Foehammer’s Grey Matter

22nd August 2007

posted in Politics by themaiden |

Those of you who are repeat visitors might remember the exchange I had long ago with FoeHammer of Foehammer’s Anvil, in which Foe repeatedly asserted his superior study and understanding of Islam. For example:

My site is saturated with facts, hundreds of articles, many written entirely by me, with links to back up what I say.

Instead of actually investigating Islam and finding out why I’m on the warpath…

Jihad will destroy us: Comment #5

And again…

You’ve only got about 20 years of study and living life to go and you’ll begin to catch up to them. The sun is out. Hit the library or grab your laptop, find a tree and then get to work.

Jihad will destroy us: Comment #20

[Edit]Originally, I had a section here concerning Foehammer’s real name, as stated at Hatewatch Hall of Shame, along with some other information about him. I included that information for the snark value of it and that may have been a bad idea. At the very least it was threatening to become a real distraction from the much more important points of this article.[/edit]

Of course, I’m the stupid one.

In time, you may even have the sense to actually find out what I’m about and why I’m simply correct in my assessments, indeed “why I have been right”, but I know it won’t happen anytime soon for either of you. You’re at that stage in life where you think it better to get the approval of your flunkies than to have original thoughts of your own.

Jihad will destroy us: Comment #12

Also obviously, until I agree with him, he doesn’t have to listen to me.

You may continue to dislike what I print, but until you actually understand the conflict at hand, your opinion of what I print matters about as much as the whisper of the lawnmower I faintly hear outside my office — it’s slightly annoying but it will stop when it runs out of gas.

Jihad will destroy us: Comment #25

Somewhat ironically, it seems to be Foe that is running out of gas, possibly because his site is being banned left and right. How could he have know that people would react badly to his inciting of hatred against a quarter of the world’s population?

Well, back to the point, which started out as a small one. I wanted to mention a site called HateWatch, which I’ve cited a few times already, whose owner Jim Sutter has put together a run-down of FoeHammer far more detailed than I’ve had ever compiled. Good for him. From that run-down, and keeping with the theme of Foe
s ‘grey matter’ and my ignorance…

The ONLY reason there is any similarity between Judeo-Christian views and Islam is because Muhammad concocted it as such. He had his parchment and pen out often during his early life, I’m sure, scribbling notes taken from his Christian cousin and the local Jewish merchants* that he came to hate so much later on.

….

Thank God the creator blessed me with more grey matter, because even these many centuries past I can see through Muhammad’s treachery like one might gaze through cellophane.

Islam: Cult of Lies

For as much “grey matter” Foehammer vainly thinks he has (and he makes this prideful claim over and over throughout his various websites), he’s showing his ignorance in the article (above) because almost everyone who has ever done the most rudimentary study of Islam knows that Muhammad was illiterate.

Hatewatch Hall of Shame: Foehammer’s Anvil Melts Under the Light

Bloody amazing! Surely an Islamic scholar like Foe, especially one blessed by the creator with extra grey matter, would know that Muhammed couldn’t write? Talk about missing something basic.

Even more amazing: The post in which Foe makes that statement of profound ignorance is more than two years old, and it is still up. Foe, update. The mistake has been pointed out to you, correct it. That’s what smart people do. That is what the intellectually honest do. You correct your mistakes.

Finally, I want to add my own little bit to HateWatch’s collection of FoeHammer Memorabilia. Compare this…

Case-in-point: the true reason why hammers are used in those posters and why the hammer is used as symbolism on my Anvil is because the hammer is an age-old, millenia old symbol of the WORKER. The hand shooting upwards on my site is actually captured from an American WW II workers’ poster and the star-spangled cuff is from Uncle Sam from a separate but similar workers’ poster. I suppose it also escaped your notice the shadow that that hammer is casting is the arm of the Statue of Liberty.

Jihad will destroy us: Comment #20

… which, to provide context, is a response to a bit of sarcasm I spit out after Foe threatened me …

Am I supposed to bow under that big ole hammer? Is that what its for? To quash dissent? Maybe that is why totalitarians like hammers? Big strong powerful symbol of squashing and crushing and pounding?

Jihad will destroy us: Comment #6

… to this…

And Foe-hammer is a sword. There you have it. I am a weapon of war and of a righteous spirit, not of the worker. The hammer motiff represents MY labor and my incessant beating of a dead-horse, which is always what is required in order to get through thick skulls such as the ones you aim to please here, and of course your own.

