"Re: he reminds me of Maxim"

Close. He is a huckster selling his own brand of wisdom. He describes himself this way: Dr. James N. Herndon is a media psychologist with Media Psychology Affiliates. He specializes in naturalistic research and media design for the worlds of politics and entertainment.

A quack? You decide.

Do you really think that we don't recognise you?

I've just tuned in to EE's news for the first time in several days, and now I find I'm being bombshelled yet again for something I have had nothing to do with! Incidentally, I've never been a fan of Ron Paul, and I'm certainly more in line in my thinking with the neocons than isolationist frieks like Buchanan and Paul. You should try to keep a little calmer and stop spitting the dummie every time you read a comment you don't like. I'm not the only sane person around here, and the one who is writing comments like me is laughing him/herself hysterical at how a lot of people misfire constantly, blaming me for this or that, when really someone else has written the comment. The only thing sad about all this is that someone is having a good time cracking up while I have to take the public brunt for it all. However, for the sake of intellectual freedom, let's let bygones be bygones, because my detractors have shown how little they tolerate public freedom of expression.

When a vague, inane and fatuous comment appears here, it's perfectly natural to mistake it for something by Maxim. There aren't many of your kind around.
And stop belly-aching about freedom of intellectual expression. There is nothing intellectual, or even literate, in your drivel. Most of the time, you only come here to goad us in some respect.

Maxim -- for the past six months or so, you have been mercifully subdued in your "messages". Before that, you regularly provoked outrage with gratuitous insults. Then, in response to justified indignation, you flat out denied it. Now you say, "let bygones be bygones".
Even though you're stupid and mentally troubled, we're prepared to forgive you -- the very minute that you acknowledge your trespasses against us and express some remorse.

I agree. But as far as Maxim is concerned, he has done nothing wrong and he has nothing to apologize for. Still, he might say "I'm sorry" just to get us off his back. Then he might behave himself for a while, but eventually he will take the boots to us again. Don't forget, we are dealing with someone who is, as you say, "mentally troubled".

Maxim deserves our forgiveness if -- and only if -- he admits wrong-doing, expresses sincere remorse for it, and promises to avoid repetition.
I would not expect him to fulfill these prerequisites. He is, after all, stupid and mentally troubled.

most ee commentators offer nothing to stimulate a debate, only complaints of anyone who differs from their very narrow line of thinking ... a rather pathetic situation
if this article by james hendron is off the rails, please explain why, and enlighten others !
rather than aw s**t, its not my line of thinking so we can't have it
at least maxim expresses his ideas(not always my perspective), but he always gets attacked personnaly, as opposed to having his positions disected

You're absolutely right, my friend, and let me add that you're hardly the only one who thinks like you do. I believe most people appreciate originality and variety of thought, although you wouldn't guess it from some of these comments. It's like they'd hope every opinion would be just the one that gets published like..umm..well..Toomas Merilo or his clone, or Anonymous. But keep it within that parameter thank you very much. Now I don't have anything against these people expressing their opinion as you obviously don't either, but I can't for the like of me figure out why there isn't a broader range of opinion expressed at this site. Has every other alternative thinker been shot down in flames years ago like the Bolshies did in Russia when they came to power. Or is this just a site for Mc Carthyist frieks? I have never everunderstood why alternate opinion is something to be automatically scorned here, and why the alternative to Maxim is always to shoot the messenger and then pretend that the rest of the community thinks one track like they do. Can this possibly be the answer, or is it just plain hopeless to hope against hope that maybe there is someone else in the Canadian-Estonian community who doesn't think like the above mentioned VIP's, yet is not afraid of running it past this audience. Somehow I think that the community spirit is one of think like us or else you'll never be welcome here again. Who else has had this feeling and lives in Toronto? You can still write while there is the chance of anonymity being secure-but that may change if the local bolshies get their way.

