Five Years After the May Day Coup

27 Feb 2016

The Dirge

It’s been five years since the May Day collective unilaterally seized the domain on May 1, 2011, an action everyone but May Day itself rejected as a power grab and a betrayal of the Indymedia movement in the UK. At this point, there’s not much left to say about Indymedia UK under the May Day group, because there’s not much left to Indymedia UK. We knew it was going to be a disaster, and it has been. The “promoted newswire” is as slow as cold treacle, having a remarkably good week if it has more than a single new item in it, and often going three or four weeks utterly static. Technical problems are proliferating, with the site often inaccessible or blank. The center column, the main visual component of the page, was updated only twice in the entire year 2015 and is, as I write this, still awaiting its first 2016 entry. Activity on the open wire is largely the work of a single commendable person doxxing up EDL/PEGIDA members. The database behind the site seems to disappear regularly, leaving the user facing an empty site, or an empty open newswire. Other than that, the site is now deep into its predicted death-spiral: lack of activity leads to lack of audience, which leads to even less activity, leading to even less audience, spiralling down until the site is… where it is today, where you need James Cameron’s deep dive equipment to see how far it’s sunk.

The May Day group remains remarkably insular, no longer pre-announcing its meetings to allow for the public to attend. Any criticism of the coup’s editorial policy is met, not with come to our next meeting to discuss it, but fuck off and form your own site.

The most interesting development over the last year is this: if I am reading this post on Indymedia UK correctly, the one-man charm offensive Roy Bard is, on top of everything else, a paid police informant. Because he is part of the May Day junta, the rest of the junta has of course automatically, absolutely, and unconditionally forgiven him, and if you think an Indymedia site run by a grass might be a problem, then fuck off and form your own site.

Isn’t it a funny thing about like Bard those who yell “infiltrators” and “grass” the loudest?

Update: The Indymedia site is currently down with the vapours again, and it’s been nearly a month since it was possible to post. Have they decided it’s just no longer worth fixing?

Second Update: The site is back up again, and in the thread I linked to above there’s a comment I think worth reading in its entirety; I’m posting it here as I suspect it will be removed or hidden quickly.

Well that was easy wasn’t it ?

A massive betrayal of the Indy readership over several years brushed away with a wave of the hand and a refusal to offer an apology or an explanation of why this man gets a pass on what he has done.

This was not some cop who infiltrated the organisation for a couple of years. this was in your words “a trusted member” active in the collective for more than eleven years. Why is he still trusted – he sold us all out for money to the cops, why are you so confident he will not do it again? His current postings on Twitter indicate he is still active in a number of campaigns – have you warned those people ?

At the very least the Indymedia community deserves a statement on what is now known by you and what has been done to ensure our information is no longer being passed to the police.

Confused of Tunbridge Wells

In the meantime, things are back to “normal” on Indymedia UK – anti-Semitic posts and all. Similarly, the truly foul anti-Semitic shitbucket “” that Roy Bard co-founded with the Holocaust deniers Atzmon, Eisen, and Clark-Lowes, and then repudiated for being too thick with too obvious an anti-Semitism, well, Bard is back to retweeting links to it, demonstrating again that he just hasn’t learned a damn thing. One day he’ll work it out about what he’s done, I believe, and why it earned him such comprehensive condemnation from every direction and source but the corner swastika-shop, but he’s now spent a decade doing everything he can to postpone that moment of insight for as long as possible.

Gilad Atzmon and the Springtime for Hitler crew

The canary in the Indymedia UK coal mine was Roy Bard’s slavish devotion to someone widely recognised even in 2008 as a crude and vocal anti-Semite, Gilad Atzmon. Bard, for deeply personal reasons he always pretended were merely political, refused to allow criticism of Atzmon to appear on Indymedia UK, even as Atzmon opened his mouth a little too wide a little too often and his reputation began to curdle over like a jug of last year’s milk.

Atzmon has been rejected by the left, and he has responded by increasing his ties — visibly and unapologetically — to the far right. Late last year, for example, he testified at a hate speech trial in rural western Canada, saying that he had inspected the site in question and found no signs whatsoever of anti-Semitism on it… although the site had massive stacks of anti-Semitic rants, Holocaust denial, the full text of Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and even the full text of Mein Kampf. None of that was actually anti-Semitic, Atzmon argued, and tried to run his usual arglebargle of an argument (“criticising Jewishness isn’t really anti-Semitism, if you put the right mask on it”). It’s the kind of handwaving mummery that works among the true believers but falls flat on its face with a very loud thud under coherent cross-examination. The jury of twelve laughed off Atzmon’s “expertise” and voted unanimously to convict.