Jihad will destroy us Comment #25

What a curious smack down?

Popularity: 1%

Love the post? Hate it? Please let me know. Leave a comment and spread the word: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 22nd, 2007 at 6:59 am and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On August 22nd, 2007, I’m the damn Juggernaut! « Foehammer’s Anvil said:

[...] now I’m very amused. I see that one of my most regular moonbat detractors is actually sourcing the leprous leprechaun today and dragging someone else’s life across the mud as if it is my [...]

2 On August 22nd, 2007, themaiden said:

Its a trackback, but what the hell…

Ah Foe…

It is interesting that you don’t actually address much of what I wrote– like, you know, the part about painting yourself as such a damn expert on Islam but missing that Muhammed was illiterate– though I’ll grant I’ve seen weak arguments to the contrary, like for example “He was merchant thus he had to have known how to read and write at least a little”. That’s like claiming to be an expert on Ancient philosophy but missing that Socrates was Greek.

Instead you 1) have a juvenile little celebration about your “Blog for a Year” rank (Your traffic tells a different story), 2) assert your megalomaniacal glory– you know, that part about being a Hindu God–, and 3) attack Sutter for a string of different things, which frankly don’t matter unless what he actually said in this instance is false and you didn’t even address that bit and besides, I looked it up on FoeHammer.net and there it is, you saying exactly what he said you said.

3 On August 22nd, 2007, Lady Predator said:

Don’t you guys even check up before you use some luzers material. This is too funny.

Robert Spencer will be on be on Pastor Ernie’s show on Sept. 4 at 9:30PM, and they will expose Sutter on that show. I suggest you people listen.

Sept. 4 at 9:30PM on http://www.whkwradio.com/ 1220 AM in Cleveland, Ohio you can listen live. Call in numbers : 216-901-0933 or Toll Free 888-677-9673.

http://www.jihadchat.com/index.php?showtopic=5350
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017000.php
http://jihadswatch.blogspot.com/search?q=Sutter
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/188605.php

4 On August 22nd, 2007, JR said:

“Welcome to the Anvil. You’re about to enter the fight in a way that most are too afraid to even discuss. This is not a site for the faint-hearted infidel, so if the idea of discovering the truth about Islam and the ‘Long War’ frightens you, turn back now. Otherwise, come on in and make use of the information here, participate, learn and educate.”

What we have here is a classic case of Framing the Argument. John has set the pre-equisites for visiting his site and engaging him in conversation: if you don’t agree with him, or if he’s saying stuff that no one else is saying, it’s not because John’s wrong, it’s because everyone else is afraid. If you dislike or disapprove of his site, it is because you are faint-hearted and/or an infidel. John then once again declares everything on his site to be the truth and not open for debate, followed by him once again declaring you the reader to be the one who’s afraid for not agreeing with him completely and instructs you to leave his site at once.

It is certainly not John who is so desperately afraid of his insecurities being unmasked that he can only tolerate worshipping idolers lest his fragile self-image start to crack from having some external force question his pre-ordained conclusions about the world. This is certainly not the reason he goes through so much trouble to surround himself with cooons of words that attack and threaten others with vague insinuations of treason for the crime of utilizing the 1st Amendment and daring to criticize him, and in public no less!

And it is absolutely not true that John is just another middle-aged right-wing authoritarian follower, so scared of ambiguity and so longing to be a part of the next generation’s Great Society that he elevates all the greys of Islam to such a height of his coveted Black and White that we must be on the eve of World War Three and John will naturally be propelled to levels of Grandeur that are in no what whatsoever Delusional.

I don’t know why he makes it so hard on himself however. He’s of legal age. He could still go and enlist and fight this battle he considers so important on the front lines in Iraq. I’m sure we’ll see a post on his blog saying he’s enlisting to stop the threat of Islam and fight the great war any day now. Any day now…

5 On August 22nd, 2007, themaiden said:

Very nice, JR. Keep that up and I’ll be forced to give you posting privileges.

6 On August 22nd, 2007, 1389 said:

Pot, meet Kettle. Your own post fails to discredit Foehammer and fails to refute any assertion he has made.

If you persist in cyberstalking a person who is not associated with Foehammer or his site, I wouldn’t be surprised if he turns around and sues you and wins.