I completely endorse Toomas' point of view. There is nothing in this article which should raise an iota of interest for Canadian Estonians, and it's publication is simply a waste of good space. It has been a good number of weeks since our old and good friend Ottawan Peeter Busch has had a chance to display his journalistic acumen, and it would be far more interesting to read a piece by him than some loser called Herndon.

“Nice to see” asked the [i]rhetorical[i] question, “Since when did criticism of the world's political leadership become offside, because it wasn't Estonian?“ (S)he of course knows this isn’t offside, hasn’t been, and never will be. (S)he also erroneously implies I’m against free speech.

So what started this? Well, ostensibly it was my comment: [i]This article has no place in Eesti Elu.[i] And it doesn’t, for the same reason that articles like [i]An Approximation Algorithm for Scheduling Malleable Tasks under General Precedence Constraints[i] has no place in Eesti Elu. It is simply inappropriate for the readership.

If one has read the article, it would become clear that it is a shill for Congressman Ron Paul. Actually, for his candidacy for the Republican Party’s nomination for President. Nota Bene: the first clue is in the article’s title, [i]Ron Paul vs. the neocon cowards.[i] Read it. Read it carefully.

As for Maxim agreeing with me? Well, not a chance. Maxim was just making a botched attempt at sarcasm. And the controversial but interesting Peeter Bush is given a back-handed insult (compliment?) in the process.

No Toomas-I am not giving Peter a backhander in any way at all, and I think Peter is broad-minded enough and always displays courtesy and civic-mindedness for him not to see my support of you as being offensive. The fact that you use this support in such a negative way shows that you do really have an inclination to be fairly narrow-minded yourself, and that you are not willing to consider that in intellectual freedom comes convergience of ideas and opinions which bring people together. This is what has happened, but you have failed to see it's occurrence. Which means you should look at what you really believe in, and why you want to restrict you association to a select group of people and not the broader public. I was very genuine in my support of you this time, yet you see this as having its roots in sarcasm. What a twisted world we live in.

In light of what you've said above, I will do what I don't recall ever having seen you do: [i]I will apologize.[i]

I am sorry, [i]Maxim[i], for having erroneously labelled your agreement with my previous points as an attempt at sarcasm. Sorry.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/ar...

Not a problem. In fact your response gives us all food for thought....

This is the second time that Toomas Merilo makes a public apology -- a noble gesture.
Many of us believe that you, Maxim, owe us many apologies. Can we expect you to follow Toomas' example?

Certainly I have said things which have upset people in the past, and I do apologize for that. However, it does seem that many of my critics have continued to push for further apologies for things which I have never even said. I can see these people from a mile off, and I don't think any amount of apologizing is suffice for them. Let it be said that if my comments carry a certain amount of bite, then that is something I cannot apologize for, as Estonia's problems are deemed too serious for them not to be coined in language which best describes there actual context. Finally, if there is anything else that needs an apology from me, I would be more than happy to hear from people and only too glad to apologize, if the request is honest and sincere. Time has shown that Toomas is one of the very few who has earned my gratitude, and I can't see that many others have the same inclination to intellectual honesty that is transparent in T M's postings. The critic to whom I am currently responding is a case in point.

Maxim, you say that, "Certainly I have said things which have upset people in the past, and I do apologize for that." Well done, Maxim; but then you say that, "if my comments carry a certain amount of bite, then that is something I cannot apologize for..."

In response to your assertion that Russia always gets its way in Europe, Toomas Merilo pointed out to you that Russia was unable to block Nato's expansion there -- a major policy failure for Russia. In your response to him, you said that he is full of "verbal diarrhea".
Can't you see that Merilo deserves an apology for that?

http://www.sloleht.ee/index.as...

Maxim, just a little while ago you were just as mad as a wet hen and threatening to sue Merilo for not showing you due respect. What has happened since?