Atzmon then appeared in an internet-radio roundtable discussion of the trial, hosted by a racist Swedish black-helicopters site called “Red Ice,” appearing chummily with a true racist rogue’s gallery — the just-convicted Mein Kampf/Protocols guy, plus the host of a radio show on Stormfront, plus another Holocaust denier who says he has “come out of the Adolf Hitler closet” and has a slew of Youtube videos praising Hitler, plus another guy who argues that the Jews run the international economy. (Not going to link it; I’ve given you enough to find it.)

Elbow deep in the swastika crowd, Atzmon was of course right at home, happy as a happy clam, at the table of Jew-haters. We knew the time was coming he would openly step up to that table; now it’s here.


Why Indymedia UK Died

4 Jul 2013

It’s been a few years since I posted here, and an update is in order.

On the death of Indymedia UK

The first thing to note is that Indymedia UK is now effectively dead. In mid-June of 2010, a year before the Mayday coup, had an Alexa rank of 159 823. Its one-month rank today, almost exactly three years later, is 477 077. That’s quite an astonishing plummet, and one carrying a clear message. The vast majority of activists have no use for Mayday’s authoritarian approach, so ably embodied in the charmless Roy Bard (ftp), and have fled the site in droves.

As I noted elsewhere, the internet treats censorship like damage, and routes around it. Mayday’s highly censorial, let-us-tell-you-what-to-think say-amen-or-you’re-hidden editorial practices and its general tinpot-tyrant attitude toward its own audience caused the activist community that once used it heavily to route around it instead.

The numbers show it: Mayday has all but killed Indymedia UK. This is what most people – Mayday excluded – expected to happen, and it did.

Atzmon the Pariah

By now it’s also clear: the Atzmon wars are over, and Atzmon lost.

It’s been cheering to see how completely Atzmon’s anti-semitism was repudiated in the wake of his racist little book. I won’t catalogue the whole list of major figures who have told Atzmon to take a hike, except to note that it carries most of the most well-known names in the Palestinian movement in the UK. Atzmon tried desperately to paint those who were opposed to him as “crypto-zionists” or “anti-zionist zionists” (!?!)  but by now only an intentionally willing fool could believe that wheeze.

Publishing his book turns out to have been a Pyrrhic victory for him. By unifying all his anti-semitic nonsense in one place, he made it clear just where he stood on the topic of Jewish identity – he’s against it, because he thinks being Jewish is mostly a bad thing. By concentrating his thoughts on the fundamentally evil nature of Jewish identity and Jewish ideology, he removed all of that carefully cultivated ambiguity that he used to weave and dodge behind for the better part of a decade. He put his anti-semitism unambiguously up front. And it stank.

And that, in turn, finally moved the pro-Palestinian movement in the UK from quietly hoping he’d go away to loudly telling him to goosestep away. It took more time than it should have. That almost a decade passed between the time Atzmon first embraced the Holocaust denial movement and his finally being swept from the scene is a testament to both his ability to muddy the waters and the willful gullibility of his followers – including Roy “Please Lie To Me Gilad” Bard.

The Tyranny of the Minority

One of the lessons of the failure of Indymedia UK is what it tells us about the nature of consensus-minus-one as a decision making process. After Notts 2008 it became clear that many IMCistas were shocked to discover that a very tiny bloc could force the entire network to tolerate posts they considered racist. Any successor to the Indymedia movement is very unlikely to accept similar structure, so clear a lesson did Bard’s abuse of it give the rest of the movement.

It’s what I think may be in the future refered to as the Two Arsehole Rule: “consensus minus one means it only takes two arseholes to destroy your movement from the inside.”

Many independent observers tried over the years to alert Indymedia UK to the dire path it had taken on its failure to actively combat left-wing “Atzmonite” anti-semitism on the site. They were, with Roy Bard’s characteristic paranoia, interpreted as attacks from a coordinated trolling campaign intent on destroying Indymedia UK. The irony here is thick – as thick, one could say, as Roy Bard, who actually did destroy Indymedia UK, more or less.

