Jim Kerr 'Nuked'

Response to "Response To James "Infensus Mentis"/"Crimes Of Zion" Linton"



This is a fun-filled response to the (as one associate of mine called it) "gnat-straining" piece written by Jim Kerr for the Brendon O'Connell web site and published there on Feb 21, 2011. Therein, Kerr responds to two separate comments I submitted to the O'Connell blog. Let's get straight to it, but first, check out my comments as they were actually submitted, so you can see how Kerr misquotes me by changing the grammar, chopping sentences in half, and putting capital letters in place of lower case ones. The first comment is here, the second here. I won't be deceiving and misleading readers of this post, as he does. His comments will be shown here exactly as they are in his 'article', minus the ubiquitous hyperlinks. He refuses to include mine, so I'll simply copy-and-paste the text like he does.

I suggest we set fair terms on this "challenge"

And I suggest Linton gets his skinny, stinky, unhygienic arse round to Lieblich's offices and confront him on camera instead of trying to invent excuses for chickening-out of the challenge I have put to him. It is looking very much like Infested Mouthpiece a.k.a. Chicken of Zion is afraid to go after the big-fish, as his pal "Poseidon" advocates. If so, psychopathic junkie-boy Linton could always ingest some metamphetamine, dextroamphetamine, salvia divinorum, LSD, ecstasy, ketamine, dimethyltryptamine to induce Dutch courage.

Where's the full stop at the end of my sentence (in bold)? I'm sure I put one there. Anyway.

1) Here's why I won't accept Kerr's "challenge" to visit Steve Lieblich with a video camera. It's very simple: Because Kerr told me to. The second he did that, he sealed the deal. I'll eat a tablespoon of my own shit and chase it down with a shot-glass of my own piss before I let Jim "Armchair General" Kerr tell me what activism is, and how I should be engaging in it. Unlike Kerr, I am an activist; that is to say, I actually leave my home to meet with other people and groups, organise events and screenings, attend real-life protests, distribute DVD media (documentaries and assorted video compilations) in order to raise awareness of the issues -- stuff like that. What I do has always been decided upon and determined by me, no-one else, and that's not about to change anytime soon.

2) I haven't made any "excuses", as Kerr claims. I'm flat-out telling him to shove it up his arse, suggesting in the process that he engage in some real life activism of his own before (and instead of) issuing mind-bogglingly hypocritical "challenges" to others who are already doing it. Fair enough?

3) I've experimented with all of the substances Kerr lists above, and I've admitted that openly and publicly, in writing. If I hadn't, he wouldn't know about it. But it wasn't me that got so blind drunk that I passed out on a railway track and lost an arm to a speeding locomotive. That was Kerr, and if that isn't substance abuse I don't know what is. Silly prick.

Perhaps Johnson will take you up on it if you volunteer to do the same

Yeah right. As if I'm going to fly over 9000 miles to Australia to confront a rabid Zionist who lives just 5-10 minutes walk from where Linton lives. Moreover, since Linton's pal Johnson lives in Perth, he is much better located to visit Lieblich than am I. But Linton is even closer still...he's almost Lieblich's neighbour.

Now Kerr is really starting to fiddle with my grammar, chopping my sentence in half in the process in order to mislead his readers. The astute reader will have noticed Kerr's deceptive modus operandi; he is taking my words out of context by separating them from the other words that make up the sentence. Here is what I wrote:

Perhaps Johnson will take you up on it if you volunteer to do the same -- get your fat, stinky, unhygienic arse out from behind that computer and get onto the streets.

As is plain to see, by "do the same" I wasn't suggesting that Kerr "fly over 9000 miles to Australia", and he knows it. Rather, I was suggesting that we set fair terms on Kerr's "challenge" to Steve Johnson. If Kerr wants a little, he should be prepared to give a little. As someone who is currently using the O'Connell site to issue multiple "open challenges" ostensibly designed to inspire real life activism, he should be willing to work in the real world as an activist himself. But he's not. Why? What is he afraid of? Is he a pussy, a hypocrite, lazy, or all three? It's not as if he's too busy or doesn't have the time, that much is certain.

"Get your fat, stinky, unhygienic arse out from behind that computer and get onto the streets"

Both Linton and "Poseidon" of takeourworldback.com have been claiming for over a year now that I am supposedly "afraid to leave my house". The (dis)information upon which they base their false claim was supplied to them by Linton's friend in Sheffield, a self-admitted, mentally ill heroin addict known as Daniel Calvert John "Smackhead" Makeham. And if Linton actually believed this propaganda, he would hardly have issued a counter-challenge for me to venture outside since he would have already "known" that I am supposedly "agoraphobic". Right? Linton evidently does not believe the propaganda that he and his friends are posting on Internet forums and on the web sites that they control.

Firstly, check out what he's done here. Not only has be bizarrely switched to adding quotation marks for this particular line, but he's capitalised the 'g' in "get" in order to deceive the reader into believing that it's a new sentence, rather than the end of the first one. "Perhaps Johnson will take you up on it if you volunteer to do the same -- get your fat, stinky, unhygienic arse out from behind that computer and get onto the streets". That is what I wrote. Taking words out of context is deceptive, and deception makes one a bullshitter.