"if there is anything else that needs an apology from me, I would be more than happy to hear from people and only too glad to apologize, if the request is honest and sincere"

Thanks for that Maxim. Since you asked, I'll say that you should apologize to Lutherans. You have implied that we are inferior and should convert to the Orthodox faith. That is unjustified and hurtful.

I'm waiting for your promised apology.

It's not really a contradiction-it's a confirmation of a different style of writing. Sometimes one can't take too softly-softly an approach, and expect to get the message across.

I think Toomas has seen my effort in a change of heart, but I thank you for taking so much interest in how Toomas feels. I'm sure you understand that people who write here are actually full-grown adults who can stand up for themselves when needed.

That is a very reasonable and justifiable request. Please accept my apologies for offending you with such comments, and I will endeavour to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

Maxim. Your style of writing simply doesn't work. It's ungrammatical and incoherent -- a barrier to communication.

Yes I agree. A real intellectual can speak English, Estonian or something. Poor Maxim is imprisoned in incoherency. But he doesn't know it. He is like a blind man who doesn't know that he is living among people with vision.

Toomas, what is the implication behind your comment? I think that many of your past criticism's have revealed your own personal views, which I am more than glad to read and learn to appreciate, but I think that rubbishing others is probably not the best tactic with which to bridge differences. There are a good number of people here who know absolutely sweet Fanny Adams about Estonian politics, and it is up to you and me to set the record straight. We should avoid being provocative at all costs-it only serves to inflame the nasty character assassinations that are so prevalent within our community.

Thank you for pointing this out to me. Apart from the grammatical side of things, have you actually any knowledge of what is happening in Estonia, and if so, why is it that you are keeping your cards so close to your own chest? There are too few people who are making worthwhile contributions here, and others who just have huge problems with seeing red in syntax. Instead of being kind enough to correct my errors, they show no inclination whatsoever of knowing what's actually going on in the homeland. If they did, they would surely be writing comments about it. It seems to me that many Canadian Estonians have become so anglicized to the point of no return!

For years, you've been barking at us incoherently. Now, we find out that you're actually educating us about Estonian politics. Thanks a lot.

My critics are usually the ones that prefer to up the heat when it serves their purpose. Most readers can see through this little scam, and the result is that wasted effort and precious cyberspace get used to no-one's benefit. If you have something constructive to add, we would all be pleased to hear it, especially myself. Thank you very much.

I was surprised to read that you haunt this page to educate us about Estonian politics. Quite frankly, I don't believe it because your comments invariably have a barb attached to them, calculated to annoy us. Occasionally, you have insulted us viciously. You have probably forgotten how you have accused us of being Nazi sympathizers, if not outright Nazis. You now deny saying that Estonian women “welcomed” (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) German occupation forces. You expressed pity when the restored Jaani kirik in Tallinn looked like a Lutheran church. You regularly remind us that we can't speak Estonian very well. It's true; but galling coming from some who can't speak anything at a level to be expected from a high school graduate -- particularly – Estonian, in spite of spending the past twenty years in Estonia. How can you explain that? Do you have a low IQ, dyslexia, or mental illness? So you think that you have something to teach us. You, the guy that once said that he was leaving Estonia because there are too many Russians there. And where were you planning to go? To Kaliningrad, a province of Russia! You also once promised to establish your own web site so that you could address your “fans” and “supporters” without jeers from the sidelines; but, you haven't done that because you have neither fans nor anything to tell them. All that you've got is us – an unwilling audience to taunt and goad.
You are an egotist of pathological proportions. Combined with your stupidity, you're a freak (or, as you spell it, “friek”).

You have pointed out a very major problem. But the problem does not lie with me-it is with you! You see, I am not here to goad anyone, and it doesn't matter how many times people say that, there is not a sceric of evidence that supports your theory. The other problem has to do with the fact that I wrote earlier on about everyone shooting the messenger, and trying to convey the impression that the Estonian community would be a lot more at peace without me. I hardly believe that, and neither should you. Finally, all of my critics for some reason or other have a preconception that the person writing under the guise of Maxim is EK. EK has not made an appearance here or elsewhere for that matter, and it would be best to let any fond memory of him lie peacefully to rest. Try to dispence with the thought that you are writing to EK-you are not writing to him, and you should be glad for that.

