Wednesday, 11 August 2010

What's with All the Troofer Appeals for Donations? [They're having a laugh?]

Rivero keeps asking for donations. No matter he charges people to become members of his site already and never misses an opportunity to brag about his work, on the popular TV show "Lost" for example. And look at his usual portrait? Techno gubbins everywhere - because Mr Rivero is the hub of a super hi-tech political investigation system, dontcha know? But he still needs "donations"....from "you guys" he can "continue his important work"....fighting for....Troof(!)

If you can't pay the bills from blogging why expect to? And what bills are there? Rivero's site is only a news aggregator, so what are the costs? A domain name? A host? Big deal. If you can't stump the cash for it from subscriptions and your own wages for real-life paid work, can't do need to do it differently, maybe even not at all. It isn't hard to understand? If you can't afford to do it, you can't do it. It also begs the question of why there isn't enough money coming into "the Troof Movement" to sustain itself, seeing as it's oh so massive, and all that, according to Rivero et al. Where's the money from all these DVD and TShirt sales going? Where's the money from all the advertisers of doom and their miracle cancer cures going? Must be going somewhere? (My costs for running a blog are practically zero. I have never once in 10 years considered asking for donations for my online activity - why would one do it? Seems a conceit, to expect other people to pay for one's own hobby, and what costs are people on about? I would have thought some paychecks from a TV company for "special effects producer" on a popular TV show would easily cover it....)

Today Rivero is promoting someone else's plea for donations. They broke their camera - awww. And they need a new one, so they're asking for donations. Last one was a red Sony Cybershot, apparently. So hey, make the donations tidy so he can get a nice new one? I mean, it's so important that YouTube has another upload of American patriot twaddle, right? It's crucial to "the movement", guys......

Sony Cybershot are circa £150 in UK IIRC. You can get a bog-standard webcam for £10, but presumably they don't have the quality to properly express Patriot loathing of Israel. Need 10 Megapixels for that......

I notice the dude doesn't say how he broke the glass on his camera, though he does say it was after he'd filmed his Jujitsu. Hmmm - kick the camera did you? So, hey! Why not get the gullible punters of the Pay-triot Movement to dip into their wallets? Pathetic.

Seems the dude is an author, of sorts:
"Ryan Dawson is the author of the book entitled "Welcome to the USSA". This book has sold thousands of copies worldwide, and you can pick up your copy at your local Barnes & Nobles bookstore, or by ordering a copy online to be shipped to you."
Surely this blockbuster can cover the cost of a camera?

Ryan Dawson's website appears to be - a commonly used source for Rivero. At the site is a forum, the list of topics are the usual fare: 911, Gaza, Ron Paul....

A few lines below a category on "Economics" (including RonPaul) there's a category for "UK" - , with a subheading:
"America's abused house wife that keeps coming back for more no matter how it treats her. In America what Europeans might call NeoLiberals are called Neoconservatives."
Nevermind that RonPaul is a neo-liberal? Why can't these people ever get anything right? God, they're all the same! Identikit opinion. Yet it's crucial we hear more, apparently. So hurry along with those donations, right?


Martin Firestein said...

I know this has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I sent you a private message at freevisionaryforums to see if you'd be interested in investigating the guy behind the "desertpeace" website who links to (and is mentioned often by) Rivero. I don't quite get this person's angle, you know?

I couldn't find anything other than that he lives in Jerusalem.

the_last_name_left said...

I haven't seen the pm - I haven't been signing-in to freevisionaries for the reasons I gave there.

If you want to mail me it's:
the_last_name_left ////

[I've had that email for nearly 10 years - there were no names left back then, lordy knows what it's like now.]

Desertpeace? I find whomever it is to be quite obnoxious. I measure them by their relatively sophisticated (and hugely cynical) censorship method: they'll feed comments back to banned IP addresses, but no-one else gets them. Hence people posting comments are led to believe their comments get published, when in fact they are not -- they are only published to the banned IP in question - nobody else sees them, and nobody knows they are banned. Neat. Cynical as fuck. Can be tested by using a proxy IP.

Apparently they live in Jerusalem, yes. Strangely enough, somehow the Mossad's supposed worldwide total control network doesn't extend into Jerusalem......

I don't like Desertpeace - it gives me the creeps. One of the things which seems a giveaway of their far-right inclination is their cynicism - such as the censorship thing. Another eample would be Rivero linking to Desertpeace's lament for Labour Day in USA, the loss of the power of the Unions, the decline of mass labour movements, trades unions, socialism. WTF? Oh, y, Rivero's a real red, huh? Seems to me they are trying to associate themselves with such movements, and acquire their power, whilst being completely opposed to what they stand for. It's like efforts by fascism in the 30s to appeal to the left - completely cynical.

the_last_name_left said...

