I wish to post a formal complaint in regards to the recent temporary
banning of Jed Rothwell from Vortex-l.
To be honest, I have had little to complain about in regards to Mr.
Beaty's handling (and temporary banning) of recent non-scientific
topics, until now. I fully realize that it is somewhat hypocritical of
me to even lodge a complaint since I myself have often been a major
contributor of political and especially religious subjects within
vortex-l. Hypocritical of me or not, I must speak my conscience. I
wish to express TWO REASONS why I don't think Jed should have been
temporarily removed - and a POSSIBLE SOLUTION to these recent actions.
If, however, my big fat mouth gets me temporary banned, I can live
with that. God knows, I've got plenty of other things to do with my
free time.
I do not feel it was fair to temporarily ban Jed Rothwell for two
reasons:
REASON ONE:
From what I could tell Jed copied to Vortex-l some comments he posted
out to the Washington Post book review:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/11/recognizing-the-struggle-for-what-it-is/
...concerning the topic: "BOOK REVIEW: Recognizing the struggle for
what it is" where Cold Fusion (if the technology can be developed
cheaply) would likely result in potential demise of the Middle East.
Mr. Beaty quotes from Jed Rothwell, presumably a quote that earned him
temporary banishment from vortex-l:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
"There is no better argument for alternative energy than the
beneficial effect such technologies would have on U.S. national
security. If cold fusion or some other inexpensive and unlimited
energy source were invented tomorrow, the Middle East could return to
being the cultural and political backwater it was for centuries."
Technically speaking, and in all fairness, this is NOT Mr. Rothwell's
opinion. Jed is actually quoting a paragraph directly from what the
Washington Post book review concerning what the reviewer believes
might happen if COLD FUSION becomes a reality in our geo-political
world.
From what I can tell Jed disagrees with the book reviewer's opinion
and says so:
From Jed:
I must say, I disagree with the sentiments expressed.
I can think of lots of more compelling arguments for
alternative energy, such as the fact that it would save
tens of thousands of lives every week and prevent global
warming. Marginalizing some anti-western groups in
Arab countries would also be a benefit, but small in
comparison.
In any case, I hope the Middle Eastern oil-producing nations
are not marginalized, or turned into a cultural backwater.
That does seem likely, but I hope instead that they benefit
as much from cold fusion as much as anyone else, and also
from a renaissance in science. Naturally, I hope the end
of petro-dollars will reducing funding for terrorism! But
I do not blame Middle Eastern nations because they
happen to be sitting on a lot of oil and we have made them
extremely wealthy. I think that was a misguided thing to
do but it was our fault, not theirs.
Now, compare Jed's comments to Thomas Malloy's follow-up response on
the above matter, which I presume subsequently earned Mr. Malloy's
place in becoming temporarily banned in Vortex-l as well:
From Malloy:
Baloney, they support terrorism because of Islam's
desire to impose Sahriah Law on the entire world,
and what the Qu'ran says about dying in jihad,.
When I personally compare Jed's comments to the responses Thomas made
it seems obvious to me that Jed was attempting to set the record
straight as he personally saw the potential future political situation
in the Middle East. Of course, so did Mr. Malloy attempt to set the
record straight as he personally sees the situation in the Middle
East. Are both comments "political". Yes, I guess you could say so.
However, In Jed's situation I perceive his Washington Post comments
(which he cc'd to Vortex-l) as constructive suggestions and
perceptions that might help us all get out of the ideological messes
the world is currently mired in. Thomas's responses, to Jed's
comments, on the other hand, IMO, only fan the flames of
political/religious conflict even more. There were no constructive
suggestions in Mr. Malloy's responses concerning how we might go about
making the geo-political situation better other than to imply that we
must ultimately prepare for an inevitable "holy" war that has been
so-prophesized within the Holy Book, the ultimate Jihad against the
enemy.
Am I being arbitrary. Yes. Guilty as charged. I don't care.
REASON TWO:
Jed in my view has scrupulously avoided engaging in any of the recent
fan-flaming of political ideology instigated by the "grok" persona. It
is my understanding that Jed wisely and quickly realized that the
"grok" persona was nothing more than another annoying troll. Jed dealt
with the matter efficiently by filtering out the "grok" persona's
email address from his personal mail box. As such, I do not recall
reading a single comment/post made by Jed from the past several weeks
that had anything to do with responding specifically to any of the
"grok" persona's political ideology.
For this reason it is, IMO, unfair and unnecessary to single out and
penalize Jed (however temporary the ban may be) for having cc'ing to
Vortex-l political-related comments he made over at the Washington
Post. Jed should not be singled out and to be made another example of
the crimes many of us (including me) were responsible for exacerbating
within Vortex-l. Jed, IMHO, is completely innocent of such actions and
should not be singled out for temporary punishment.
POSSIBLE SOLUTION:
I offer myself up as a prisoner-exchange with the specific purpose of
freeing Jed from temporary banishment from Vortex-l. However, in order
to do so I must be charged with violating the rules. Therefore, I must
now proceed to violate the rules:
Thomas, I thought your recent religious response to Jed's suggestion
about the Middle Eastern problem was full of poo-poo ka-ka. I think
Ann Coulter is the equivalent of a media-troll. After all one can only
lift one's skirt so many times to offend the grown-ups before the age
of four and get away with such outrageous behavior. After the age of
four, one must come up with more sophisticated ploys to outrage
others. I think Rush Limbaugh is a big fat blowhard. His recent
physical infirmities, particularly the one that almost cost him his
hearing was likely due to his Inner Essence desperately attempting to
warn him that if he continued to behave like the big fat blow-hard
that he is that soon all he would be able to hear (literally) would be
his own blow-hard opinions blowing in the wind right back into his own
fat face.
Mr. Beaty. I stand guilty-as-charged for violating the rules. I offer
myself up in exchange for Mr. Rothwell's release from temporary
banishment.
I hope this will be considered a fair exchange.
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
