Or, Heart-Sick Over Dick-Pic.

This may be old, but I had Glenn Greenwald feveh. Still good.

A high school yearbook photo was snapped of a man as he jumped to shoot a basket, revealing in a shot that displayed his mansac. He's suing for... I don't know, intentional infliction of raw nut or something.

In [the photo], he is shown making an elongated jump to score a basket. Bennett claims it also clearly shows his genitals in the absence of underpants, which he claims has left him scarred.

"I was shocked, embarrassed and upset," Bennett told the New York Post. "I remember a student taunting me and asking, 'How's it hanging?'"

I don't have a joke here, but I have made the item funnier by swapping out the Post's choice of word, "underwear," with the word "underpants," which is, for some reason, 82% funnier. I don't know why it's funnier. Just one of life's mysteries, I guess.

SeanM also has a story that has the headline, "Dog-Cooking, Tree-Taking School-Burner May Lose Job:"

A Chinese headmaster, who tried to buy off colleagues by cooking dog meat for them after secretly selling off trees around the school, ended up setting fire to classrooms when the meal burst into flames, a Chinese newspaper said Friday.

Okay, now I'm going to make a point. Sean had both of those stories and what does he tip me to?

A link of a typically moronic liberal "analysis" of foreign policy from the Los Angeles Times, making the case that under Clinton, America and the world were... oh, why even fucking bother saying. You know where it's going.

The story writes itself -- reluctantly, looking up at the author to ask "You sure you want to go with this kind of hackneyed, leftist retard-cant? Really?" as it types itself, sighing, onto the page.

It's a good story, okay. But-- he's got a guy suing because a picture showed his balls, and another story about some kind of monstrously destructive fire caused by a Chinese man trying to bribe people with roasted dog, and...

I give up.

No one knows what the hell they're doing in blogging except me. I swear to God.

It continues to baffle me I am not Chief Executive In Charge of Something Tremendously Important by now.

Posted by: Ace at 12:12 AM | Comments (37)
Post contains 400 words, total size 3 kb.

Worth reading in full.

Muslim Canadians, as Muslims elsewhere in Western societies, have felt increasingly besieged for some time now, both from outside their community and from within.

This sense of isolation, of being misrepresented and misunderstood, will inevitably deepen as the full story of the arrests of 17 Toronto-area Muslims on terrorism charges unfolds.

But whose fault is this? Let us, Muslims, be brutally honest.

We have inherited a culture of denial, of too often refusing to acknowledge our own responsibility for the widespread malaise that has left most of the Arab-Muslim countries in economic, political, and social despair.

Statistics and intergovernmental reports over the past several decades have documented a gap, perhaps now unbridgeable, between Muslim countries and the advanced industrial democracies in the West.

...

Instead of acknowledging the reality of the Arab-Muslim world as a broken civilization, we Muslims tend to indulge instead in blaming others for our ills; deflecting our responsibilities for failures that have become breeding grounds of violence and terrorism.

...

We have made hypocrisy an art, and have spun for ourselves a web of lies that blinds us to the real world around us. We seethe with grievances and resentment against the West, even as we have prospered in the freedom and security of Western democracies.

We have inculcated into our children false pride, and given them a sense of history that crumbles under critical scrutiny. We have burdened them with conflicting loyalties - and now some of them have become our nightmare.

We preach tolerance yet we are intolerant. We demand inclusion, yet we practice exclusion of gender, of minorities, of those with whom we disagree.

We repeat endlessly that Islam is a religion of peace, yet too many of us display conduct contrary to what we profess. We keep assuring ourselves and others that Muslims who violate Islam are a minuscule minority, yet we fail to hold this minority accountable in public.

Wow.

Okay, and now for the link. You have two options.

First, you can click on the original source, here, in the Middle East Times.

Don't click yet, moron. You haven't heard the other option.

Or, you can click on this site, which has a CONTENT WARNING because the top-left logo is a pair of knockers and there are phone-sex ads and chicks lifting their skirts to show off their heinies, and has the slogan A Conservative Who Likes Naked Women. Deal With It.

I think I'm about to throw a lot of traffic towards the Middle East Times.

Posted by: Ace at 11:50 PM | Comments (13)
Post contains 437 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, it turns out that Glenn's Magic Boyfriend writes up his sock-puppets so that they wind up using another favorite opening phrase of Glenn's. We already knew that Glenn and "Rick Ellensburg" both favor opening sentences with the phrase "To recap," but now we find out how much they all love their opponent's arguments.

Match the quote with the correct person or sock puppet for each. (Emphasis added):

I love how Lorie Byrd thinks she knows more about the security concerns of Rumsfeld and Cheney than the Secret Service and Rumsfeld himself know.

a) Glenn Greenwald
b) "Rick Ellensburg"
c) "Thomas Ellers"

I love how you criticize the post for being too long and then criticize it for not including enough examples.

a) Glenn Greenwald
b) "Rick Ellensburg"
c) "Thomas Ellers"

I love how Franks claims not to know who Greenwald is and never reads his blog...

a) Glenn Greenwald
b) "Rick Ellensburg"
c) "Thomas Ellers"

Answers after the jump.

The Boys From Brazil graphic is courtesy Bbeck, the official Ace of Spades T-shirt model; the quotes are from Patterico's upcoming big-bastard ball-bustin' Glenn Greenwald Sock Puppet Round-Up Rodeo.

McQ-- you still claimin' that it's easy to tell Glenn Greenwald's style from his sock puppets'?

The funny thing is, both of these were done independently of each other. They both came together accidentally.
more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:37 PM | Comments (20)
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.

People asked, so I'll answer. I should never have started any of this, nor posted a personal spat on my blog, nor got angry with people who disagree with me, even if they are proposing all sorts of preposterous scenarios defending Glenn Greenwald.

But I did, so here's the update.

Also, I'm going to add some new sites to my blogroll; let me know your site if you want to be included in the thread below. And for once-- I'll actively solicit liberal sites, as long as you're not bananas. Like Gun Toting Liberal. He asked for a link a while ago; time to add him.

Clarification: Please note your blog in the thread below. It makes it easier for me to find them if they're all in one place. more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:29 PM | Comments (165)
Post contains 1476 words, total size 8 kb.

I don't even know what to say.

Let me attempt to guess what happened here. A liberal/"progressive" wrote a post on HuffPo in which he basically defended Israel and cautioned the left it was too unbalanced in always criticizing Israel whenever war breaks out between Israel and Palestine, and Hezbollah, and etc.

He got a lot of flack from lefty commenters.

Too wussy to stand up to the seething lefties, and yet unwilling to abandon his defense of Israel, he now offers this bizarre concoction of a compromise. He still gets to defend Israel, but now he shifts the blame for the left's anti-semitism to... the right.

Somehow.

I came to the conclusion that the hostile comments about Israel on these liberal blogs are not coming from true liberals. Most of the anti-Semitism comes from racism and most of the racism I have experienced has come from the far right, not the left. And history shows that the Christo-fascist policies of the right have been responsible for historical anti-Judaism. It is only lately that the extreme evangelical groups have conveniently aligned with Israel now to validate their biblical beliefs. These extreme evangelicals were the most anti-Jewish because of the Passion Narratives of the New Testament. And for my friends in AIPAC, they should be aware that short-term alliances with people who have endemic hatred of you could be disastrous. The early Zionists found this out when they signed a trade agreement with Germany hoping that Germany would deport the Jews to Palestine.

I have never heard this before -- that "early Zionists" were cutting deals with Hitler himself (Hitler!) in order to establish their dream of an independent Jewish state. (PS, if it's not clear from what I posted, he makes this point more explicitly earlier in his screed.)

I am calling unhinged lefty crank bullshit on this one, until someone tells me such a thing occurred. I suppose it's borderline possible; sometimes politics creates all sorts of strange bedfellows.

But the Jews teaming up with Hilter? I've heard that before, yes. From the likes of Osama bin Ladin.

Let's continue.

...

So my conclusion is that the bloggers who violently hate Israel and see it in black and white terms are not really liberals. They may even be anti-Semites, but they are not representative of the liberal community that was so active in achieving racial and ethnic equality. It is a contradiction for a true liberal to be an anti-Semite. Furthermore, I would not put it past the right wing to flood the liberal blogs with hateful criticisms of Israel to advance a perception that liberals are anti-Israel or anti-Semitic. And I see Karl Rove's fingerprints all over this.

Asshole, we don't read liberal blogs! Because, you know, we're conservative.

We barely visit them, and barely comment on them, and always to pick fights, not to engage in some too-cute-by-half agent provocateurism.

So there you have it. The Left, which has always been extremely antagonistic towards Israel, to levels often approaching and sometimes exceeding outright Jew-hatred, and has always been dedicated to the plight of the poor murd'rous Palestinians, has always been so because Karl Rove willed it to be, back when he was but knee-high to a grasshopper.

Remember Vanessa (or was it Lynn?) Redgrave campaigning for Palestine in the early seventies? That was just because Karl Rove monkey-banged her so hard she didn't know what was goin' on.

Thanks, I think, to Funny, He Doesn't Look Amish.

And by the way: Last night "Jesus' General" here was doing his hi-larious parody of a rightwinger. Well, we were making fun of him for that, sarcastically tellling him how funny it was.

Then a guy calling himself "Mission Accomplished" shows up, doing the same act. And so we sarcastically tell him how funny he is, too.

Turns out "Mission Accomplished" was just Amish doing a parody of Jesus' General, so we were making fun of a guy who was making fun of a guy who was making fun of a guy who was making fun of us.

A big waste of time. Like a lot of things on this blog lately.

Amish: Please make it obvious next time.

Posted by: Ace at 07:55 PM | Comments (78)
Post contains 721 words, total size 5 kb.

The US is rushing sales of precision-guided bombs to Israel, administration leakers want us all to know, so long as their names are kept secret.

See? They have their priorities straight. Sensitive, classified information which is obviously harmful to us in the Muslim world is kind of a bullshit sort of secret that everyone really should know, but their names?

Ohhhh... that's a secret which must be kept upon pain of imprisonment.

Posted by: Ace at 07:37 PM | Comments (15)
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.

Fut the Wuck Update: Before I remove it, check out one of the last comments posted to this thread about greenwald's sockpuppetry. You'll know which one I mean.

Hey, whether you're bored or not, you have GOT to give me that I am driving the right people insane.

Thanks to DDG, or "John," as he sock-puppets as now.

..

In a previous post, I identified "Rick Ellensburg" as a Greenwald sock-puppet, posting over at Right Wing Nut House.

I id'd him based on the Brazilian IP.

However, Xlrq (and, I think, Kevin from Wizbang) pointed out the small nit (I thought it was pretty small anyway) that, while the IP was from Brazil, the ISP (internet service provider) was different from the one used in the July Greenwald and Ellison posts. The latter were on the NET Servicos ISP: the former was the Telemar Norte ISP.

I didn't think this was as a big deal. A source told me he had an email from Nov/Dec 2005 demonstrating that, at that time, Greenwald himself WAS on the Telemar Norte ISP, so it didn't seem to be a big assumption that he'd switched service providers.

But, just to pick that nit a little more, I asked people for postings from Glenn Greenwald himself in that time-range-- February 2006. I haven't gotten one for February 2006, but Patterico sent me official Glenn Greenwald IP's from Jeff's blog, from January 23rd 2006, just 19 days before the "Rick Ellensburg" post.

And yeah, it' on the Telemar Norte ISP. So yes, Glenn Greenwald was either on that service, then later switched to NET Servicos (his present service), or else he frequents a location with that service, like a Starbucks, or an internet cafe, or a library where he does "research" for his "book."

I guess I shouldn't have put "book" in quotes. I mean, it is, undeniably, a book. It has pages and a cover and stuff.

And yet... I have a need to put sneer quotes around it.

So yes, Virginia, the Rick Ellensburg posts were from Glenn Greenwald.

I mean-- someone posting from within Glenn Greenwald's house, of course. It might have been the plumber, who just figured he'd argue all of Glenn Greenwald's points with perfect familiarity and fluency in between snaking the toilets.

A Cautionary Tale For Glenn Greenwald Defenders: Don't get yourselves too committed to defending a liar.

Posted by: Ace at 03:30 PM | Comments (31)
Post contains 414 words, total size 3 kb.

Kim Il Jong's blog.

I know some people will say "It's old," but I'm sorry, I never read this blog.

Thanks to Dawnsblood, who was a good sock-puppet at Q&O.

Posted by: Ace at 02:56 PM | Comments (8)
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

The picture is of course more visceral than the written description.

Again, I can only ask: Really? You're all terrorists?

Why then thank you for clarifying the situation.

Thanks again to yls.

Posted by: Ace at 02:21 PM | Comments (8)
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

I don't advise going here. It's a nasty little blogwar with a couple of liars and a couple of (god bless 'em) AoS Digital Brownshirts giving them hell.

But, some people may be interested in such nastiness, so here.

I don't mind giving them traffic today, because I suspect, for most people who click, it will be one of the last times they check out the very credible, and very honest, and very civil Q and O.

Who, by the way, I never read, because the blog sucks. Yeahp-- I said never. I still don't think I've actually ever "read" their blog in the sense of actually going to it of my own desire. It was always off an Insty link (in which I usually just quoted Insty's own quote) or an email tip or, of course, Allah.

If I've ever actually gone to Q&O before the past two days, I'd be surprised.

There were a couple of days when I was desperate to post and started randomly clicking on my blogroll... but even then, I don't think I bothered with Q & O.

Blogwar Over: Jon, who I think is really the prime mover of the Q&O site, has attempted to de-escalate things, and has been fair. And I've apologized to him for, in a fit of juvenile anger, declaring "this blog sucks." (His, I mean. My does suck, as you all are painfully aware.)

McQ and the prissy, preening, pretentious prancing pretty pony Dale Franks have had their heads served to them so forcefully, and in so many permutations (underhanded lob, overhand smash, in your face spike) that there hardly seems to be any further point to it.

Except that, I suppose, I would like Jon to print a retraction, or a correction, or his own take on the matter, but at this point I don't think it matters if he does or not. I won't sweat it either way. I think he ought to, but I know he has a couple of idiots to deal with, so I'll accept his decision to let scary-thoughtful and always-civil superblogger "Dale Franks" leave his asinine post up for the world to read.

"someone" told me that I was crossing the, um, Blogger Obsession Disorder line, and he was right. I have, by and large, refrained from getting into these comment pissing-matches, and my Rule Zero has served me in good stead. In the past week I've sparred with Idiot Paul from Wizbang and now lying prancing ponies McQ and Franks from Q&O, and during that time, my blog suffered, my blood pressure spiked, and I behaved in a juvenile fashion that served me no bit of good.

That's it for me. I hope I have the forebearance to avoid commenting on a post attacking me.

Like the forbearance that Glenn Greenwald has shown on countless occasions, avoiding all comment in posts denigrating him. Fortunately for him he had "Rick Ellensburg" and "Ellison" and "Wilson" and "Ryan" to make his points for him, whereas I didn't.

(Okay-- I did have the amazing Megan, and John, and Pablo, and Warden, and JackStraw, and a few I'm sure I'm forgetting. But they are, as I've said before, sock-puppets themselves. I don't have real people defending me like Glenn Greenwald does.)

Blogwar Back On: Dale Franks just doesn't know when to quit.

Deciding to "prove" I read his blog -- which I don't, by the way -- he googles to find me linking them. One of his examples is a case of a COMMENTER linking Q&O in a thread.

Okay, fine.

The first batch of examples of me "reading his blog" all end with me writing "Thanks to Instapundit for the Q&O" quote and "Thanks to Allah." Like I told him: I only even see his site when I get tipped about it, or read a quote on Instapundit.

McQ posted one of these citations as "evidence" I read the blog, but somehow forgot to include the key sentence at the end: "Thanks to Instapundit for the Q&O quote."

Well, now Dale, digging e'er deeper, finds five or more citations to Q&O over the past two years, and some of these, he triumphantly announces, don't have hat-tips to them, thus proving I came to Q&O without prompting.

Apparently he disregards the possibility that I didn't tip anyone for these posts as the tip came from a Q&O blogger himself. Like, for example, McQ:

Re: "New Evidence of Ace Links Without Attribution"

Hey, guys? Ever realize I donÂ’t hat-tip when the tipster himself is tipping to his own blog?

HowÂ’s this email grab ya:

....

from McQ to Allah [and a long list of addressees, including me]

Guys Â… through a particularly good connection I have obtained and posted a copy of Jesse MacbethÂ’s original and unaltered DD214. It is clear as a bell and shows he was a Chapter 11 discharge with all of 1 month and 13 days in basic training.

I have it on line now at:
http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=3957

See, when a blogger sends you a tip, and you link it, you don't say "McQ has the story. Hat-tip: McQ." You just post it.

There's no reason to hat-tip, and no one ever does it in that situation. Plus, we bloggers like to hide the fact that we're relentlessly promoting our blogs through email. Well, I don't really do that very much, but a lot of people do.

To recap: When a tip comes from the blogger himself, no hat-tip. No attribution. The illusion is created that the linking-blogger just found the piece himself, because he's such a fan of the site.

Instapundit doesn't hat-tip me when he (occasionally) links me. And a lot of those links come at my own prompting. So he does me the favor and pretends he was just reading Ace of Spades HQ one day and came across an interesting piece.

Now, I really don't feel like going through my email box and proving all of my unattributed Q&O links are the direct result of blog-pimping emails (maybe even by Dale Franks himself), but if he's going to be an absolute asshole about this, I can do so. I seem to have a lot of Q&O emails in my box, despite the fact that I have never, until an hour ago, written one of them an email myself.

(Except, maybe, those two times when I sent EVERYBODY in my mailbox a tip.)

So, keep it up, Dale. If you want me to expose you for how petty, dishonest, and, in the scheme of things -- even in the no-account world of blogging -- meaningless you are, keep it up.

I had thought a truce was the best policy, but, given that you had your ass handed to you so thoroughly in the comments, you thought you'd be cute and just start posting new lies on the front page.

Posted by: Ace at 01:16 PM | Comments (82)
Post contains 1154 words, total size 6 kb.