It's one of the things i look at as being symptomatic of fascism - confusion, or rather contradiction. Rivero has it in spades. So does Alex Jones. With no firm doctrine, no schools of fascism, no core texts etc - it can take (and drop) whatever it likes, as and when needed. Complete tactical cynicism. That's what I see in Rivero linking to Desertpeace's lament about mass workers movements. Just as they pose as critics of capitalism - of banks, corporations, inequality (though it's all the jooos fault for them, ultimately, of course - which betrays their claims to materialist socialism. Such claims are made only for cynical tactical reasons and have nothing to do with what these people (Rivero/Desertpeace) are really about.)

These people are all capitalists - they love RonPaul, and *America*, right? But they often criticise capitalism as if they were socialists. They're simply deploying the arguments for the sake of attack and acquiring some support - they are not fighting for socialism. They aren't really criticising capitalism either, rather they criticising degenerate capitalism with the degeneracy firmly the responsibility of Jooos..err...Zionists...errr NeoCons...Neoliberals...? Somehow these groups have wrecked it, apparently. Nothing to do with capitalism itself, which is responsible for the pure and perfect America which existed before these people wrecked it (nevermind anything Zinn says in Peoples History of USA etc)

The Golden Age, brought back anew from the hands of the damned - phoenix-like rebirth and renewal - pallingenetic populist ultranationalism - the core of fascism.

Places like Desertpeace ban me from commenting - and yet I know I could say some outrageous things and they'd post it so long as it fit their needs. Look at what they do publish? With no right of reply? Gah! It's outrageous, really. And yet they still rail against censorship, thought-control and all that - and Rivero and The Truth Movement echo the idea.

Personally I would expect all that contradiction and cynicism would get a bit much for any honest personality. Wee're not dealing with honest people though, imo.

the_last_name_left said...

What would they get out of Zinn's Peoples' History? A load more Jewish names? A load of pages with highlighter pen on Jewish names........amazing.

The Patriot and Truth movement generally ignore Zinn and his history. Sure, they could rightly claim it appears occasionally, but as I say, it's only to highlight the Jewish names and/or to further their conspiracy angle - it's always been happening, right?

They seem to completely miss the point. No surprise then to see the Troof Movement turn on Zinn so viciously when he said the truth about 911 Troof - that it doesn't really matter and it misses the point. Chomsky said much the same thing too. They're both right, yet Conspiracism throws them over because of it, nevermind everything else they ever said.

I find that annoying too - that they will exploit Chomsky and Zinn, say, or Amy Goodman, John Pilger and even that Keynesian economist (whatshisname?) whilst completely deriding such people in another breath. One moment Chomsky's words from the 80s are used and he is speaking for 'the troof movement', the next moment he is "a gatekeeper" and always has been, zio-scum, blah blah blah.

Bring anything up about this and they'll retort "we're non-ideological". That means they can say black today and white tomorrow. And yet they're still so damned self-righteous. I honestly can't see why.

socrates said...

I think I saw that website once, and it was full of scumbag idiots with no clue. Typical Joooo hate as I recall.

Martin, the strange thing about the Desertpeace dude is that he is close to someone named Tinoire who is close to Rivero. They all showed up on the scene at the same time and advertise more of the same hatred and idiocy from that milieu.

They are also tied to Wayne Madsen, some creep named Stan Goff. You can go to Progressive Inedependent dot com and still see who their closest affiliates are, one of them being Velvet Revolution, the place run by convicted bomber, drug smuggler, and suspected pedophile Brett Kimberlin and fellow con artist Brad Friedman. There's a reason I sense they are all part of organised disinfo. I didn't just pull the idea out of nowhere.

There's something very fishy about Mike Rivero. He worked for McDonnell Douglas. That doesn't add up. It never will.

They all pull the donation scheme. I totally agree with TLNL that bloggers shouldn't ask for money. If you get something rolling, then you make money off of advertising. That's how it works.

Bloggers asking for money are mostly comprised of scammers.

Martin Firestein said...

Hi TLBL/Socrates:

I never felt comfortable labeling Desertpeace as anti-semitic because I could never find anything on there that the author printed that was clearly anti-Jew in nature. I'm always wary of mixing criticism of Israel with anti-semitism, even as a Jew myself. And yet, that's what makes sites like Desertpeace so dangerous. They're not like Rense or WRH which clearly link to idiocy about the Protocols, or the Holocaust not happening, or the Federal Reserve being some insidious Jewish scheme, yet Desertpeace links to Rense and WRH and other sites like that.

