I'm outta here - and a few observations

[dbeach]

HI QUTB<br><br>U DA BEST !<br><br>Come on over sometimes<br><br>on those lonely rainy afternons when the TREASON trials of rover and libby begin to wear ya down..<br><br>come on over<br><br>enjoy the banter and dreamin.<br><br>dreams come true ya know??? <p></p><i></i>

[seemslikeadream]

Like dbeach says you are the best, luv ya. <br><br>There are some things that just get very tiresome and just should be ignored.<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[banned]

...your position, Qutb. <br><br>However, I am saddened by the outcome here.<br><br>I hope everyone will take a moment and duly note what has happened. Jeff, who had said he didn't want to make a lot of rules for posting, has now made it a rule that you can't accuse someone of being a disinfo agent.<br><br>This, to me, is a victory for any disinfo agents that are targeting this board. Unfortunately, since on seeing the way this thread was going people didn't stop on their own with people realizing and agreeing that taking sides over a departing disgruntled poster is destructive to the site, I don't see what else Jeff could have done.<br><br>I know no one will listen, but I will say it again. Inflammatory exits serve no legitimate purpose; if someone is committed to RATIONAL criticism, they should be able to make it concerning what is bothering them about the board, without the histrionics/melodrama. If someone needs a time out by all means they should take it.<br><br>I've seen this type of exit destroy one site entirely; another split into two, neither with the vigor of the original because the truth DOES emerge best from vigorous FAIR debate by two (or more) points of view, not by huddling only with the people who agree with you and echoing RIGHT ON! One of the sites was not even political so there was no question of 'agents.' As I have said this type of outcome even when not INTENDED as sabotage functions as such and can only please those who do not want the truth to emerge.<br><br>One last thing. In the end, if 9/11 was MIHOP, and there is abundant evidence to that effect, it should not be necessary to figure out every single aspect of it before exposing it as an inside job and rounding up the known perpetrators! When people who basically agree it's MIHOP fall out over some aspect of the plot it weakens the entire movement to get the truth out and to bring those responsible to justice. Clearly some aspects need further research. As far as I can see, at this point it would not be possible to present a case on WTC 7 in a court of law that would be airtight on either side--was or wasn't CD. But suppose there never had been a WTC 7! Isn't there a compelling case without it? Some aspects of this plot, which I believe was in the works for many, many years, probably back into Bush I or even the Reagan Administration, will only--can only--come out when a real investigation is launched, not a rigged one. <br><br>Seems to me using the strongest evidence to convince the American people to demand that honest investigation is the only hope, and if that means some of us have to temporarily drop our own pet issues that is for the ultimate good. For example, I believe Shrub was supposed to get pruned that day--probably in Air Force One. But I can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and when I bring it up it's generally, pun intended, quickly shot down. I think it's important, but it's not, to use David Lifton's title for his book on JFK's assassination, "Best Evidence." It's that 'best evidence' we need to focus on.<br><br>===<br>Sidenote:<br><br>" personally speaking, I don't have any problem with the by now self-evident fact that your top priority as an RI contributor has been attempting to convert the board into a kangaroo court for the purpose of running ideological litmus tests and show trials. I find your schtick entertaining, as well as educational. Along with pushing the envelope of Marxist-Leninist self-parody to an occasionally hilarious extreme, your overbearing busybody megalomania serves as an instructive warning of the perils of allowing politically obsessed idealists such as yourself to ever gain positions of official authority and decision-making power. That's an invaluable lesson, even if it's one that you're providing unintentionally.<br><br>However, it sounds as if Jeff is beginning to weary of having RI discussions recurrently mutate into inquisitions seeking to target the board's own posters...even if they often resemble interrogations by a prosecutorial tag team of Inspector Clouseau and Captain Queeg- or your own boffo specialty, that peerless caricature of Lavrenty Beria you do, with occasional shadings of Meir Kahane thrown in for flavor."<br><br>I haven't been here long enough to form an impression of proldic, so please don't take this as necessarily agreement, only that I have known others who it could apply to--this is one of the best smackdowns I've ever read, I laughed outloud at the Clouseau/Queeg <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :b --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":b"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[robertdreed]

