Explaining Things to Brooks D. Simpson

On the comment thread following his post that falsely claims Southern  heritage folks "need to feel hated," Simpson made a few remarks I'd like to reply to.

David, let’s be honest. If you deem these comments signs of hatred, then you would have to say that what you and your fellow Flaggers, including the charming Miz Connie, say about me can best best (sic) understood as expressions of hatred.

No, he wouldn't have to say that, because it's not true. Let's look at the difference. First, very few of the VaFlaggers ever say ANYthing about you; I think that's a big part of your problem with them, the way they ignore you. Second, you have kept up a relentless barrage of gratuitous attacks on them, for no good reason, for over two years -- more than 130 attack posts from you, inciting hatred for and  harassment of them among your followers, to their ONE about you on their blog, and a  handful of comments on Facebook that are REACTIONS to your attacks.

Third, you "tiptoe" through the Internet looking for Southern heritage people and posts you can bring back to your blog and denigrate for the entertainment of your followers, and this pre-dates the formation of the VaFlaggers. You say your motive is accurate history, but if that were true, you would simply correct what you see as erroneous history; instead you insult people, throw off on their intelligence, and wallow in hideous, squawking ridicule. That is an attack on a person or persons  -- not a disagreement about history -- and  it's an outward manifestation of hate.

As for Miz Connie, I am responding to YOUR attacks on us, your disparagement of us as human beings. When you post strictly about history, very rarely do I say anything, even if I disagree. If you were to post about how you think we have gotten history wrong in a civil manner, I might not even respond to that. But when you viciously attack people's intelligence, when you disparage their motives, and when you misconstrue in order to label somebody "white supremacist" or "racist," there is a pretty good chance I will defend, and not only that, but counterattack, in trumps. I am holding up a mirror to your attacks and aiming them back at you. If you feel "expressions of hatred," consider that they originated with you and were aimed at us.

Perhaps you folks should spend less time pondering what others think of you and more time owning up to how you think about your critics.

Perhaps you should spend less time tiptoeing through the Internet looking for Southern heritage folks you can bring back to your blog and dangle for your minions to peck to death.

I’ve read all sorts of comments about me that speculate that I harm children or about my sexual preference.

Not from me, and I've rarely seen that from others in my blog comments or my Facebook groups. In fact, I don't recall a single instance of it. If somebody has said that, it has occurred too few times for it to even register with me.

That you then get upset about BParks’s comments suggest that y’all can dish it out, but you can’t take it.

She is attacking; I am defending or counterattacking. Moreover, her attacks are gratuitous and fabricated solely to demean, hurt and harm. In her case, most of the time, I am not defending us from her attacks, though, because I know she's wrong. I bring up BParks and her attacks simply to point out the viciousness of the "tolerance" crowd, because she is a wonderful example of it.

Same with all the speculation about the many identities of Corey Meyer.

Corey Meyer and his fraudulent profiles are not speculation. My experience with him dates back to about 2000 or so, when he joined the old Dixie Perspective Yahoo group, and several others, to harass and insult -- NOT, I should make clear, to debate about history. I wrote two articles about him for my old 180 Degrees True South e-zine at the time.

It's pretty bad when you use a stock photo model for your profile pic in an attempt to defraud, but even worse when you steal an actual person's photo off the web.  I don't know of any heritage folks who've done that.

I don’t happen to think much of such business (besides, y’all have some moles in interesting places, and you would be taken aback by who they are).

Sez you. In any case, if there are moles, I'm not among them.. Except for one Yahoo forum years ago, all the Internet  group/forum-type IDs I have ever used are variations of my actual name. The few times I've been unable to use such a variation (e.g.., "southern writer") I make it known that the ID is mine.

But when we see Austin/Carter/Melbourne post over here, or Bader Ruffian/Battalion, and so on, well, anything y’all say about Corey can be said about them … 

No. What can be said is that Corey, like you, attacks. Austin, Border Ruffian and others of us defend or counter-attack. Their comments are virtually ALWAYS a response to a flogger attack.

...including your sidekick Carl Rodent posing as a young girl on some blogs (then again, given Carl’s fan fiction interests, perhaps that’s just research).

Perfect example not only of your double standard. but your stomach-turning attempts to tar and foul a harmless activity and denigrate a person engaged in it. Fan fiction writing, btw, is a hugely popular activity, and early forms of it date back to the Bronte siblings. Moreover, per Wikipedia, on May 22, 2013,  Amazon.com established a new publishing service, Kindle Worlds, that would enable fan fiction stories of certain licensed media properties to be sold in the Kindle Store. Your attempt to sully and malign Carl for writing fanfic shows your animosity for heritage folks because, I suspect, if somebody on your side wrote fanfic -- even  "Slash" or "Femslash" fanfic -- you would be stone cold silent about it, the way you were about O'Hara and Confoy.