The fact that a site is banned or blacklisted by some filtering service, company, or organization need not have anything whatsoever to do with the site’s quality. Anybody can get a site blacklisted or banned these days, simply by making a false complaint. The fact that your own site has not been banned as “hate speech” demonstrates that your opponents exhibit far more tolerance, and a far greater understanding of the need to protect political speech, than you do. Whether you deserve such forbearance is another matter entirely.

7 On August 22nd, 2007, themaiden said:

1389,

Pot, meet Kettle. Your own post fails to discredit Foehammer and fails to refute any assertion he has made.

That is so patently absurd it is silly. 1) I quoted Foe as directly contradicting himself and 2) I quoted someone as pointing out that Foe reveals some profound ignorance of his self-professed area of expertise. Foe, of course, went off on a rant about several completely different things.

Cyber-stalking? Persist in? One reference. Are you mad?

As for ‘not associated with Foehammer’, who would that be? John LaTemple? If LaTemple wishes to contact me and explain that he is not the man in question, he is welcome to do so. If he is convincing– even just plausible– I’ll apologize with all sincerity. Hell, if he is very convincing, I might even go to his defense. The fact that you care enough to bother with it, though, kinda speaks to the opposite conclusion.

The fact that your own site has not been banned as “hate speech”…

That’s amusing. Find anywhere on this site where I’ve advocated, for example, kicking people out of the country because of their religious beliefs.

…demonstrates that your opponents exhibit far more tolerance, and a far greater understanding of the need to protect political speech, than you do.

It demonstrates, if anything, that the first half of that sentence is utter crap.

And as to banning Foehammer, take a look at the bottom of the site. See that banner just below the comment box? Guess whose banner rotates through there very frequently? Yes, that’s right– Foehammer’s. I could pull that banner rotator, get rid of Foehammer, and loose pretty much nothing, as the service is very small. Why don’t I pull that banner? Ponder.

8 On August 22nd, 2007, themaiden said:

Lady Predator,

People who spell loser as ‘luzer’ are… no. I’ll stop myself.

As for the links, that’s nice. I read them. (Surprise) Nothing in there about 1) Foe’s ignorance of Islam, 2) his directly contradicting himself in an earlier exchange with me, or 3) about LaTemple. In other words… irrelevant.

9 On August 23rd, 2007, Lady Predator said:

Ah I get it even if the felon who is doing the “exposing” is well known fabricator of facts you don’t care.

Former BBB official pleads guilty to lying about car to FBI
The Plain Dealer - Cleveland, Ohio
Author: KAREN HENDERSON
Date: Sep 18, 1990
Text Word Count: 440

Document Text
A former Better Business Bureau official, who claimed he was being harassed by a Beachwood psychologist he was investigating, pleaded guilty yesterday to lying to the FBI about being followed by a car licensed to the psychologist’s wife.

James M. Sutter, 34, of Lakewood, a former BBB trade specialist, appeared before U.S. District Judge George W. White, after being charged earlier in the day.

Sutter admitted he lied about the car and told White he had become “over- zealous” in his pursuit of the investigation of Dr. Edward LaMonte Ohlson. Ohlson is under federal investigation in connection with an advance-fee loan scam involving millions of dollars.

Sutter claimed he was followed by someone in a white Corvette on three occasions and gave the license number of the car to the FBI, which found it belonged to Ohlson’s wife.

When FBI agents investigated the complaint, they found Ohlson’s Corvette was inoperable and had been sitting for a long time, according to an FBI report.

Sutter was suspended by the BBB and forced to resign on Aug. 13 because of the pending charges, an investigator said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney James V. Moroney said the FBI also is investigating whether Sutter may have sent threatening letters to himself, which he claimed were from Ohlson, and whether a burglary of the BBB offices in May, after which Sutter claimed part of Ohlson’s file was stolen, really occurred.

Moroney said the letters received in April, May and June have been turned over to an FBI handwriting expert.

Ohlson, 45, was charged in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court in May with intimidating Sutter in connection with the letters. Ohlson has denied sending Sutter the letters or intimidating him. Ohlson’s trial is pending.

Sutter faces up to five years in jail and a $250,000 fine for lying to the FBI.

Ohlson, a Canadian citizen who lives in South Russell, has been under investigation by the BBB for two years. The investigation was headed by Sutter.

According to their investigation, Ohlson posed as an honorary consul to Canada from Sierra Leone, a republic in West Africa. He allegedly used phony credentials to convince at least 30 people that he could obtain loans in return for a fee. The loans were never obtained.

