I Guess This Means No Christmas Card
From 9/11 Blogger:
From: theresistancemanifesto.com
Just a reminder, Friday December 15th is John Conner's book singing in Encinitas CA. 8:00pm. We'll either meet in Starbucks or in the study areas right next to the Starbucks.Some haters at a sad blog claimed they were going to call BN and warn them about us to try and get them to throw us out, but hey ... we're just going to be hanging out in Starbucks for some coffee ... who are the wack jobs here?
Twenty free Manifestos will be given out to the first people to show up ... and if we get kicked out, we'll just hang out on the sidewalk or in the parking lot.
Also, check youtube in a day or so for a new college video. This time it was UCLA and before John could even crash some classes, he was questioned by the police and enrolled in some database. Some random student yelled "Nazis" to the cops as they were running his ID to check for warrants, and the dean of student affairs showed up, probably to make sure the cops didn't go tazer happy.
I don't get this whole "haters" title they have started calling us. It is not like we just randomnly picked them out of the phone book and started picking on them because we were bored of harassing ethnic minorities or something. We dislike them because they are stupid and dishonest. Hate has very little to do with it.
posted by James B. @ 10:25 AM
24 comments
24 Comments:
Not to mention that Conner sends us emails hoping we'll publicize his latest stunts.
Democrat said...
We dislike them because they are stupid and dishonest. Hate has very little to do with it.
This text goes lower than anything before.
Dem,
It has helped me to look at Pat's blog to find a context to stomach the injustice of the "slash and burn" approach. To be fair, this approach is also taken by "many sides", such as Air American, or buzzflash.com.
It's Pat and James' choice to go this direction. At this point, I'm not against you or me speaking out. However, the decision to use heaping of ridicule, that the ends justify these means, has been made long ago.
It certainly does raise a question about Pat's frequent admonition: "play the ball, not the man", when he and James are doing anything except that in the tone of many of their posts.
I think the discourse here must ineviditably become an cheering section for the sliming, or a
'"Love" You'.
No, '"Love" you' degraded interchange. (and anyone can guess the 4 letter word I'm replacing Love with.)
This blog makes James and Pat "BMOC" in the right wing camp, so it has become more and more apparent over time that they believe that this is the height of their reward and responsibility rather than being interested in hosting a forum for honest exchange.
Hate has very little to do with it.
Nah, I hate 'em.
Sorry BG, would you rather that I lied and claim that I thought that "drones, UAVs, star wars death rays, and thermite" were all great ideas?
And this is not a personal attack, I am not calling you dishonest and stupid, or even John Conner specifically, I am saying the 9/11 "truth" movement as a whole is dishonest and stupid, and I have provided plenty of proof in the past to back this up, many of which even you agree with. If you happen to disagree with my conclusions, that is your prerogative.
B...than being interested in hosting a forum for honest exchange. I hate to point out an error in your thinking but this blog was NEVER meant to be a forum for honest exchange or for that matter honorable and civil exchange.
It is a great place to learn how to classify people as retards, however.
Hate? You guys are the ones who believe that the attacks were carried out by a demonic Vice President bent on destruction, an evil Jewish landlord eager for profits, the compliant military lacking a moral compass, and covered up by thousands of corrupt engineers, the media and shadowy government officials.
Talk about hate.
honest exchange of ideas
Excuse me?
Anytime anyone tries to debate you 9-11 Truth people on the facts, you change the subject, rehash a bunch of previously-addressed issues, dig up some random trivia, post out-of-context quotes, ignore information inconvenient to your conspiracy theory, post a new series of questions you're "just asking", claim your studies are peer reviewed when they are nothing of the sort, claim non-Twoofers as members of your movement, post a spamvalanche of random links to conspiracy websites, discredit people by fabricating "ties" to the Bush administration, slander entire industries by saying they're "in on it" or "paid off", use Holocaust denial newspapers for source material, and just plain make stuff up.
The claims of the 9-11 conspiracy movement have been answered with far more intellectual rigor than they ever deserved.
BG, we allow far more of the CT stuff to be posted here than, say, Dylan Avery allows of the OCT at the Looser Board (which, by the way, can no longer be seen by non-members), or 911 Blogger. I have personally removed several obscene comments that have been posted. We are trying to allow both sides to be expressed here, but we're not going to pretend to neutrality on the issue.
