Are Truthers' accusations against Silverstein based on latent anti-Semitism?

RedIbis said:
Primarily, I find the quick connection of criticizing Silverstein with anti semitism to be illogical and counter to the spirit of this forum.
Click to expand...
I agree. This thread has me thinking of starting another, in a more appropriate forum.

Specifically, I've found skepticism to be situational. People can be very skeptical about some things but not so much on others. Visit the politics forum here and you'll find people who's skepticism appears reserved for only those things which counter their personal political beliefs. When it comes to their own beliefs, they might as well be political supporters of Sylvia Brown.

This thread highlights the exact same phenomenon.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater though. Just because someone may accuse you of anti-semitisim without evidence (other then typical CT style evidence), doesn't mean they can't exhibit "normal" skeptical behavior in other matters.
 
~enigma~ said:
Of course I would but then I would drop it.
You mean there aren't those in the truth movement that blame Silverstein for the exact same reason those same people claim Mossad was involved (IE Daniel Lewin was aboard flight 11 as an agent of Saryat Maktal although he retired 5 years prior and founded Akami who had offices in Boston and San Fransisco), same people who claim the "dancing" Israelis were Mossad, same people who claim the protocols of the elders of zion are true and accurate, same people who deny the holocaust, same people who claim jews (whom the mask as zionists) are evil? You mean there are none of those? Believe me Red, the connection isn't being bandied about for no reason.
Click to expand...

You can be sure I'll drop the issue as soon as charges of anti-semitism cease.

You can also be sure that I'll heartily and vigorously defend myself if they continue.
 
RedIbis said:
I've articulated endlessly how I think Silverstein was being dishonest in his interview, and not once did I bring up his religious or ethnic background. All of this jew hater talk originates with the so called skeptics, which is often the case around here.

More importantly, I never accused Silverstein of a crime since lying and botching an interview is not a criminal offense. I have been far more scathing in my criticisms of Giuliani, Myers, Bush and Cheney, and oddly, I have not been called anti-Italian, anti-general, anti-frat boy Conneticut blue blood, or anti-cyborg.
Click to expand...

Well, if my recollection is correct, your references to Silverstein "lying through his dentures" and such about the destruction of the Salomon Bros Bldg strongly implied that he was somehow complicit in its destruction. Not just that he "botch[ed] an interview." Are you saying that you do not believe he was complicit? That there was no "inside job" in this case?

I look forward to your answer, but I don't believe you will give it.

Depending on your age, you may or may not be aware that it did not used to be unusual for arson to be referred to as "Jew insurance." That is, there was a trope that Jewish landlords were somehow more inclined to destroy their properties for the payoff. I ran across this most recently at, of all places, a tired-old-lefties-and-folkies cookout (!) in Ann Arbor, Michigan. (Yes, the People's Republic of Ann Arbor.) I was so surprised to hear it that all I did was snarl at the clown.

Like it or not, you are plucking anti-semitic tropes from the cultural context in this matter.
 
RedIbis said:
You can be sure I'll drop the issue as soon as charges of anti-semitism cease.

You can also be sure that I'll heartily and vigorously defend myself if they continue.
Click to expand...
No comment on the latter part of my post? Why? Is it wrong?
 
DavidJames said:
I agree. This thread has me thinking of starting another, in a more appropriate forum.

Specifically, I've found skepticism to be situational. People can be very skeptical about some things but not so much on others. Visit the politics forum here and you'll find people who's skepticism appears reserved for only those things which counter their personal political beliefs. When it comes to their own beliefs, they might as well be political supporters of Sylvia Brown.

This thread highlights the exact same phenomenon.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater though. Just because someone may accuse you of anti-semitisim without evidence (other then typical CT style evidence), doesn't mean they can't exhibit "normal" skeptical behavior in other matters.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more. The skepticism does appear conditional. I was thinking of starting a thread myself but I was not sure where to post it. It should be a requirement that if a charge of bigotry, racism, anti-semitism is made against a member, there must be evidence for such a charge. Without it, the charge should be retracted and an apology made. This isn't a casual insult. I can't imagine too many people here would take kindly to being called a jew hater.
 
