Really, don’t . . .
Twitter can be bewildering to a newcomer, with its specialised acronyms and sometimes obscure mechanics. Even Twitter veterans can have difficulty using it.
Graham Linehan is an old hand at this, but even he seems bewildered in the following exchange. The subject is genocide denial, but it quickly becomes clear that Mr Linehan is more concerned with Twitter etiquette.
The conversation is a continuation of one from the 24th of November, but I’ll get back to that. We begin with Oliver Kamm addressing Mr Linehan:
OliverKamm Oliver Kamm
@Glinner 1/2 Only just noticed you asked @medialens to tell you if I replied to their serial attempts to get my attention. Pls be aware...
OliverKamm Oliver Kamm
@Glinner 2/2 ... that I don't debate with people who deny Bosnia & Rwanda genocides, but if you write to me at Times, will provide details.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm aware of your opinions on it, ta. What I don't understand is why you draw their attention by putting their username in tweets
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm seems odd to bring them in on the debate in this way and then refuse to debate them
@Glinner No "debate" that 8,000 Bosniaks massacred at Srebrenica. Deniers of that fact shd be disabused of notion they're part of a debate.
Mr Linehan doesn’t seem to understand or recognise the explanation:
Glinner Graham Linehan@OliverKamm yes, but you didn't answer my question. Why include their username in your tweets if you don't want to debate them?
Mr Kamm explains once more:
@Glinner 1/3 I did, but happy to spell it out. There's no debate 8,000 Bosniaks were massacred in Srebrenica genocide, July '95. But...@Glinner 2/3 ... @medialens claim otherwise. They say Edward Herman "perfectly entitled" to dispute 8,000 victims. Well, he's not. Bodies...@Glinner 3/3 ... have been found & identified. People who subscribe to fraudulent conspiracy theories shd know they're outside legit debate.
Mr Linehan once again fails to recognise the explanation’s existence, never mind comprehend its meaning.
Glinner Graham Linehan@OliverKamm again, you haven't explained why you constantly include their username if you don't want to debate them.Glinner Graham Linehan@OliverKamm I don't want to debate with people who deny the massacre of 600,000+ Iraqis by Blair and Bush, so I don't include their usernameGlinner Graham Linehan@OliverKamm it's the equivalent of calling someone out for a fight and then running away.
A last attempt to make it clear:
@Glinner OK, no real purpose in repeating with different words. Have done @medialens favour of explaining why they're outside legit debate.
But Mr Linehan remains in the dark:
Glinner Graham Linehan@OliverKamm still none the wiser. And there you've done it again. Now when they write back, you'll ignore them. So odd.
And Mr Kamm gives up:
OliverKamm Oliver Kamm
MT @Glinner still none the wiser.>> This appears to be true.
But now Mr Linehan raises another point of etiquette:
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm editing tweets now! Twitter really brings out your classy siode.
Mr Kamm helpfully explains the meaning of the MT acronym on Twitter:
@OliverKamm Oliver Kamm
@Glinner That's what "MT" signifies, i.e. "modified tweet". You'll find it used quite often on this site.
As I said at the start, all this was a continuation of an earlier discussion from the 24th of November.
That began with Mr Linehan re-tweeting a link to a story by Medialens regarding Iran. Peter Risdon and Citizen Sane tweeted him to point out the genocide denial issues surrounding Medialens, linking to articles by Oliver Kamm and George Monbiot.
Mr Linehan then changed the subject to Oliver Kamm and his opinions on the Iraq war. Mr Sane tried in vain to highlight George Monbiot as an alternative source on Medialens, while Mr Risdon argued against Mr Linehan’s one-sided assignment of blame for deaths in Iraq.
I briefly stuck my head in, and for my trouble it was suggested by Mr Linehan that I was likely to condone torture next, and when I firmly rejected this, he blocked me.
Presumably I was guilty of some breach of Twitter etiquette.
