I have never, ever, called any person a raghead. I defy you to find such a quote from me anywhere -- on Omni or off.

I have also never made any bigoted statement and have stated on numerous occassions that it is not fair to confuse Arabs or Moslems with terrorists.

The accusations made against me by ftomnibox are simply lies. There is no diplomatic way to put that.


I did call a woman who walked into a Haifa restaurant and blew herself up -- killing 21 other people -- both a terrorist and a murderer. That is not bigotry. That is recognizing the simple facts of life.

Today, I posted for the final time on Omni. After two people wrote in supporting me, the thread was immediately locked for being about another FT Flyer -- even though it was not.

Someone else started another thread and that, too, was locked -- saying that it should be posted on this board.

Below is my locked thread. It includes my original "hateful bigoted post". You are all free to make up your own minds both about the post and about my feeling that Omni's moderation is so strongly oriented towards the Left that free discussion on Omni is now impossible.

--------

This is my last post on Omni. There really is no point in continuing discussions when one side is allowed to flame freely while the other side has its posts censored, and is threatened with being banned, even when no flame is involved.

Omni, apparently, is doomed to become a sterile zone where Leftists can hotly debate whether homosexual marriages should be legalized first in North or South Dakota or whether Hillary or Dean is best suited to be president. Nothing more controversial will be allowed.

The following items appeaered on a thread which was closed. The posts, however, were not removed and remain there for anyone to see:


Didn't ap2110 post on Dec 29, 2003 03:41 PM, the following racist comment:

"I refuse to ride in a cab driven by a raghead, I just wave them on and catch the next one even though I just stood in line at LGA for 30 minutes at the taxi stand."
So we're supposed to listen to him on this topic?

***

Again, you beat me to it! I find myself asking, why all these Islamophobic topics? What is this, a one-person campaign to bring back the Crusades?

***

He and his friends are on a crusade to bring back the Crusades. Must be an ally of Osama bin Laden ... who also wants a neo-crusade/neo-counter crusade.

***
On another thread, the following was allowed to stand, [b] I feel like I'm talking to a kindergartner. Please think before you post. Ah, well... [/B}

***

I, myself, was the subject of the following flame: : this is nothing more than a personal opinion dishonestly represented as the official intent of the artists in question.

The above all have three things in common:

1. They are flames.
2. They were allowed to remain on Omni.
3. They were flames of by members of the Left about members of the Right.

What was NOT allowed to remain was a post I made which contained no flame at all.

When I asked why it was removed, the moderator wrote to me saying I should "Not to give all the reasons that Doppy is an ... for taking his position."

(Note: That was a typo by the moderator. Doppy was not involved at all.)

Number 1: I did not call anyone an .... I also did not use any other perjurative.

Number 2: I did not cite the reasons why the originator of the letter was an ....

What I did do, is note both what he said and what he did not say. (The full letter appears at the end of this post so you can judge for yourself if what I am saying is true.)

Apparently the moderator felt that by pointing out both what he said and didn't say, I made it obvious to the reader that the originator was an .... That may or may not be true, but the moderator certainly was not going to allow someone taking a position from the Left to be subjected to that possibility.

In recent months, posters from the Right have been repeatedly suspended and/or banned. If that has happened to anyone from the Left, I have not heard of it.

Can it be because those of us on the Right are the ones who flame? Obviously not, as the above quotes prove.

In December, I told one poster that something she said was straight out of Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I still feel that way but would not have been surprised if that letter had been considered "flaming". Apparently, it was not. Had it been banned, I would not have objected.

I have never, other than that, ever written any letter which an impartial person would consider flaming.

Still, I have been threatened with suspension and had the following letter removed. (Note: I am replacing the originating poster's name with XXX. I am not doing this because I believe I flamed him. I am doing this so the moderators will not have an excuse to remove this post. If it is to come down, let it be clear to all that it is being removed because the moderators can not abide having their Leftward orientation exposed.)

BANNED LETTER:


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

quote:


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

Originally posted by XXX:

Israel has the right to withdraw her ambassador from Sweden in protest but the rat doesn't have the right to destroy the art in Sweden.


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

XXX used a harsh word: "Rat".
He used no such word to describe the mass murderess.
He used no such word to describe the artist who honored her.
He used no such word to describe the Swedes who allowed the exhibition.
Only one person warranted such a denunciation from XXX: the Israeli diplomat.
A few months ago Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh was murdered while shopping. Ms. Lindh was not particularly loved in Israel as she was one of its harshest European critics. If an Israeli museum were to put up an exhibit honoring her assassin, I wonder if XXX might use his harsh words a bit differently.





[This message has been edited by Dovster (edited Jan 21, 2004).]