SDC said:
Well, if my recollection is correct, your references to Silverstein "lying through his dentures" and such about the destruction of the Salomon Bros Bldg strongly implied that he was somehow complicit in its destruction. Not just that he "botch[ed] an interview." Are you saying that you do not believe he was complicit? That there was no "inside job" in this case?

I look forward to your answer, but I don't believe you will give it.

Depending on your age, you may or may not be aware that it did not used to be unusual for arson to be referred to as "Jew insurance." That is, there was a trope that Jewish landlords were somehow more inclined to destroy their properties for the payoff. I ran across this most recently at, of all places, a tired-old-lefties-and-folkies cookout (!) in Ann Arbor, Michigan. (Yes, the People's Republic of Ann Arbor.) I was so surprised to hear it that all I did was snarl at the clown.

Like it or not, you are plucking anti-semitic tropes from the cultural context in this matter.
Click to expand...

It was actually referred to as "Jewish Lightning."
 
SDC said:
Well, if my recollection is correct, your references to Silverstein "lying through his dentures" and such about the destruction of the Salomon Bros Bldg strongly implied that he was somehow complicit in its destruction. Not just that he "botch[ed] an interview." Are you saying that you do not believe he was complicit? That there was no "inside job" in this case?

I look forward to your answer, but I don't believe you will give it.

Depending on your age, you may or may not be aware that it did not used to be unusual for arson to be referred to as "Jew insurance." That is, there was a trope that Jewish landlords were somehow more inclined to destroy their properties for the payoff. I ran across this most recently at, of all places, a tired-old-lefties-and-folkies cookout (!) in Ann Arbor, Michigan. (Yes, the People's Republic of Ann Arbor.) I was so surprised to hear it that all I did was snarl at the clown.

Like it or not, you are plucking anti-semitic tropes from the cultural context in this matter.
Click to expand...
I got you beat on that. I heard it on LCF last year from a member that they "warned" me for calling anti-semitic. Then they made a special forum for anti-jewish stuff. And Dylan was stupid enough to think that he was going to work in hollywood in the media they claim is controlled by jews while his forum allows anti-semitic hate balony.
 
~enigma~ said:
No comment on the latter part of my post? Why? Is it wrong?
Click to expand...

The problem with this latter part is that you are conflating a whole bunch of unrelated info.

You are suggesting that a legitimate criticism of Likudniks or Israeli neo cons automatically suggests an endorsement of the historical hoax, the "Protocals."

I'm not going to get into another drawn out debate on whether political criticisms of the Israeli right wing is akin to anti-semitism. If that were the case, more than half of the Israeli electorate would be called anti-semitic.
 
RedIbis said:
The problem with this latter part is that you are conflating a whole bunch of unrelated info.

You are suggesting that a legitimate criticism of Likudniks or Israeli neo cons automatically suggests an endorsement of the historical hoax, the "Protocals."

I'm not going to get into another drawn out debate on whether political criticisms of the Israeli right wing is akin to anti-semitism. If that were the case, more than half of the Israeli electorate would be called anti-semitic.
Click to expand...
No...if you actually read what I wrote you would see that I am talking about one poster over at the LCF boards that incidentally wasn't banned. Now if you want to call it all unrelated, that is fine but you are avoiding reality and I am now one step closer to those that see you "defending" or rather turning a blind eye to the blatent anti-semitism in the truth movement.
 
~enigma~ said:
No...if you actually read what I wrote you would see that I am talking about one poster over at the LCF boards that incidentally wasn't banned. Now if you want to call it all unrelated, that is fine but you are avoiding reality and I am now one step closer to those that see you "defending" or rather turning a blind eye to the blatent anti-semitism in the truth movement.
Click to expand...

I could care less about some idiot bigot on the LC forum (which I don't read) or any other forum. What does this have to do with Pomeroo calling me a jew hater and not being able to support his charge with evidence?
 