Among the complaints against Ohlson was one from two businessmen who claimed Ohlson took a $17,500 advance fee from each of four investors and promised to get them a $10 million loan which would be underwritten by Sierra Leone. They never received the loan.

Canadian officials claimed they had never heard of Ohlson, and Sierra Leone officials denied he ever held a consular position with them.

10 On August 23rd, 2007, themaiden said:

Lady Predator,

Actually, I do care. Or I would care if this related somehow to 1) Foe’s ignorance of Islam, which is demonstrated by posts on his own website or 2) his directly contradicting himself in an earlier exchange with me. It doesn’t. Those two points are really quite independent of who or what Sutter is. I quoted him on the one of those two points because it is from him that I got the information. That seems fair play. That information is independently verifiable. Sutter could be a pathologically lying nutball and the facts that 1) Foe missed a basic fact of Islam, which is demonstrated by posts on his own website, and 2) that he directly contradicted himself in an earlier exchange with me don’t change. Focus on Sutter all you want, but it doesn’t matter unless unless you can demonstrate that these points themselves are invalid.

As for LaTemple, I am willing to apologize– and be very ashamed to boot– if I’ve quoted something false about him. So far, though, no one has provided any evidence or argument concerning that point. Besides, it is a minor point worth about a ‘1′ on a scale of 1 to 10, assuming it is true, and I don’t really feel like getting distracted down that course anyway. It was probably a bad idea to include that segment in the first place and I am tempted to remove it. It just isn’t important enough.

11 On August 23rd, 2007, Lady Predator said:

The if you care about Foe’s ignorance of Islam deal with that. Why play use the logical fallacy of posing the well. Can’t your arguments stand up on their own?

And since there is so much evidence of Sutter’s lack veracity I question your judgment.

You see all I see is some one wanting to sling mud.

12 On August 23rd, 2007, themaiden said:

Um… Lady…

…if you care about Foe’s ignorance of Islam deal with that.

I did. Really, on one point, Sutter did. This fact you dance around like a champ.

13 On August 25th, 2007, Rev Jim Sutter said:

Why is it that when presented with easily verifiable facts, the hate mongers can only respond with ad hominems, desperately trying to distract readers from the facts. I could the Pope or I could be Ghengis Khan, but the facts of the article remain the same. Notice too, how anyone who points out that the facts are unchallenged also get to targeted for ad hominem attacks?

It’s ironic, I get exactly the same tactics whether exposing neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, terrorist supporters, White Supremacists, anti-black bigots, anti-gay bigots, or any other type of hate monger (people who go far beyond expressing their opinions.) It’s as if they’re all using the same playbook or something. When their fellow hate mongers come running to their defense, none of them seem to realize that trying to distract readers only makes the average reader more curious, and sends them to the site to read the article and verify the facts for themselves.

This is why I put as many links as possible in my articles. I want my readers to use their gray matter, to use their critical thinking skills, click on the links to verify the facts I post. See the original source (or if it’s been erased or altered I have mirrors of everything). The most damning evidence has always been the hate monger’s own words.

There’s an open offer on the site for anyone who has been listed to show that I made a factual mistake, and I’ll be glad to correct it and apologize. I lay out a simple yet specific process, yet only one person in the history of the site has disputed facts (Dr. Pipes); he and I had a pleasant email exchange, he provided evidence to correct my error, and I promptly corrected the entry on him and publicly apologized. That’s more than the vast majority of blogs offer (I note this blog offers that, too.)

14 On August 26th, 2007, themaiden said:

Rev Jim,

Yeah, I know. The bully tactics come out in full force don’t they? What I really enjoy is on the one hand the insistence upon ‘veracity’ and ‘dealing with the issues’ rather that mud slinging, and on the other hand ignoring the issues– like Foe’s rather amateurish mistake (never once mentioned by his supporters, much less defended)– and engaging in mudslinging. Especially amusing is Lady Predator in this regard, who questions my judgment for accepting something you wrote, something which also happens to be trivially easy to verify, yet defends Foe, whose statements are a tribute to ignorance in the one case and self-contradictory in the other.

15 On September 8th, 2007, Facts are funny Things | hell's handmaiden said:

[...] several of my exchanges with Foehammer– notably in “FoeHammer’s Grey Matter” but also in “Jihad will destroy us?”– I’ve been challenged to “attack [...]

16 On October 1st, 2007, Challenge Religion - Today’s Top Blog Posts on Atheism - Powered by SocialRank said: