This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) at 06:29, 12 July 2005 (→Myatt, National Socialism and Islam). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Myatt's alleged travels to Islamic nations

Myatt and Coolmoon both claim that he travelled to Islamic countries, but not a shred of evidence has been produced. I will gladly remove the accuracy notice following that paragraph if evidence is produced.Robert0 18:24, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Not a shred of evidence has been produced regarding the assertion - which you made and inserted here - about Myatt being a satanist. An assertion by you or a magazine like "Searchlight" is not evidence. Searchlight has not produced "one shred of evidence" to back up such a claim. In the interests of trying for NPOV I have not deleted such an unproved assertion about Myatt, but - I write again - it most certainly is not NPOV to insert "alleged" or "claimed" into the main article time and time again as you have done when a whole paragraph is devoted to that.

Did you not bother to read what I inserted below about NPOV and weaselspeak?

I claim nothing "about Myatt", contrary to what you assert above. Myatt himself has written about such travels in several published articles and in several private letters. You could of course now claim that Myatt is "lying" about this which would be an unproved accusation made by you which might seem by many to show your own bias against Myatt. Please do not bring that bias, that personal opinion - evident in what you write below - into this article. Coolmoon 03:59, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Myatt seems to put a lot of effort into self-promotion (many of the "neutral" external links are probably sites created by Myatt himself). Editors of this article need to be aware of this, and ensure that this article doesn't become another promotional vehicle for Myatt's apparently vivid fantasy life. Robert0 20:35, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

His own site (or sites, insofar as they aren't redundant) are on-topic. I don't think this article will serve him very far as promotional material ;-) - David Gerard 22:40, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

He seems to revel in the attention given to him, both positive and negative.Robert0 21:23, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Robert is just repeating what Searchlight_magazine claims about Myatt, and his comments about Myatt do not appear to be objective: note the smear "Myatt's apparently vivid fantasy life," and that he keeps adding items such as "Myatt claims" to the article.

In one respect Robert is clearly in error - Hamas has used, and does use, articles written by Abdul Aziz ibn Myatt. See

http://www.hamasonline.com/indexx.php?page=Qassam/martyrdom%20operations

I expect this link to be down sometime soon, however, as such sites tend to come and go.

The Searchlight claims have been made without any evidence being produced, and one can see in them an attempt, perhaps, to discredit Myatt.

The Julie Wright site has been existence for over six years, and presents both pro- and con- views.

I have amended the Myatt article in an attempt to be more objective. Coolmoon 07:38, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I have removed the web-link to the Folk site as much of the material is replicated on the Julie Wright site.

As for user Robert's assertion about this article promoting Myatt, I agree with user David Gerard - the references are all to material which are uncomplimentary about Myatt. Coolmoon 18:03, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Can we try and keep the article neutral and objective? I mean, avoid the use of terms like "alleged", or "Myatt asserts"? Also, avoid dragging in unsubstantiated allegations made by magazines, or newspapers, or political groups or individuals with probably their own agenda? So "Richard" has his own views about Myatt. Excellent. So do I have my own views - not pro- actually - but I do not wish to push my opinions on other readers. This after all is an encyclopedia, not a work of political journalism. Coolmoon 11:13, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There's absolutely nothing wrong with "alleged" or "Myatt asserts". The allegations are fine with the sources referenced - David Gerard 16:07, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I disagree. That reduces the article to the level of tabloid journalism, for all the allegations made about Myatt are just that - allegations, without any proof whatsoever being offered.

Now, if the sources were researched, academic, or detailed that would be another matter it seems to me. But these sources are far from that. In truth, most if not all of them seem to stem from the "Searchlight" magazine. Now, to apply such allegations, and innuendo and the like to all articles about individuals would make them far from objective.

Are we going to produce articles which just give someone's personal opinion about someone else, or are we going to try to be somewhat objective?

Let me see - take an article on wikipedia about someone at random and do what "Richard" is doing here. What do we get?

"Barack Obama has been accused of being a satanist - the founder of a secret satanic cult. A well-known self-publicist, Obama's weird fantasy life has come under media scrutiny recently when he spoke of his alleged visits to Africa. Obama has denied being a satanist..."

