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

[metamars]

As a response to some of metamars' comments, above, I would say this. If the Salomon Bros Bldg (now more frequently referred to as WTC7) had been owned by, say, Donald Trump, who is also an actual NYC real estate mogul, but who is not Jewish, I believe that there would have been very little discussion about the collapse of the building.

And I believe that this is a preposterous belief.

 

[pomeroo]

I said before that I don't feel personally insulted, although I expect if someone called you a jew-hater you would want to defend yourself.

Primarily, I find the quick connection of criticizing Silverstein with anti semitism to be illogical and counter to the spirit of this forum.

If I asked you to name the person who called you a Jew-hater and cite the post number, you'd vanish. Why not drop this puerile deception? As usual, you've conned no one.

 

[pomeroo]

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.

No one has accused him of anti-Semitism with or without evidence. He is being asked to explain his refusal to denounce the Jew-haters in the mindless, evil movement he serves.

 

[metamars]

I don't take charges of bigotry lightly.

But if you ignored them, I have a feeling you'd be accused of being a "coward". Just a feeling, mind you!

 

[SDC]

And I believe that this is a preposterous belief.

And I disagree with you. (I wish "posterous" were a word.) I think it is all too probable. That said, it's not provable; only arguable. No smoking guns.

Frankly, in your posts a little ways upthread, you lost me completely. I cannot follow your argument.

(ps No luck with a response from Chomsky? The left gatekeepers' thread? Ever since that video clip of him in, I think, Hungary, I've been interested in his views on the 9/11 conspiracy ideas.)

 

[pomeroo]

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?

Ah, so you been reduced to flat-out lying! Okay, we have established that pomeroo never called you a Jew-hater (quick--show us the post). We have further established that you have refused repeated requests to denounce the Jew-haters in the fantasy movement. You must either say something of substance (unimaginable for you) or perform your usual vanishing act.

 

[pomeroo]

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.

Turning a blind eye to the rampant anti-Semitism in the fantasy movement and refusing to denounce it IS tacit approval of anti-Semitism.

 

[pomeroo]

This thread is idiotic.

First of all, Larry Silverstein is a white American, not an Arab semite. He even has a white American sounding name. Larry is a common Christian name in the United States.

Second, Silverstein made the statements he is acussed of making on TV, so Silverstein should be blamed for the comments, not the 9/11 Truth movement.

The people who are blaming the Arabs are the anti-semites.

It doesn't work when the Black Muslims try it, either.

 

[pomeroo]

Follow the link in the OP. Pom admits as much, although he cowardly refers to it as an implication.

Several people, LashL, and others jumped on the opportunity and agreed with this silly charge.

The biggest coward here is calling someone else a coward??? No, I'm afraid the adults have caught you again. My insinuation cried out to be denied. Your refusal to issue a denial is what engendered this debate.

 

[~enigma~]

Turning a blind eye to the rampant anti-Semitism in the fantasy movement and refusing to denounce it IS tacit approval of anti-Semitism.

I agree...Lip service and actions are two different things and I see Red giving lip service only.

 

[Confuseling]

And I disagree with you. (I wish "posterous" were a word.)

Protoposterous! I've always wanted to be whelmed by something. I've heard spades about the underwelmed and the overwhelmed, but never the just nicely whelmed thanks.

I think it is all too probable. That said, it's not provable; only arguable. No smoking guns.

Frankly, in your posts a little ways upthread, you lost me completely. I cannot follow your argument.

(ps No luck with a response from Chomsky? The left gatekeepers' thread? Ever since that video clip of him in, I think, Hungary, I've been interested in his views on the 9/11 conspiracy ideas.)

When you say the left gatekeepers thread I presume you mean this one. Will have to read it at some point.

Chomsky has already spoken on 911, and I think done a pretty good job of it.





[edit - oh, I suppose that's what you meant! [sheepish] Is that Hungary then?]