Is Roy Bard an anti-semite? Is Indymedia UK an anti-semitic site?

Finally, this question. At this point it’s generally recognized that no single individual did more damage to the Indymedia movement in the UK than Roy Bard. He was at the center of the Atzmon crisis, driving a wedge straight through Indymedia in order to keep the antisemite Atzmon’s Jew-hating posts up over deep and principled objections of other IMCistas. He was also at the center of the Mayday coup, the reprehensible decision to unilaterally powergrab and seize shared Indymedia resources, including the domain, by locking out those he declared to be his enemies. And he has presided over the increasingly empty husk of Indymedia UK as it has spiralled down the page ranks like a WWI fighter plane with a wing shot off.

What’s more notable is that, since my last update a few years ago, Bard has essentially thrown aside any pretense of not being an antisemite himself. His participation in the deeply, floridly antisemitic site “,” which he co-founded with Gilad Atzmon in January 2012 and which quickly became a cesspit of raw Jew-hating, makes it clear that he has no fundamental ethical problem hanging out with the “Jews run the world and faked their own Holocaust” set and cheering them on. He’s embraced the “Khazar” fantasy – a favorite of white power activists like David Duke – that Ashkenazi Jews aren’t really genetically related to Sephardic Jews and cannot trace their lineage to ancient Israel. Every genetic study shows that Bard is wrong on this, but given a choice between firmly established scientific fact and an Atzmon-approved fairy story that lets him bash the Jews, no one will be surprised that he chooses the latter.

More information on the development of Bard’s anti-Semitism is here, in a series of very damning comments about the hate site. Bard has – naturally – hidden the comments, because they make him look just as bad as he turns out to be. The good stuff is near the bottom.

So: yes, by now the record is quite clear. Roy Bard is an anti-semite. He attacks anti-semitism on the right, but when it appears on the left he can’t lift a finger against it. Just can’t do it. Will do everything in his power to avoid even seeing it. What’s worse, he actively tries to silence any criticism of anti-semitism when it’s on the left. Every time, year after year after year, given a choice between promoting and defending Atzmonian anti-semites and Holocaust deniers, on one hand, or repudiating them on the other hand, he’s applauded the anti-semites and condemned those who said such people should be no-platformed. And he has effectively destroyed Indymedia UK, driven among other things by his desire not to have his own antisemitism silenced.

It is no longer possible to give him the benefit of the doubt, because there is no longer any doubt. Does Roy Bard have a serious problem with the Jews? Hell yes. And as long as he remains ensconced at post-coup Indymedia UK, everyone who remains willingly associated with him at Mayday carries the stain of Bard’s anti-semitism.

What happens to the Indymedia site now? This damage is irreversible – any IMCista who objected to Bard has long since abandoned the ship. Like Bard’s Jew-hating party “”, Indymedia UK – now past saving – will drift to the bottom, even further into obscurity.

And so thick its its self-delusion, it won’t even know why.

Indymedia deserved better.

And now, the world

26 Oct 2011

I thought it would be worth a quick update in the wake of the release of Atzmon’s book, which looks like it’s just a slightly re-edited rehash of the stuff he put on his site. It was very encouraging to see the degree to which Atzmon’s book was met with almost universal opposition among Zionists and anti-Zionists alike. This fact, of course, blows apart Atzmon’s central defense, that he’s really being attacked only by Zionists — an excuse that was transparently false half a decade ago and has become only more so recently.

That there are a few dead enders, hanging on to the fringe of the fringe, is simply the nature of hate literature.

The other incident that’s worth mentioning is Mayday’s eviction from the global Indymedia network. Mayday, very simple, did a raw power grab, unilaterally claiming shared resources for itself and then trying to hide all traces of public dissent. So if Indymedia UK seems even dumber than ever, more overrun with idiots and conspiracy theories that a five-year-old could find the flaws of, even happier to promote anti-Semitism ever more raw, that is because the nuts finally succeeded in taking over the nuthouse.

Looking back, three years later

18 Mar 2011

There have been three interesting developments in the three years since the Atzmon fiasco, and I thought it was worth an update.