Secondly, I have never claimed that Kerr is afraid to leave his home. He's bullshitting again. I'm about to speculate on precisely that so stick around, but if Kerr could produce evidence that I've done so in the past, you know he'd do so. He's got screen-shots of just about everything I've ever written.

Thirdly and most importantly, what the hell is this poofter raving on about? What kind of response is that to a perfectly reasonable suggestion that he get off his arse and engage in some real life activism? Yes, I called him fat, stinky and unhygienic while suggesting it, but he is fat, stinky and unhygienic. In any case, he's working very hard to stay away from the activism issue, isn't he?

Start fighting the war like a real man.

This is an amusing statement to make given that Linton is a huge supporter and promoter of "Poseidon", the guy who has consistently refused to reveal his true identity, his location, or any other personal information whatsoever. Linton the double-talking hypocrite ought to save his pious lectures for his evasive mate.

Whut? What the fuck is this knob-end on about? So what if Poseidon chooses to remain anonymous on the Internet? What the hell does that have to do with anything? Since Kerr doesn't know who Poseidon is, he has no way of knowing whether or not he takes part in real life activism. He could be the lead organiser for the local chapter of 'Save The Penguins' for all Kerr fucking knows. No, you won't get out of it that easily, Kerr. I'm not talking to Poseidon, I'm talking to you, the guy who thinks hassling people with video cameras is a fantastic idea and, by the look of it, the only legitimate form of "activism". More on that later.

I myself am actively involved with several groups here in Perth

Doing what exactly? Nurturing his contacts network with a view to boosting his drug-related earnings of $85,000 a year?

No, I'm out there connecting with like-minded people, raising awareness and trying to change for the better the world we live in, but nice try, dipshit. Hey I'm not the only one that can see how much of a twat you are, you know. Your readers can, too.

I'm currently organising a Unity Festival to unite the local activist scene

All hail James "Invented Messiah" Linton, the self-ordained saviour of Perth's "fractious activist scene" and "small 9-11 truth crew". Tel Aviv must be shaking in their boots at the potential damage that Linton's picnic is going to inflict upon world Jewry.

Again, Kerr is chopping up my sentences. Here's what I wrote:

I myself am actively involved with several groups here in Perth and I'm currently organising a Unity Festival to unite the local activist scene, and I've seen Johnson (and even his children) demonstrating at least 2 FOPWA rallies -- not exactly hiding behind a telephone.

Why the fuck can't Kerr keep my sentences intact? Was that too much to swallow all at once or what? I'm doing just fine without butchering his remarks, but he cuts up what I write so finely that technically, he's not addressing me at all. He's addressing what looks to me like someone who doesn't know where the full stop key is, and misrepresenting my comments to the point that they bear very little resemblance to what I actually wrote. My guess is that he's being deliberately disingenuous and attempting to make himself look smarter and more articulate than I am. As Kerr would say, "you decide".

Anyway, back to his response. It was, for those with short memories:

I'm currently organising a Unity Festival to unite the local activist scene

All hail James "Invented Messiah" Linton, the self-ordained saviour of Perth's "fractious activist scene" and "small 9-11 truth crew". Tel Aviv must be shaking in their boots at the potential damage that Linton's picnic is going to inflict upon world Jewry.

Here is some information about the first picnic meeting that Kerr is referring to, so that you know what he's talking about. A second took place this month, and so far things aren't looking too bad; we should be able to pull it off (you'll notice at that last link that I am only one of three organisers, and that it's only Kerr who is talking about "messiahs" and "saviours". As the event comes together and the local scene coalesces, I may well step aside to let more seasoned event organisers take the reins. I am not emotionally attached to this thing, I don't consider it to be my 'baby', and it wasn't even my idea.) But as you can see, Kerr is doing his damnedest to mock and trivialize my actual activism in order to steer his readers' attention away from his total lack of activism, and it's transparent as all fuck. You, Mr. Kerr, are a first class twat.

I've seen Johnson (and even his children) demonstrating at least 2 FOPWA rallies -- not exactly hiding behind a telephone

So, Linton believes that participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations would inflict a more serious blow on Israel than exposing someone who is heavily involved with a suspected Mossad-front, someone who Linton himself has described as a "rabid Zionist", someone who is also heavily involved with the Australian Jewish lobby? And Linton calls me "delusional". Pah.

More obfuscating, misdirection and typical convoluted Kerrian bullshit. This is what I was addressing with that remark:

"He didn't hide behind a telephone like you [Steve Johnson] do. Brendon has proven himself. You haven't."

If someone were to expose Steve Lieblich as being an agent of the Mossad (for example and for argument's sake), then yes, that someone's time will have been better spent on that than on taking part in a protest rally as a single participant in a crowd of other protesters. But we're not talking about that, are we. As is plain to see, I was pointing out that Johnson does more than just make phonecalls -- he gets out on the street (with a video camera too, it just so happens) because he cares about the Palestinians and he's pissed, very pissed, at the racist, apartheid state of 'Israel'. If Kerr has done the same - let alone take to the streets with a video camera - I'll eat my own nuts. Kerr doesn't even "hide behind a telephone" as he accuses Johnson of doing, by recording phone calls to Jewish / Zionist organisations as Johnson does. The only recording of Kerr's voice ever to have been released is here. (He has done a 'state of Israel' with that recording by releasing written statements refusing to confirm or deny it, maintaining a policy of deliberately deceptive 'ambiguity'. Clearly if it were not his voice, he would simply deny it.)

