The lying game

As many of you may already know, when we invite guests onto the podcast who are likely to prove controversial, we read out a disclaimer at the head of the discussion reminding them that we do not give our permission for any of our comments to be edited, or used out of context, or used in any commercial products — including YouTube videos — since these too are eligible for the Google AdSense revenue sharing scheme, and count as commercial content.

Once we’ve secured a verbal acknowledgment from the guest, that they will not breach this agreement, we proceed with the rest of the conversation.

Persons associated with a certain YouTube channel have decided to ignore this, and have been peddling a clip on the video sharing site, which uses audio comments made by myself and Alex Botten without our permission. We have asked for it to be taken down twice. On each occasion YouTube have agreed to do this, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

I am now receiving DMCA take-down notices on images hosted on this blog. This could be a coincidence, or it could be the childish games of someone who doesn’t like having the lies he sells to the credulous and the gullible, who comprise his target audience, open for discussion by people who know his game and aren’t afraid to expose his tactics.

UPDATE: In an email dated 14th of May, Sye ten Bruggencate denied that the DMCA take-down notice filed against me, for an image hosted on this blog was issued by him.

Either way, the aim of the Fundamentally Flawed podcast, and indeed this blog, remains clear. We do not make any money. We do not want to make any money. We exchange ideas freely, without censorship and without exception. The only caveat to this, is when someone is clearly spamming or flooding and using abusive and aggressive language, in which case we ban their IP address, making it difficult but not impossible for them to continue posting blog comments.

The one person who I have had no choice but to take this action with, is most probably the same person behind the YouTube video, which illegally uses our content, as well as being the likely person behind the DMCA take-down notice I received today.

This particular individual moves from blog to blog, chat forum to chat forum, preaching provable falsehoods, in the hope of ensnaring the easily misled. He also hopes to enrage those of us who, without wanting to sound conceited, have a little bit more about us, in terms of critical thinking and intellectual honesty, so he can make a name for himself as an atheist killer — when in reality all he has, is one meaningless argument which doesn’t make any sense, and the temperament of a cuntyfool with tiny penis syndrome.

I have personally tried to engage sensibly and rationally with this person for a very long time. I have tried being polite. I have tried being jovial. I have tried being downright rude. I have tried using logic, evidence and common sense. Nothing got through.

In the end, I simply gave up. Life is too short and beautiful to spend it dealing with someone who self-confirms every crazy Christian stereotype in the book. But with the people skills of a bag full of lukewarm piss, this individual has apparently decided to come back for more of what he received last time and will continue to receive for as long as he asks for it. This wise decision, probably had something to do with the utter taking apart of his argument, when it was presented to us by a Padawan of his, who learned it by rote and so lacked the diversionary tactics and slimy stealth of his mentor, Master Windex.

Or I could be leaping to completely the wrong conclusions, and in fact the DMCA issued towards this blog today was merely a coincidence — and the person or persons responsible for illegally using our content, has learned their lesson and won’t make the mistake of doing it for a third time — which, if I understand the DMCA correctly is no laughing matter — unlike the life of a small man with big ideas, and no evidence for any of them — which is absolutely fucking hilarious!

30 comments on “The lying game

  1. “Let him without sin cast the first stone”

    Mess with that bull, get the horns. lol

    No, this is normal. I received a cease and desist letter from National WIC’s lawyers for linking to a pic on my “Atheists Eat Babies” of a baby with a UPC on his forehead with the WIC logo. It was only a link and they were very upset and slandered my “distastefully done blog.” I too suspected an Atheist whistle blower.

    Jim if you do no wrong you can play these games. Otherwise you should make sure you’re not hypocritically complaining all the while breaking the same laws. You opened the can here so you get what is fair and equal. I, for one, think it is very childish on your part to act that way and you deserve the same treatment for doing that to others. Exposing your hypocrisy is über rich with the irony of your thinking. You deserve this. You’re entire position about this is a relativist fallacy. As it’s “good enough” to treat the Christians like this, but not the Atheists. You made your bed, now sleep in it. OK three cliché’s are enough. Now a Bible verse:

    ” Therefore, whatever you want others to do for you, do also the same for them—this is the Law and the Prophets.” ~Matthew 7:12

    Once again you disregarded the wisdom of the Bible.