And it's ... well it's smart/clever, but insidious at the same time, what they do. They mix legitimate criticism of Israel with blatant anti-semitism. I truly believe there is a line separating the two, but what Rivero and others of his ilk try to do is blur the line, so that the two mix together, and there's no clear distinction anymore. And then they can say that whenever they're called out on real anti-semitism, that criticizing Israel isn't anti-semitic. But they're missing the point. Of course it's not. But saying the Holocaust never happened, or saying that "there's a reason why Jews got kicked out of every country they've ever inhabited" is clearly on the anti-semitic side of things, but it's so hard to tack that label onto them when they mask it with the struggle for the Palestinian cause.

Martin Firestein said...

And I think well meaning people get tripped up by this blurring of the lines between criticizing Israel and real anti-semitism a lot. Here's a perfect example:

I'm really interested in the history of the American civil rights movement, so I subscribed to the listserv for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee just so that I could talk to activists if I ever felt like it, and just to observe what they're talking about regarding the movement. Now, I was born in 1977, so clearly I wasn't a part of the main CR struggle in the 50s or 60s. I just felt it important to mention that and put things in context.

So about a week ago, someone posts this link to the listserv:

which talks about Jewish dominance/exploitation of the CR movement. And of course, if you visit Jewishtribalreview as a whole, you can see just how anti-semitic it is, and indeed, some Jewish members of the SNCC listserv brought this up. I honestly feel the person who posted that link wasn't intending to say anything bad about Jews, but just bring this up for discussion (I have no way of proving that, of course, not knowing anyone on the list personally), and yet it caused a really big stink, with Jewish members of the listserv noting that it was blatantly anti-semitic, and others saying that these are legit areas for discussion and mixing in criticism of Israel/Zionism/AIPAC. And again, I think this reinforces the point of how well Rivero types have blurred the line between anti-semitism and criticism of Israel.

Martin Firestein said...

I wanted to ask Socrates, when you say "disinfo", are you talking about a coordinated right wing effort to infiltrate the left and discredit it by taking on their beliefs and damaging them somehow? Like some corporate/government effort to do this?

socrates said...

I experience the same frustration TLNL does about the hypocrisy. I think it was Jeff Rense or maybe Rivero who had a Noam Chomsky quote as a top banner. These are the same people who claim Obama is a socialist.

I just had some troll drop a post into my archives concerning the Johnny Gosch story. He called me a babbling, coffee house, proletariat, I guess a poser.

I've seen these conspiracy freaks go after the Frankfurt School. That's probably because they were mostly Jewish and generally combined marxism and freudian theory. They didn't hold their punches. They went after all forms of totalitarianism and culture production no matter generated by either superpower.

Marty, here's the deal. Desertpeace and Tinoire do not have to be publishing overt Jooo hate because they let their buddy Rivero do it. Rivero isn't even that bad compared to the people he links to, such as Maynard and others. It's a good cop, bad cop, neonazi cop formula.

The difference between nobodies like myself and TLNL with these others is we do care about who we associate with. We do try our best to vet links and sources. The other day I posted a blog suggesting the FBI had created a limited hangout to cover up the Hal Turner story.

TLNL called me on it, and I admitted I might have went a bit down Goofy Street. But I also pointed out that it was strange the FBI waited two and a half years to confront Wikipedia, and that they did so as we approached Hal Turner's third trial.

TLNL cut me some slack and gave me an avenue to save face, that the most important story is what was up with Hal Turner's connection to the FBI. So I came up with a bit more on his being sent by the FBI to Brazil to pose as a leader in the American neonazi movement.

It's called watching each other's back. Alex Jones got into trouble because he was having a dumbass like Rivero on his show every month. Rivero is cornered into the neonazi label precisely because he has been promoting obvious scum like Maynard and Carto.

Tinoire banned me because I pointed out that someone had used the phrase Jewboy. She deleted that post, in fact all of mine, I'm guessing a hundred or so, and then saying I made it up. But some website called Prosemite Undercover watched my back and posted the now whitewashed words proving I wasn't lying.

This last year I found out Tinoire had posted on an obscure Ronald Reagan forum that she had worked for military intelligence. She then posted I was crazy. She didn't explain why a self-proclaimed lefty would have been spying on the Russians. She voted for Ron Paul. She sponsored What Really Happened.

socrates said...