At this point, it's worth looking at my comment in its entirety a second time:

He didn't hide behind a telephone like you do. Brendon has proven himself. You haven't.

I suggest we set fair terms on this "challenge". Perhaps Johnson will take you up on it if you volunteer to do the same -- get your fat, stinky, unhygienic arse out from behind that computer and get onto the streets. Start fighting the war like a real man. I myself am actively involved with several groups here in Perth and I'm currently organising a Unity Festival to unite the local activist scene, and I've seen Johnson (and even his children) demonstrating at least 2 FOPWA rallies -- not exactly hiding behind a telephone. Will you rise to the challenge, Kerr? Will you pick up a camera and confront some real Jews?

I think not, you hilarious old try-hard bastard.

So as you can see, Kerr has isolated a part of my comment after splitting a sentence into sections, taken it out of context, and misrepresented its meaning. He then uses the newly manufactured context to his advantage by dribbling the kind of shit you see above, of which there's plenty more to come. It should be becoming clear by now that Kerr is not the 'honest researcher' that he portrays himself to be.

Will you rise to the challenge, Kerr? Will you pick up a camera and confront some real Jews?

If Linton were to dip-in to that huge inheritance of his and buy me a return ticket to Perth, I'd happily fly out and pay Lieblich a visit myself seeing as neither him or his pal Steve "Nephilim70" Johnson appear to have the desire.

So sure am I that Kerr is unwilling to do any actual footwork for the anti-Zionist cause that I am, right now, hereby offering to pay half the cost of a return ticket from England to Perth, Australia so that Kerr can "expose" Lieblich on camera. This is no bluff; all Kerr has to do is match me dollar-for-dollar and pound-for-pound. What say ye, Kerr? That's a pretty good deal. Australia is a beautiful place and since you're unemployed and on a welfare pension, you have plenty of free time to put aside for a holiday.

Alternatively, if Linton were to send me details of any rabid Zionists who are heavily involved with a suspected Mossad front organisation and who happen to live in the same neighbourhood as me, I'd be delighted to accept his counter-challenge. But since Linton isn't going to pay for me to fly to Australia, and since there are no Jews living in my neighbourhood that I am aware of - unlike Linton's which is crawling with the fuckers - I will decline his counter-challenge. In any event, I'm supposedly "agoraphobic", aren't I? Is this not what Linton and his friends "Poseidon" and Daniel Calvert John "Smackhead" Makeham have been telling people for the last year or so? And if I'm "agoraphobic", as Linton and his friends claim, then how the hell could I ever be expected to venture outside my house? Linton can't have it both ways. He either believes the propaganda that he and his motley crew are spouting or he doesn't.

Again, I've never claimed that Kerr is "agoraphobic", and I challenge him to produce evidence that I have. The entirely believable "never ever leaves the house" claim was made by his partner's son, Dan Makeham, who has lived with Kerr.

And again, look at how the limp-ankled foot-waggler tries to wiggle out of my perfectly reasonable suggestion that he himself do what he is challenging Johnson to do. Just look at it. 'Since this is the case and that is the case, how can I blah blah blah?' What a fucking dick.

I think not, you hilarious old try-hard bastard

But this isn't about me rising to Linton's counter-challenge, it's all about Linton rising to mine. But will he do so? I think not. James "Whippersnapper" Linton is a man of words, not a man of action. He'd much rather discuss Verint from within the safety of Internet forums rather than pay one of their top men in Australia a personal visit.

You're damn right Kerr, I won't be doing that at all. As I said, you can shove it up your fat, unwashed arse. I will, however, fork out hundreds of dollars to help you do it yourself. I'm not joking around, either. Let's see what you've got.



Maybe O'Connell supporters could sponsor a Jim Kerr "Get-Off-Your-Arse-In-2011" appeal!


Kerr now begins to address my second comment.

Classic! Kerr, you are one of the dumbest bastards I've ever come across

But if I'm so "dumb" then one must wonder why Linton has devoted so much time over the course of the last four years trying to "debunk" me. Doesn't Linton attempting to "debunk" someone he perceives to be "dumb" make him even dumber still?

I don't "try" to debunk Kerr, I just debunk him. I don't always have the time, but when I do, it's fun as fuck. Kerr is an utter numpty.

Take another look at the comment I wrote about Lieblich

The first sentence of Linton's statement was: "There's something I didn't know." The next sentence of his statement was: "Steve Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby". This can be interpreted as him admitting that there's something he didn't know: that Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Jewish lobby.

Only by an utter numpty. Here is the "statement" Kerr is referring to.



You'll notice that he doesn't show a picture of this in the 'article' I'm now responding to -- his own screen capture -- and he doesn't provide a link to it, either. But Jim Kerr loves hyperlinks! Do you suppose he might be trying to bullshit us again?

Clearly I have written that I wasn't aware of his relationship with the Keysers

There's nothing "clear" about Linton's statement at all. "There's something I didn't know. Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby" can be taken as a statement of Linton not being familiar with Steve Lieblich.