The end of the Indymedia UK coalition per se

The first and most important change is that Indymedia UK, the coalition that runs the Indymedia UK aggregator site and newswire, is effectively being demoted by consensus of UK IMCistas. Other Indymedia collectives in the UK were increasingly unhappy with a hierarchy which implied that Indymedia UK was some sort of master-of-all-UK-Indymedia and that the Indymedia UK site did not represent the will of anyone other than the Indymedia UK collective rather than UK Indymedia as a whole.

With other UK collectives becoming convinced that the situation was unsustainable, there was a split (they refer to it as a ‘fork’) resulting in a decision for the removal of Indymedia UK’s collective from its point of centrality. By May 1, by mutual agreement of all involved, there will no longer be a coalition called ‘Indymedia UK’ nor a website called ‘’. [Correction: the ‘’ website will become a frozen archive of its current state.]

Indymedia UK served two functions: one as an all-UK aggregator of Indymedia stories, and another as a news-gathering collective in its own right. The function previously provided by the ‘Indymedia UK’ collective will be split into two. A new site will be created to serve as aggregator; that name is not yet decided, and it will not be in the hands of the current Indymedia UK collective. The current Indymedia UK collective will then have its own site, at the same hierarchical level as other local sites but with material provided by those who either don’t have a local Indymedia collective or can’t work with them for some reason. That site will likely be something like “UK Mayday Collective.”

This split was of course not caused by the Atzmon fiasco, destructive as that was. However, the enormous amount of energy and time of so many Indymedia people having been utterly wasted in 2007 and 2008 simply because one or two editors at Indymedia UK were blind to Atzmon’s blatant antisemitism, cuffed themselves to the barricades, escalated the conflict at every opportunity, and smeared anyone who disagreed with them as a Zionist conspirator no matter their anti-Zionist credentials – phreeww! – was the canary in the Indymedia coal mine, showing the fault lines and reflecting in advance the deep operational divisions which soon became clear between Indymedia UK and other UK collectives.

It’s famously been said that the internet considers censorship to be damage and routes around it. Indymedia in the UK is now routing around a different kind of damage.

Atzmon continues his descent

Gilad Atzmon, the anti-Semite at the center of the 2008 debacle, has continued to be more and more blatant about his antisemitism and in particular his embrace of Holocaust denial. The SWP, which used to have a page up saying, ‘We don’t always agree with him, but he’s no Holocaust denier,’ surreptitiously took the page down. Anthony Julius, among other things the solicitor who defeated David Irving, included Atzmon in his long study of the history of anti-Semitism in the UK, Trials of the Diaspora. Howard Jacobson put a former-IDF ex-pat jazz-musician anti-Zionist Holocaust denier into his Booker-winning novel The Finkler Question— although it was plainly not meant as a dig at Atzmon, since the former-IDF ex-pat jazz-musician anti-Zionist Holocaust denier plays jazz drums, not jazz saxophone, which is a completely different thing.

Atzmon has however a new champion in the form of American arch-racist David Duke, former head of the Ku Klux Klan, who adores him, posts Atzmon essays on his personal site, and praises him as ‘brilliant’.

In a 2010 visit to the US, Atzmon appeared on a local-access television channel in Aspen, Colorado as part of a panel discussion. He immediately began to play his Holocaust denial cards, and the others on the panel – all of them anti-Zionists who thought they were there to talk about Israel – turned visibly green bit by bit. It’s funny to watch how decent normal human beings react when they realize they are sitting on a panel with a Holocaust denier. You can see the nausea rising.

In short, in 2008 Indymedia and the SWP were the last two UK organizations not run out of someone’s garret somewhere granting Atzmon’s anti-Semitism even the slightest shred of political cover. Neither now does.

Israel Shamir exposed internationally as an anti-Semite

It’s also become clearer just why one Indymedia editor tied himself to the barricade and refused to accede in the banning of Gilad Atzmon from Indymedia. How was it possible for him to simultaneously be so wrong, so cluefree, and yet so hardheaded about it?

The answer turns out to be here.

The Israel Shamir who so stirred one of the problematic Indymedia editors to the bone, causing him to escalate the Atzmon dispute into the crisis it became, was getting his worldview from someone now internationally recognized as an anti-Semite and Holocaust denier. (See also, e.g., here; there are plenty more links like that at Wikipedia.)