I do hate them.
I hate everything they stand for, I hate their diregard of basic science, logic and critical thinking, and I hate their cultish groupthink that has only (historically) led to awful things.
I hate to point out an error in your thinking but this blog was NEVER meant to be a forum for honest exchange or for that matter honorable and civil exchange.
Oh it is an honest exchange.
You people just don't understand how dishonest you are.
It's great to see how hate is spread around the world. Too bad I was educated otherwise.
Don't lie; you were never educated.
BG, Swing and "Democrat", please read the following scenarios and answer the simple question:
Scenario 1:
You are accused of being dishonest and stupid
Scenario 2:
You are accused of perpetrating mass murder of your own country's citizens.
In which scenario is your accuser being more "hateful"?
I don't get this whole "haters" title they have started calling us.
Very Jerry Springer I thought.
Hate? You guys are the ones who believe that the attacks were carried out by a demonic Vice President bent on destruction, an evil Jewish landlord eager for profits, the compliant military lacking a moral compass, and covered up by thousands of corrupt engineers, the media and shadowy government officials.
James you disinfo agent you! How many times have I had to explain applying 100 theories to 3 people isn't going to lend support to your attacks on those who search for the truth.
Do us a favor and factually point out where I have supported your statement above? Or is this another lump them all into the same bin again to try to make a point?
Trite great list of accusations.
Now post some facts to support such accusations. Make sure these 'facts' that you post don't contain assumptions on your part. I await your post.
Condesimo Hate means to dislike intensely or passionately.
The accusation you mention doesn't by definition include hate. If I accuse my wife of lying and being dishonest, that doesn't equate to hateing her. Now if you were to ask me which question is more relevant, I would simply state the one that is more factual. Since neither are factual, the questions are moot.
Have a good day.
Lying_Dylan If your comment was directed towards me regarding the Chinese eating dog things, then I accept that comment but not as a racist. The thing is you show your lack of understanding and knowledge regarding the Chinese culture. It also displays your ignorance. I wonder if you are perhaps sitting in a trailer, with a Old Glory proudly displayed outside your shack reflecting on how American you are.
The truth is, the Chinese do eat dogs.
Here read what this expert has to say and shut your mouth when it comes to things you don't know.
In fact I really can't believe you tried to use that comment to paint me as a racist.
http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=162564
Fact or Fiction?: The Chinese Eat Dogs
LONDON, January 26 /PRNewswire/ --
- New Book Highlights the Importance of Understanding the Chinese Culture
For hundreds of millions of Chinese around the world, Sunday will mark the beginning of the Year of the Dog, which is a fitting symbol for the cultural differences that have to be bridged between China and the rest of the world. Given China's historical attitudes toward dogs and the emerging Chinese interest in keeping pets, many Westerners have often pondered, "Do Chinese really eat dogs?"
According to Tom Doctoroff, author of Billions: Selling to the New Chinese Consumer, published this month by Palgrave Macmillan, the answer is, historically, a declarative "yes."
"True, there are some hot pot dog restaurants, particularly in the South, and one or two on the sparkling streets of Shanghai, but most educated folks wouldn't admit to having a dog sandwich for lunch," explains Doctoroff. "But globalization is everywhere, and with international standards of behavior and consumerism impacting China too, dog chowing is less and less popular."
Lying Dylan I'm going to ask a couple of questions to justify your stupidity. A common tactic for some OSer's is to lie through their teeth to try to make CT'ers look bad by pretending they are an expert at something, in this case LyingDylan and Chinese culture.
1. How old are you? Why do I ask? That might explain it.
2. How educated are you? Why do I ask? That might explain it?
3.How traveled are you? Why do I ask? That might explain it?
4. How honest are you? Why do I ask? That might explain it. Which in this case I think it does.
See the Chinese culture do include dog in their diet. Better yet instead of depending on a more educated, well rounded, more traveled, expert on the subject, lets take a look at another expert:
http://www.k9magazine.com/
viewarticle.php?sid=15&aid=1212
Is The End In Sight For The Chinese Dog Meat Trade?
