Split Thread the TM and anti-semitism

[HotRodDeluxe]

Do you or do you not consider whomever you're talking about to be "the vilest individuals one could interact with online"?

Note for comprehension: "THEY" (the subject) being the 'many...on a site I frequent'.

Did I not state thus? Yes, 'they' are the vilest individuals I have had the displeasure of interacting with online. Their comments are unbelievably hateful.

Precision of language would be helpful, thanks.

So would good comprehension.

 

[trustbutverify]

Actual Jew checking in. In my experience, anti-semites don't need a reason for their hatred. Whatever reason they claim to have is just the latest rationalization of their beliefs.

Another actual Jew checking in. I agree 100% with this comment, but the point is that Jew haters seem to be at the root of truthdoom and many similar CT's. I doubt trutherism would have acquired a fraction of its peak momentum without its despicably racist foundation.

 

[Jango]

Note for comprehension: "THEY" (the subject) being the 'many...on a site I frequent'.

Did I not state thus? Yes, 'they' are the vilest individuals I have had the displeasure of interacting with online. Their comments are unbelievably hateful.



So would good comprehension.

Thanks. A more appropriate way of saying it.

 

[Jango]

Another actual Jew checking in. I agree 100% with this comment, but the point is that Jew haters seem to be at the root of truthdoom and many similar CT's. I doubt trutherism would have acquired a fraction of its peak momentum without its despicably racist foundation.

Both are quite the stretch to take seriously.

 

[HotRodDeluxe]

Thanks. A more appropriate way of saying it.

It would have been obvious if you observed the subject of the post, but you didn't. You chose to ignore in a pathetic attempt to create a false generalisation that didn't exist in the post.

 

[trustbutverify]

Many Stormfront supporters on one site I frequent are truthers. The 'dancing Israelis' canard comes up with alarming regularity, and 'da Jooz' are behind 9/11, and just about every other event that happens in the world today.

Personally, in my experience 9/11 truth and anti-Semitism are concomitant. I am labelled a 'Zioshill'; a 'Sayanim'; a 'Jewbot' and every other anti-Semitic term you can think of just because I understand the irrational nature of truther claims.

They are the vilest individuals one could interact with online.

Now, there's some real truth.

 

[trustbutverify]

Both are quite the stretch to take seriously.

For someone who needs not to, I suppose.

 

[Jango]

It would have been obvious if you observed the subject of the post, but you didn't. You chose to ignore in a pathetic attempt to create a false generalisation that didn't exist in the post.

Instead of lying your ass off now, you could have simply admitted your hyperbole, which is exactly what this statement is: "They are the vilest individuals one could interact with online."

 

[Jango]

For someone who needs not to, I suppose.

Then make your argument.

 

[Oystein]

Another actual Jew checking in. I agree 100% with this comment, but the point is that Jew haters seem to be at the root of truthdoom and many similar CT's. I doubt trutherism would have acquired a fraction of its peak momentum without its despicably racist foundation.

I understand the feeling and intuition, but so far find it very difficult to gauge, weigh, quantify the influence of anti-semitism on trutherism.

 

[JSanderO]

It seems as if people who reject all sorts of mainstream narratives find common cause with each other. I suspect this accounts for the fact that many "main stream narrative rejecters" pop up in various groups. It the tendency to dismiss the mainstream as a pack of lies... on issue A and then embrace that notion... that someone who lies about A is probably lying about B, C, D, E and so on... They find common elements in the "official" narrative and this reinforces the notion of a systematic approach to manage perception and conceal agendas.

 

[Jango]

It seems as if people who reject all sorts of mainstream narratives find common cause with each other. I suspect this accounts for the fact that many "main stream narrative rejecters" pop up in various groups. It the tendency to dismiss the mainstream as a pack of lies... on issue A and then embrace that notion... that someone who lies about A is probably lying about B, C, D, E and so on... They find common elements in the "official" narrative and this reinforces the notion of a systematic approach to manage perception and conceal agendas.

Ever read Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media or anything else from Noam Chomsky that has to do with public relations, the media or national security?

Here's two recent examples of changing stories to better manage perception:
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/05...fghan-hospital-from-mistake-to-justification/
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/15...an-waters-to-an-even-more-suspicious-version/

 

[trustbutverify]

I understand the feeling and intuition, but so far find it very difficult to gauge, weigh, quantify the influence of anti-semitism on trutherism.

