Taking responsibility for counteracting bigotry in our midst

[Doodad]

"In my opinion, those of us who do believe that Israel was involved in the 9/11 attacks have an extra responsibility to counteract, not just disclaim, what would otherwise be the likely bigoted fallout of their position."

Why is this a bad idea?

But people like Hufscmid and Bollyn and the hard right "Truthers" do the opposite, and purposefully blur the categories of Israel and Jew and mix historical revision and holocaust denial into the 9/11 mix. It stinks, and don't think people can't smell it.

Exactly. IF there was an Israeli role it will get buried because of the smell. Of course some will say it's the Zionists themselves doing it to cover their asses because after all, dancing Israeli Mossad commandos in delivery vans full of explosives were caught; everyone knows that

[GM Citizen]

Trotting out, yet again, this sort of fiction, appears to equate 9/11 truthers to anti-semitism.

Apparently, we the people, are too stupid to see that the Zionists that had a role in this event, we mere patsies.

Now why would you want to do that, Doodad?

What exact roles did they play? Most of the stuff I've seen bandied about has been discredited or unproven. Specifics?

I'll keep this simple for you. I don't know the "exact" roles, but let's take the fact that the Mossad had operatives, depending upon which theory you prefer, either babysitting the alleged hijackers (to create/maintain a legend), or were keeping a watchful eye on them. This is but one example.

Now, why should this be hidden, or glossed over as anti-semitic? Now I am not privy to Mossad's role in this. Maybe you are, but I can only go by public sources. If or when they get legitimately debunked, then fine, but until then I keep an open mind about it.

[GM Citizen]

"In my opinion, those of us who do believe that Israel was involved in the 9/11 attacks have an extra responsibility to counteract, not just disclaim, what would otherwise be the likely bigoted fallout of their position."

Why is this a bad idea?

I believe the "likely bigoted fallout of their position" would be a result of being labelled anti-semitic, nazi, or whatever is the label of the day, used by some parties to stifle legitimate debate about everyone's role in the entire operation.

[Doodad]

Trotting out, yet again, this sort of fiction, appears to equate 9/11 truthers to anti-semitism.

Apparently, we the people, are too stupid to see that the Zionists that had a role in this event, we mere patsies.

Now why would you want to do that, Doodad?

What exact roles did they play? Most of the stuff I've seen bandied about has been discredited or unproven. Specifics?

I'll keep this simple for you. I don't know the "exact" roles, but let's take the fact that the Mossad had operatives, depending upon which theory you prefer, either babysitting the alleged hijackers (to create/maintain a legend), or were keeping a watchful eye on them. This is but one example.

Now, why should this be hidden, or glossed over as anti-semitic? Now I am not privy to Mossad's role in this. Maybe you are, but I can only go by public sources. If or when they get legitimately debunked, then fine, but until then I keep an open mind about it.

Pretty well discredited

http://www.911myths.com/html/israeli_ar ... spies.html

[Jeff]

Now, why should this be hidden, or glossed over as anti-semitic?

But that's neither the suggestion nor the point of the article posted, which was that there are anti-Semites exploiting and hijacking "9/11 Truth" and distorting it with their agendas. Therefore, it is incumbent upon serious researchers who raise Israel in relation to 9/11 to distance themselves from such reactionary elements so their work will not be tainted by association.

[OnoI812]

Bollyn is the source of the rumor that the Popular Mechanics editor with the name of Chertoff is the cousin of Michael Chertoff. People still cite that (I'm thinking of the Godfather of 9/11 Truth, Alex Jones) but Ben Chertoff denies it. Bollyn may not get respect anymore but some of his ideas do.

Here's how the story about uncovering the PM Chertoff angle went down, from my memory, from listening to a Jones broadcast right around the time he was debunking the PM hitpiece right before or directly after it came out: Jones is talking about how when he was being interviewed by PM that they promised him it would be balanced, he had learnt of Chertoff's name at that time and PM had assured him there was no relation to Michael Chertoff...Then in the middle of his debunking a caller called in and said he had confirmation that Ben Chertoff was a cousin to the Michael Chertoff branch. I forget who the caller said he called but it was either Ben Chertoffs MOM or Michaels Mom. I'm thinking it was Ben's...he said he was calling every Chertoff in the book till he hit paydirt, anyway he schmoozes the mother by talking about "The GREAT Michael Chertoff" and asked if there was any relation, at which point Ben's mother admitted that he was second cousin, or something like that, to the Michael Chertoff branch of the Chertoffs...I don't think it was Bollyn who called into the Jones broadcast...I also think the caller had a recording of the conversation but my memory fails me. Anyway that's the way I remember it, it was quite a while ago.

But I believe this to be the foundation of the rumor.

[GM Citizen]

Trotting out, yet again, this sort of fiction, appears to equate 9/11 truthers to anti-semitism.

Apparently, we the people, are too stupid to see that the Zionists that had a role in this event, we mere patsies.

Now why would you want to do that, Doodad?

What exact roles did they play? Most of the stuff I've seen bandied about has been discredited or unproven. Specifics?

I'll keep this simple for you. I don't know the "exact" roles, but let's take the fact that the Mossad had operatives, depending upon which theory you prefer, either babysitting the alleged hijackers (to create/maintain a legend), or were keeping a watchful eye on them. This is but one example.

Now, why should this be hidden, or glossed over as anti-semitic? Now I am not privy to Mossad's role in this. Maybe you are, but I can only go by public sources. If or when they get legitimately debunked, then fine, but until then I keep an open mind about it.

Pretty well discredited

http://www.911myths.com/html/israeli_ar ... spies.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Willi ... nce_writer)

a sentence in there says "His motivation has been attacked, with claims he is a paid disinformant."

His attempts to discredit everythnig except the officel tale has been likened to the Popular Mechanics hit piece.

'nuff said about that site

[Doodad]

'nuff said about that site

lol

Well, of course.

[GM Citizen]

Now, why should this be hidden, or glossed over as anti-semitic?

But that's neither the suggestion nor the point of the article posted, which was that there are anti-Semites exploiting and hijacking "9/11 Truth" and distorting it with their agendas. Therefore, it is incumbent upon serious researchers who raise Israel in relation to 9/11 to distance themselves from such reactionary elements so their work will not be tainted by association.

But as it happens, when loaded phrases such as "anti-semite" is put into play as labels, it does indeed stifle debate.

To start the article naming 2 specific people, and then broadening it to widespread ideologies encompassing 911 truthers, the article ends up marrying the 2 concepts so that 911 truthers become anti-semites.

The end result would be that 911 truthers will be divided. For every fact gleaned from a source, the source will need to be double and triple checked to make sure there is not even the slightest hint of a whiff of smoke of anti-semitism in it.

The same does not hold true for other alleged participants in 911, for example, some muslims, arabs, pakistanis, germans, floridians, californians, etc. No pre-censoring is required of these, so any theory is fair game.

[GM Citizen]

'nuff said about that site

lol

Well, of course.

But should you ever come up with a valid, legitimate site/source, then I would love to help you come to terms with it.

With love,

gmc

[Jeff]

But as it happens, when loaded phrases such as "anti-semite" is put into play as labels, it does indeed stifle debate.

Then let Hufschmid speak for himself, and let's see who's loading the phrases:

"Smith was always trying to convince me that Professor Michel Chossudovsky of globalresearch.ca is a good Jew, why should I trust either Smith or Chossudovsky? Why should we follow any Jew when it's obvious that there is a gigantic, Zionist crime network running horrendous crimes? My advice is don't trust Jewish Muslims, Jewish Christians, Jewish feminists, or Jewish atheists. We are suckers to let Jews tell us about Jewish crimes. Let's do our own investigation. We're not helpless babies, are we?"

And yet when pressed, he'll say he's an "anti-Zionist," notwithstanding his holocaust denial.

He's a sometimes speaker at 9/11 conferences and his book Painful Questions and video Painful Deceptions were the earliest examples I know of CD theory.

Does my 9/11 Truth tent include Eric Hufschmid? Fuck no. Does that mean I'm guilty of "division"? I hope the fuck so.

[Hammer of Los]

This is another interesting thread which touches upon a topic which has been of some interest to me for a fair few years now, like the threads on the recent Homeland Security committee hearings, and the setting up of "Israel as Patsy."

For once I am glad to say that I agree with everything Jeff has said on this thread.

I have to say though, that it seems to me that there is no populist appetite for anti-semitism. Most of us are rightfully appalled at anti-semitism. In this regard, there are no real dangers of a sudden large scale anti-semitic backlash. I hope. Unless of course the english speaking media started to take seriously the idea, "we were fooled! 911 was the work of the Mossad!" This is my paranoid fantasy, that the (largely wasp-y although that is actually irrelevant) controllers will take advantage of the way they have seeded the "conspiracy" media with anti-semitism and Mossad did 911 themes to provide a foundation for that idea to go mainstream and official.

I think the US alphabet agencies use disinfo agents with public ties to holocaust denial and anti-semitism to poison the well and bad-jacket information that is under active suppression. This I think is the major point that needs to be stressed. I think they work to monitor and control (and even fund and supply with information) various neo-nazi and white supremacist groups for a variety of ends, one of them being to paint people suspicious of government as dangerous, violent extremists.

Of course added complications are provided by evidence of historical conspiracies relating to WWIII, quite a few really, that are still under active suppression. I am thinking of the support Hitler received from US financiers, some British political figures, and of course the possibility (it's not something I have really looked into) that historical early leaders of the Zionist movement were involved to some degree in the persecution of european Jews themselves, in order to bring about their dream of return to a mythical homeland.

[Hammer of Los]

Like Gouda, I have never considered Eric Hufschmid and Christopher Bollyn at all respectable either. I wonder whether the author of the original piece is naive, misinformed or disingenous.

The rest of the article has some fair points, although I think he misses the background and context, my opinion of which I sought to supply above.

Speaking of neo-nazi or white supremacist militia groups, they probably believe their alphabet agency contacts are indeed fellow travellers, supporting them because of a shared ideology. They may even, on occasion, be correct in this belief.

I think its a bit complicated you know. A little bit more complicated than, "you can't believe all those "conspiracists," they're all anti-semitic dontcha know."

[GM Citizen]

But as it happens, when loaded phrases such as "anti-semite" is put into play as labels, it does indeed stifle debate.

Then let Hufschmid speak for himself, and let's see who's loading the phrases:

"Smith was always trying to convince me that Professor Michel Chossudovsky of globalresearch.ca is a good Jew, why should I trust either Smith or Chossudovsky? Why should we follow any Jew when it's obvious that there is a gigantic, Zionist crime network running horrendous crimes? My advice is don't trust Jewish Muslims, Jewish Christians, Jewish feminists, or Jewish atheists. We are suckers to let Jews tell us about Jewish crimes. Let's do our own investigation. We're not helpless babies, are we?"

And yet when pressed, he'll say he's an "anti-Zionist," notwithstanding his holocaust denial.

He's a sometimes speaker at 9/11 conferences and his book Painful Questions and video Painful Deceptions were the earliest examples I know of CD theory.

Does my 9/11 Truth tent include Eric Hufschmid? Fuck no. Does that mean I'm guilty of "division"? I hope the fuck so.

Ok, so the guy has some serious issues.

1) His role as an 911 truther should not paint other 911'ers with his stain.

2) Holocaust denial is yet another lousy label, sometimes used to paint/taint folks that merely question the numbers, and not the acts. (See: anti-semite, nazi, etc)

3) By him saying "Zionist crime network running horrendous crimes" does not negate the possibility of that being true.

Thus, he has been labelled, tarred and feathered, and everything coming out of him is therefore no good.

Now understand this: I am NOT saying he is good. But any facts/truths he may have unearthed are pretty much rendered useless.

For the sake of truth, is that justifiable, I ask you?

[orz]

But any facts/truths he may have unearthed are pretty much rendered useless.

Yes, they've been rendered useless by him!