A request

[whatchamacallit]

In the spirit of fairness, could we stop making cynical comparisons between unsavory individuals and 9/11 skeptics as a group? It sucks to have your character and intelligence equated with every scumbag, murderer, holocaust denier... that happens to not believe the official story. Since there are enough DU "truthers" to be regarded as a group, it seems those kinds of posts would be an infraction of DU rules. What do you say?

-Whatcha

[OnTheOtherHand]

1. "OCT have made a career out of clobbering anyone who didn't find the old explanations unassailable"

I'd say you have no standing to hector anyone about fairness. But maybe that's just me. :shrug:

[whatchamacallit]

2. You shout bloody murder

when, in defense, someone equates you guys with Bush, based solely on the incidental fact that you share the same beliefs about 9/11.

[LARED]

3. "equates you guys with Bush"

I for one make a clear distintions between "equating me with Bush" (not sure anyone has done that), and being told I am a shill for Bush. (been told that perhaps hundreds of time)

[whatchamacallit]

4. I imagine in the majority of those cases

someone alerts and the mod deletes those posts. Shitty comparisons between psychos and truthers are rarely, if ever, deleted. Strange that.

[LARED]

28. You are complaining to the wrong people

The truther is the one usually posting whack jobs that back up their pet fantasies.

The fact the there is a strong correlation between wackos and truthers is not my problem.

If you don't like the company at you own party you should reconsider how you got there in the first place.

[OnTheOtherHand]

8. you're screeching at the wrong person -- and I don't think there is a right one

Some DUer I've never heard of before, for reasons unknown to me, posted a low-content OP about a Catholic bishop who happens to be both a 9/11 conspiracist and a Holocaust denier. A couple of posters pointed out that those beliefs dovetail nicely. As far as I can see, nobody called any DUer a Holocaust denier.

If you have any criticisms of my posts, please state them, with reference to my posts. If you'd rather indulge in tribal whining, I think that is a shame.

[whatchamacallit]

10. How do they "dovetail nicely"

man this shit is stupid...

[OnTheOtherHand]

11. at least two ways

First, some people seem to be predisposed to believe poorly supported alternative realities; Holocaust denial and a wide range of 9/11 conspiracist views fall within that ambit.

Second, many 9/11 conspiracist views specifically implicate dancing Mossad agents, Larry Silverstein, and other unlikely villains. It isn't at all hard to find screwball anti-semitism in the "truth movement."

This isn't something we made up to smear you with; as far as I know, it has nothing to do with you. It's true nonetheless.

[whatchamacallit]

16. It still doesn't give you the right to lump me in

There are a lot of people who have doubts about the events of 9/11 who don't subscribe to those theories. How 'bout you give us a fucking break?

[terrafirma]

18. Aww

There are a lot of us who have doubts about the conspiracies spouted here.

Do we get a break from being labeled as shills or Mossad or members of Bushco or the PTB?

No. I'm afraid not.

Part and parcel. Deal with it. If you don't deny the holocaust, more power to you. What difference does it make if I think you do or not?

[whatchamacallit]

20. Those posts get deleted

WTF, why am I even conversing with an obvious _____.

[jberryhill]

25. Why do you think anyone was talking about you?

Look, everyone here is perfectly aware that there are:

some truthers who believe -

1. The Pentagon was hit by:

(a) a cruise missile;

(b) nothing, it was a bomb;

(c) a military jet.

2. The WTC towers were:

(a) not hit by airplanes;

(b) hit by remote control airplanes;

(c) destroyed by energy beams.

Now, all of the truthers play nicely with each other, oddly, but there is one species of truther who gets kicked out of here on a regular basis, and that is the "Jews did it" type of truther.

It is not some kind of accident that "Jews did it" truthers have a high probability of being Holocaust deniers and vice versa. It is part of a general anti-semitic view of the world which posits that behind every dastardly deed in history is a Jew.

That excommunicated Catholic Bishop has been tried and convicted of race hatred crimes in Germany. His beliefs about 9/11, and what animates those beliefs are perfectly well known.