Yes, by an utter numpty. Kerr claims that "[t]he first sentence of Linton's statement was: "There's something I didn't know. Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby"." But that's not quite true, is it. Linton's comment begins with a quote from an article, and it is that quote which Linton is commenting on. I've very clearly put "Family friend Steve Lieblich" in bold, and I even typed "[Keyser]" in front of "Family friend Steve Lieblich" to produce "[Keyser] Family friend Steve Lieblich". I then remarked that "[t]here's something I didn't know," as a clear reference to Steve Lieblich being a family friend of the Keysers. Kerr knows this, but he's insulting his readers with this codswallop:

"There's something I didn't know. Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby" can be taken as a statement of Linton not being familiar with Steve Lieblich.

And it doesn't stop there (and I literally mean, it doesn't stop there). My sentence did not finish with "Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby", as Kerr implies. The full sentence is "Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby (including but not limited to AIJAC), so if the Keyser family were indeed friends with Lieblich prior to this episode, it's no wonder such a big deal was made out of such a minor altercation."

It should be crystal clear by now that Kerr consistently misleads his readers in order to induce them to arrive at erroneous conclusions. In other words, Kerr is a bullshit artist.

Not that I wasn't aware of Steve Lieblich's rabid Zionism

In which case a question then arises as to why Linton did not expose the fact that Lieblich is heavily involved with the suspected Mossad-front, Verint. There are only two possible answers: a) he didn't know of Lieblich's involvement with Verint, or b) he knew.

Jim "PlanetClouseau" Kerr is nousey bastard, isn't he. His probing questions are fascinating and his powers of deduction and meticulous analysis are nothing short of astonishing< /sarcasm>. The answer is I didn't know.

In the first scenario, Linton would stand accused of sloppy research and not exercising due diligence at the very least. If Linton was already aware of Steve Lieblich and knew him to be a "rabid Zionist" and a "major player" for the Australian Jewish lobby as he claims, then surely he would have carried-out some background checks on Lieblich? Right? But did he? It would appear not. But if Linton did actually check Lieblich's background, he must then explain how he somehow managed to not spot that Lieblich is heavily involved with Verint

I had never heard of Steve Lieblich prior to the day that Brendon O'Connell was convicted. After Lieblich began making statements to the media on behalf of "the Jewish community", I decided to look into Lieblich's background. It took me all of five minutes to discover that Lieblich is heavily involved with Verint. If Linton didn't already know this, he won't half look a tool given that he believes me to be one of the "dumbest bastards" that he's "ever come across".

But if the second scenario is correct, Linton would then stand accused of suppressing vital information: that Steve Lieblich is heavily-involved with a suspected Mossad-front group. Questions would then be asked as to why he did not go public with this vital information. Linton would be wide-open to legitimate accusations of covering-up vital evidence and of protecting Lieblich.

So, which of these two scenarios is correct? Did Linton priorly know about Lieblich's involvement with Verint, or did he not?

As I say, I didn't know, and I didn't know because I hadn't checked. Let's do a Google search for "Steve Lieblich" + Verint. The lieblich.com.au/verint page is the 4th listing on my end, and I imagine it would've been the first before Whitelaw Towers started writing about it. And Ker says that took him 5 minutes? He must have a pretty slow Internet connection, because it only took me 1.

Of course I know who Lieblich is.

A candid admission. So, the first scenario outlined above is correct.

Genius.

Linton is therefore guilty of sloppy research and of not exercising due diligence. His "credibility" as a "researcher" is now called into question and he now appears very foolish and conceited given that someone he perceives to be "dumb", and who he considers to be "delusional", has managed to discover vitally-important information that Linton my supposed intellectual "superior" has somehow "overlooked". Should Linton attempt to save face by coming back with: "I knew all about Lieblich's involvement with Verint all along", he is then obliged to offer a credible explanation as to why he has not published this vitally-important information in the public domain.

Blah blah blah blah. You're rambling, Kerr. This is what I have to put up with, non-stop fucking idiocy disguised as brilliant deductive reasoning from the super-sleuth of Sheffield.

As a local activist for Palestine I've been aware of his sorry arse for years

Yet another candid admission.

Whoops, I really put myself in it there, didn't I. I should've known PlanetClouseau wouldn't let me get away with that one.

So, despite him having been aware of Lieblich "for years", are we supposed to believe that all this time Linton has remained "blissfully ignorant" of Lieblich's involvement with a suspected Mossad-front, a salient fact that took me just five minutes to discover. And despite Linton having also been aware "for years" that Steve Lieblich is a "rabid Zionist" as well as a "major player" for the Australian Zionist lobby", are we are also supposed to believe that Linton did not know that Lieblich resides in the same suburb? And are we supposed to believe that despite Linton's candid admission of him having been aware of Steve Lieblich "for years" and of Linton being fully aware of Verint's Australian operations, Linton was somehow unable to connect the dots? James Linton has a lot of explaining to do.

No, I don't. I had a lot of laughing to do but I'm over it now. Now I've just got a stupid grin on my face, but I'm sure some of the people reading this right now will be cracking a giggle.

My friend, associate and former convener of FOPWA Alex Whisson (now Public Advocate of Australians For Palestine) has debated him several times on air and in print

Linton's "friend" and "associate" appears to be too embarrassed to link to any of the blogs Linton operates. Maybe Whisson is too ashamed to be publicly known as a "friend" and "associate" of a psychopathic, possibly bi-sexual junkie who thinks that creating and distributing a blasphemous image of Jesus Christ is "funny". Pehaps Whisson is too ashamed to let it be known that while his "friend" and "associate" protests at the loss of Palestinian lives, that same "friend" and "associate" didn't give "a fuck" about the death of his own unborn, infant child, who was aborted in a Perth clinic while James "I Care A Lot" Linton watched the 9-11 attacks on TV.

Yeah ummm, I dunno. I don't know what he's on about either. Here is FOPWA's list of links. There's not much there, is there. I count eleven links. I would imagine that they don't link to sites like Crimes of Zion because it delves into matters such as Israel and 9/11, not because I was in an abortion clinic on that day or because of my irreverent sense of humour. "Perhaps" Palestine Solidarity organisations aren't in the habit of conflating justice for the Palestinians with the 9/11 issue, but that's just a wild guess.

http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/video/pandora/mv-rachel-corrie-will-not-be-allowed-reach-gaza-implies-israeli-mouthpiece-mark-regev#comment-45620 http://australiansforpalestine.com/19007

As you can see, the first link is a comment I wrote halfway through last year, laying to waste your absurd claim that I didn't know that Steve Lieblich is a major player for the Australian Zionist lobby. Do you feel like a tool? You should

I don't actually. I feel great knowing that Linton has publicly revealed himself to be a sloppy researcher who doesn't exercise due diligence, and who somehow "overlooks" vitally-important information such as Steve Lieblich being heavily involved with the suspected Mossad-front, Verint. James Linton is the one who looks like a tool, not I. Linton is the one who makes public boasts of him supposedly being "smarter" than me. But it wasn't James Linton who discovered Lieblich's heavy involvement with Verint. It was me. So who's the tool here?

You are, Kerr. Do you feel like a tool? You should. You really, really, should.

I resolutely stand by my claim that no single person has done more to sabotage the Perth anti-Zionist scene than has O'Connell

But does Linton still stand "resolutely" behind his absurd claim that Brendon O'Connell is Daryl Bradford Smith a.k.a."Fester"? Is he still "80% convinced" that his claim is factual rather than a load of nonsense, or has Linton's 20% uncertainty now escalated to 100%? If Linton no longer believes his ridiculous claim to be the truth, will he have the balls to publicly admit that he was wrong, or is such an act of humility beneath his arrogance?

No, I'll quite happily admit I was wrong. But Kerr will also have to admit that my absurd claim was made only once or twice and had arisen out of speculation that lasted not more than a week, before being promptly binned. Compare that to Kerr's two-year campaign of disinformation designed to convince the world that "Brendon O'Connell does not actually exist - except in the vivid imagination of Jamie Linton a.k.a. Crimes of Zion". Or his hilarious obsession with Poseidon of TakeOurWorldBack.com being Peter Wakefield Sault. Or any number of other equally hilarious and equally ridiculous theories about person 'x' being person 'y'. And speaking of Fester, wasn't it Kerr that mistook me (and O'Connell, since we were the same person for 2 years) for that particular WUFYS poster? I think it was.

It wasn't me that raised the specter of "anti-Semitism" to such heights that it catalyzed the formation of one of the most powerful Zionist groups in the country. Brendon O'Connell did that

I quote from "J-Wire":

"The Jewish community wanted to show support for Israel after O’Connell had been charged and a group of us got together with one purpose in mind…to find support for Israel not just from the Jewish community but from all Australians. Today’s event was the culmination of this initiative. Instead of the usual 300-400 diehard Jewish supporters we got 1500 of which about 75% were not Jewish."

That Linton should accuse Brendon O'Connell of raising "the spectre" of "anti-Semitism", should tell you much about James Linton. Linton talks just like one would expect a Jew to talk. And if Linton seriously believes that that "Friends of Israel WA" was formed as a consequence of "The Jewish community" wanting to "show support for Israel after O'Connell had been charged", then by default, Linton would be acknowledging that Brendon O'Connell has inflicted damage upon Israel, in which case one would be expecting Linton the "anti-Zionist" to be applauding and commending Brendon instead of attacking him at every available opportunity as he and his associates have relentlessly done ever since Brendon told Linton back in 2007 that he wanted nothing to do with him.

1) O'Connell has done no discernible damage to Israel, but he's certainly done some damage here in Australia. Show me how he's hurt Israel, Kerr. There's a challenge. Don't even get me started on the damage he's done in my country. I already touched on that here, but an entire essay would be required to explore in depth the full extent to which O'Connell's dickwad sabotage operation has damaged Australian anti-Zionism, and even global anti-Zionism, for that matter.

It's not without reason that manufactured "anti-Semitism" has been put to use by Zionist interests for all these decades. "The anti-Semites shall be our best friends", remember? And you wonder why I think you're stupid.