 

[stateofgrace]

But if you ignored them, I have a feeling you'd be accused of being a "coward". Just a feeling, mind you!

Really?

What's the matter, do you have a problem answering a simple question? Tell you what, I'll give you a substitute one.

Do you condemn the JREF "debunkers" who are wife beaters? Do you? No evasion, now!

And if you don't like that, question, I'll give you another option. Do you condemn the JREF "debunkers" who are child molesters?

Please don't tell me that these simple questions are too hard for you to answer.

Wife beaters and child molesters? Just a feeling, eh?

Any other feelings you wish to share, oh wait............

Neither do I normally correct or condemn people who swear, say malicious things about black people, or say malicious or stupid things about women.

Revulsion is not a word I can use to describe your opinions, as it breaks forum rules, therefore I will not use it.

 

[metamars]

Wow! You can say absolutely nothing in many words. When we dispel your smokescreen, we find that a significant percentage of twoofers are Jew-haters. Whether the number is more than or less than half, I don't know.

Not only don't you know whether it's more than or less than half, you don't know whether it's near half or far away from half. You don't know whether it's 49% or 51%, and you also don't know whether it's 3% or 97%.

But why should such details bother you? You've got an axe to grind, and grind it you will.

It's actually very easy to figure out that many of you liars are anti-Semites. All one needs to do is read the crap churned out by your evil movement.

There's that nebulous word "many".

I don't feel embarrassed because I'm completely correct; you don't feel embarrassed because you're irrational.

Laughable.

Yadda-yadda. And in the end, your evil movement teems with Jew-haters.

In the end, the "debunker" community screams with smear merchants.

 

[metamars]

(ps No luck with a response from Chomsky? The left gatekeepers' thread? Ever since that video clip of him in, I think, Hungary, I've been interested in his views on the 9/11 conspiracy ideas.)

No, not yet. I posted my questions on the zcommunications' Chomsky Chat forum 6/22. 6/22 was the last day he posted, and he didn't address me.

 

[pomeroo]

Not only don't you know whether it's more than or less than half, you don't know whether it's near half or far away from half. You don't know whether it's 49% or 51%, and you also don't know whether it's 3% or 97%.

I don't know if it's 51% or 49%, but I know it's far greater than 3%. I know this because I receive countless e-mails from anti-Semitic twoofers.

But why should such details bother you? You've got an axe to grind, and grind it you will.

Such details shouldn't bother me, and they don't. I and the other rationalists here understand that a large segment of the fantasy movement consists of Jew-haters. Your ludicrous effort to deny the obvious has fallen flat.

There's that nebulous word "many".

You are understandably befuddled. It means "many."

Laughable.

What I have stated is completely true, and you are irrational.

In the end, the "debunker" community screams with smear merchants.

Another simple word that conspiracy liars are incapable of using correctly. When a loon accuses of Larry Silverstein of some vague, inexpressible crime, that's a smear. When a rationalist states that the fantasy movement teems with Jew-haters, that's a fact.

 

[RedIbis]

Ah, so you been reduced to flat-out lying! Okay, we have established that pomeroo never called you a Jew-hater (quick--show us the post). We have further established that you have refused repeated requests to denounce the Jew-haters in the fantasy movement. You must either say something of substance (unimaginable for you) or perform your usual vanishing act.

To me exposing you as irrational and bitter isn't much more than sport. For you, sadly, the implications are far more grave. It goes like this:

Originally Posted by Max Photon
Sorry Pomeroo, that speech was made when you played the Jew card on RedIbis a few posts ago.

Originally Posted by pomeroo
Hey, that's a good one! A rationalist plays the "Jew card" on a Jew-hater

Then when you pressed on it, you backtracked a wee bit and lamely said:

To be precise, I implied that you are a Jew-hater.

 

[pomeroo]

To me exposing you as irrational and bitter isn't much more than sport. For you, sadly, the implications are far more grave. It goes like this:

Has anyone figured out what I might be "bitter" about? Oh, right, you were lying.