She in turn has been sponsored by Wayne Madsen who says he used to work for the NSA. He is a well-known disinfo wiiter. She is also very close to the Desertpeace loser.

You are right there with our awareness of the insidious nature of this milieu. They have been clever about it. But over the years, it has all fallen apart. There was a guy called the Mysterious S. Boyle who first exposed Rivero and his ties to the Special Forces Underground and Carto. TLNL and myself have carried on with that kind of work, and I believe even though Boyle backed up a smidgen on his allegations, myself and TLNL actually proved that he was right the whole time.

You see, myself and TLNL were getting abused a few years back at some place called The Unofficial WRH Forum. It was anything but unofficial. Rivero prnminently linked to them, and they housed his archived letters. Right before they closed shop, a fake lawyer showed up, just like what happened to S. Boyle, and threatened TLNL for defamation and whatnot.

Long story short, a convoluted yet sophisticated cybersmear script was put in place in which myself and TLNL were called the same person with many various sock puppets. I saved the most important thread before it was washed away forever. Tinoire was in on the scam. So was some dude named Jeff Wells of Rigorous Intuition.

Now to your specific question Martin- I can't say for sure this is a government sponsored program. It could very well be. Most people will not think so, and will think I am a fruitcake for thinking it. One person has characterised myself as one who fights conspiracy theory with conspiracy theory.

socrates said...

Hal Turner proves I am not that far off. There is Lyndon Larouche who has had government ties. I don't think this is widespread. This would be a small program within the US government hiding behind security non-disclosure. The Special Forces Underground was started by a US Green Beret or something, Steven or Stephen Barry. Even Sixty Minutes covered it. Rivero first got into trouble because he was circulating their publication called The Resistor. I'm sorry in advance if my spelling is ever off, or if I end up rambling. I get a bit of jolt of energy whenever someone even comes a whiff near what I've been primarily blogging on. Now in the case of Jeff Wells, it appears he is just a kook who took bible studies and dove into the disinfo rabbit hole. People like Rivero and Tinoire, those I believe are involved in some goofy disinfo operation. There isn't as much proof as there is with Hal Turner, and even there it is tough to find out much. But yes, I do believe there is some form of internet cointelpro. It is now actually open knowledge yet not widely known as an anti-terrorism operation. I've been thinking about internet fakes since late 2005 when I first started blogging a bit at Huffington. I saw the Renses and Prison Planets, the Randi Rhodes, the et als, the so-called zeitgeist. Over time, and based a lot on personal experiences, I believe the thing is an utter cesspool. Did you know that Markos Moulitsas of The Daily Kos said in 2006 that the CIA isd a liberal institution he'd have no qualms working for? Man, I've hated the CIA since I was 18. Why would the top rated "left" blog be promoting the CIA? Why would Mike Rivero have worked for McDonnell Douglas and Tinoire for military intelligence? I'm not going to proofread this, so I hope it's all right with a limited amount of typos and that it makes a certain amount of sense concerning what I believe is going on in some places on the internet. I'm not sure where you are in regards to internet awareness. If you want me to track down some specific proof, such as the McDonnell Douglas or Tinoire thing with military intelligence, I can do so. My ultimate fear is that the noise to signal ratio is so high that this like throwing pebbles into the ocean. Not saying in regards to yourself but in general. There are just too many crap websites to toss to the side in order to find the information nuggets. Maybe I'll try to write up a book, but unfortunately I am not too ambitious.

Martin Firestein said...

Hi Socrates. Thanks for replying to my post.

I'm not entirely sure how far apart its fallen, as I've seen books in bookstores or websites online that reference back to WRH or it's affiliate sites. Now maybe they're in on the action, or perhaps they haven't been smartened up yet. I honestly don't know. But if they are innocent of knowing the real motives behind Rivero, et al., then the fact they link to them shows just how masterfully they've stirred the pot to merge/confuse anti-semitism with criticism of Israel. That's alarming to me.

I found the S. Boyle stuff on Rivero and McDonald Douglas, as well as the stuff about Rivero and the Resister. So you don't need to track this stuff down. Thanks for offering, though. You really should, or perhaps you and TLBL both, set aside a page on your sites to make this information more available to people, because I honestly don't remember how I found it, but it would take a miracle for me to find it again. Having quick, easy access to it would be very beneficial.

