Cberlet has, with great fanfare, announced that he is leaving for a month, to protest the failure of Wikipedia to "deal with" supporters of LaRouche who have opposed him in content disputes. The announcement appears on his user page and at least two article talk pages. This appears to be an attempt to copy one of the more successful maneuvers from SlimVirgin's playbook, where she plays the part of the damsel in distress, in hopes of drawing legions of admirers to take her side in a quarrel.

Heretofore, Cberlet has been successful in posting distress signals from time to time on talk pages, which would generally summon SlimVirgin, Will Beback, or Tom Harrison to his aid. Lately his cries of distress have largely fallen on deaf ears -- Will Beback responds, but he is somewhat circumspect about indulging in blatant abuse of his sysop powers. Historically, Will has preferred to let SV do the dirty work, and then he would write elaborate justifications for whatever thuggery she decided upon.

Now, with Jayjg gone, SV on the sidelines, and cberlet on strike, is the whole edifice beginning to crumble?

2.) racist, sexist, homophobic, antisemitic, and Islamophobic bigots.
-- CB "list of WP turn offs" on his user page.

Cberlet has, with great fanfare, announced that he is leaving for a month, to protest the failure of Wikipedia to "deal with" supporters of LaRouche who have opposed him in content disputes. The announcement appears on his user page and at least two article talk pages. This appears to be an attempt to copy one of the more successful maneuvers from SlimVirgin's playbook, where she plays the part of the damsel in distress, in hopes of drawing legions of admirers to take her side in a quarrel.

Heretofore, Cberlet has been successful in posting distress signals from time to time on talk pages, which would generally summon SlimVirgin, Will Beback, or Tom Harrison to his aid. Lately his cries of distress have largely fallen on deaf ears -- Will Beback responds, but he is somewhat circumspect about indulging in blatant abuse of his sysop powers. Historically, Will has preferred to let SV do the dirty work, and then he would write elaborate justifications for whatever thuggery she decided upon.

Now, with Jayjg gone, SV on the sidelines, and cberlet on strike, is the whole edifice beginning to crumble?

I am leaving for one month to commemorate the anniversary of Kristallnacht, which is on November 9th; after which I will reconsider my options, especially regarding the failure of Wikipedia to deal with the protracted and multi-year manipulation of Wikpedia by supporters of the notorious antisemite, sexist, and homophobe Lyndon LaRouche, especially on the entry, Views of Lyndon LaRouche.

Please show me even once instance where Berlet has stood up against Islamophobia. One academic whose aid he came to for an Islamophobic attack. One political figure, right or left, he has criticized as anti-Muslim. I do not mean general, useless hand ringing, but specific figures in public debate. I don't know. I don't follow the guy that close, so maybe he does defend Muslims. I would like to know.

from Rob Smith [redacted]
to Stephen Schwartz [redacted]
date Jan 17, 2006 4:15 PM


If you click on "What links here" on your biographical page in Wikipedia, you can discover the smears against you are a longtime in the making. Particularly related to other articles. In the "Neofascism and religion" article for example, we read, "The use of 'Islamofascism' to describe perceived strains of authoritarianism and totalitarianism in contemporary Islamic movements has nevertheless gained wide currency in the United States, particularly among neo-conservatives. It has been attributed to Christopher Hitchens, Khalid Duran, Stephen Schwartz,.."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neofascism_an...ascism.22_label


How did this get here? Let's look at the history.

Chip Berlet created the article on 28 May 2005.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=14076836

Here Berlet adds, "Allegations that any religion is involved with neofascism are hotly contested, and can bring out the worst in rhetoric and bigoted claims by advocates or opponents. Assertions that religious fundamentalists and militants are "fascists," can often be understood as a [[hyperbole|hyperbolic]] political attack that uses [[Fascist (epithet)|the term fascism as a politic epithet or slur]]). This article will examine this phenomenon in context, but will also review scholarly claims that have more substance ."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=21574296

Here you see " To combine it with the word 'fascist' in one phrase is a desecration and a form of hate speech."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=29495096

And here Chip Berlet links the Islamofascism page
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=29495553

Reviewing this and other articles, you will see you are a "neo-conservative pundit", a proponent of 'bigoted rhetoric" and "hate speech", and lacking in "scholarly review." Berlet laid the framework out in that particular article, and other anonymous sockpuppet trolls finally attached your name to it. This is just one example.

Rob Smith,
aka "nobs" in Wikipedia

Cberlet has, with great fanfare, announced that he is leaving for a month, to protest the failure of Wikipedia to "deal with" supporters of LaRouche who have opposed him in content disputes. The announcement appears on his user page and at least two article talk pages. This appears to be an attempt to copy one of the more successful maneuvers from SlimVirgin's playbook, where she plays the part of the damsel in distress, in hopes of drawing legions of admirers to take her side in a quarrel.

Heretofore, Cberlet has been successful in posting distress signals from time to time on talk pages, which would generally summon SlimVirgin, Will Beback, or Tom Harrison to his aid. Lately his cries of distress have largely fallen on deaf ears -- Will Beback responds, but he is somewhat circumspect about indulging in blatant abuse of his sysop powers. Historically, Will has preferred to let SV do the dirty work, and then he would write elaborate justifications for whatever thuggery she decided upon.

Now, with Jayjg gone, SV on the sidelines, and cberlet on strike, is the whole edifice beginning to crumble?

Isn't Chip's message an outrageous breach of protocol?
Is LaRouche "a notorious antisemite, sexist, homophobe"? I don't know a lot about the guy and he's only shown up on my international radar via the wiki-wars, but I'm pretty sure he isn't notorious for any of those things. Not outside of Berlet's weird circle of anti-LaRouche campaigners who have been trying to smear the guy for decades, at any rate.

To be fair to the Chipster, the bigots certainly drag a good faith editor down. Unfortunately, Chip isn't a good faith editor.

Is LaRouche "a notorious antisemite, sexist, homophobe"?

So far as I can see, LaRouche isn't a notorious anything, at least in Britain. Wikipedia has inflated his status beyond all reason, possibly as a counterweight to their inflation of Ayn Rand.

The matter here isn't really about LaRouche as we know, it is about someone who is prepared to write that a subject is a "notorious antisemite, sexist, and homophobe" on their user page, who spent years attacking the subject in print in the real world, and then goes on to wikipedia to make 1000s of edits about this person on various pages.

Is there no sense of moral obligation left among administrators? It is time to stand up and take action.

Train others to step forward if leaders are arrested, and arrange beforehand for legal support for all those who are detained. Be aware that some people, especially those with family caretaking responsibility or medical issues, need to avoid arrest,

Interestingly, Thatcher131 has now redacted "notorious antisemite, sexist, and homophobe" on BLP grounds from the talk page versions of Chip's little manifesto.

Denial of racism, sexism, homophobia is wrong, Well-established facts should not be deleted

Please do not try to engage me in a conversation during my period of rethinking my particiapation on Wikipedia. It is far too late for that. When the Foundation members, Arbcom, and Jimbo decide to get a backbone and deal with this issue, please send me an e-mail. Otherwise, the issue of Kristallnacht is far more important than any bullshit anyone tries to post on this page. History judges us. What do you see when you look in the mirror? All posts on this page will be deleted until the commemoration of Kristallnacht on November 9th. What would you have done? Where do you stand? History judges us!

Never Again!

¡No Pasarán!

Deal with it.--Cberlet 01:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and how dare he invoke ¡No Pasarán! in this context. How dare he compare that to his relentless assault on some marginal eccentric American political figure. Bah!

Berlet quits in a huff. Accuses the Admin community of "disgusting" behavior,
This is the same activist who writes,
but does not mention a word about the wisdom of taking children and the elderly to violent protests. One wonders how many times agitators like this have "sang in jail" or "washed tear gas" out of his own eyes.

He did this repeatedly until... yeap...

PS. Oh, and how dare he invoke ¡No Pasarán! in this context. How dare he compare that to his relentless assault on some marginal eccentric American political figure. Bah!

SlimVirgin told ArbCom,
"'An extreme political website should never be used as a source for Wikipedia except in articles discussing the opinions of that organization or the opinions of a larger like-minded group,' a passage I (SlimVirgin) was the author of back in March. [466] What I meant by "extreme" was political groups like Stormfront, Hamas, or the Socialist Workers Party"

The complainant in that case stated,
"Slim - Nothing you've quoted from NOR contradicts what I've quoted from WP:RS. In fact the section you cite giving the Socialist Worker's Party as an example of an extreme source actually seems to solidify my case against Mr. Berlet, as his biography openly boasts that he has done work with that group! If the Socialist Workers Party is not a reputable source as the section you quote states, would not the same be true of political activists who openly and proudly align with the Socialist Workers Party and dozens of other equally extremist organizations?

Bwahaha, that's hilarious. Where's your honor guard now Berlet?

It's a witchhunt I tell you! The anti-semites have won the day and are polishing their jack boots as we speak!

It's a witchhunt I tell you! The anti-semites have won the day and are polishing their jack boots as we speak!

What? Berlet isn't Jewish, is he?

Berlet's identity spoiler implies that he's not; but then again, all we have is the credibility of the author to on.

What? Berlet isn't Jewish, is he?

What? Berlet isn't Jewish, is he?

He's as WASPy as they come. His given name is John Foster Berlet, because his parents were great admirers of John Foster Dulles. The acorn doesn't fall far from the tree.

Hey, Chip is not so slick. He immediated created User:Hardindr as a sock to evade his block, and then his sock got blocked, too.

Appeal of Indefinite Block to Arbitration Committee

I am appealing this indefinite block to the Arbitration Committee. I am emailing clerk User:Newyorkbrad to make a formal request. --Hardindr 00:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Berlet hand-delivered a letter to Oliver Stone dated January 16, 1992, in which he called on him to "distance yourself publicly from attempts by racist, anti-Jewish and pro-fascist groups to use your film JFK as a vehicle to promote bigoted theories claiming Jewish control of U.S. foreign policy and the CIA..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hardindr
Hardindr's Contribs

He shows up yesterday and begins editing Berlet's page ...

He's as WASPy as they come. His given name is John Foster Berlet

It is telling that an administrator at conservapedia is complaining about Berlet, whereas I find it offensive that Berlet invokes the slogans of international socialism to conduct his petty attacks. Years of solidarity movements, union battles and working class resistance in the face of private power, reduced by Berlet to some campaign against a marginal and powerless American independent. Liberals like Berlet have nothing to do with the socialist movement.

Berlet is a WASP name?

Wrong. Berlet is a Trotskyite. He is no liberal as his writings clearly show.

Berlet's a Charter Member of the Enver Hoxha Society, and Enver Hoxha is no Trotskyite.

I do believe Berlet has a sock, but the name escapes me. It started with a W, if I recall, and was two names.

Possessing a genuine affection for Stalinism, in 1983 Berlet was a founding member of the "Chicago Area Friends of Albania," an organization whose mission.... BLAH BLAH BLAH

Socialist, Communist, Trotskyite, Stalinist... who cares? Just like horseshit, bullshit, chickenshit, and goatshit are all somewhat different from one another in composition, but they all stink, the same is true of all the different varieties of socialism.

That nonsense is just as wrong headed as Berlet's own missives, Nobs.


Berlet has all the attributes of the ex-Trotskyite scribe, the denunciations and the hyperbole. But that's about it. The guy who wrote your link is another screaming ex-Trotskyite scribe, Nobs. Why can't the pair of them just f-f-f-f-fade away.

