Jon Gold Addresses Pat Curley and the jref

[bje]

Namecalling, now that's impressive.

As opposed to Jon Gold: "You are scum. You deserve to hang for the crimes you're committing."

And you still believe Jon Gold is "just asking questions."

Gosh.

 

[1337m4n]

"You deserve to hang for the crimes you're committing."

Well I feel all warm and fuzzy. How about you, Red?

 

[Drudgewire]

Namecalling, now that's impressive.

So is completely avoiding the nine posts pointing out the hypocrisy of you using the term "strawmen" in order to focus on the one below it.

It's a shining example of the only way this stupid movement has been able to stay somewhat afloat after seven years (albeit mainly by floating on the corpses of your own sinking ship). By claiming you're "just asking questions" and closing your eyes and putting your hands over your ears while yelling "LALALALALAAA!!" at any sort of answers while telling yourselves you're actually engaging in debate.

 

[RedIbis]

Well I feel all warm and fuzzy. How about you, Red?

I would certainly admit that I think the weakest part of the essay is any exaggerated indignation, and I stated clearly in the OP that I don't agree with everything, and that I might have approached it differently.

What I do think is effective is that all of the points are not necessarily CT related. This is the middle ground of criminal incompetence, botched and resisted investigation, and no mention of demolition.

Why do you think most of the posters jumped on the angrier comments and avoided all the rest?

 

[Drudgewire]

Why do you think most of the posters jumped on the angrier comments and avoided all the rest?

I can't find the irony meter emote, so here's a monkey rocking back and forth.

 

[bje]

Why do you think most of the posters jumped on the angrier comments and avoided all the rest?

It's been addressed for years here and elsewhere. Jon Gold is no different in behavior than other truthers in the necessity to ignore and deny evidence inconvenient to his desired end to hang us all.

Why do you pretend this is all new to you, Red?

 

[1337m4n]

Why do you think most of the posters jumped on the angrier comments and avoided all the rest?

Probably because "the rest" have been done to death on this forum already. We've got dozens of age-old threads on just about everything he mentions if you dig deep enough. We have found nothing that would indicate LIHOP.

Jon Gold does not answer the question. Everything is written to the tone of "we might be wrong that the sky is blue". He clearly isn't willing to admit he's wrong about anything, even though he says he is. He is inviting more hostility, not debate.

He was asking for hostility, so the people here gave him hostility. Had he been asking for debate, we would have given him debate.

 

[T.A.M.]

I would certainly admit that I think the weakest part of the essay is any exaggerated indignation, and I stated clearly in the OP that I don't agree with everything, and that I might have approached it differently.

What I do think is effective is that all of the points are not necessarily CT related. This is the middle ground of criminal incompetence, botched and resisted investigation, and no mention of demolition.

Why do you think most of the posters jumped on the angrier comments and avoided all the rest?

I personally did not address the meat of his post out of time constraints. He made a lot of comments, that would require a hefty answer in reply.

All of his "We could be wrong" comments however, are just an annoying twist on "JAQ"ing off, so they really do not deserve that much of my time.

TAM

 

[johnny karate]

What I do think is effective is that all of the points are not necessarily CT related. This is the middle ground of criminal incompetence, botched and resisted investigation, and no mention of demolition.

No, LIHOP is not "the middle ground". That term means there is a compromise; some kind of integration of two opposing ideas. LIHOP in many fundamental ways is a contradiction of MIHOP, and therefore just another example of the Truther "Let's just throw a bunch of crap at the wall and see what sticks" mindset.

 

[The Big Dog]

Why do you think most of the posters jumped on the angrier comments and avoided all the rest?

Why do most of the posters jump on the complete bull **** instead of just the minor bull ****?

That being said, last freaking week, I "jumped" on the nonsense about the stock options.

Your and Gold's response?

crickets.

why are you wasting our time Red?