    OK, one more. Put that in your pipe, and smoke it. :7)

  2. Dan:

         You shouldn’t believe that. I called whoever filed the spurious claim against Jim “the child of illegitimate birth.”

  3. >> I called whoever filed the spurious claim against Jim “the child of illegitimate birth.”

    Oh, it a relativist fallacy. Got it.

    >> Did you issue the DMCA against this blog?

    If you knew me you would not ask that. No, I did not. I do not play such silly hypocritical games as you do. You see, I do not want anyones rights violated. Unlike you. You rail against the government getting involved in our lives and yet you report people. You’re a fraud. You rail against SOPA, PIPA, and the like and even have a blog post titled “Political censorship and moderator bias…” ( but you did that EXACT SAME THING! You’re a complete joke and have been exposed as one. Please repent.

  4. …and if it wasn’t you, why the hell do you care? And it’s interesting that you have the time to comment on this, which has nothing whatsoever to do with you, when on the previous story, which proves categorically that the bible is made-up gobbledegook, you remain mysteriously silent! Silly person.

  5. Yes, because the best way to divert attention away from something is to plaster it all over your own blog. You fucking prat. Think it through, you numbskull. We both know who is doing this and why he is doing it. He was specifically refused permission to do exactly what he is doing, because he thinks it’s pissing us off, when in reality it’s proving our point for us. You people really are dense.

  6. And since we’re on the topic of diversionary tactics and fucking coward liars, are you going to nut up and come on the podcast to explain yourself face to face, or are you just going to keep on ignoring all the blog posts which prove your entire worldview is utterly made-up bollocks, and focus instead on the ones which have nothing whatsoever to do with you? Wait, don’t tell me, you’re too busy looking after the kids on the night we record? How convenient.

  7. Censor, restrict, eliminate, and hypocrisy. This is YOUR M.O.

    So why would I, or anyone, want to associate or colaberate in any way with that complete unrighteousness that goes against my entire belief system? Not just the realms of Christianity either. I am more of liberty, freedom, allowing, and accountability. We are completely on opposite sides of the planet. You, and your type, is the reason why there are problems in this world.

    2 Corinthians 6:14

  8. It is very interesting that DAN decided to point fingers when Jim blatantly states he does not know if it is the person we all have reason to expect. Instead it seems Jim took the high road and made sure to let everyone know that he is not sure and would rather not point fingers if the assumption is incorrect. Now I can’t speak for anyone else but if Jim stated he received a DMCA take down I would immediately jump to the obvious suspect, instead Jim seemed to make it clear that he doesn’t want people leveling judgement in case it is not that person that we would all be happy to crucify and see if he dies for our sins just like the messenger he deifies.

    So DAN, how about reading a full statement and stop trying to make it sound like Jim is immediately leveling blame on one of the two people we’re all sure is behind this child’s game.

    I mean, you were the one that mentioned collecting a group to attempt to mass copyright violate the FF guys… seems you have a motive (petty revenge, but it motivates so many these days), and a call to action (, watch out DAN, these kinds of things come back to bite you.

    I don’t understand how people think that they are above the laws because they consider themselves untouchable due to their faith.

  9. I’ll take that as a “no”.

    For your information: We recorded the entire disclaimer and included it on the podcast. The interviewee agreed to the terms and conditions on air. You can listen to it in full on the Fundamentally Flawed Podcast website. He says, “I understand” right after the part where we explain why we do not give our permission for anyone to edit our comments, use them out of context, or in a commercial setting. I even added the phrase, “Including YouTube”, to be doubly sure this was made clear.

    When the interviewee released a version of this exact same conversation on his website, the part where he agrees to the terms and conditions had been edited out.

    And we’re the ones who “censor” and “restrict” people? We’re the ones who are hypocritical?