I really want proldic to stick around. Even given that he's been enjoined to pull his comic-opera Der Kommisar act to the curb, he's capable of making intelligent comments. He's a smart guy. I think he'd be smarter without the mind-forged manacles of Marxist-Leninism fettering him, but I'm not about to do a forcible intervention on him. Some folks have to drink from that bottle until it's completely empty, without so much as a trace of even vaporous condensation remaining. <p></p><i></i>

[heath7]

Qutb, please, stick around. <p></p><i></i>

[somebody]

I don't agree with this: Qutb said:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Which is one of the things I like about RI, but after having witnessed the <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>decline of the level of discussion here</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, I can understand better why sites such as DU and Kos try to enforce a certain minimum standard on the content that is allowed, or consign certain topics to specific forums.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br>First off, that was one of the <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>best, most informative threads going</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. And I hope it continues on.<br><br>And I seem to remember alot of trash talk coming from Qutb, such as these remarks:<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>By the way, as, indeed, a first-timer, you ought to be a little more humble. At least you should register first, before you start flinging accusations at the regular posters here. And didn't your mama teach you that it's impolite to talk about people in the third person when they're present?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>And this:<br>I<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> think this obsession with pictures and video clips is the conspiracy theorism of the visually oriented MTV generation<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Since when are most of the people here from the MTV generation??<br>I guess when I see condescending remarks...and then grand announcements such as "I'm leaving" (which I'm sure he'll be back)<br>it seems like one big game. So many great comments have been left here on this particular thread, I've learned a lot. And I'm probably as full of shit as everyone else, but I hate to feel muzzled by the "drop of the level of discussion"... and need for moderation. Whenever something is hitting a soft spot, as in a really important topic ..... the distractions and call for moderation begin. Something to think about. And who pray tell would moderate? <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>I don't even know what your argument with Qutb was about. I was responding to what you said, that there was no evidence presented that it was a holocaust deniers site. It's well known as exactly that...I don't even think they hide this. Personally, I don't frequent such sites as I'm old fashioned and still believe that Nazis are bad guys. However, if you want, we can have another thread about IHR, Weber and all that weird crop of people who want to a: deny the holocaust and b: support theories that would justify another one.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I said I have not seen any evidence that it is a holocaust denier site but, at the risk of opening a semantic can of worms, that depends on what exactly is being "denied". I do see plenty of questioning about it, I see questioning of the numbers and similar, which by the way have in fact been officially revised. Is that denial? I even see the idea that there was no planned genocide that took place. I don't agree with that. To me it just like the US governments insisting "we do not torture" while W contemplates a veto specifically over this.<br><br>I don't know everything about IHR, their history etc. but I'm not especially interested in investigating the entire IHR site. You want to research beyond Wiki or what schools Weber went to then go right ahead. Just who is forming an opinion with "two clicks"? Look, I'm not a huge fan of IHR but at least I can go there occasionally to see their side, well, until a judge or somebody somewhere decides that doing so is a thought crime. It's easy, with a mere two clicks you can open a window to Nizkor and one to IHR. <br><br>There was no argument with Qutb per se because it never ever got beyond IHR. Besides, I really don't want an argument, discussion is preferable. I was happy to leave it as only an FYI link but Qutb mentioned that link among the reasons why he was leaving while at the same time complaining about group think. Did not the Weber article add information about Wiesenthal? It was simply dismissed out of hand.<br><br>I have previously stated my opinion on Zionism, Israel and similar. <br><br>Re: IHR, Sobran has a take, it's his take. Should I be afraid to post it? You know you have to walk on eggshells around here. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

See my post on "evidence." A good rule of thumb is that the agenda and background of a site is, believe it or not, important when assessing the reliability of the information on a site. I know that's hard to understand for some. I'm also fascinated that those who want to dismiss the holocaust also advocate "conspiracy theories" that put Jews right in the center. Which, of course, is exactly what Hitler did to justify the Holocaust. <br><br>But you keep reading. And don't worry about eggshells...I've noticed no reluctance to print anti-Semitic links on this board. <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