2) O'Connell did not tell me in 2007 that "he wanted nothing to do with" me. On the contrary, he publicly declared that he was making it his mission to "destroy" me, and his 3 year stalking campaign is another minor tidbit that belies that claim, you idiot. When you don't want anything to do with someone, you don't visit them at their home repeatedly with a video camera. Neither do you contest a restraining order specifically designed to ensure that you will have 'nothing more to do with' that person. Especially when you have nothing to lose by that order but physical contact.

Should Linton not actually believe that Brendon has inflicted damage upon Israel, then he is guilty of parroting Jewish propaganda. For someone who denies being a Jew, James "Look At The Size Of My Beak" Linton sure talks and acts like one. He looks like a Jew too, don't you think? Pro-Jewish web sites are even promoting his essay on Judaism. And if this doesn't tell you all you need to know about where James "Crimes of Zion"/"Infensus Mentis" Linton's true sympathies lie, nothing will.

This single pro-Jewish website that is "promoting" my "essay on Judaism" is also "promoting" Kerr's work; articles from the FugaziQuo blog. Or perhaps I should say "articles", because most of Kerr's serious stuff (stuff that isn't frivolous bullshit such as that which I'm currently responding to) is just copy-and-pasted from other sites.

Kerr knows that the pro-Jewish, pro-Zionist web site Anti-Semitism.net "promotes" anything that it identifies as having to do with "anti-Semitism", and if he doesn't know, he's "publicly revealed himself to be a sloppy researcher who doesn't exercise due diligence." For example, Anti-Semitism.net "promotes" the work of Chris Bjerknes, Mike "Prothink" Delaney, Brother Nathaniel Kapner and even Adam Austin's crap over at Subverted Nation. Oh, and let's not forget Brendon O'Connell.

Kerr writes that I look like a Jew and that I have a Jewish-looking "beak". Either Kerr doesn't know what a Jewish beak looks like, or he's bullshitting again (it should be clear by now that Kerr isn't averse to a bit of bullshit here and there). For those who are interested, my "beak" is viewable both on video and in numerous photographs released by myself over the years. You decide.

It wasn't I who publicly advocated that Jews be rounded up and imprisoned in camps, or that their days were numbered; (it turns out the only person whose days have been numbered is O'Connell). No, it was O'Connell who did that, too

In his "First Fruits" video (4:28), Brendon states clearly and unambiguously that the people whose days are numbered are those members of the Judaic community who remain silent and uncritical of Judaism's worst excesses - and there are plenty. But of course, Linton would have issues with Brendon's belief that Judaism is the problem - Linton believes that Zionism rather than Judaism is the problem. Linton defends Judaism, so much so that a pro-Jewish web site saw fit to promote the piece. But Zionism has only been around since the late 1800s. Judaism has been around for thousands of years. It wasn't "Zionists" who wrote the Talmud, Judaism's most holiest book. It was Jews. And it wasn't "Zionists" who have been expelled from over a hundred locations since 250 A.D. It was Jews.

Firstly, Kerr's misquoting of my comment in this instance is particularly interesting. Take another look at what I actually wrote and how I wrote it. Where earlier he added quotation marks, this time he has deliberately removed them. Check it out:

"It wasn't I who publicly advocated that Jews be rounded up and imprisoned in "camps", or that their "days were numbered" (it turns out the only person whose days have been numbered is O'Connell). No, it was O'Connell who did that, too."

I draw your attention to the text in bold. Clearly I've used quotation marks there, and clearly he has copied-and-pasted my words for his article. He's gone to the trouble of altering what I wrote by manually removing the quotes. Why? Consider his remarks immediately below my butchered commentary: "But of course, Linton would have issues with Brendon's belief that Judaism is the problem - Linton believes that Zionism rather than Judaism is the problem. Linton defends Judaism, so much so that a pro-Jewish web site saw fit to promote the piece." Could it be that he's attempting to portray me as 'pro-Jewish' to O'Connell's "anti-Judaic" readership? That's my guess, but hey: "You decide".

Secondly, Kerr repeats his misleading bullshit about a "pro-Jewish" web site "promoting" my Judaism Is Not The Problem piece, and attempts to paint me as an apologist for Judaism. Not so. Everyone who has read it knows that I roundly condemn Judaic extremism, and not even White Nationalist icon John de Nugent suggested in his comment that I was too soft on Judaism.

Judaism Is Not The Problem is less about what is and isn't "the problem" than what is and isn't a viable strategy for dealing with the problem. I believe Kerr knows this, but of course, he's out to win a shitfight so all bets are off as far as he's concerned. He's a disingenuous bullshit artist, and I mean a true artist (fiddling with quotation marks, spinning the "promotion" of my work by Anti-Semitism.net, subtle disinformation techniques etc. etc.); why should one be surprised to see him using bullshit artist tactics?

It wasn't James Linton who exposed Verint's operations in Australia. No, it was Brendon O'Connell who did that. And it wasn't James Linton who had the motivation to confront a Zionist Jew on camera and rip his paltry arguments to shreds. No, it was Brendon O'Connell who did that too.