[whatchamacallit]

27. Oh, I don't know

Maybe all the "Meet <scumbag-in-the-news>, 9/11 Truther" posts, get old.

[zappaman]

30. oh, brother

anyone who uses someone who has the type of history this dipshit-bishop does to back up their point, regardless of what that point is, SHOULD be called on it.
WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH...people pointed out this Catholic Bishop's history......WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH

[whatchamacallit]

36. Your simplistic provocations

are a fail.

[jberryhill]

40. Pol Pot wrote a very interesting essay on civility...

I can't find the link to it at the moment, but it's a really thoughtful piece.

[jberryhill]

35. Well, then, I guess people will have to stop introducing them to us

Williamson is, however, a world-class multidisciplinary scumbag.

The other area where your complaint breaks down is that nobody here posts a thread like:

"Dick Cheney announces new evidence disproving controlled demolition"

That would be laughable.

But coming to a progressive forum to offer the authoritative musings of an anti-Semitic, misogynistic far right wing defrocked bishop is surely a "meet the scumbag" moment, yes.

[zappaman]

31. bad post

you left out "mini-nukes" taking down the WTC.

[jberryhill]

34. Shhh...

We're not supposed to mention the m--- n----.

[OnTheOtherHand]

43. excuse me, but I think your hypocrisy is absurd

Once again, if you can point to any post in which I lumped you in with Holocaust deniers, then by all means call me on it. Otherwise, you have a lot of nerve complaining about how I'm lumping you in.

Not long ago, I went out of my way to defend a poster -- with whom I have often quarreled at great length -- against an attribution of anti-Semitism that I thought was unwarranted. ("Attribution" may be too strong, but I don't have the patience to look it up right now.) There was no big quarrel about this; as far as I can tell, no one here is hell-bent on depicting truth movement folks generally as anti-semitic.

As LeftistBrit has pointed out, the underlying problem here is that someone who appears to believe in controlled demolition hauled a Holocaust denier into the discussion -- and didn't even have the grace or sense to walk it back when called on it. If someone here posted that 'you have to be anti-semitic to believe in controlled demolition,' I would be one of the first to call bullshit. But that isn't how it happened. I'm sure there are exceptions, but every time I can think of when anti-semitism has come up, it has been because someone on the truth movement side either made a point or cited an 'authority' for which anti-semitism was a legitimate consideration.

(edit to remove trigger word)

[Ohio Joe]

5. So....

When truthers point out that their opinion is shared by a scumbag, murderer, holocaust denier... This should not be pointed out? It should just be accepted as ok?

[whatchamacallit]

6. I'm not following your question

please reword.

[Ohio Joe]

7. Well... Lets look at this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x322892

A known holocaust denier, racist and scumbag gets press for stating 9/11 is a lie... A truther supports it and people point out what a douchebag he is... Is that not OK?

[whatchamacallit]

9. It would have been fine if the derision had been confined to the OP

but no:

"Holocaust denial and 9/11 conspiracy theories "truthers"....wacky combo...."
"Gee, what could those two things possibly have in common A real puzzler there."

Notice it wasn't 'truther' it's 'truthers'. I'm sure you're bright enough to understand the distinction.

[Ohio Joe]

12. So.... A truther holds up one of these scumbags and....

It is OK to make fun of the scumbag but not associate that with the truther that holds him up? Would it not be easier to ask truthers to stop associating with scumbags?

[whatchamacallit]

13. Did you read what I wrote?

OP meant the guy who posted the video. Your issues are with him. Don't compare me to the bishop *or* the OP, just because we have similar beliefs about 9/11. How come you don't get this?

[Ohio Joe]

15. Truthers hold up these scumbags to prove their point

How come you don't get this?

[whatchamacallit]

19. All truthers?

Try "some truthers". No point discussing this if you're going to play games

[Ohio Joe]

21. Your issue is with other truthers

I'm sorry for the loud beliefs of other truthers, I find it as troubling as you do... Take it up with them... or perhaps denounce them instead of being upset you end up being lumped in with them for silence.

[whatchamacallit]

22. self delete

for lameness.