Then when you pressed on it, you backtracked a wee bit and lamely said:

Nobody pressed me on anything, and I didn't "backtrack": I corrected you.
Yes, I insinuated that you were a Jew-hater in order to provoke a response. I wasn't prepared for your refusal to denounce the Jew-haters in your evil movement, which is another of way of saying that I didn't expect to reveal yourself as a Jew-hater. You see (and, yes, you really do see it), if I thought you were a Jew-hater, I would not have been so astonished by your subsequent behavior.


Your feet, as always, are flying, but you still haven't said anything.

 

[MarkyX]

Second, Silverstein made the statements he is acussed of making on TV, so Silverstein should be blamed for the comments, not the 9/11 Truth movement.

What statements? Oh right, the statement the 9/11 Deniers created a myth about ( "Pull it is a controlled demolition term for explosives" ) and you're suggesting Larry should be blamed for the dishonesty of 9/11 Deniers.

Sweet Allah, you're nuts.

 

[LashL]

And yet for all of this from you, Pom, LashL, and the rest who have latched on to this silly line of thinking, not one of you can quote me making an anti-semitic remark.

What are you blathering about now? I posted three times to you in this thread, once asking a question (that you never answered) and twice about your ridiculous "debate" tactics (your "you have a red bird deep in your head" nonsense) and your bad habit of making unsupported accusations against people and then running away when you cannot provide any evidence in support of your accusations.

So, stop lying.

No, what passes for logic is you insisting that Silverstein lied, but not being able to say what he lied about.

Dave

Indeed.

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.

Exactly.

Follow the link in the OP. Pom admits as much, although he cowardly refers to it as an implication.

Several people, LashL, and others jumped on the opportunity and agreed with this silly charge.

You are lying again. See above. I made only two posts in this thread, as follows:

specific questions about Silverstein cannot be answered.

What specific questions about Silverstein "cannot" be answered?

Perhaps you are asking the wrong questions, or perhaps you are asking them of the wrong people. That does not make them unanswerable.

It might, however, mean that you will have to do more than mindlessly accuse innocent people of criminal offences on an Internet discussion board - with absolutely no evidence to support your accusations - in order to obtain the answers.

and

There is a red, wading bird very deep in your head. You cannot even post without referring to it.

Don't flatter yourself, RedIbis.

Your "rinse and repeat" nonsense, which you've blathered on about several times in the past, is no more convincing this time than it was the last several times you've used it.

It seems that when you find yourself unable to respond meaningfully to another poster as a result of your own failings and your own inability to support your baseless and unfounded accusations with anything approaching facts or evidence, you revert to blathering that [someone] has you [a red bird] "deep in [their] heads" etc. It is a particularly stupid and ludicrously silly thing to say even once, never mind the numerous times that you have repeated it.

Readers realize that it is just another one of your poor attempts to get yourself out of yet another corner into which you've painted yourself.

However, you are not fooling anyone but yourself. Nobody here gives a darn about you (or your avatar), and nobody gives a darn about your bleating. What we care about is facts and evidence, and you are sorely lacking in both. You make all manner of unfounded allegations and accusations against innocent people, yet you never back them up with anything approaching facts or evidence.

So, don't bother repeating your "red bird in your head" BS over and over. Nobody's buying it, and it's way, way past its "sell by" date.


ETA: And as to the OP and following discussion, have you ever managed to come up with an answer to the question about what exactly it is that you have repeatedly accused Larry Silverstein of "lying through his dentures" about? I seem to recall that you have repeatedly failed and refused to support your baseless accusations and that you have fled from the threads in which you made your repeated unfounded, unsupported accusations.

I have never made any accusation whatsoever about you being anti-Semitic. Stop lying.

 

[RedIbis]

I have never made any accusation whatsoever about you being anti-Semitic. Stop lying.

Don't put words in my mouth. I said you latched onto this silly line of thinking, which is exactly what you do here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3821239&postcount=336