The whole mess below the fold.
A massive must-read from @medialens on the Iran 'nuclear threat': crucial facts, going almost totally unreported. medialens.org/index.php?opti…
Retweeted by Glinner
PeterRisdon Peter Risdon
@jackseale @medialens @Glinner You know medialens is not exactly a serious source? @OliverKamm has been pointing out their idiosyncrasies.
@PeterRisdon Well said. I pointed out similar.
PeterRisdon Peter Risdon
@
@citizen_sane Thanks, and yes I noticed, pretty much simultaneous with my tweet. Shame. @Glinner is such a beautiful writer.
@PeterRisdon He certainly is a comic genius. But depressingly prone to the Pilger fag end of lefty political opinion.
PeterRisdon Peter Risdon
@citizen_sane I've noticed. What is it with creatives? Maybe a desperate need for peer approval?
@PeterRisdon The age old leftist trap isn't it? If someone on "my side" thinks this then it must be true.
PeterRisdon Peter Risdon
@citizen_sane I think so. It's interesting how personality is at the root of a lot of political affiliation.
poorbastardmarv poorbastardmarvin
RT @PeterRisdon: @jackseale @medialens @Glinner medialens is not exactly a serious source? @OliverKamm > Understatement bit.ly/s7mgEo
Retweeted by PeterRisdon
citizen_sane Citizen Sane
@Glinner An example of why Media Lens is an unreliable outlet by @GeorgeMonbiot : monbiot.com/2011/08/04/med… | Also this: oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2008/01/m…
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon @citizen_sane is he same guy who thinks Blair&Bush shouldn't answer for the deaths of 600,000+ Iraqis?
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon @citizen_sane if so, do you have any more reliable sources on the failings of media lens?
PeterRisdon Peter Risdon
@Glinner @citizen_sane Possibly. Most sane people think that, preferring to hold, you know, the murderers themselves responsible.
@Glinner @citizen_sane The criticisms stand or fall on their evidence, not on who makes them.
@
@Glinner @peterrisdon If you don't like him then check George Monbiot vs Media Lens instead. The criticisms remain valid, regardless of Iraq
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon @citizen_sane well, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz etc of course but ultimate responsibility for the crime is with bush and Blair
@Glinner @citizen_sane No it lies with the religious zealots who delivered the bombs, and their friends in west who encouraged them.
@Glinner @citizen_sane Unless you hold the view that brown people are moral infants and cannot be held responsible for their own actions.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon @citizen_sane it was a racist war, zero concern for Iraq's people, run by ideological fanatics. Nice talking to you.
@Glinner @citizen_sane Racist? Was fought over *race*??? Plumbing depths there. I'll support fighting fascist regimes. You do as you wish.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@
@PeterRisdon didn't say it was fought "over" race. Typical deflection of point from someone shrugging off mass-murder. Goodbye
@Glinner If you want to flounce off, do - no point repeating 'goodbye'. There's no other meaningful construction for 'racist war'.
@Glinner And 'shrugging off mass murder' is a shameful libel. I'm attaching responsibility where it belongs: to the murderers.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon Bush and Blair, yes. This is where we came in. Goodbye.
@Glinner No, that's intellectually and morally empty, to be polite. Responsibility lies with those who actually did the killing.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon farewell! Adieu! Till we meet again! Au revoir!
@Glinner Here's a wee tip: when I don't want to continue in a conversation, I shut up.
@
@PeterRisdon @Glinner Best not to muddle people with details - Bush and Blair is so much easier to remember and repeat.. B&B, B&B, B&B..
@PeterRisdon @Glinner Reminds me of Galway days, walking out Salthill way, past all the B&Bs..
@
RT @kelliestrom @Glinner Reminds me of Galway days, walking out Salthill way, past all the B&Bs.. >> :-)
Glinner Graham Linehan
@
@kelliestrom yes, the 2 who launched an illegal war that resulted in the deaths of 600,000+ people. I find them very hard to forget
@
@Glinner ..following votes in the US congress and the House of Commons, citing UN resolutions back to Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait..
