For weeks I called on "Zepp" to provide a source or cite to back up his claim that Tucker Carlson interviewed me for an article dealing with the death of Steve Kangas nine years ago. Time after time my calls were ignored. Finally,in a March 5, 2008 post, "Zepp" relented and allowed:
"Can't find it. I guess neither you nor Tucker were important enough for anyone to keep."
Does "Zepp" want us to believe that such an article once existed in his possession but that, just now, he can't produce it? Does he expect us to believe that he HAD it to write his 2007 article but, shucks, it has since disappeared?
Interesting that *I* can produce an article from Carlson written aboutKangas' suicide but lacking any claims to interview me or any other Usenet poster, "Zepp" is unable to do the same. Also, *I* can produce an article from Salon written at the same time which contains interviews of me and other posters.
Shall we believe that "Zepp" conflated the two articles or shall we believe that he simply made the whole thing up? Will we see further explanations from "Zepp" on this issue? Will he finally accept what I say when I simply deny that Carlson ever interviewed me? Stay tuned.....
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Steve Kangas Day: Zepperdaemerung
On Januray 14, 2007, Bryan "Zepp" Jamieson posted an article to certain political newsgroups entitled "Rotterdamerueng"(sic). In the main, this "essay" differed very little from Bryan's usual collection of lies, lame invective and canards but it did include the following paragraph which - even with the name misspelling - caught my eye:
"We in the Lying Socialist Weasels (Steve was a member) also learned another important lesson: television media personages were no longer journalists. A week after Steve's death, a smarmy little creature named Tucker Carlson decided to write a story about the emotionally troubled would-be assassin of Richard Scaife. Or so Carlson had decided Steve should be portrayed. Of the hundreds of friends and foes on Usenet Carlson could have asked for information, he chose exactly one: a noisome Usenet denizen, a Free Republic habitue who routinely liked to mine the internet for personal information on liberal posters with an eye to intimidating them. That user, one Kirk Nicklas, posts a celebration of Steve's death each year, just because he enjoys hurting people. That was the only person that Tucker Carlson found to be worth discussing Steve's death with. It taught us that the stuffed shirts on cable news were more interested in promoting diseased propaganda then they were in getting news stories."
I've reprinted the story from Carlson in a separate thread entitled "Stalking Scaife". The article makes no mention of me 'Kurt', 'Kirk' or otherwise. Why did Bryan lie about the article? I've challenged him repeatedly to produce any piece where Carlson claims to have interviewed me. Each challenge is met with silence.
On, the other hand, the following is the one and only article regarding the suicide of Steve Kangas for which I WAS interviewed. I leave it to the reader to decide if I was 'celebrating' Kangas' death as Bryan alleges. What will be obvious is that most of those interviewed for the piece *are* friends of Kangas.
Perhaps "Zepp" is simply miffed that no one from Salon interviewed *him* for the piece. Until he breaks his silence about this subject, we'll never know....
A VINCENT FOSTER FOR USENET LIBERALS? http://archive.salon.com/21st/feature/1999/03/19feature.html
"We in the Lying Socialist Weasels (Steve was a member) also learned another important lesson: television media personages were no longer journalists. A week after Steve's death, a smarmy little creature named Tucker Carlson decided to write a story about the emotionally troubled would-be assassin of Richard Scaife. Or so Carlson had decided Steve should be portrayed. Of the hundreds of friends and foes on Usenet Carlson could have asked for information, he chose exactly one: a noisome Usenet denizen, a Free Republic habitue who routinely liked to mine the internet for personal information on liberal posters with an eye to intimidating them. That user, one Kirk Nicklas, posts a celebration of Steve's death each year, just because he enjoys hurting people. That was the only person that Tucker Carlson found to be worth discussing Steve's death with. It taught us that the stuffed shirts on cable news were more interested in promoting diseased propaganda then they were in getting news stories."
I've reprinted the story from Carlson in a separate thread entitled "Stalking Scaife". The article makes no mention of me 'Kurt', 'Kirk' or otherwise. Why did Bryan lie about the article? I've challenged him repeatedly to produce any piece where Carlson claims to have interviewed me. Each challenge is met with silence.
On, the other hand, the following is the one and only article regarding the suicide of Steve Kangas for which I WAS interviewed. I leave it to the reader to decide if I was 'celebrating' Kangas' death as Bryan alleges. What will be obvious is that most of those interviewed for the piece *are* friends of Kangas.
Perhaps "Zepp" is simply miffed that no one from Salon interviewed *him* for the piece. Until he breaks his silence about this subject, we'll never know....
A VINCENT FOSTER FOR USENET LIBERALS? http://archive.salon.com/21st/feature/1999/03/19feature.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