[Ohio Joe]

26. I expect there is something for me to "get" there

But I don't. Since you mention a game... I guess I could go look in the gaming forum to see what the connection is but... That is way more ambition then I have right now.

Look... I'm sorry you feel that scumbags are so often associated with the truth movement but... The fact is that a lot of scumbags get put up by truthers, this is not the fault of people who do not buy into it. I do not see anything in that thread by any truther suggesting that a known anti-semite should not be the person held up for truth. You do not see people posting "Charlie Manson believes the OTC" ... Fuck... I'd be denouncing that shit. It does not seem unusual for crazy people to get posts that they do not believe the OTC... And no truthers denouncing them. WTF?

I agree with Ron Paul's anti-war stance but I still fucking denounce him every time I see anyone putting him in a positive light for it. Scumbags do not deserve positive press even if we agree with them on one thing.

[zappaman]

32. +1

doubt it will stop the crying though.

[whatchamacallit]

38. Your childish taunts

only paint *your* picture.

[zappaman]

39. boo hoo n/t

[jberryhill]

45. When you guys are done, give Jesus back the wood /nt

[terrafirma]

14. Those of us who support reality

Get compared and equated to Bush on a daily basis here.

Turn about is fair play.

Especially when one offers up the unsavory character freely.

[whatchamacallit]

17. I recall when that happened it was almost always

in response to a nut case = truther = nut case post. And I also remember the majority of them being deleted by the mod.

[zappaman]

23. bullshit

those posts don't get deleted.
being called shills for BUSHCO or saying "you must love BUSHCO" and endless variations do not get deleted.
some of the posts that accuse posters of being paid, however, do get deleted.
go ahead and search if you don't believe it.
might want to blow your nose and dry your eyes first.
WAAAAAHHHHHHHH

[whatchamacallit]

24. You couldn't say that without checking

so why didn't you post links right now? Never mind, I know why.

[zappaman]

29. Instead of looking

you just continued to whine?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x319988#320310
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x320607
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x318303#318441
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x317358#317435

would look for more, but trying to watch football.
your turn.
or are you still crying?
:rofl:

[OnTheOtherHand]

44. some do, some don't

When I've alerted on "shill" sorts of posts, they've usually been deleted. There are lots of things one can say that fall short of that line. (I don't know that the mods are completely consistent on where they draw the line, but then again, I'm not sure that they could be.)

whatchamacallit seems to be complaining that the mods are biased -- not only that, but perhaps biased for some particular reason. I don't think the mods are biased, and I think it's odd how much time some people spend here on DU complaining about DU mods and admins. I alert on it when it's downright nasty, but when it seems mostly embarrassing, I usually leave it alone. I hope the mods don't mind.

[jberryhill]

33. Request Denied /nt

[whatchamacallit]

37. Obviously

Carry on with your strange, mean-spirited, fetish. Not everyone has to have a dignified life. :)

[zappaman]

46. Maybe us "un-truthers" should cry like babies when being called "traitors" and "disinfo agents"?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x321972

[Behind the Aegis]

41. This is almost funny, were it not so sad.

You may want to explore "general" use, comparisons, and "implied "some"" when discussing certain issues. Also, since the thread in which I responded was posted in R/T, the obvious connection was Jews (religion, not ethnicity).

[LeftishBrit]

42. A problem here...

is that it's not unknown for some 9/11 skeptics to quote any individual who seems to support their views, even if they happen to be far-right, racist, a Holocaust denier, etc. Probably this is generally due to a failure to check, rather than actual tolerance for right-wing, antisemitic, etc. views; but it is still upsetting to others, and damaging to the 9-11 skeptics' own cause. Only yesterday, the extreme-right, Holocaust-denying, ultra-misogynist Bishop Williamson of the SSPX was quoted in support of 9-11 skepticism.

I don't think I've ever made spontaneous comparisons between 9-11 skeptics and general scumbags/racists/etc; and I agree that it would be quite inappropriate to do so. But if evil people are quoted in support of this, or any other, view, I will point their evilness - even if they're quoted in support of a view that I agree with.