUSE McParland had copied it in full in an article at his paper (NaPo). Jason said that it was no longer necessary to leave that post at Liblogs now. So I'm not so sure it would have been removed if that had not been the case.

Jeff has also stated that he, & others in the administration, were not happy about Jason posting that at the top of the page, posting it at all actually, & that it ran contrary to what the aggregator is all about, basically.

Jason does have a blog & could have done the posting the way the rest of us do but as we all know he said he will no longer be blogging. Well in a way he broke that statement by doing what he did - twice. And Liblogs is his baby so he can do what he wants.

Jeff has said, & I believe him, that the admin. is working on making rules/changes & I don't think we will be seeing sticky posts at the top of the page. At least I hope not. Changes can take some time to implement & I hope we see these changes soon.

Believe me, WTF, I'm very unhappy & disturbed by what has gone down at Liblogs recently but am willing to give it a chance & see what changes occur.

Cherniak_WTF said...

But am willing to give it a chance & see what changes occur.
You are much more consolatory than I am.
But I understand your point of view.

The Mound of Sound said...

KNB - there's a brand new, Cherniak/Kinsella/Levant-free Liberal aggregator run by James Curran.

liberalsonline.feedcluster.com

come on in, the water's fine

Cherniak_WTF said...

Or
www.liberalsonline.ca

Dame said...

There is a deafening silence from all Countries /in real terms/
about Gaza and the outrageous WAR CRIME what is going on there the world just looks the other way right now.



Everyone is waiting how the new administration in the USA will approach it and then decide what is their own views and tack themselves for the new ways we all expects..

Israel knew they have to do this brutal rundown now before their hands may be tied .../well hopefully./


I Think the Bloggers should do the same .
That is how I see It .

Anonymous said...

There is a deafening silence from all Countries /in real terms/
about Gaza and the outrageous WAR CRIME what is going on there the world just looks the other way right now.

-----------

Ah, yes. There it is again...the mental illness that once only effected NDP and other far-left loonies, now running rampant through Liberal ranks.

Yes, there were definitely some 'war crimes' being committed. Problem is, according to the Hague and Geneva conventions (and other commonly accepted international law) it was the terrorist thugs of Hamas committing those crimes, not the Israelis. SPECIFICALLY not the Israelis, if you bothered to actually read the rules...the act of firing back against rocket, mortar or other fire coming from civilian areas is NOT PROHIBITED at all. The act of using civilians as human shields IS. The 'war crime' was committed by your beloved Hamas, sorry.

But hey, you must have been thrilled to see the Hezbollah flag (complete with AK-47) being flown in Montreal, right? How about all those other demonstrations in Canadian cities, where chants of "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas!" and "go back to your ovens!" filled the air? How about all those neo-Nazis siding with you...didn't that just make your heart swell with pride?

What a bunch of losers. :)

penlan said...

Anon - You are ridiculous. You rant without any coherent thought. Go away.

Dame said...

First of all why are You ANON?/Why can't You show your True Identity?? so we Could talk like equals ?

Secondly
here is my post what is did at another site.I am From Hungary I lived through the Soviet military occupation rule , destruction ,oppression , abuse and constant force and try of "remade" our nation without the slightest success... we were crippled for LIFE under their oppression and yes occasionally the people were trying to upraise and fight back BY WHATEVER MEANS and it was always answered by Soviet tanks making rubble out of the streets of Budapest...

And the world was looking The other way ......just as today.

Gaza is under the military Occupation/oppression of Israel.
Gaza is part of Palestine land without the right of being a Palestine State.

Israel is the oppressor and waging now an war what is a Crime .

I see No difference

FredfromBC said...

Blogger penlan said...

Anon - You are ridiculous. You rant without any coherent thought. Go away.

-----------

Riiiight. Ridiculous.No coherent thought. And that's the real reason that you couldn't come up with any rational counter-arguments, right? Not because you couldn't think of any. Got it.

You guys are being left behind by the Liberal Party. Anti-Semitism will no longer be tolerated under Ignatieff, it seems...so either learn to keep your bigotry to yourself or change political parties, okay? The mainstream media *is* starting to pay attention to the blogosphere, and the sheer volume of posts attacking Israel and defending Hamas poses quite a problem for the new Liberal leadership (even if they themselves believe the same as you do).

FredfromBC said...

Dame said...

> First of all why are You >ANON?/Why can't You show your True >Identity?? so we Could talk like >equals ?

As you wish.

> Israel is the oppressor and >waging now an war what is a Crime
>
>I see No difference

If that's true (even at this point, after all the eyewitness accounts and gunsight video showing Hamas *clearly* firing rocket/mortars outside a school, then running inside to hide among their human shields, and after all the video evidence of huge econdary explosions from munitions stored inside schools and mosques) then no amount of factual evidence I could present here will ever change your opinion.

penlan said...

Fred from BC,

We are not anti-Semitic. We are against the slaughter that happened in Gaza by a well-endowed Israeli army against a Palestinian "concentration camp*, (Gaza), that has no army, no powerful weapons, no air force, no tanks, etc. The Palestinians were "penned in". Literally. It's like a lion slaying a mouse.

The slaughter killed mostly civilians who had nowhere to hide or go to be safe. None were allowed out. And the IDF has now admitted they used phosphorous missiles. Another Geneva Convention no-no. They broke International Law.

The whole thing is/was an abomination. You obviously have no compassion for the more than 1,000 who died & more than 5,000 gravely injured of which, I'm sure, many will still die. Plus there are bodies in the rubble of houses & building that have not yet been retrieved.

Also, we are not anti-Liberal or Ignatieff. We just don't like the one-sidedness of Ig's statement but he has also put out another one that is a little bit softer. Go read it.

And stop being such an anonymous ass.

Dame said...

Fred I am very happy To see you with your name on the Blog. It is a Good sign.

Being anti-Semitic?/ far from it.
I was in Grade one when I was scarred forever when one day I saw some people in my small town were started to walk on the streets with yellow star armbands and then soon after the next street where I lived with my family Jews in all ages were "collected " 'housed' for a few days ..... then one morning the street /ghetto/ were all empty .I was very young but still shocked . How could this happen?//
And years later only 3 people returned from that "journey". These images are still making me very silent when they pop up.
I am witnessed this ..I can never be anti-Semitic as long as I live.

But But but.

It is no excuse for Israel not being a human compassionate no abusive country today.


Get down to negotiate... let the two states idea develops with clearly defined borders laws for respect on both sides.

Conquering with better weapons is not an option..

For me the Arab culture based on the Koran is an absolute turn off
I will never approve it or side with it... but since we cant eradicate it we need to deal with and negotiate .

Ever since W Bush was in power the whole thing Got completely wrongheaded..I hope the new adm. will use different approach.

I am a little long winged here I know..

FredfromBC said...

> penlan said...
>
> Fred from BC,
>
> We are not anti-Semitic. We >are against the slaughter that >happened in Gaza by a well-endowed >Israeli army against a Palestinian >"concentration camp*, (Gaza), that >has no army, no powerful weapons, >no air force, no tanks, etc. The >Palestinians were "penned in". >Literally. It's like a lion >slaying a mouse.


Right. "Penned in". A literal "concentration camp". With HUNDREDS of TUNNELS leading in and out of it (not to mention an international border with Egypt). As for the lion/mouse, hey, here's a thought:

STOP FIRING ROCKETS INTO ISRAEL!

Yes, kids...it really is that simple. Don't be poking the pit bull with a stick through the fence, then whining and crying when it finally gets out and takes a big bites out of you. You can do that once, maybe twice...then people start to catch on.


>The slaughter killed mostly >civilians who had nowhere to hide >or go to be safe.


Oh, and you actually *believe* that, do you? Because Hamas said so? How gullible can you be?

So I guess all those people who were mass-dialed and text messaged with warnings to clear the area around Hamas installations didn't pick up the phone...and speaking of that, why does Israel even allow them to have cell phones, anyway? And why doesn't Hamas build bomb shelters for their people like the Israelis do?

(oh, wait...if they did that, they couldn't use women and children as human shields anymore, could they? Nevermind...;)


> None were allowed out.


Gee, no kidding? You don't think that has anything to do with *suicide bombings*, do you? Funny thing about that...when Israel got smart and starting erecting big concrete walls and installing checkpoints, suicide bombings ceased. hmmm...

>And the IDF has now admitted they >used phosphorous missiles. Another >Geneva Convention no-no. They >broke International Law

I'd love to call you a liar here, but I really think you're just ignorant. How else can I explain the fact that the UN agency that first reported this was quick to point out that Israel HAD NOT used White Phosphorus improperly. No, it is NOT a banned weapon when used as Israel did (airbursts), and no, they did not break International Law (and every mainstream news outlet reported as much; where were you?..)

> The whole thing is/was an >abomination.


Yes. Orchestrated by Iran, via Hamas.


>You obviously have no compassion >for the more than 1,000 who died & >more than 5,000 gravely injured of which

[snip]

Okay, enough with the regurgitated Hamas propaganda, okay? Despite their best efforts and the enlistment of millions of "useful idiots" like yourself to help spread it, people just aren't buying it like they used to. Sorry.

penlan said...

Fredfrom BC,

You sound like one real sick dude. Not going to converse with you any longer. You aren't listening to reason & truth.

FredfromBC said...

You sound like one real sick dude. Not going to converse with you any longer. You aren't listening to reason & truth.

-------------

You go right ahead and stick to your "reason and truth". I'll be content with mere facts, thanks...