Brendon O'Connell has "exposed" nothing, and anyone who has been watching closely enough knows this. That topic is deserved of an article of its own, and I suspect there's one on its way. But it certainly was O'Connell who "had the motivation to confront a Zionist Jew on camera and rip his paltry arguments to shreds." Yes, and he fucked it up so royally that we're all paying the price, especially him. Kerr came dangerously close to using the word "courage" there I think, but wisely decided not to. Poor, skinny, whiny little Stanley Keyser, being chased down the street by 110 kilogram Brendon O'Connell. Keyser's arguments were indeed "paltry", I'll agree with Kerr there, so I imagine that Kerr would agree with me that it didn't take a genius to 'rip them to shreds'.

And it wasn't me who did everything in my power to lose a court case which, from the very start, Western Australian anti-Zionists could not afford to lose

Linton asserts that Brendon "did everything in his power" to 'deliberately' try and "lose a court case", but he is oh so wrong. I spoke with Brendon on the phone the night before his conviction, and any illusions he might have had of winning his case were no longer present. He knew by this point that a guilty verdict was imminent and that he was going to prison. He was quite upset at the prospect. Who wouldn't be? This is hardly evidence of someone who "did all in his power" to lose his case.

This would appear to be evidence that he "did all in his power to lose" (another misquote), and this would appear to be evidence that he wasn't very really truly "quite upset" about it:

"Chuckling and smiling as the counts were read out to him, O'Connell appeared unaffected by the sentence handed down by Judge Henry Wisbey."

That's right; so full of shite is Jim Kerr that I'm prepared to trust the mainstream media over what he heard from another liar on the other side of the globe via telephone the night before O'Connell's sentencing, and by now, the discerning reader should be quite able to understand why.

Those disinformationalists who have been propagating this view: that Brendon set-out to lose his case, will soon be debunked and further exposed as the filthy, lying, traitorous scum that they are. Watch this space.

I'm not sure how Kerr plans to "debunk" something that can't be proven either way. No-one but O'Connell himself can know for sure whether or not he deliberately set out to lose, and why. But when Kerr does release his "exposé", watch this space too. I love tearing up this moron.

I note that you've made a point of avoiding my challenge

Linton thinks that he can duck my challenge simply by issuing a counter-challenge so to create a diversion. But it is Linton who lives just 5-10 minutes walk from the offices of a "rabid Zionist" who Linton himself has acknowledged to be a "major player" in Australia's Jewish lobby, and who is heavily involved with Verint, not I. I at least have the excuse of being located over 9000 miles away from Lieblich's offices. Linton has not. Neither has Steve "Telephone Warrior" Johnson.

Kerr thinks he can duck my challenge simply by changing the subject, but back to it we go. All I've "challenged" Kerr to do is to work for the cause in the same way and with equal commitment and "motivation" to that which he has "challenged" Steve Johnson with (and now that I piped up, me too). Kerr is challenging people to engage in real life activism without being willing to engage in it himself. That's the bottom line. Kerr can not take the bottom any further because we are already here, at the bottom line.

Here are some definitions of the word activist.

activism - a policy of taking direct and militant action to achieve a political or social goal;

activism - The practice of using action to achieve a result, such as political demonstration or a strike in support of or in opposition to an issue;

one who is politically active in the role of a citizen; especially, one who campaigns for change; one who is conspicuously more active in carrying out any occupational or professional functions;

activism - the attitude of taking an active part in events, especially in a social context.

Kerr can call himself a "webmaster" and a "writer" if he likes, and he can even claim to be a "researcher" (ROTFLOL), but he can't call himself an activist. Not yet. I'm giving him the opportunity, though. I'm serious about paying for half his airfare to Australia to help him expose Steve Lieblich and Verint, and if he takes me up on it I'll even publicly admit that he's earned my respect, because he will have. In fact, I'll drive him back to the airport for his return flight home and shake his hand. Gently, of course (poor bastard's only got one left).

You won't put yourself on camera, like I have because you're a fat, lazy, ugly one-armed cripple

Once again, Linton demonstrates that he doesn't believe his own propaganda. Linton in conjunction with "Poseidon" of takeourworldback.com, has been asserting for almost four years that I am "afflicted" by "Narcissistic Personality Disorder". Predictably, the same assertion is now being made against Brendon O'Connell. No doubt this is another claim that Linton will "resolutely" stand by. But if I was "narcissistic", then surely I would be salivating at the prospect of filming myself and uploading the videos to YouTube, would I not? If I were a "narcissist", would I not be unable to resist the prospect of getting myself noticed and possibly admired? Linton either believes his propaganda or he doesn't. For a real example of narcissism we need look no further than Linton himself.......



I find it amusing that someone who bears a striking resemblance to a monkey would have the cheek to criticise anyone else's physical appearance. But such is James "Handsome" Linton's inherent arrogance and egotism.

Anyone can purse their lips and make a monkey face -- not everyone can smile normally and look almost identical to Uncle Fester.



And this photo is just, scary.

You won't get involved with real-life activism, like I do, because you're a keyboard coward and a pseudo-activist

Although having picnics in the park with lefties is Linton's idea of "activism", it sure isn't mine. Paying Steve Lieblich a personal visit would be demonstrative of real activism, but Linton hasn't got the bottle to confront the big-fish. He'd much rather be having picnics in the park with the likes of the Socialist Alliance, animal rights groups, and raw food enthusiasts. How brave and noble.