Israel Shamir hit the headlines over the past few months over his association with WikiLeaks. Say what you want about WikiLeaks – not the topic of this blog – but even the most sanguine of commentators in the press is bothered by Assange’s decision to work with Shamir. If you followed the press over the last few months, the general conclusion was that although Assange was not an antisemite himself – a few odd utterances and failed jokes aside – he was apparently a catastrophically poor judge of character, nowhere better emblemized than in his choice to work with the Holocaust denier Israel Shamir.

So now we know why one of the Indymedia editors felt it was his personal duty to put Indymedia in the UK through its worst crisis to date, overriding the better judgement of nearly every IMCista in the UK. He was prepared from day one to treat the whole issue as nothing more than ‘Zionist slander’ (from people any fool could see were obviously not Zionists) and to never once stop and question himself one bit whether Atzmon and Shamir were legit, no matter how the rest of the network begged him to do so. The editor had his initial frame, erroneous from the start, and swore by his sword that no fact could ever change it even one millimeter — all inspired by someone whose raw antisemitism is now the stuff of headlines, even though the editor could never quite see it and was reduced to mumbling smears smears smears as he could formulate no other response.

That’s the most disappointing part of the whole business. At the end of the day, the editor in question still doesn’t have clue one about what the discussion was even really about. His position did not change one iota from start to finish: Shamir and Atzmon are perfectly, perfectly innocent little lambs being persecuted by those mean anti-Zionist ‘crypto-Zionists’ through utterly false cries of ‘anti-Semitism!’ – and incidentally, what’s so very wrong with calling the gas chambers of Auschwitz “discredited” anyway? His position – exactly the defense offered by the mad hatters Shamir and Atzmon themselves – made no sense on day one and makes no sense now, but sometimes you have to simply stand back and let the force of implacable stupidity hold its sway.

So that’s it then

In the end it all comes out in the wash.

And the comic aftermath: Atzmon’s sour grapes

21 Feb 2008

Because there is a troll out there on Indymedia UK and pretending to be someone who attended the Nottingham meeting, Indymedia UK decided they needed to post an official version of the story of what happened there and the context in which the Atzmon decision was made.

Draft story.

The story is quite clearly written from the pro-Atzmon perspective, and barely touches on the central point of the whole controversy, the antisemitism of Atzmon’s writings. Instead it’s all the same “there was a crypto-zionist campaign” stuff, in which view a perfectly innocent set of postings by and about Atzmon were cruelly attacked by a vicious conspiracy trying to silence him for being such a brave spokesman for etc. etc. etc. In other words, at the end of the exercise, apparently some Indymedia UK editors remain blissfully unaware what the whole exercise was even about. There are a few hints that perhaps there was something disquieting about Atzmon’s posts, but as a whole it’s so out of balance it was in essence a defense of Atzmon rather than a story about Indymedia, or especially an even-handed report on the state of the consensus.

Controversy exploded on the features list. Some said that the story was biased; others said that posting a feature was just “pouring salt in the wound” and the best thing to do is ignore it all; others expressed regret that Atzmon had ever been published in the first place. Some of these emails are pretty heated. There is also in these mails a general sense that a great deal of time and energy had been wasted over nothing productive, and that the net result of publishing Atzmon was substiantially damaging to Indymedia UK.

Then came the most comic single moment of the whole affair: Gilad Atzmon, knowing that he had been by group consensus shunted off into a special little penalty area built just for him, did what charlatans do: he declared victory and stomped off, declaring that upon consideration he no longer wanted to be posted on Indymedia. Apparently, once Indymedia stopped celebrating Atzmon as a sage political sage and stuck him into the “disputed” bin, they no longer deserved his transcendently wise words.

The grapes, said the fox, were probably sour anyway. (Although I think the moral here is really about an animal Aesop neglected: weasel is as weasel does.)

In short, Gilad Atzmon decided to punish Tony Greenstein by giving him exactly the thing Greenstein had wanted all along: an Atzmon-free Indymedia. And Atzmon has rewarded those Indymedia UK editors who fought tooth-and-nail for his right to publish on Indymedia by kicking them in the teeth.


I think Atzmon was no longer willing to have his posts hosted somewhere they wouldn’t be fawned over uncritically, and as long as his posts were being fought over so publicly it was obvious that his favorite narrative — that this was just Tony Greenstein’s vendetta and nothing more — could not hold water. There are enough places, such as Mary Rizzo’s blog, where he doesn’t have to worry about anyone actually disagreeing with his oracular wisdom that its foolish for him to post in a place where what he writes will actually be subjected to independent inquiry rather than empty, goggle-eyed adulation.