That’s why people suspect all of y’all’s whining is just about projection (and perhaps a little distraction).

No, that is not what they suspect. Claiming "projection" is simply a way for you instigators to deflect attention away from yourselves and your instigating.

First, David, you might consider that others might not share your understanding of matters or your motives.

Obviously, but it's more likely that they deliberately misunderstand, and assign motives, wrongly, out of their animosity.

They might also fall under the description of being unable to take what they dish out. Connie and her fake name follower “Austin” are right there, right now, and it seems to me they’ve gone off the deep end (that should inspire a number of tirades posing as posts).

And LibertyLamp, who threatened the Virginia  Flaggers and has kept up a steady flow of invective on your comment threads, is his/her real name. Ha. As I have noted, you dish out attacks, I dish out defense or counterattacks. Go through my Backsass blog, find any post about you, Simpson, read it -- and it will clearly identify what it is defending against, or counterattacking. There have been very, very few posts from me that were not reactions to some attack YOU posted first.

“I don’t think you are a pedophile.” Gee, that’s so nice. I guess I should say I think the same of all the Flaggers, even if one of their past heroes is a registered sex offender.

Sez  you. If  this were true, you would have already gleefully trumpeted it far and wide, you would have slung it at the VaFlaggers like elephant dung splattering the Virgin Mary.

I’ll note that Connie Chastain continued to welcome one of the people included in this discussion long after I barred him from my group. She can explain why that is. She can also explain why she went after them, while I’ve withheld the identity of the Flagger favorite.

If you're talking about Ray O'Hara's membership at Due South Facebook group, I've already explained it, and you know it. He was a member, and he was booted, long before any news about his arrest for child pornography distribution was brought to my attention. See how you lie by innuendo?

I didn't "go after them," and I made it crystal clear why I posted about them -- to retaliate against BParks' filthy accusations against Carl Roden. To show her the difference between a fanfic writer and a registered sex offender who had solicited minors for sex -- a genuine kid-toucher -- who happened to be her fellow Crossroads commenter.
http://mybacksass.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-crossroads-carnival-of-malice-part.html 

As for Heimbach, recall that several Flaggers stood up for him. No one stood up for any accused child molesters. Susan Hathaway could publicly distance herself from Rob Walker after that fiasco, but she has yet to do the same with Heimbach. These are critical differences.

Indeed; let me explain the differences, though I'm sure you already know them.

Heimback showed up for a couple of events that the VaFlaggers also showed up for; events that many others who were not VaFlaggers also attended. He joined a public Facebook group anybody could join, and made a few posts. At the time, the VaFlaggers didn't know about his activities at college in another state because, unlike you, they don't constantly sift the Internet looking for something they can trash people with.

Rob Walker approached the VaFlaggers and asked to videotape them for film school projects. They had a real, if informal, working relationship. I have no idea why Walker chose to attempt harming the VaFlaggers with fraud and betrayal. -- whether he had some personal reason for doing it, or whether somebody got to him, convinced him ... maybe even paid him ... to bring dishonor to the VaFlaggers.

In any case, Susan handled it admirably, taking several days to ascertain the facts when she happened to be very busy with other things, while you were screaming and ranting and raving that she was "silent" -- and as soon as she could, she made a public explanation and issued an apology, although she had not done anything wrong. Contrary to what YOU would love to have seen, nobody turned on her. Everyone was more appreciative than ever of her candor and sincere humility. We all moved on; you're still jumping up and down and screaming about it.

Besides, nobody expects Susan to "publicly distance herself" from Heimback when she has never been publicly close to him. The only people who are screeching about it are you floggers, who'd hate her anyway, no matter what she did. My gosh, you get all bent out of shape simply because she wears red tops. That is   an example of you revealing your underlying hatred.

I recall your version of the VDOT camera story. I think you need to revisit my post about possible locations, and examine one closely. In the end, however, so what? People complain they can’t see the flag easily, anyway.

But it gets more visible all the time. The VaFlaggers are volunteers; they don't work to your timetable. Visibility was boosted recently by the cutting of trees around the flag, by somebody who is not a VaFlagger and is not connected with them. I know it annoys you that you can't besmirch them with that (not that you didn't try). Your animosity for the VaFlaggers took a sharp upswing with the I-95 flag project, because of which you allied with Kristen Konate, who lied about Grayson and Barry, and you repeated her lie; and tried your best to sic the Richmond media onto the flaggers..

To reiterate. We don't feel a need to be hated (what a ridiculous thing to claim). We just recognize it when hate IS aimed at us.