    Tell me, Dan. Have you actually been following this story, or did you just assume we were the ones who were to blame, simply because we’re not religious? Get your facts straight before you jump in with both feet. And keep your nose out of things that have nothing to do with you.

    You’ve been invited to talk to us face to face many times now, on why you spread lies about people, and you don’t have the basic courage to defend yourself. You’re a bully, and a cheat. And if you don’t start contributing something other than the same tripe we’ve already told you we’re not interested in hearing, I have absolutely no qualms in adding you to the ban list, alongside your “brother in Christ” — which frankly is one of the most homoerotic things I’ve ever heard.

    You’re just not worth the time and effort of trying to explain things in sensible and rational terms, because you’re just not listening. I’ve repeatedly asked you to comment on a story where I mistakenly thought you might actually have something interesting to add, because it deals with the basic truth of your magic book. Clearly I was wrong.

    Before you started crawling up the arse of shysters, your blog was sometimes genuinely interesting. I even commented on a story you wrote about Ron Paul, and generally agreed with you on some broad points. But your latest fascination with creeping around fraudsters and cheats, just because they dress up their nonsense in pseudo-philosophical gibberish which sounds like Christianity, but actually serves no-one but the people who are selling it, is just tragic.

    You’re becoming the perfect example of what happens to otherwise perfectly normal people, when they fall under the spell of superstitious garbage, just because it’s dressed up in religious terminology. Wake up. We’re not the ones lying to you, or trying to financially gain from your phantasmagorically obvious confusion about a great many things. We’re the ones trying to say it’s OK to be unsure sometimes. All you have to do is admit it to yourself, and the rest will follow. It really is as simple as that.

    Now, do you want to talk sensibly and calmly on the podcast, like adults face to face, or not?

  10. Derik,

    >> Instead it seems Jim took the high road and made sure to let everyone know that he is not sure and would rather not point fingers if the assumption is incorrect.

    My rant had nothing to do with that. Jim and Alex already Censored and restricted Sye in the podcast by demanding he cannot use his own voice from the podcast. Then his complete hypocrisy came from posting something complaining about “political censorship” on reddit when that is exactly what he did with Sye. Jim is a fraud.

    I feel icky just having this conversation and for being curt to Jim. I guess the Bible was right again. 1 Corinthians 15:33, Proverbs 13:20

  11. Dan:

         You might have a better argument if Sye only used his own voice. But that is not the case. Sye edited what Jim and Alex said to suit his own purposes.
         “Then his complete hypocrisy came from posting something complaining about ‘political censorship’ on reddit when that is exactly what he did with Sye. Jim is a fraud.”
         No, he did not say that Sye could not make a statement. Nor did he make any attempt to suppress Sye’s views. What he said was the Sye could not use this to make money. Sye didn’t like that. He agreed to it but he didn’t honor the agreement.

  12. Dan, this is why I asked if you’d actually been following this story, because that isn’t what this is about at all. I had assumed you already knew this, but I’ll explain it one more time.

    He was invited to present whatever evidence he liked. It wasn’t about restricting his voice, it was about nailing him down to the specifics of what he himself claims to have. Remember, we’re talking about a guy who has a website literally called PROOF that god exists here.

    proof |pro͞of| noun
    1 evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement:

    It was the opening question which he objected to, because it specifically asked him if he was now prepared to present what he had refused to present in the three previous podcasts we held with him — each of which also contained a disclaimer about the commercial and partial use of our comments.

    This latest nonsense with the YouTube clip is the SECOND time in which these people have deliberately ignored the verbal agreement made with myself and Alex Botten. On the first occasion, Mr. Hovind appeared to recognise our genuine concern and pulled back from offering a copy of our conversation for sale on his website, as some kind of “free bonus disc”.

    This second clip is mere goading. There’s nothing of any substance to it. If anything, it casts the interviewee in a pretty bad light, and would be ostensibly in our interest for him to self-promote it. But that’s not the principal which is at stake here. The objection isn’t that our comments are used, it’s that it was done without our permission.

    Had that permission been sought, everyone and anyone who has ever read or listened to anything that me and the other Fundamentally Flawed guys have ever produced would know that we would give it, on the one condition that a portion of the profits would go to Doctors Without Borders, and not into the pockets of the very liars we’re in the business of exposing.

    As for the accusation of censorship and suppression, I think there was a total of 4 emails between myself and the Hula Hoop Kid after the recording took place, in which it was made perfectly clear he was welcome to appear on the podcast again at any time in the future, when he was prepared to present the objectively valid evidence of his own basic truth claim. Which I think is pretty fair, considering the amount of times we’ve been told that by merely requiring this basic information, we’re likely to burn forever in a pit of despair.

    Now, are you going to come on the podcast to talk like adults, face to face, or not?

  13. Derik: I think what’s particularly amusing here, is that the story I wrote about political bias on, specifically highlighted a case where it was rightwing opinions that were being censored. It seems that these people are so willing to take offence, they fail to recognise when someone is actually arguing for their right to speak as vehemently as they would fight for their own. And they say Americans don’t “do” irony.

  14. Dan said: “So why would I, or anyone, want to associate or colaberate in any way with that complete unrighteousness that goes against my entire belief system?”

    I don’t know, why would you? If you’re complaining about it I’d suggest your first port of call for fixing the problem would be to take down any blogs you own that might be seen as antagonistic to atheists….such as ‘Debunking Atheists’ – yeah, do that, then you can stop complaining about having to ‘associate’ or ‘colaberate’ [sic] with ‘unrighteousness that goes against [your] entire belief system’.

    Or STFU and stop whining.

    Your call.

  15. Pingback: There’s a Simple Solution « an atheist viewpoint

  16. Dan the liar
    My rant had nothing to do with that. Jim and Alex already Censored and restricted Sye in the podcast by demanding he cannot use his own voice from the podcast. Then his complete hypocrisy came from posting something complaining about “political censorship” on reddit when that is exactly what he did with Sye. Jim is a fraud.
    Except, as has been pointed out, Dan, that it was NOT just “Sye’s voice” on that podcast. They said that Sye couldn’t use the podcast itself for commercial purposes.

    Typical xian hypocrisy: Go on and on about how the other guy is the “fraud”, while it is you who is the one who is lying…So, where is that lying f***er Dan, now?

  17. Dan is lying about this on his blog. I’ve posted the below comment, and am including it here, in full, in case he removes it or edits it.

    Dan said:
    “To catch you up, Jim and his “Robin” Alex demanded unfairly that Sye could not use his own voice from the Skype conversation that they had, for any purpose. But “Batman and Robin” proclaimed they could use it freely on their blogs, podcast, and YouTube…”

    This factually incorrect. I’ve written a total of five comment replies on my blog explaining why you have you this completely wrong. If you’re not prepared to correct this story, removing the parts which accuse us of saying something we did not, I will apply to the blogger admins to remove it.

    To be perfectly clear, for the sixth and final time:
    Sye was not told he could not use the recording. He was told he could not use it for financial gain, or edit out our full remarks.

    The reason for this stipulation, was that he had already suggested he might break our original agreement, not to use the recording of our first podcast conversation with Eric Hovind, by selling a DVD of the conversation on we had on Hovind’s site.

    That is why we read the disclaimer, and that is why we specifically included YouTube in the agreement, which Sye verbally agreed to TWICE.

    No-one, repeat NO-ONE is suggesting for one single solitary second, that Sye cannot do whatever he wants with the recording, so long as he doesn’t break our agreement that he should not profit from it.

    If he had sought our agreement, for it to be used, he would have been told the same thing we told Eric Hovind; that we have no problem with him making it available for sale, as long as he gives the profits to the Doctors Without Borders charity. But he didn’t even ask. He just went ahead and used it anyway.

    If you do not amend the above blog entry, to reflect the actual facts of this story, you’ll find out the hard way what happens to people who use my name to spread slanderous lies, in the name of blatant profiteering. You’ve been asked politely. I won’t ask twice.

  18.      I have already commented on my own blog about what Dan has become. I have no reason to believe that he will correct his libel. Deception is now his way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s