@Glinner @kelliestrom @citizen_sane 'illegal war'... getting exciting, my card almost full. Almost BINGO time.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon @kelliestrom @citizen_sane same here! All I'm waiting for for now is a spirited defence of torture and indefinite detention.
@kelliestrom @peterrisdon Bush so often derided for his Manichean view yet the fallback contrarian view remains: Bush & Blair are criminals!
Retweeted by PeterRisdon
Glinner Graham Linehan
@citizen_sane @peterrisdon @kelliestrom I have tried to get out of this conversation several times, but you keep fishing for more.
@Glinner @kelliestrom @citizen_sane well, you let me down. One million dead is my last spot but you had a moment of accuracy.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@citizen_sane @peterrisdon @kelliestrom let's all just say cheerio and leave it at that. Nice talking to you all.
@Glinner @PeterRisdon @citizen_sane No defence of torture from me - but then I'm not playing the same simplistic game you seem to prefer.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@kelliestrom ok, that's it. Blocked! Buh-bye!
Did I just get blocked by @Glinner because I won't defend torture?!
@kelliestrom @Glinner @citizen_sane Sorry, just had to clean the dogs and give the chickens a quick walk. Bugger. Be right back.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@PeterRisdon buh-bye
@Glinner No: you raised issue. Deniers of Srebrenica/Rwanda genocides are outside legitimate debate, yet these are @medialens's sources.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm I didn't raise that issue. The issue I raised was whether you were a trustworthy source on Media Lens
@Glinner I know you didn't: I'm pointing it out to you. Can be as far-left as you like, but you don't need to deny genocide. @medialens do.
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm sure. My point is that those who disagree that the 600,000+ bodycount in Iraq counts as a war crime are equally suspicious.
@Glinner Well, if you agree with me that people who deny genocide are outside legitimate debate, why are you posting their stuff on Twitter?
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm because none of their sources in that particular piece were involved in what you describe. Also...
Glinner Graham Linehan
@OliverKamm ...I often RT pieces from Observer and other newspapers that supported the Iraq war. Doesn't mean I agreed with that either
@Glinner But I thought we'd just agreed that denying Srebrenica/Rwanda genocides puts you outside legitimate debate. Such is @medialens.
5 comments:
Hmm, what to say. Perhaps Graham should stick to what he does best - absurd comedy...
On the other hand his tweets look like that. Perhaps they are out takes from Father Ted or the IT Crowd....
My face is set in its most extreme Father Dougal-like gob-open stare.
With a hint of Maurice Moss too I bet!
I tend to use Twitter as a handy news aggregator so I rarely comment on things I see there, Delia Murphy aside... or if I get followed by a so called leftist who posts anti semitic videos from Stormfront!
Probably very wise. I suspect few minds are changed by direct argument, and on a topic like Iraq, the arguments are so over-rehearsed that one sees this kind of anticipation of opposing moves by both sides, but precious little that reflects the complexities and uncertainties of the topic.
Iraq is particularly frustrating because so many arguments imply counterfactuals of better outcomes had this or that decision gone differently, and all these are unknowable. Even the intended outcomes for the US and UK governments themselves are now in the realm of an "if only" counterfactual Iraq, the difference being we know some of what went wrong there, while we don't know what would have gone wrong with other counterfactual Iraqs.
And even without the unknowable counterfactuals, there's the seeming impossibility of certainty on so many matters of fact in the actual history of what did happen. It all deserves a lot more nuance and humility than seems possible on Twitter.
Ach I know only to well that when it comes to Iraq views are hugely entrenched. On the other hand so are mine!
When it comes to arguments in general I wonder if I would have cause myself a lot less grief if I spent the time running up to walls head first.
Post a Comment