I freely agree my conclusions are based on a certain degree of subjective experience and observation, by their very nature. That doesn't mean, of course, that they aren't balls-on accurate, which I believe they are.

I also believe racists seem to be at the root of the Obama "Birther" CT, and I doubt it would have have reached a fraction of its peak momentum without its despicably racist foundation. Honestly, do you think most reasonable skeptics would find that statement a stretch to even take seriously, let alone accept? I don't.

 

[Bubba]

Posted by Bubba View Post

Yes seriously.
They claimed Mossad orchestrated 911 so that USA would attack Mossad's enemies.
I'm not saying it made sense.

According to its proponents in 911 truther world, it was a garden variety false flag attack scenario.
Lack of evidence didnt matter to them.

Thanks for explaining.
So why would they say such things? -> Anti-semitism.

Possibly, but how does one know for certain? Are they actually anti-semitic?

Maybe they thought they saw criminal ie deception activity.

Wouldnt proof of antisemitism be needed? Are you saying that accusing Mossad is automatically anti-semitic?

Without proof, why would accusing Mossad be deemed antisemitic?

Thats why I ask if accusing mafia of crime is anti-italian.

Suspecting an italian of being in mafia might be similar....possible but not automatic.

Suspecting a truther of being anti-semitic is similar...possible but not automatic.

 

[beachnut]

... or anything else from Noam Chomsky ...

Chomsky knows 911 truth is dumbed down BS.

Chomsky shut down Tuskin's claims. If scientists had strong evidence to support 9/11 conspiracy theories, he said, they would have presented their discoveries to other architects and engineers, would have published their arguments in scientific journals and attempted to persuade other professionals that they'd found something worth investigating.

"There happen to be a lot of people around who spent an hour on the Internet and think they know a lot of physics," he added, "but it doesn't work like that ... There's a reason there are graduate schools in these departments."

 

[HotRodDeluxe]

Instead of lying your ass off now, you could have simply admitted your hyperbole, which is exactly what this statement is: "They are the vilest individuals one could interact with online."

Come on, you're fooling no-one. If you don't strawman, you go for the cheap 'gotcha' moment. Most interactions with you are the same.

If you observed the subject of my post you would have had no problem, but you chose to ignore it on some quest for a cheap 'gotcha' moment.

You chose to interpret my post incorrectly and ignore the key clauses and words in order to manipulate the converstaion, and for that immature tactic you've earned my contempt.

 

[Oystein]

Ever read Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media or anything else from Noam Chomsky that has to do with public relations, the media or national security?

Here's two recent examples of changing stories to better manage perception:
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/05...fghan-hospital-from-mistake-to-justification/
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/15...an-waters-to-an-even-more-suspicious-version/

Yes I have read Manufacturing Consent (by Chomsky and Edward Herman). Good, convincing book.
It doesn't conclude that the media lie about everything and are able to invent anything and conceal forever everything they want to conceal.

In fact, Chomsky himself finds the idea that 9/11 was a huge conspiracy by the Bush government (or substantial elements thereof) idiotic, precisely because the information that all the necessary co-conspirators would have could not be managed in the way truthers imagine - and that would include truthers who have read Chomsky.

 

[trustbutverify]

In fact, Chomsky himself finds the idea that 9/11 was a huge conspiracy by the Bush government (or substantial elements thereof) idiotic, precisely because the information that all the necessary co-conspirators would have could not be managed in the way truthers imagine - and that would include truthers who have read Chomsky.

Not to mention the type of contortions necessary for the collective mass media to continuously achieve in order to maintain this astronomically complex sham.

An actual example of Chomsky's consent-manufacturing in action would be RT and PressTV's glossy campaign to convince the willingly guillable that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job secret conspiracy.

 

[trustbutverify]

Wouldnt proof of antisemitism be needed? Are you saying that accusing Mossad is automatically anti-semitic?

No. I'm saying the chances claims of Mossad being responsible for the 9/11 attacks not being related to an antisemitic agenda are roughly the same as claims that the Holocaust was a hoax not being related to an antisemitic agenda.

 

[Jango]

Come on, you're fooling no-one. If you don't strawman, you go for the cheap 'gotcha' moment. Most interactions with you are the same.

If you observed the subject of my post you would have had no problem, but you chose to ignore it on some quest for a cheap 'gotcha' moment.

You chose to interpret my post incorrectly and ignore the key clauses and words in order to manipulate the converstaion, and for that immature tactic you've earned my contempt.

Projection much?