 

[Cuddles]

There's one big problem with the two sides throwing the "If you were wrong, would you admit it?" question at each other - one side has already been proven wrong, and they haven't admitted it. Almost everything that has been claimed by truthers is either proven wrong or is so stupid and insane that no-one even bothered. No planes, pods, missiles, elves, space destruction beams, dancing Jews, billions in stolen gold, voice morphing, holograms, commandos, faked wreckage, faked data, controlled demolitions, thermite, Al-Qaeda being CIA or Israeli inventions, cardboard boxes, thermal expansion, gravity and air pressure, free-fall, speed of clapping, and so on. And on and on and on. On the few occasions that they're not hilariously wrong, they simply have no evidence whatsoever for their claims.

Of course, as RedIbis is always quick to point out, not all truthers believe all of these, and the numerous fights between factions proves that nicely. However, the vast majority of truthers do believe, or have at least made claims (or should that be "just asked questions") about at least some of them. How many have ever actually admitted to being proven wrong on any of these points? More importantly, how many have actually meant it and not just latched on to something else equally wrong and stupid?

Loose Change provides a perfect example. The first edition was full of nonsense and lies, some of which were quietly dropped in later editions. But did they ever actually admit to being wrong, or did they just claim to have deliberately left mistakes in to make people think, and go on to make several more editions filled with slightly different nonsense and lies?

The point is, there's really no point in either side asking the other if they'll admit to being wrong. One side has been proved wrong about nearly everything they've ever said but still refuse to accept that, and the other side simply isn't wrong about most of the relevant claims.

 

[The Big Dog]

"No planes, pods, missiles, elves, space destruction beams, dancing Jews, billions in stolen gold, voice morphing, holograms, commandos, faked wreckage, faked data, controlled demolitions, thermite, Al-Qaeda being CIA or Israeli inventions, cardboard boxes, thermal expansion, gravity and air pressure, free-fall, speed of clapping, and so on. And on and on and on. nonsense and lies?

"One of these things is not like the others... One of these things just isn't the same"

Lyrics by Oscar the Grouch

 

[RedIbis]

No, LIHOP is not "the middle ground". That term means there is a compromise; some kind of integration of two opposing ideas. LIHOP in many fundamental ways is a contradiction of MIHOP, and therefore just another example of the Truther "Let's just throw a bunch of crap at the wall and see what sticks" mindset.

How about criminal incompetence, calls for accountability, and investigation into obstruction of justice?

 

[WildCat]

How about criminal incompetence, calls for accountability,

It's tempting, but I don't think there's anything criminal in your stated belief that there's no evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

 

[dtugg]

How about criminal incompetence, calls for accountability, and investigation into obstruction of justice?

Also in conflict with the MIHOP that you believe in. You can't believe that they were incompetent when they actually did it.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

"One of these things is not like the others... One of these things just isn't the same"

Lyrics by Oscar the Grouch

Hah. I think Cuddles is referring to the notion a number of truthers have latched onto; that thermal expansion was a phenomenon invented by the NIST.

 

[Drudgewire]

Also in conflict with the MIHOP that you believe in. You can't believe that they were incompetent when they actually did it.

Of course if they'd left anything around obvious enough for the stupidity magnet known as the truth movement to actually find, now THAT would be gross incompetence.

 

[Brainster]

How about criminal incompetence, calls for accountability, and investigation into obstruction of justice?

There is no such thing as criminal incompetence.

Calls for accountability? Whom exactly do you want to fire? Bush and Cheney are on their way out the door. Tenet left the CIA in 2004. Mueller? The guy only took the job a week before the attacks.

Please feel free to present your evidence for an investigation into obstruction of justice into a thread.

 

[Pardalis]

Of course if they'd left anything around obvious enough for the stupidity magnet known as the truth movement to actually find, now THAT would be gross incompetence.

And we could accuse the TM of the same "crimes". They're incompetent at getting anything done, they are accountable for not doing anything, and they clearly are obstructing justice by not delivering their key evidence to the proper authorities.

 

[RedIbis]

There is no such thing as criminal incompetence.

You can't possibly be that naive.