Examining all the evidence, Berlet's association with the Chicago Area Stalinist Association probably should not be interpreted in that type of ideological context. After the Russian Wheat Deal of 1973, Soviet commodity traders, that is to say the KGB, became very active in Chicago Commodity markets. Here we need to reexamine the activities of other friends of Berlet who got filthy stinking rich on Chicago Commodity markets in the 1980s (remember, for example, how the Soviets manuipualted the price of gold in 1980 when it shot up to $875 per oz from about a $320 base after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Coincidentlally, the Soviets were the worlds second largest gold producer and seller as price floated inadvertantly high for much of the 1980s). This is where Berlet's financial angel, Richard Dennis comes back in the picture.

Then we have Berlet's longtime association with the commie rag, Guardian whom Wilfred Burchett wrote for in the 1950s in between coercing confessions from American POWs during the Korean War. Oddly, Berlet stopped writing for Guardian about three months before it, and the Soviet Union, both went out of existence when Gorbachev pulled the plug in 1992.

they all stink, the same is true of all the different varieties of socialism.

The problem with Berlet is not his leftism. There are good and bad people on the left like everywhere else. I don't have any problem with Berlet's resume or affiliations (although the Hoxha thing is pretty iconoclastic or splinter Maoist.) In fact we have traveled some of the same roads. Berlet's greatest evil as far as I can tell has been directed at other leftists, especially those who he has unfairly smeared as anti-Semites, often for nothing more than seeking justice for Muslims. I would be interested in hearing more concerning the options traders possible funding of his activities. I think it might be a full blown case of an outright sale out after have his ideological rug pulled out from under him. This would make him a very unpleasant person indeed.

My point is that Chip is no liberal.

Examining all the evidence, Berlet's association with the Chicago Area Stalinist Association probably should not be interpreted in that type of ideological context. After the Russian Wheat Deal of 1973, Soviet commodity traders, that is to say the KGB, became very active in Chicago Commodity markets. Here we need to reexamine the activities of other friends of Berlet who got filthy stinking rich on Chicago Commodity markets in the 1980s (remember, for example, how the Soviets manuipualted the price of gold in 1980 when it shot up to $875 per oz from about a $320 base after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Coincidentlally, the Soviets were the worlds second largest gold producer and seller as price floated inadvertantly high for much of the 1980s). This is where Berlet's financial angel, Richard Dennis comes back in the picture.

Since I cannot eat it and it does not pay any dividends, it is not an appealing anything to me.

I doubt he has any principled beliefs at this time.

I think back when he had honest politics he was left of liberal. I doubt he has any principled beliefs at this time.

Guidestar, the internet search service of Philanthropic Research, Inc., lists Political Research Associates as follows:

"PRA is a research center that analyzes information on anti-democratic movements and trends and publishes materials that explain their ideologies, strategies, agendas, financing and links to each other."

What this description leaves out is the heavy radical left agenda of PRA itself, including the fact that those "anti-democratic" movements fail to include Marxist-Leninist and extreme leftist movements unless they are in sectarian dispute with PRA.

Source: Laird Wilcox, The Watchdogs: A Close Look at Anti-Racist "Watchdog" Groups, Second Edition, Part 2, Chapter Four: Political Research Associates, A Study in "Links and ties," Editorial Research Service, 1999, pgs. 20 - 21. ISBN 0-993592-96-5.

gold peaked in and around 1980 at approximately $800 per the troy oz. It then declined for the next 20 years. (Very quickly (actually) in the early 1980's to around $300 per ounce.) It became free to trade in the late 1970's and moved in sinc with inflation and oil and the commodity bull market of the 1970's, as well as, the last major decline in the U.S. dollar.

Political turmoil can be cited as a partial cause for gold as a "hedge," however, it has never worked as any such thing. For nearly 20 years people have lost money owning gold.

The political turmoil you cite was manufactured in the Kremlin.

Nobs, all I'm getting from your links on this thread are mirror images of the Chipster. Efforts to smear people using dubious findings, political hacks dredging up 2 and 2 and making 5. Dubious and shady propaganda pieces to attack ideological enemies.

We don't need to do this to discredit the Chipster. He already did it himself.


Utter codswallop!