This site accuses me of being a "9/11 Truther," which is a bit like saying that Winston Churchill was a big fan of Adolf Hitler.
I've spent countless hours writing posts and comments debunking the claims of controlled demolition. In the left hand column, I link to many sites which detail the scientific flaws of the "tranny" arguments. In the right hand column, I have placed a large and colorful ad -- of my own devising, and offered free of charge -- linking to a site which offers an excellent refutation of those absurd claims. The CDers despise me.
And yet twice now, fools on pro-Obama sites have classified me as a CD proponent. Is there something about Obama-worship which injures the ability to read the English language? (Oh...and just in case some revisionist wants to try to convince me that Churchill really was a big Adolf fan: Please peddle that malarky elsewhere.)
11 comments:
He corrected the error of calling you a 9/11 truther.
The Obama'bots are worse than right wingers when it comes to lying about everything.
Quite frankly, I think most Obamabots are ex-right wingers. They are using the same mindless spiel and tactics as they used to push Bush.
You were called a 9/11 truther because you ARE.
You have an ad to a video "press for truth" right there on your front page.
Can you show me where an Obama fan called you a CD tranny?
Just because you truthers are split amongst lunatics and healthy skeptics doesn't immediately separate you from a truth movement.
Your problem now is the smearing of Obama you are engaging in.
You prove none of it is racist because you voted for Jessie Jackson, but you fail to mention how incredibly misinformed and naive you must have been voting for him based on the rational you present for rejecting the Democratic nominee in 2008.
Jessie was FAR MORE connected to the people you claim make Obama unelectable.
Your reputation will forever be tarnished by your irrational attempts at concocting reasons the 'whitey' tape could be real.
Enjoy the wilderness.
You'd think the controlled demolition folks and Obama supporters would be better friends, really. They occupy the same parallel universe of delusion.
Hey Joe
we all know that it was you, actually, who put the thermite in the buildings ....in BLACKFACE (because you're such a damn racist) and that you did it for two reasons only 1) VINCE FOSTER!!!! 2) WTC7!!!! and 3) MENA MENA MENA!!!!! when oh when will you stop loving Hillary??? (and don't think because there'2 three reasons up there that 2 + 2 doesn't = 5
I suppose I had best reply to amy.
You show the typical Obot mentality -- you judge before you do your research. You have not seen "9/11: Press For Truth," and you did not bother to read up on it.
It is NOT a pro-CD documentary. The producers, I happen to know, are utterly contemptuous of that whole subculture. The most important sections of the film concentrates on the escape of Osama Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda members after the invasion of Afghanistan.
Neither did I concoct anything regarding the "Whitey" tape. My non-insane readers understood that I had debunked one iteration of the story. I suspect that one of the reasons why Larry Johnson doesn't particularly care for me is that I once suggested in cyber-print that his sources have read his CIA psych workup and thus know exactly what approach to take in order to string him along.
As for the wilderness -- I embrace it. You must be new here - otherwise, you would know that my motto is "Dig or Split." Unlike every other blogger you can think of, I try to chase off my readers, especially ANYONE who tries to tell me what to do. I have discouraged links to this site. (Getting Raw Story to stop linking to me was an epic struggle.) Oddly enough, though, despite this snarling, ursine go-to-hell attitude, my readership has been going up.
Not sure why that is. Maybe for the same reason that Jeremy Brett's waspish version of Sherlock Holmes became more popular than Basil Rathbone's noble and ingratiating interpretation.
What I don't understand is why the Obots keep coming here. I have one O-nut who shows up like nearly every morning to tell me that nobody visits my site anymore. He's been doing it for weeks. He doesn't seem to notice the contradiction.
By the way, I LINK to a page where an Obama fan called me a CD-er. The proprietor changed the reference. It also happened before on DU.
Well, Joseph, I was going to comment to the effect of seeing your trying to reason with those who make false claims about you or your work as being futile. But now I read that a correction has been made (is that as distinct from a retraction and apology?), so it becomes obvious to me that your reasoning with writers of nonsense not always futile. Overall, the amount of work necessary in presenting such reasoning and evidence, as compared to the effectiveness of the clarity and factfulness produced remains, to me, an open question (my tendency is to see it as hard work, but worthwhile, assuming the targets are chosen with some care.)
Still, looking at the thought-object which spurred my first impression, there seems to be another facet worth examining.
We are at war. It is a fight for the minds of people. Too much "on the defensive" means too much expenditure of time and energy that could used in offensive pushes. Good art, poetry, and science are not defensive, I'm thinking (although, God knows, the enemy has certainly made some inroads against quality being expressed in those fields.) If there is some truth to that, I'm wondering if good blogging (in reference to this war) might also look to the same principle in allotting its resources.
Churchill's love for MUSSOLINI was evident; for Hitler, not so much.
Although he did have a few nice words for Adolf as well.
For the same reason, evidently, that he liked Il Duce: anti-communism.
...sofla
lookin good!
sofla,
Communism? I don't buy that. Curchill and crowd financed and otherwise put Hitler into power to turn East against RUSSIA, whose potential economic, scientific and cultural development threatened the empire.
Why did the same crowd destroy Germany after WW I? Same thing--stop such development.
The imperial utopia dreamers went sour on Hitler when he turned West threatening the seat of the empire.
They hate development under sovereign nation states. They are forced to allow some (post-Renaissance) under their corporatist-fascist-imperial model. (Having the trains run on time is O.K. as long as they are full of virtual cattle.)
Post a Comment