When you don’t research properly

by Sunny
9th June, 2006 at 10:30 am    

I usually try and avoid using PP to take take personal digs at other bloggers, but I couldn’t resist this time, sorry. I really tried, honest.

Last week David T wrote about an ongoing argument between Johann Hari the commentator and Scott Burgess the blogger, over climate change. I waded in with a flippant remark:

Why is Johann even bothering to reply? Scott Burgess spends all his time wanking off with attempts to debunk climate change and thrives on journalists coming back to him so he can wank off that even more. I’m just disappointed his much vaunted ‘The Muslim Brotherhood translation project’ wasn’t about 10,000 pages long so he’d still be wanking over that.

A bit vulgar, but about right I thought.

Not sure on how to get back at me, Burgess posted this on Monday.

The reasons behind his tirade become clearer, however, when one recalls that the mud-hurler in question is founder of something called “Asians in Media” – an organisation that, due in part to posts here, has one less potential member.

[hat tip: Jarndyce]

Burgess refers to Dilpazier Aslam, the Guardian journalist he helped get the sack (without Harry’s Place picking it up he would have been ignored). So he thinks I’m having a crack at him because I was annoyed over the Aslam controversy.

If Burgess had done a quick search on AIM he would have found this article where I approved of the decision in giving him the sack. D’oh!

And of course, my support for Hizb ut-Tahrir is legendary around these parts. Better luck next time Burgess.

              Post to del.icio.us

Filed in: Humour

22 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs

  1. curtis blow — on 9th June, 2006 at 10:51 am  

    “I usually try and avoid using PP to take take personal digs at other bloggers, but I couldn’t resist this time, sorry. I really tried, honest.”

    “faced by a bunch of dimwits who won’t even believe it happened”

    “the freaks are out in force”

    “Your stupidity is quite evident here anyway. Why would we want to engage with it anymore? And no, I’m not going to start a thread just to allow you to spill more filth. I value my sanity. ”

    “fuck off now WTE”

    “bananabrain! Hello again”

    “overrun by idiots”

    really mature !


  2. leon — on 9th June, 2006 at 11:03 am  

    God that Daily Ablution blog is boring…

  3. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 9th June, 2006 at 11:29 am  

    Hey Curtis, that was a low blow

  4. Lady Madonna — on 9th June, 2006 at 12:17 pm  

    What are you talking about?

    “due in part to posts here, has one less potential member.”

    I read that line and it makes perfect sense to me that he means that due to your churlish and highly unprofessional remarks on his site that he will no longer be a member of AiM. It’s very clear, he’s not ‘reffering’ to anything – youre the one trying to read between the lines and find some (potentially paranoia induced) deeper meaning.

    You really do think quite highly of yourself don’t you?!

  5. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 12:36 pm  

    Looks like not everyone is going to ‘get’ this one Sunny. :-D

  6. Lady Madonna — on 9th June, 2006 at 12:46 pm  

    As an aside – take a look at the NY Post’s front cover today.


  7. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 12:58 pm  

    Good of you to flag for the rest of us the kind of humour you do get.

  8. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 9th June, 2006 at 12:58 pm  

    Lady Madonna, that’s funny! I love it!

  9. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:02 pm  

    Although due in part to posts on Daily Colon-Irrigation, Burgess would sell his glory hole to get into the media, Asian or not.

  10. Lady Madonna — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:10 pm  

    Sid – erm… at what point did I say I found the NYP’s cover humorous?

    I actually offered no opinion on it. Now you’re reading into things the way you want to see them. Bad form.

  11. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:17 pm  

    Sorry LM. But the category of this thread is Humour. Since your post admittedly wasn’t humorous, I’d be happy to know what non-humourous point it is you wanted to make.

  12. Lady Madonna — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:28 pm  

    My opening “As an aside” should have given you some idea that it was… ‘an aside’.

    I was offering it up as something I found quite startling and wanted to simply share. You could have proffered an opinion on what you thought of it – and as it was introduced as ‘an aside’ it could just as easily have been ignored – but instead chose to attack and sully.

  13. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:42 pm  

    attack and sully

    ah that explains your complete hit and miss of the consternation in #4.

  14. Lady Madonna — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:49 pm  

    I attacked Sunny for his possible misinterpretation – but mostly for the lack of quality in the comment he left on the website which led to the retort by Burgess. I also offered an opinion on both.

    I would say that’s a fairly balanced comment I left.

    Whereas you presumed that I somehow found the cover of the NYP funny simply because I shared it. And then went on to make a judgemental remark on “the kind of humour” I like based on your presumtion. I repeat – that’s bad form.

  15. matt_c — on 9th June, 2006 at 1:58 pm  

    Go and read Scott’s post, LM. It’s quite clear that the ‘posts here’ quote refers to Scott’s own regarding Aslam, and that Aslam is the ‘one less member’ of AiM. Sunny’s comment was on HP and Scott reproduced it on a Daily Ablution post.

    And the thought of Burgess belonging to Asians in the Media doesn’t really make loads of sense, does it?

    I thought Scott’s comment was a pretty shit retort and had a whiff of a “You Asians stick together, don’t you?” about it, unless he genuinely thinks Sunny is a secret Hizb member.

  16. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 2:06 pm  

    LM, think its you who have misinterpreted Burgess and not Sunny, as matt_c has explained. So your point in #4, which is a bit of the old “attack and sully” as well, is misdirected.

  17. raz — on 9th June, 2006 at 4:51 pm  


  18. Ehjuan — on 9th June, 2006 at 5:26 pm  

    Nice to see you addressing the actual arguement; climate change. Maybe, as it appears, you agree with Hari. But why is another POV “wanking off”?
    Is it because of a perceived slight from Burgess? Which makes it worth being rude rather than informative?
    By all means take sides.But please continue to inform and present views that are interesting and, I think, should have a wider audience. And please don’t write in a way that could leave you open to charges of “throwing the toys out of the pram”.
    PP is more important than that.

  19. Zak — on 9th June, 2006 at 5:32 pm  

    Fight! fight!

  20. HA HA HA — on 9th June, 2006 at 6:14 pm  

    I thought the NY Post was hilarious! Don’t be so pompous Sid that was a good joke!

  21. Sid — on 9th June, 2006 at 7:16 pm  

    Yeah, but nothing to wet yourself about. But then you probably think he’s is “cool” and “funny”.

  22. El Cid — on 10th June, 2006 at 1:42 pm  

    I thought the NYP cover was funny. But if that means being compared to Jeremy Clarkson, I might have to reconsider!

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.