RedIbis said:
I could care less about some idiot bigot on the LC forum (which I don't read) or any other forum. What does this have to do with Pomeroo calling me a jew hater and not being able to support his charge with evidence?
Click to expand...
Hmm...i thought we were talking but I guess you prefer to sidestep and bring up Pomeroo. So you deny that it is seen as a problem. Do you know one reason the jews have a huge problem with the church is? During the holocaust the church essentially remained silent which is essentially a tacit aproval of what the nazi's were doing. You want to continue to turn a blind eye to the anti-semitism in the truth movement and people like pomeroo (and a few others) will continue to equate that with your tacit aproval of anti-semitism.
 
~enigma~ said:
Hmm...i thought we were talking but I guess you prefer to sidestep and bring up Pomeroo. So you deny that it is seen as a problem. Do you know one reason the jews have a huge problem with the church is? During the holocaust the church essentially remained silent which is essentially a tacit aproval of what the nazi's were doing. You want to continue to turn a blind eye to the anti-semitism in the truth movement and people like pomeroo (and a few others) will continue to equate that with your tacit aproval of anti-semitism.
Click to expand...

You don't need to tell me anything about the relationship between the Vatican and the Nazis. I can assure you of that.

Honestly, posters on jref give far more attention to the idiot bigots on the LCF than do most LCF members. The only time I've ever read LCF threads is when it's posted here. Then racist rants are either ignored or ridiculed by LCF members and receive far more attention here. People like Pomeroo give racists and anti-semites an audience. I don't choose to give them my attention.

I will also add that people like Pomeroo diminish the reality and danger of racism and anti-semitism by throwing that charge around so carelessly.
 
~enigma~ said:
Maybe that is what the vatican was doing...but for some reason that is neither what history nor the jews say is it?
Click to expand...

Why are you equating me with a millenia old religious institution that was turning a blind eye to giving safe passage to Nazis, as well as other sordid activities?
 
RedIbis said:
Why are you equating me with a millenia old religious institution that was turning a blind eye to giving safe passage to Nazis, as well as other sordid activities?
Click to expand...
You are admittedly turning a blind eye toward blatent anti-semitism in the truth movement. See any similarity?
 
~enigma~ said:
Hmm...i thought we were talking but I guess you prefer to sidestep and bring up Pomeroo. So you deny that it is seen as a problem. Do you know one reason the jews have a huge problem with the church is? During the holocaust the church essentially remained silent which is essentially a tacit aproval of what the nazi's were doing. You want to continue to turn a blind eye to the anti-semitism in the truth movement and people like pomeroo (and a few others) will continue to equate that with your tacit aproval of anti-semitism.
Click to expand...


Did you read this?

RedIbis said:
I would condemn any bigot, racist or anti-semite in or out of what you fallaciously refer to as the Twoofy Twoof Movement.

I also condemn anyone who throws around charges of bigotry, racism or anti-semitism without knowing what the hell he's talking about.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that it took longer than it should have, but then I admit some sympathy. Sometimes, when a pack of wolves advances, you can let them exhaust themselves and make themselves foolish without any need to expose any more flesh.

Are we making red look stupid here, or is it the other way round?
 
Last edited:
Confuseling said:
Did you read this?



It seems to me that it took longer than it should have, but then I admit some sympathy. Sometimes, when a pack of wolves advances, you can let them exhaust themselves and make themselves foolish without any need to expose any more flesh.

Are we making red look stupid here, or is it the other way round?
Click to expand...
And he turns around and says he doesn't see any blatent anti-semitism...seems like he contradicts himself MAJORLY. I wonder if he is as conflicted as Daniel Burros was?
 
RedIbis said:
More importantly, I never accused Silverstein of a crime since lying and botching an interview is not a criminal offense. I have been far more scathing in my criticisms of Giuliani, Myers, Bush and Cheney, and oddly, I have not been called anti-Italian, anti-general, anti-frat boy Conneticut blue blood, or anti-cyborg.
Click to expand...

The title of this subforum suggests that you are lying. If you are not accusing Silverstein of conspiracy then why do all of your accusations against him appear in a "9/11 Conspiracy Theories" subforum? Oops, you have been caught lying again. So sorry.
 
RedIbis said:
I could care less about some idiot bigot on the LC forum (which I don't read) or any other forum. What does this have to do with Pomeroo calling me a jew hater and not being able to support his charge with evidence?
Click to expand...

Quote where he specifically accuses you of being a jew hater. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom