The astonishing internet resource Wikipedia
has a judicious entry for Free Republic
which uses references to VDARE to anchor its summary of the opposition case:
On some issues, however, the Free Republic membership is divided… with neoconservatism being represented in the large majority of posts…Immigration RiftRobinson has taken informal positions in favor of George W. Bush`s amnesty program for illegal immigration, causing a substantial rift in the membership of the site. The difference of opinion has allegedly resulted in Robinson`s decision to ban several hundred posters and the resignation of many others. (/articles/alipacs-gheen-refutes-frs-jimrob) Critics on the right, such as VDARE have likened Robinson`s activities to political purges and suggest that he screens new members of the site who take a differing position on immigration from his own. (http://vdare.com/articles/not-so-free-republic-the-shot-heard-around-the-net) Robinson is also said to engage in censorship of articles that criticize illegal immigration”
(“Informal”? JimRob could hardly be more more systematic in his repression of immigration reformers. “Covert” perhaps.)
The Wikipedia note closes by listing a series of “External Links” with VDARE’s FreeRepublic Archive
being the main skeptic resource.
I found this reference (by following a search on the blog search engine Technorati
) on the bulletin board of the Friends of Liberty
website where the poster commented:
Once a good site. Owner Jim Robinson pulled a classic "bait & switch" routine on hundreds of thousands of contributors to his erstwhile "online forum for independent, grassroots conservatism…I pity the fool who ever gave a nickel to that skunk. Stupid is as stupid does. Etc.
I am delighted to see VDARE.COM cited in this way– confirming that I was right to turn to the internet after being purged
from National Review.
Where would we be without the Internet?