Neo-nazi deprived of vilifying ‘lefties’
Monday March 27th 2006, 12:23 pm

Ben Weerheym, convicted race-hate criminal and neo-nazi, recently stole a Sydney Grogblogging 2006 image for use on his ‘Leftywatch’ hitlist blog. Weerheym uses the Blogspot facility primarily to facilitate physical attacks and intimidation against his political foes. Weerheym is well known for his association with fugitive racist Australian Nationalist Movement leader Jack Van Tongeren.

Despite Weerheym’s numerous threats of violence against various anti-racists and hundreds of complaints to Google per their Terms Of Service agreement, their Blogger/Blogspot division continues to tolerate Weerheym’s racial vilification and hitlist site, albeit with a warning message attached. Should you complain about TOS violations on Blogger? Yes, you should.

Weerheym believes that by publishing images of his political foes (though never images to which he owns copyright) and adding his own defamatory comments, he will intimidate his critics into submission.

Weerheym denied. Deal with it, Bennie.

Wrong, camel-breath.

Got news for ya Ben, you can vilify people who shine a spotlight on your racial hatreds and attempts at intimidation until the proverbial cows come home, but you won’t be doing it with your victims’ own images.

UPDATE: Weerheym’s characterisation of me as ‘Elmer Fudd’ made me laugh. I decided to check an independent arbiter regarding whom else I might resemble.

Facial recognition software at MyHeritage.com reckons I

look a bit more like these guys than Elmer Fudd:

Ben, lay off the drugs, k?

UPDATE II: An anonymous mgk reader decided to try Bennie’s photo in the MyHeritage facial recognition system.

The top result?

Poor John Goodman!

Face match result number six for Bennie will make him even less happy!


14 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Quote (weez): “Ben, lay off the drugs, k?”

I think its a bit late for that, the damage has already been done, methinks…

Comment by Marcus 03.27.06 @ 2:35 pm

If Ben is going to be semi-sentient, it’d be more pleasant if he’d at least do it quietly.

Ben, if you’re reading, contact your Centrelink Social Worker about treatment programs. It’s time.

Comment by weez 03.27.06 @ 2:44 pm

Oh, I looked like Charles Manson only. Quite nice really, that.

Comment by Jennifer 03.27.06 @ 3:12 pm

Could be worse. Benny hasn’t accused anyone of eating babies just yet.

Comment by weez 03.27.06 @ 7:09 pm

Hirohito aye Benny? Jeez, you little race traitor, you…

Comment by Dave 03.29.06 @ 10:08 am

Dave, Bennie has in the past admitted to being very upset by seeing his non-Anglo ex-GF with a new partner. Could Bennie’s sole motivation for his bitter racism be the scorn of a woman?

FYI- she dumped him because he’s a rabid moron, but Ben can’t accept that- so he disses the poor girl for her lack of whiteness… go friggin’ figure.

Comment by weez 03.30.06 @ 8:03 am

I feel sorry for people like benny, they’ll never get it. Forget the Centrelink social worker, it’s time to send in guys with the big white coat. Then we can all get some sleep.
BTW weezil, I think you’re a dead ringer for sting!

Comment by wall eyed horse 03.31.06 @ 1:13 pm

Hi WEH, I’m told the guys in the white coats don’t wear white coats anymore, so as not to tip off the patient.

I’m rather fond of the Centrelink Social Workers I’ve spoken to in the past. Have always found them helpful.

Sting, huh? I think I look more like Elton John.

Now if you really want to see an actor who is a dead ringer for me, check out James Stephens. Stephens played the character ‘Hart’ on the early 80s US drama program ‘The Paper Chase.’

Comment by weez 03.31.06 @ 2:11 pm

Naaah! I stick with sting.
Personally, I think that he’s the better looking one out of the group!

Comment by wall eyed horse 03.31.06 @ 6:51 pm

Centrelink BustedI have a web site up & running which Centrelink threatened me with legal action if I didn’t close the site down. On my site I can prove Centrelink have changed my financial records & lied in court. Under “Freedom of Information”, Centrelink gave me these files which I wasn’t suppose to have, they wanted them back – YEH RIGHT!!! The site has been up & running for over 18months after I told them to take me to court if they want it closed. If & When a Judge tells me to close it down, I might, NOT WHEN CENTRELINK TELL ME TO!

Comment by Jason 08.15.06 @ 10:32 am

Jason, why did Centrelink ask that you close your site? Anything to do with the swastika you Photoshopped using elements of the Centrelink logo?

Comment by weez 08.15.06 @ 11:27 am

Weez, the swastika was designed by me, in photoshop, 6 – 8 weeks after recieving the “Legal Threat” via an email from a person who claimed he was representing Centrelink & who only put his name and email @ on the “request”, the request to remove the site from public access!
It has taken Centrelink over 12months to send me this very same request on “hard copy” & to-date this is all they have sent me concerning the site!
As far as copyright goes, refer to the “fair use” & “reporting of events” – I have the Legal right to use!
Also, my other logo is a “moving animation” – for which I would be quite prepared to fight & prove ownership of copyright, in any court in The United States of America, as my site is hosted on a server in the US.
My site comes under US Law – FREEDOM of SPEECH -
Oh & 1 last thing, I know Centrelink will see this, copy this & place this in my file as they have done with other letters I post on other internet sites, Joe, Jeff & Hank – Please refer to #1 thru #3 of the 11 IPP’s of the Privacy Act 1988 –

Comment by Jason 08.15.06 @ 2:02 pm

Yikes, sounds like quite a drama. I’ve very rarely had problems with Centrelink. If calm, reasonable discussion doesn’t move them, I’ve been known to escalate to supervisors, but I find that the Social Workers will go to bat for you if you have a good case.

Process is everything. If you accuse anyone of a conspiracy, you’d best be able to prove it. I can’t say where I’d next go were I you, outside of the ICAC.

Good luck. :)

(and you can stop linkspamming mgk & FDB now…)

Comment by weez 08.15.06 @ 2:12 pm

My site comes under US Law – FREEDOM of SPEECH -

Websites are not entitled to protection under the First Amendment of the US Constitution merely because they are hosted on a server in the USA. Computers don’t have rights; the author of a bit may be protected by the Bill of Rights, but their computers are not. The author must be located on US soil, or if physically overseas from the USA, must be a US citizen. You’re none of the above, Mr Pickett. Don’t fool yourself into thinking you have any US Constitutional rights.

Comment by weez 01.22.08 @ 6:47 am



Leave a comment

(required)

(required)