Now is that character assasination, or what? Coolmoon 18:07, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• To labor the point - I suggest "Robert" looks at the NPOV article and also Misplaced Pages:Guidelines for controversial articles, and in particular the "Be careful with weaselspeak" section.

For "Richard" it appears is indulging in weaselspeak.

It is not NPOV to continually insert "alleged", "assumed", or "claimed" in the main article about Myatt when I have already inserted a paragraph about some people claim to have doubts about certain events in Myatt's life. Coolmoon 06:17, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I agree with Coolmoon about the weaselspeak and have altered the Myatt article a little but keeping some comments about "the doubts" expressed by Robert above. They are all now at the end of the piece. For comparison, go see for example the article about Nick Griffin of the BNP - another neo-nazi - where weaselspeak is noticable by its absence. Deneb 07:25, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Since the article contains seven paragraphs of which the last two are given over to what in my view is weaselspeak, may be we can leave the article alone now, since these last paragraphs are nearly a third of the whole article and the introduction of any more weaselspeak would tip the balance too far. Coolmoon 18:00, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Robert is at it again - I mean, introducing more weaselspeak, which I've deleted. Read what Coolmoon writes above. About one third of the article is given over to other's views about Myatt - we don't need more. Those interested can follow up the Searchlight claims, or whatever, or read the books referenced in the article which give a quite anti-Myatt view. Robert - if you want to pursue what seems to be some kind of vendetta against Myatt, write elsewhere. Remmember, as keep writing here, Wiki is about NPOV.

• "Robert" inserted more claims about Myatt - which have been removed by A.N. Other - and even those claims are bogus. I've researched the Usenet archives, and found that such claims have been made, a few times, by others, and also refuted, very clearly, by Myatt aka Abdul Aziz.
  • Lest this falls to the level of a Usenet diatribe, others can do the research about Robert's assertions for themselves. They can start with "soc.religion.islam" and submissions by Abdul Aziz. I'm with Coolmoon et al that such "weaselspeak" as Robert is inserting is out of place in this article. I suggest he writes an article for "Searchlight", or even posts one on Usenet, which are far more suitable places for such claims and character assassination. Deneb 12:36, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• I have somewhat changed the part relating to Myatt's travels in Muslim lands - striving here for less bias (pace, Robert!) and the NPOV which is essential here. Coolmoon 05:43, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Further note re NPOV - if "Robert" inserts more weaselspeak, the next best course of action might be to consider a wiki "Request for arbitration" on this page which should put an end to the edit wars that seem to be going on here. We can avoid this by agreeing that the article as it stands is neutral and contains enough comments from others relating to certain events in Myatt's life, something I have strived to explain in my comments here. Coolmoon 14:38, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Merged articles

See Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Folk Culture and also Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Cosmic Ethics.

British Empire?

How much of a British Empire was there between 1950 and 1967? RickK 06:18, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Less than there was half a century before, certainly, but enough for his father to have been employed in its administration if that's the statement in the article you're refering to. See British_empire#Decolonisation. Plenty of African countries achieved their independence in the 1960s. — Trilobite (Talk) 13:16, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

References

This article seems to be based almost entirely on Myatt's own websites, or websites he appears to control. It would be useful to track down independent sources, particularly for claims about him having translated ancient Greek texts, being a former monk, and having studied physics. I deleted the section on cosmic ethics as it went on and on, didn't say anything all that different from the previous section, and seemed to constitute advertising for Myatt rather than a summary of his views. I also tidied up some poor writing, odd use of capitals etc. SlimVirgin 20:51, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Forgot to add that I rewrote the intro and added a photograph. SlimVirgin 21:29, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

To the anon IP, we can't call suicide attacks "martyrdom operations," though we can add that Myatt calls them this, if he does, bearing in mind that Misplaced Pages must be based on published sources. See Misplaced Pages:No original research. Many thanks, SlimVirgin 15:36, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