China’s animal welfare groups have called for end to dog eating. In what will be an historic and bold move, Chinese animal welfare groups have unanimously called for a ban on dog eating.
Geez Dylan, why would they do that if they didn't eat dog???
Dylan-shut the fuck up.
James you disinfo agent you! How many times have I had to explain applying 100 theories to 3 people isn't going to lend support to your attacks on those who search for the truth.
Well how the heck am I supposed to keep track of which of the thousands of versions of the "truth" you believe in? Maybe you guys should all be required to have a little code as part of your name or something. Something like:
Swing Dangler (WTC P+ T+ PEN P- UAV+ SHNK P+ SD+)
James Fair enough question. Instead of us doing that, why not address the particular issue with the individual you want to point your comment to, rather than lumping us all into one huge category?
Swingdangler WTCUCCD/SHP
Trite great list of accusations.
Now post some facts to support such accusations.
As evidence of my assertions, I cite the entire Screw Loose Change blog. Examples of Truthers using all the intellecutally dishonest tactics I listed can easily be found on most ony thread here, as well as pretty much any other place where 9-11 conspiracy theory is discussed.
Swing, nice attempt to avoid answering the question. The factual underpinnings are not important in ascertaining the attitude of the accuser, rather it is the implications of the allegation.
Being stupid carries no criminal sanction and being dishonest rarely does. However, mass murder does. You and your ilk claim the President, the Vice-President, Larry Silverstein and a few more named (depending on the conspiracy claim) plus plenty of unnamed individuals of complicity mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11. The worst you are accused of is being stupid and dishonest.
Now, again, who is spewing hate?
Examples of Truthers
That is what I thought. You can't narrow it down to one individual to prove your case, you have to use a nice mixture of everyone in the movement to attack a single person.
You and your ilk claim the President, the Vice-President, Larry Silverstein and a few more named (depending on the conspiracy claim) plus plenty of unnamed individuals of complicity mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11.
Please inform our readers where exactly I accused the above mentioned as being in on the conspriacy?
The factual underpinnings are not important in ascertaining the attitude of the accuser, rather it is the implications of the allegation.
They don't? Did I just provide an example of one?
Hypothetical example:
If I accuse some one of mass murder does that mean I hate them? No.
Another hypothetical example:
I'm a political realist, and I recognize the need to shore up the remaining reserves of oil in the world, and I support a false flag operation to begin such a resource grab. If I accuse the a someone of doing something I support, does that mean I hate them? No.
There is your answer, Consdemo. It is a flawed question. Now if you want to ask me which is a more serious accusation that has implications that apply to the entire world, well of course scenario 2.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Please inform our readers where exactly I accused the above mentioned as being in on the conspriacy?
Really? These theories get more and more bizarre. If they aren't complicit then what are they? Innocent? Also, who did do it?
Even if you don't accuse them, plenty of your allies do.
It is a flawed question.
No, you just continue to dodge it. Even if you were indifferent to the murder of 3K, many others would not be. The question didn't refer to your attitudes, it referred to that of millions of others. Hilter earned eternal damnation. Bin Laden is hated, at least by millions of Americans. If some domestic criminal cabal perpetrated 9/11, they would not be indifferent either.
I'm a political realist, and I recognize the need to shore up the remaining reserves of oil in the world, and I support a false flag operation to begin such a resource grab. If I accuse the a someone of doing something I support, does that mean I hate them? No.
So, not only was 9/11 and inside job, it was a good thing. Wow, I thought I had heard them all. If you believe that statement, you are truly demented.
Oh, he's one of those "I'm just asking questions" retards. Ofcourse, the problem is that he thinks making clear insinuations counts as "just asking questions", and, whenever confronted, he hides and pretends not to actually believe any of the nonsense he's been spewing. It's the main reason I'd like to beat some sense into him. He's such a dishonest little bastard.
That is what I thought. You can't narrow it down to one individual to prove your case, you have to use a nice mixture of everyone in the movement to attack a single person.
Hey, here's a Dishonest Twoofer Tactic I forgot to list: when cornered on the facts, start quibbling over semantics.
Post a Comment
<< Home