[edit:] Indymedia UK has decided not to post an article summarizing the issue. It’s well and truly over, and anti-racism has won.

How it looks.

Looks good that way. Should have happened months ago.

A last comment

8 Feb 2008

Indymedia is holding their all-UK meeting this weekend, and for now I’m going to end this blog. However, let me close with a comment from the Socialist Unity blog that sums it up rather well:

After 20-30 years of hard work we have finally realised that when a woman cries rape then she means it. 20-30 years that when a person of Caribean or Asian descent says that they didn’t get a job or was attacked on the street, we believe him. When a man says he can’t get a job working with children because he is gay, we believe him. When a Muslim man tells us of excrement put through his letter box because he is a Muslim, we believe him.

But, when a Jew screams antisemitism, in typical Stalinist fashhion, we tell him that it can’t be true because there has been no antisemitism for the past 60 years, and so he has to be making it up; in fact, not only do we tell him that they are making it up, but that they are making it up to hide the truth, and that they are making it up for no other reason than as a means to oppress and silence everyone in the world so as to protect “their” obnoxious little Jew-state.

After all, this is what some people here are saying, when can you ever trust a Jew?

So, I guess, when all is said and done, what I am saying is, no, [discussion participant], you fuck off!

What motivates the critics of Atzmon? Pt VI

21 Jan 2008

A long post about Gilad Atzmon’s praise of Holocaust denier Paul Eisen was hidden on Indymedia UK:


This is from Tony Greenstein, an ardent anti-Zionist, with something like twenty years history working for pro-Palestinian causes. The post was hidden — and this is nothing like a surprise, and it was hidden by the same Indymedia UK editor who so convinced that the anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon is the victim of “Zionist censorship,” which is also nothing like a surprise. As has been noted elsewhere, Atzmon dismisses his critics as “Zionists” even when, as in the case of Greenstein, he couldn’t be further from the truth.

The editor in question provides the following excuse for hiding the post: “Repeated : content that is reposted or text that was originally a comment posted as a report/ inaccurate”


The “repeated” claim apparently is based on the assumption that the hidden post is the same as this one. A quick check of the two shows just how duplicitous the editor in question is being.

One can also gauge the truthfulness of the “repeated” claim by comparing the following unhidden posts: A, B, C. As the serial number in the URL proves, these three identical posts were all posted before Tony’s, yet they remain unhidden. Why? Because the editor in question didn’t abuse his authority on them the way he did on Tony’s post.

The editor’s clear-headed, rational, unemotional response?

“I won’t be apologising for anything – I do despise you, you are despicable…… “

Independent journalism at its finest.

Greenstein’s argument is simple: that Atzmon has become an open Holocaust denier. I believe, however, that Greenstein has overstated the case. As I’ve said before, Atzmon does dimly echo the standard arguments of Holocaust denial, but not with sufficient strength or ardour to justify the very serious charge that he has become a Holocaust denier himself. On the other hand, Atzmon has certainly shown that he’s as willing to exploit Holocaust denial as he is other forms of anti-Semitism in his drive to demonise the Jews — careful to spread the ideas, but careful to maintain a certain minimum level of deniability when it comes to anti-Semitism, in hopes that observers won’t look too closely.

Thus he sends around Paul Eisen’s Holocaust denying essay, and repeatedly says that he is glad to have done so, but is unwilling to actually address the details of Eisen’s essay. He knows that to address Holocaust denial on the facts is to lose, and so he prefers to dance about the facts instead, billowing out his nebulous clouds about “historiographic narratives.”

Fortunately, the editor in question isn’t able to completely silence the issue of Atzmon’s Holocaust denial; Greenstein’s post also appears — and is well-commented upon — on the blog Socialist Unity (a blog, incidentally, that — because it actually opposes anti-Semitism — Atzmon derides as “Socialist Jewnity”).

Greenstein, incidentally, apparently believes that Atzmon may also be posting under the name “knuckles.” There’s certainly a similarity of tone, but that is because they are both singing from the same Holocaust denial hymnal, not because they are the same person. I believe however that reading enough of their respective posts would convince the reader that, while Gilad is duplicitous, mendacious, and tricky, “knuckles” is duplicitous, mendacious, and vapid.