This is sooo old. I’d really rather let it go and move on to less dysphoric topics. However, sometimes action is necessary whether one wants it or not, and this is one of those times.
Yesterday, a reader sent us this screen cap:
If you can make out the contents of that image, someone with a blog called Bare Naked Islam is claiming “Gates of Vienna” solicited her support for the open letter to Pamela Geller.
This is bizarre! Gates of Vienna asked her to support the Open Letter? How, pray tell, does a blog write an email, call or skype someone? Neither Bare Naked or Ms. Geller include the means by which this purported communication from Gates of Vienna (referred to as “him”) arrived at her door. It is simply asserted as fact.
The Baron looked at Bare Naked’s site to see if perhaps this purported outrage on our part was posted on her blog. Nada. The only thing he found was a link to our site on her blogroll. Go figure. If we did this, where’s her outrage?? I certainly wouldn’t let such a blatant demand go by unremarked upon were I in her place.
I’m puzzled: why didn’t either Ms. Geller or Mr. Spencer (who mirrored it) question its plausibility? They’ve both been blogging long enough to know how to verify an assertion. The whole thing reeks. As Nixon used to say (and now Obama does) let’s be perfectly clear:
At no time did my husband or I (or our blog) ask this woman for her support in any way. Those signatures added later were done so at the request of the people who signed on, and we have their emails as proof. Besides, we don’t even know this Bare Naked person. My memory may be faulty, but for sure the Baron would recall such an encounter.
For the record, as mentioned early on: The Baron sent out no emails soliciting support for the open letter after it was published. Those who signed it were either part of the group that were originally invited to help compose it, or they read the letter after publication and asked to be included.
In sum, a group of concerned people wrote a letter in defense of the EDL as a response to Ms Geller’s sudden attack against them. The group decided to publish it, and the Baron was one of the signatories. Later on other people showed up and asked to be added — thus those subsequent updates.
From: Dymphna Gates firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM
Subject: A public claim that isn’t true
A reader in Europe alerted me to a statement on Atlas Shrugs claiming my husband had contacted you soliciting your signature for the Open Letter written by the European team re their defense of the EDL.
Here is the URL:
Here is the snip from that post:
Despite being asked by GoV to sign their “open Geller letter” (and they said they sent out no emails begging for signatures), the cutting edge counter-jihad blogger Bare Naked Islam asked to join our list of supporters. She told me:
Gates of Vienna asked me to sign his letter and I refused.
This statement is false.
We don’t know you from Adam.
We did not ask you to sign the petition.
Where is your record of a phone conversation, a skype message, or an email from my husband or from our website requesting your signature?
I am indifferent re your signing on with Pamela Geller. However, bare naked untruths about Gates of Vienna do concern me deeply.
Please produce proof for this claim that we asked you to sign, or that we had any form of contact with you at all.
If you can’t produce this proof (complete with headers in the email showing its routing, if your claim is based on an email) then I expect to hear back from you about this mistake.
Please contact me by tomorrow, July 5th.
Gates of Vienna
I’m still waiting to hear from this blogger about the false allegation published in her name at Atlas Shrugs and Jihad Watch:
- Besides being fraudulent the claim at Atlas Shrugs was and is bizarre.
- Not only is the assertion assigned to BNI fallacious,
- But it was unfortunate that Atlas Shrugs chose to publish the charge without a shred of proof.
At this point a reasonable person would ask: cui bono?
Being a reasonable person, I’m wondering.
We don’t know who is responsible for this falsehood. It’s possible that someone sent a spoof email masquerading as a message from Gates of Vienna. If so, a forensic examination of the full email with its headers might provide a clue about the identity of the real sender.
I have neither time nor inclination to determine how many additional falsehoods may be included in the two posts. Many listed on that long group of “supporters” opposing the Open Letter will simply have to be taken on faith, I suppose. There certainly is no way to verify their existence. Nor do I intend to do so.
Due to the nature of this post, comments are closed. However, I will leave you with my motive in publishing this information:
“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.
Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
— Dietrich Bonhoeffer