Perhaps green goddess IS Neil Clark.

Initially I thought greengoddess might be Clarkie's better half - hence my question about "her" possible Hungarian origins. However, it seems like our host has hit the nail on the head yet again. "greengoddess" certainly is the kind of handle Clarkie is likely to choose given his love of objects antiquated, ugly and useless and his quite barmy desire to turn the clock back fifty years and more.

I'm actually feeling a little bit sorry for Clark ("rachmones" is my middle name). How can one not feel sympathy for a guy who has been so comprehensively crushed by Mr. Kamm? It's been like watching a tiger flicking a mouse away with its paw. What possessed him to pick a fight with someone who outclasses him so comprehensively in every single area is I suppose something that will remain forever a complete mystery. I just hope that he can pick himself up and carry on with the rest of his life. Given how obsessed Clark seems with the whole business, I do have grave doubts about this.

" What possessed him to pick a fight with someone who outclasses him so comprehensively in every single area is I suppose something that will remain forever a complete mystery. "

To be fair, this all started when Clark was commissioned by the Telegraph to review Kamm's book, so it's not so much a case of picking a fight as having one picked for him.

But it's undoubtedly true that Clark isn't the brightest spark: quite aside from the touching (if not toe-curling) naïveté of most of his writing, if you notice the entries in his blog circa January to March this year, you'll notice a lot of linkage to other people's comments about Kamm, but virtually no substantive criticism originating from him.

And I suspect that this is because he knows full well that if he attempted the Kamm-fisk that he so unwisely promised, Kamm would respond in kind and the end result would make Christians being fed to lions look positively humanitarian by comparison.

Dearest Stephen,

I can assure you I am not Neil Clark.
But I will not be revealing my true identity when commenters who agree with you are under no compulsion to do likewise.
With my warmest regards,
The Green Goddess

p.s. As much as I disagree with most of your opinions Stephen, I would not dream of sending malicious emails, under an alias, to your editors at The Times and the Daily Mail in an attempt to prevent you from earning a living. That is what a "Mr George Courtenay" did to Neil Clark. And "Mr George Courtenay" cced his email to Mr Oliver Kamm. Clark has posted the email in question on his blog. www.neilclark66.blogspot.com

"To be fair, this all started when Clark was commissioned by the Telegraph to review Kamm's book, so it's not so much a case of picking a fight as having one picked for him."

I am referring to the court case. The great Lord Goodman, a very wise man with no small experience in this area, always used to strongly advise clients against pursuing a claim for defamation. His argument was simple: such cases tend to greatly amplify the original statements. He used to tell the client to forget all about it and in a short while so would the rest of the world. It is advice that would have served Clark very well. That Kamm is a wealthy man and Clark is not should also have deterred him given the potential costs which could have run into the many hundreds of thousands of pounds (the County Court schtick was obviously a complete non-starter). The most important issue that should have weighed with Clark is that while Kamm's statements may very well be hurtful (the truth often is), they are obviously not defamatory. The claim that he suffered financial loss as a result of those statements would also have been impossible to prove.

"I can assure you I am not Neil Clark."

LMAO. That's a claim that could easily be made by his wife. So is it Edgar Bergen or Charlie McCarthy?

"As much as I disagree with most of your opinions Stephen, I would not dream of sending malicious emails, under an alias, to your editors at The Times and the Daily Mail in an attempt to prevent you from earning a living."

This quite mad accusation which is obviously directly aimed at Mr. P. should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

There is a neat little package out there which enables bloggers to identify the physical address posters are using. I must send the relevant link to Mr. Pollard.

"Given that Mr Clark himself has been so thoroughly discredited as a reliable writer, perhaps his wife is the only person left who is willing to defend the mass murderer worshiping lover of the Warsaw Pact in public."

Didn't she once send you an e-mail threatening legal action unless you withdrew your charge about Clarkie worshipping mass-murderers?

And while you're at it "Joshua" you can also send the "neat little package" to Neil Clark so he can find out who you are and, far more importantly, who "George Courtenay" is.
Toodle pip!

"And while you're at it "Joshua" you can also send the "neat little package" to Neil Clark so he can find out who you are and, far more importantly, who "George Courtenay" is."

You have completely lost it.

Dearest Stephen,

When "Joshua" and your other regular commenters who hide under an alias reveal their true identities, I'll happily reveal mine. Otherwise, readers of your blog might suspect your only interest was in outing those commenters who disagree with you!
We wouldn't want them to think that of such an outspoken defender of free speech would we?

Warmest regards,
The Green Goddess

"We wouldn't want them to think that of such an outspoken defender of free speech would we?
Warmest regards,
The Green Goddess"

The longer you continue in this vein, the more people will side with Stephen Pollard. Behaving like a total bitch might well work well in your usual neck of the woods, but around here all you're likely to get is the cold shoulder.

Having dealt with ticket agencies such as Ticketmaster, I can confirm that the 'sod the public' attitude is alive and well in the private sector. For some events at least, such agencies are the only source of tickets so the option of choosing a better supplier is not available.

oh balls, comment is in wrong thread - humble apologies

Just to mention, Stephen, that I'm doing a longer piece on you on Saturday evening, based on the Sadler's Wells [had to choose between that and Green Goddess] - I'd tell you by e-mail if I could but of course I'm still blocked and can get no e-mail notifications from you either.

"When "Joshua" and your other regular commenters who hide under an alias reveal their true identities, I'll happily reveal mine"

The foul stench of Clarkian hypocrisy is truly overpowering. We are "hiding" and you are not? And if you are indeed Clark or his wife, then there is also a huge difference between us and you. For a normal poster to adopt an alias is common practice on the internet and more particularly the blogosphere. Indeed, out of the countless millions who read blogs and post every single day, the vast majority adopt handles. The reason for this is obvious: personal security. However, when a blogger uses his real name, it goes against a widely accepted principle to then defend herself or himself on his own or other blogs by using a pseudonym (I see little difference if the poster employs a relative or friend to do the same). If I remember correctly, a prominent American journalist was fired a year or two back for breaching that exact principle.

There is another thing which relates to you more personally. Most posters at one time and another have lost their rag with Mr. Pollard or decided that he was due for a little ribbing. And while posters can be quite cutting when hurling insults at each other (something that is often completely forgotten by the next post), I can think of no poster other than yourself who has not displayed at least a basic level of courtesy to our host. Such courtesy is his natural due - he is a decent human being, a respected journalist and intellectual, and we are merely his guests. Actually, I think it goes way beyond that. You display a level of snideness and viciousness towards Mr. P. that is really quite chilling. It is almost as if you would get great pleasure from seeing Mr. Pollard, or anyone else who crosses you, dead. Whilst it would obviously take a lot more than your malevolence to rattle our host, such behaviour is most inappropriate.

What I have learned over a number of years in the most cut-throat of businesses is that few serious fights are worth it. Even after the fists are flying, it is usually far better to swallow one's pride, take a step back and then offer to take one's opponent out for a decent meal instead. This goes double when your opponent outclasses you. Obviously, this does not always work (I wouldn't try it with Hamas or Putin), but in most cases you'll find, especially in the right little, tight little island where you are living, that people are basically decent and by nightfall the fight will be well and truly over. In Mr. Clark's case, the problem is, I suspect, that he is one of those rare people who would rather pop his clogs than take a step back. Unless of course his house and savings are at stake, and then he simply runs off the field of battle. In that, he puts me in mind of a cartoon Paris Match carried many moons ago. A little man is walking down the street and puffing out his chest. "I'm the biggest, I'm the strongest. I'm the biggest, I'm the strongest," he tells himself. This continues for a long time until he arrives at the corner of a street when he is confronted by a huge bruiser of a man obviously ready for a fight. We next see the little man running down the street. "I'm the fastest, I'm the fastest," he reassures himself.

And now, if you don't mind, I'm going to go listen to a little Zoot Sims and eat a bagel or three with my beautiful girlfriend.

Who's hiding around here? Miss 'Communism was great in Hungary' or this commenter?

OK, this one's in the blogfocus on Saturday. And I still think greengoddess is Neil Clark in a skirt.

"You display a level of snideness and viciousness towards Mr. P. that is really quite chilling. It is almost as if you would get great pleasure from seeing Mr. Pollard, or anyone else who crosses you, dead. "

Sorry, Joshua, but this is ridiculously hyperbolic - and utterly undermines what was otherwise a reasonable case against our verdantly pseudonymous friend.

In any case, you are demonstrably in NO position to accuse others of viciousness. Given my line of work, calling me an anti-Semite is as vicious as insults get (not to mention far more grossly defamatory than anything Oliver Kamm wrote about Neil Clark), and yet you thought that this was an appropriate response merely because I complained that your graphic account of rapes and similar abuses (recounted in considerable tactile and even olfactory detail) was almost surreally inappropriate in what was ostensibly a Milton Friedman obituary thread.

It's a shame, because I think your analysis of Clark is otherwise right on the money.

Has anyone actually seen any Joshua comments on any other site but Stephen's? Just asking.