Sometimes you have to read the classics really closely, to appreciate their true genius:

> My critics - Yes, Toomas Merilo, et al., they all belong to Maxim, united in a singular nefarious purpose (see below).

> are usually the ones - But not always? Who are the others? His fans? Disinterested bystanders? Political authorities? Maxim himself?

> that prefer to up the heat - As opposed to what? Please note that the active verb here is "prefer." Remember, we sometimes have persons other than Maxim's critics doing the preferring with respect to increased heat..

> when it serves their purpose. - and not when it serves Maxim's purpose? How very nefarious of them! Imagine that! Preferring to do something when it suits their purpose! The nerve of some people!

> Most readers can see through - but don't? or can't be bothered? And what about the minority who can't?

> this little scam, - ah, so that's what "preferring to up the heat" is! A little scam! A petty fraud! It is one of the great pleasures of reading Maxim's commentary that you never know what he is writing about until you sort out all the syntactical discontinuities.

> and the result is that - We have to remember that the result that is the subject of this sentence (wait for it) will be that of the readers being able to see through, but not necessarily actually seeing through, the "little scam" of preferring to up the heat. You see how elegantly and economically Maxim conveys such a complicated thought arrangement!

> wasted effort and precious cyberspace - this introduces a breathtaking range of conceptual quantities.

> get used to no-one's benefit. - all that "wasted effort" ... "used to no-one's benefit". Such a resultant shame! An outrage to all right-thinking, decent, intelligent, not to mention eloquent Eesti Elu commentators everywhere! To think of the benefits someone might have derived from all those wasted efforts! And all that "precious cyberspace" ! Home of YouTube and Facebook and Pornoworld.com. Mütsid maha ja nutma! But at least we can take comfort in those "wasted efforts and precious cyberspace" being used, even if it is to no-ones benefit. Much better than not being used at all. Even Maxim must derive some comfort from this.

> If you have something constructive to add, - Who is he addressing in the first person here? What thing is he referring to? Constructive preferences? Constructive heat? Constructive frauds? Constructive results? Constructive benefits?

> we would all be pleased to hear it, - Who is we? And what pleasure is being referred to here?

> especially myself. - Awwww, that's poignant. See how neatly Maxim returns to the first person at the very end. That is the mark of a true rhetorical talent, so adroitly going from first person singular to infinitive to collective and back to first person -- toying with us in suspense until he sets the hook at the very end.

> Thank you very much. - No, Thank You, Maxim. Thank You. Where would we be without you?

Many of my critics have decided to uphold what little natural talent I have and make that a more prominent issue than Ron Paul. Sometimes you have to wonder what it is that drives my critics to insanity, all in the name of being able to get the boot into Maxim once again! However, I you think I am worthy of such attention, then please accept my gratitude for that. I didn't think I had left such an indelible mark on this readership. I have seen that many people are grateful for my input, and I thank them for their response, and I look forward to being able to provide many more insights into Estonian politics as the opportunity arises. Please rest assured that I will continue to be faithful where it counts, and that means keeping you informed of events in the Motherland. I wish to close this section of comments and would be grateful if the last person out pulled the chain...

"I have seen that many people are grateful for my input"
What nonsense! The only praise that you have ever received here is that which you have composed yourself in your illiterate style that no one else could possibly duplicate.
"I look forward to being able to provide many more insights into Estonian politics as the opportunity arises."
Insults aren't insights, Maxim.

Please give us an example of what you think is one of your insights into Estonian politics.

In the archives, you have built up a veritable dunghill of commentary. I'm wondering if, by chance, there might be a sensible comment in there.