As one of the first posters here at RI, I have to agree with nashvillebrooke- manners have really taken a hit here, and it's pretty sad. We used to be a mellow group that still had intense discussions. Now it seems there are a lot of "Zionist" here, which wouldn't be so bad, I guess, if that word didn't conjure up the image of an "evil Jew" in most peoples minds. "Disinfo Agent" comes up quite a lot. There is no need for name-calling; just pointing out errors in logic, factual mistakes, and plain wrong-headedness will suffice, I think.<br>The openness of the board is what makes it attractive to me- even with all the alien talk, which I <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>completely</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> ignore. <br>Since Katrina I've mainly been lurking, not having the time to do the reading and research necessary ( I live in South Alabama, had a spot of trouble with the weather around here)to keep up with everyone here, most of you being impressively informed. <br>Whatever the topic, people should be able to post about it and say anything they want to say and not have others throwing flames. Qutb, for one, challenged my assumptions about CD, and even though I believe him to be wrong, I respect his views <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>and</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> his grip on the subject. robertdreed is skeptical of just about everything and his long, erudite essays sometimes make my eyes bug out, but I always learn from him. proldic is obviously passionate and committed, and Annalivia has a gentle humor that I greatly enjoy. DE, is there no subject upon which you cannot pontificate? dbeach, I'd love to go surfing with you and have long political conversations over (quite) a few beers!<br>Open, thoughtful and personal interactions are missing from the board, now. Or perhaps I've missed them? During the first board discussions, we all had postings of a personal nature, sharing a little about ourselves, helping others to understand where we were coming from. Where is Wolf Pauli? I miss him. Can't we all just take a deep breath, and dare I say it? just get along? Where do we really want to take this board? Somehow, I don't think the sniping is making anyone happy here. <br>I'm afraid to post sometimes, because my views might be considered a little naive. That's my take on it, anyway, what might others have to say? I never used to think that way about RI. <br>But I will say this: DE is right about evidence, and some sources, like (should I say it? hell yes!) Skolnick should be placed under a moratorium. That's my 2 cents; anyhoo, thanks for listening.<br>Sonya<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br> <p></p><i></i>

[robertdreed]

No matter how many times someone like Skolnick's wolf-crying leads to a dead end, it seems as if there's a host of people who simply re-set the counters and give him another chance. <br><br>Nobody tracks 100% in the business of researching covert opertions, conspiracies, and political scandal. But if it's just one chain-yank after another, some of us don't have time for it. <br><br>Some of you might like that sort of thing, but not me. <br><br>Additionally, there are some stories about which a journalist can't afford to be wrong <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>even once</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> if they want to continue to be taken seriously. They simply don't deserve another chance, after that...it's like those millenarian religious cults who predict the end of the world for a given date. If that day comes and goes and the world is still here, the faithful ought to realize that their faith has been badly misplaced. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Homeless Halo]

Who needs disinfo agents when you have conspiracy theorists already? <p></p><i></i>

[Col Quisp]

Glad you're sticking around, dude! Now let's put this thread to rest! <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

I never said that assessing a site's agenda is unimportant, it's just not, believe it or not, the only thing. That is what is hard for some people to understand.<br>Some put Zionists at the center, some put WASPS at the center or even reptiles and aliens. Should all those sites that put anyone at the center be dismissed out of hand... to the point where you won't even go to them? <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>But you keep reading<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Gee, thanks.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[michael meiring]

sweejack,<br><br>'''Some put Zionists at the center, some put WASPS at the center or even reptiles and aliens. Should all those sites that put anyone at the center be dismissed out of hand... to the point where you won't even go to them? ''<br><br> Why even some sites peddle the muslims did it all too, if we banned all those sites, thered be a lot of government pen pushers out of a fat salaried job.<br><br> If the evidence points to whoever, then under free speech i would have thought one would be allowed to say that. Apparantly not these days.<br><br> Lets just have a level playing field is all i ask, probably utter naive i suppose.<br><br> There seems to be nations that no matter how much spying or rogue 'intelligence reports' they put out or false flag bombings or operations they indulge in, their nationality seems to be taboo to mention. <br><br> However other nationalities who are accused of all manner of things with rogue crackpot 'intelligence dossiers' etc seems to be open season day with the religion or faith mentioned before anything else......<br><br> Now where and who do i apply to for my permit to go and stand in the free speech zones in america? They will be bringing them out before you are allowed to post on the internet soon at this rate.<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

I'd be interested to hear how your rights of free speech have been violated. Please, do tell us. Or is your definition of free speech that you can say what you want but those who want to vigorously object to what you say are NOT allowed free speech? Are your ideas that fragile and indefensible? Are you that insecure? <p></p><i></i>