Okay, so what is your idea of real activism? Paying Steve Lieblich a visit seems to appeal to you, so jump on a plane. And barring that, what are you willing to do for the cause you claim to be so dedicated to? That's a simple question. Please don't shoot back with any of that ridiculous "since I have already told Linton x and he responded with y, we can only conclude that blah-blah-blah-fucking-blah" bullshit. Just drop the facade and be honest for a change, you blithering nonce.

You're a fucking hypocrite, a total wanker, and you're dumb as shit

I think not. Linton is the hypocrite. He purports himself to be an "anti-Zionist" and an "activist", and presents himself as an "exposer" of Verint's operations in Australia, but when he is given the opportunity of exposing a key Verint player and an "major player" in Australia's Jewish lobby, Linton all of a sudden becomes inactive and begins issuing diversionary counter-challenges so to create an excuse to avoid confronting Steve Lieblich.

I've never "presented [myself] as an "exposer" of Verint", as Kerr claims. I looked into O'Connell's claims, did some research, and posted it to a public forum. O'Connell is the one who "presents himself" as the "exposer", and my own assessment of his claims, and the assessment of many others, is that he's full of shit. He's big on story-telling, but there is zero evidence for 98% of his allegations (the Leon Wende Mossad agent claim, Australian Collins Class submarines sabotaged by Israeli intelligence, 'I was poisoned by Jews and suffered a stroke' ['and "they" targeted poisoned my dope plants too'], James Linton is a meth addict and a homosexual [later changed to bisexual when he found out I had a girlfriend], 'bodies are piling up around me because I'm such a threat to Israeli interests', 'I beat up six South African boxers at a night club, etc. etc.). O'Connell is bullshit artist, just like Kerr.

If you're worth your salt, Kerr, you'll stop issuing stupid "open challenges" and actually do something, other than opportunistically making O'Connell's spot-lit blog a pissing ground for your own personal vendettas, and riding on his coat-tails in the hope that you might garner yourself some credibility

[Four long-winded paragraphs of his silly response follow, but this one sums up it all up; see the article for the rest if you're interested.] Linton speaks of "personal vendettas", but it is he who has the vendetta, and as you will have already noticed, it's very personal indeed. Linton and I once e-mailed one another. He initiated contact with me in January 2007, but by late April of that year I had decided that I wanted nothing more to do with him and he was duly binned. "Infensus Mentis" went away for a couple of weeks and re-invented himself as "Crimes of Zion" before showing-up at wakeupfromyourslumber.com. That is where and when Linton began his personal vendetta. Now here he is four years later crying like a wee baby because he can't take back what he so readily dishes out. It is oft said that the Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you. Linton is the epitome of that saying. The more one looks at Linton, the more one sees the Jew.

I've responded to this Orwellian rewriting of history already. See here. As you'll discover, Kerr's behaviour is more reminiscent of "the Jew" than mine could ever be. He's a living, breathing, walking, foot-waggling state of Israel.

Come out and play, Kerr

Linton has been posting over on Ryan Dawson's Anti-Neocons forum. As much as he would like to begin a crapfest over there, it's not going to happen. We'll "play" alright, for a little while anyway, but it will be on my terms, not Linton's. I recommend that the reader digests what Linton has written over there because he will be choking on his words in the not-too-distant future, that's for sure.

He's been saying shit like this for years. Kerr plans to "nuke" me and imagines that I'll come out of it "mortally wounded", but all I ever get hit with are comedy pieces like this one. As I put it in 2007, Kerr's "nukes" are akin to an extremely effeminate gay man storming up to you and macing you with his breath freshener, only to turn around, run off in his stilettos and trip arse-up on a fortuitously placed banana peel. Slightly annoying but utterly hilarious, and a waste of an idiot's time.

Let's see what you've got

Linton will soon be seeing what I've got and he isn't going to like it one bit.

Yes I will. Unless he sends me another photo, I won't like that at all. That shit just isn't funny.

And instead of refusing to publish my comments like the coward you are, out of fear that the links embedded therein will show you up as an utter fruitcake, here's one last "challenge" for you: nut up and click on publish instead of reject you dumbarse

Linton complains that I am "refusing" to publish his comments. Not so. His comments have been published. All comments posted on this blog are moderated. That's the way it has always been here, even when Brendon was the administrator and that's the way it is going to stay. Should Linton continue to post here, he'll just have to accept that any comments he leaves will not be published until such times as they have been addressed by me. And should Linton not like the way this blog is operated, that's too bad. He's always welcome to fuck-off and post elsewhere.

Kerr published my comments approximately 8-10 days after they were submitted, and only after I pointed out the irony and hypocrisy of freedom expression being denied at a blog owned by someone languishing in prison for precisely that. Actually, they were published on the same day (Feb 21) as his response to them was published, which means that he withheld their publication until he could plaster the front page of the O'Connell blog with his 'article' before anyone had a chance to read them. And these comments are the only ones ever to have seen the light of day; I've submitted at least two others that were never published there.

Here's one last challenge for James "Infested Mouthpiece"/"Chicken of Zion": nut-up and visit Steve Lieblich at his offices you yellow-bellied, mealy-mouthed coward.

Jump on a plane and I'll hold your camera for you, you one-armed pansy-picking powder-arsed girly-boy.