Oh I didn't realize that Gscholz was also from Norway.
So I take it now that that's what this was about.
There a few things I might say about the relationship between Gscholz and the AHOC community.
I think that his criticisms here of American policy far outnumber any other contributions made by him to this board. In essence, his presence here can be construed as being only about the criticism of American policy.
Does that piss Americans off?
Well honestly, I'm really not so sure that it does. Give me some room.
On a post per post basis, what could not be argued and settled within the thread that the posts reside? Is he consistently and knowingly stating factual errors? Is he misleading? Is he trying to bait and distort and inflame via bogus claims? Is that really what's happening?
Facts aside, does it come down to a reasonable difference of opinion, which the lot of us have every right to? Or are his opinions so outside the bounds of reality that it appears that his only participation in political threads is just to shreck it all up by any means necessary?
Now we all know what his political views are. Let me ask you this: Is he deliberately trying to mess up threads by injecting it with opinions he doesn't even hold, data that he doesn't even believe to be true?
Is he playing a role? Is he trolling?
I think that if you honestly believed that he were, then you wouldn't respond, let alone devote precious time in going after him.
The reality, it would seem to me, is that while he enjoys political debate and relishes the role of the antagonist or devil's advocate, he most certainly respects the integrity of honest debate, and he most certainly does not have a habit of being deceitful in what he says. Views or means of expression aside, unfortunately, I can't say that for everybody here.
Now, there have been calls for his being banned, and indeed he has been banned before. But what does that leave everyone here with? Nuke agrees with Steve agrees with Drediock agrees with Martlet agrees with Gunslinger?
Is that really what you want this BBS to look like?
No, some (many) need people like Gscholz. Because I really think that a certain group of people get a kick out of having to defend themselves against attacks - real or imagined.
If Gscholz wasn't here to defend against, then there would be more posts here about Micheal Moore, or Jane Fonda, or Janeane Garofalo, or scores of people who are basically harmless, but who to them pose some never-ending and very real (bogus) threat.
And but..... it's fun to argue. Because ultimately, it's healthy to bounce ideas not particularly in harmony with one's own off another's head.
How hurt you get from Gscholz's criticism is really only your business, and the reaction you have to it should, in a perfect world, be ably responded to directly. As the criticism occurs. As it happens. In a perfect world, you should not need to do anything besides that.