In reply to SlimVirgin. If you do a simple google you will find Myatt's Greek translations which have in the past eight or more years been used by several Universities. Copies of his translations are in the British Library. His Sappho translations are appreciated in some Sapphic circles, no less. As for him being a monk - this is documented. A photo of him with the other monks even appeared in a brochure published by the monastery in question. As for him studying Physics - again, this is documented. I suggest you approach people like Gerry Gable at the Searchlight organization (UK) if you want proof. But for your records - Uni was York; monk, Fort Augustus in Scotland. As for your remark about the websites - please, NPOV! Julie Wright's, the main one, is hardly pro-Myatt. As for using the term "martyrdom operations" - this is common in the Mid-East, and used by Islamists. Check out Hamas, Al-Qaeda and so on. Also, note that the term "Zionist-Crusader alliance" is likewise in common use by Islamists. I also suggest you read the books which are referenced - they give some background detail to Myatt's life, especially the one by Goodricke-Clark. I hope this helps :) Coolmoon 17:57, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Coolmoon. Do you have a source that says he went to Hull, because it would good to add this, and the matriculation year. I've checked with a friend who teaches Classics, and he doesn't know of Myatt's translations, which is not to say they don't exist, but we'll need to pin it down. The Google searches I've done return only Myatt-related or WP-related websites. Do you know who published the translations and when? Thanks for the Ampleforth Abbey information.

Also, do you know who Julie Wright is? It's not a question of using sources that are pro- or anti-Myatt. It's that we must use credible, reputable published sources, not personal websites. We can use Myatt's personal website as a source for what he says about himself, but if we want to state something as a fact, then we need an independent, reputable, third-party reference, and as we don't know who Julie Wright is (or I don't, anyway), we can't judge whether she counts as that. See Misplaced Pages:No original research for more details.

Regarding martyrdom operations, this article isn't about what Islamists say; it's about Myatt. If Myatt has called these martyrdom operations anywhere that we can find, then we can add after suicide attacks, "which Myatt has called martyrdom operations." But we can't associate the term with him otherwise, and we can't use it as though it's a normal way of describing suicide attacks. Most people in the world don't call them martyrdom operations. Hope this helps. SlimVirgin 18:11, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

If you read the Myatt article which is on the Hamas site you will see he uses the term martyrdom operations - the article is reproduced on his own Islamist site, and was on several other Islamist sites, which got closed down. Reference - http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/002935.php

As for his Greek translations, the original edition of his Agamemnon, for example, is 094664635X published in 1994. But I do believe many of his translations have been amended since publication with these amendments being on-line only, since Myatt has announced he upholds copyleft, not copyright. Suggest you try the following sites for use of his Greek texts - http://classicpersuasion.org/pw/sappho/sappmyatt.htm

www.pagebuilder.com.br/proscenio/biblioteca/oedipus.doc www.sogang.ac.kr/~anthony/Classics/Oedipus.htm

You say "reputable" and "credible" sources. And just who decides this? The virtue of this medium, this Misplaced Pages, is that we are not constrained by the Establishment. The Julie Wright site provides much Myatt material - check out the "Private Letters". We can use our own judgment to decide if what is on such a site is "credible" and "reputable" surely - and "published" now of course includes the Internet! As for her reliability, she has been used as a Myatt source by no less than the Searchlight organization - and is just "an ordinary bystander" with an interest in Myatt's poetry. Coolmoon 18:36, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for all this information, Coolmoon, which is extremely helpful. Regarding jihadwatch, I can't see anything on there from Myatt; sorry if I've missed it.

The ISBN number turned up this: Agamemnon: A Commentary and Radical New Translation, (Thormynd Greek Literature S), Aeschylus, D W Myatt (Translator), September 21, 1993), ISBN 094664635X, as well as other publications of Myatt's. I'd already checked Amazon and had found nothing, but I didn't know he was published as D W Myatt.

Regarding what counts as a reputable source, you are right, of course, and this is something of a bone of contention in Misplaced Pages, and we have to judge sources on a case-by-case basis. Academic sources are best, mainstream newspapers next best, and so on. The worst sources would be personal websites (unless we're writing about the website's owner, in which case it becomes primary-source material, and that's okay), or anything posted to a website's noticeboard, blog, Usenet etc. The problem with Julie Wright is that we don't know who she is. You say she's an ordinary bystander, but who? The difficulty is that we have no way of knowing if what she says is accurate, and if it's a personal website, there has been no fact-checking process, such as you'd find with e.g. The Times, New York Times etc. — as inadequate as their fact-checking procedures often are, they do exist, and it's this process of peer-review that makes the source credible or reputable by Misplaced Pages's standards.

If you can find a published source where Myatt explicitly calls suicide attacks "martyrdom operations", then I'm fine with you adding it to the intro, though it would be a good idea to link to the source after the sentence. SlimVirgin 19:14, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

• I've given a reference for Myatt's use of the term martyrdom operations, and you and others should know that many Muslims find the term "suicide attacks", or whatever, to be objectionable, and biased. Julie Wright's site contains verifiable information - such as the codename used by Scotland Yard when they were investigating Myatt for terrorist offences in 1998-2001. She gives most of her sources in her Biography of Myatt . She is an academic at an English University, I understand. Her sources have been accepted by people like Goodricke-Clarke, and "Searchlight", and have been used in at least three books which make mention of Myatt. AFAIK her sources are based on her own research, and on her personal correspondence and interviews with Myatt. Coolmoon 05:32, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

• • I've also added some more detail regarding Myatt's "The Numinous Way" since it seems that this and his Cosmic Ethics has led him to reject Islam, National Socialism, and so on, and to embrace such things as vegetarianism. One reference which mentions this is http://www.geocities.com/davidmyatt/gnostic_writings_of_david_myatt.html. Coolmoon 05:38, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Anon IP edits

The world "nature" isn't capitalized, and we can't keep adding to Myatt's views, as this article isn't meant to reflect only his views. SlimVirgin 07:26, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

• I beg to disagree regarding Nature in contrast to nature - for that is the essence of Myatt's argument regarding "Nature"; he sees it as a living being. Here is a reference

http://www.geocities.com/dwmyatt/cosmos1.html

and also

http://www.geocities.com/dwmyatt/whatnature.html

I have now added some additional references to the Reference section, and deleted the mention of Myatt having rejected Islam - no where can I find an explicit reference, by Myatt, to this. 65.57.106.52 04:00, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the references and correcting the thing about Islam. About the word "nature," if Myatt capitalizes it, we should do so when quoting him, but outside quotation marks, we have to write it as it's normally written, otherwise it looks as though we're going along with his worldview, which we're not allowed to do. Thanks for digging up all these references; it's very helpful. SlimVirgin 05:49, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Hi SlimVirgin! Cool name! (Yes - I've checked your page for it's origin!) On balance, I think you're right, so I'll leave as is. 65.57.106.52 08:29, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

I have removed the edits by 81.135.7.92 as the "Statement" they reference does not exist. I have reverted to my previous edits. 65.57.106.52 05:04, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Abdul Aziz Al-Qari

Myatt has denied using this particular Muslim alias, although it has been claimed, by others (on Usenet and elsewhere) that he does and has used it.

Myatt has only ever admitted to using the Muslim names Abdul-Aziz and Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt - see his replies on soc.religion.islam for instance and the following link:

Therefore, I have removed this name from the main article - unless someone can supply some evidence. Coolmoon 5 July 2005 06:18 (UTC)

Myatt, National Socialism and Islam

• I have removed the edits by Anon and reverted to some previous edits as the evidence indicates Myatt's rejection of Islam . See also where Myatt states:

<quote>I am not a Muslim. I have striven to explain the fundamental differences in my essay The Theology of The Numinous Way, which is a re-write of my older essay The Theology of National-Socialism. I have re-written that essay because The Numinous Way of Folk Culture differs not only from Islam, but also from National-Socialism...

Would you therefore describe yourself as a National-Socialist?

No, for I have gone beyond National-Socialism - beyond even that of my own earlier evolutionary National-Socialism - to the essence manifest in The Numinous Way.</quote>

This article is dated JD 2453519.813 which works at around May 29, 2005 CE Coolmoon 05:29, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, Coolmoon. Thanks for keeping an eye on the anon edits. Some of them looked a bit dodgy. SlimVirgin 06:29, July 12, 2005 (UTC)