I realize this wasn't really a question you asked, but I figured I'd mention anyway, that this all started way back when I found WRH talking about 9/11 as an inside job, and I became fascinated because I could never quite figure out this guy's angle. Rivero spoke the talk of left wing movements, yet incorporated right wing stuff too, and I sensed a blatant anti-semitism on his part. Turns out I was right. I probably don't follow online stuff that much, so perhaps there's so much more out there in this area (anti-semitism masquerading as criticism of Israel) than I'm aware of.

the_last_name_left said...

ack - I ended up writing essays in response. I'll try a different tack.

I think I'm right in saying Socrates believes that this far-right network is organised, by some aspect of Government. I wouldn't go so far, though I'm sure we're in total agreement that there is a definite network of interests operating, whose tone is far-right, but whom can appear as left. I think S (but someone, anyway) characterised that as "right woos left". A good description I think.

There's also the Hal Turner thing though, which isn't right woos left. It's right wooing right, and then turning them in? Well, so it appears atm imo.

But it does show FBI/state involvement in political activism on the internet, even if it isn't 'right woos left'.

My resistance to the idea of all of this stuff being state-instituted is simply because the evidence to say so doesn't exist. Some evidence for it does exist - Hal Turner. Still - that's only one instance. ;) (I'm sure there's many more, but we really can only go as far as the evidence allows. Beyond that is speculation and it's worthwhile - but we need remember it is only speculation, however well founded. Often intuition is right though - I try to trust mine)

I have to say I think Rivero is pretty committed. Seems always to be his voice, although he can often sound like a propaganda manual imo.

Anyway, I think it's safer to assume these people really do believe what they say, and to a large extent represent a somewhat grasroots movement providing a means of contact for genuine people.....and their anti-semitism and anti-socialism etc. I don't think we lose anything by accepting these people at face value, in this respect.

My position is that if people are going to rant on about zionism, they have a responsibility to repeatedly attempt to put it beyond doubt that they are not anti-semites. I've never seen this done successfully, and few efforts are even made. Those efforts that are made are usually pretty transparent - they're just tactical cynicism.

So, i dunno. We have evidence for state involvement, but only in a limited sense. and we'll only ever get that, bar a stasi-HQ style ransacking like in E Germany?

the_last_name_left said...

MF: I could never quite figure out this guy's angle. Rivero spoke the talk of left wing movements, yet incorporated right wing stuff too, and I sensed a blatant anti-semitism on his part. Turns out I was right.

That's pretty much how I'd describe my own experience. Likewise I share your unease and concern about how insidious it is. They're pretty accomplished at what they do, right? I find that really quite threatening.

set aside a page on your sites to make this information more available to people

I did have a respository of sorts with most of the stuff laid out. It was hosted at Trasuti's old place and disappeared when we moved to freevisionaries. It might still be backed up, but I'd have to ask Trausti for it. He hasn't responded to my flouncing out of freevisionaries over what I see as anti-semitism. So that might be uncomfortable.

I really should have it all here somewhere anyway. And much else besides. :D

I wanted this place to be something of what you suggest, but without that old site, then I guess a lot is missing. Point taken.

I had been on to S before that we needed to do image maps of connections between people and groups. I think it needs doing. But I'm lazy, too. ;)

socrates said...

I agree with TLNL there is a degree of laziness involved. I agree with Marty a bit that these guys are not as finished as I seemed to put it.

Yes, wrapping it all up into tidy form would be sweet, but it would take a full-time committment. It's tough enough writing these posts without fixing spelling and grammar. I've been out of the academic loop for a while now. I can feel my work slipping. In fact, any of us who spend a prolonged amount of time on the net are naturally going to be drawn into the masses vernacular of shoddy presentations.

I just think the Jooo hate zeitgeist and other various misinfo hoaxsters have been exposed to such a degree that they are done as far as having any far reaching potential.

Look at the KKK. They used to be pretty big. Blacks were being lunched. In the early 20th century, the #1 film producer loved the KKK. Now we have a black president.

Look at the Rivero's, Madsen's, Larouchites, Tinoire's, Jeff Wells and Brad Friedmans, even Markos Moulitsas, for just a few examples. They had their golden era which peaked in 2005. Their run is over. Look at this Rivero versus Jones squabble. Other than TLNL, I don't see any "normal" people covering it. Maybe that Canadian Alexjonesville or what's it called lady. Otherwise, this is a milieu that has been isolated.

Thus all these people, even the good cops like desertpeace can now be seen as being part and parcel of anti-semitism falsely presented as legitimate criticism of Israeli politics concerning Palestine.

How do I put this? It's a matter of perspective. These people are cockroaches. They'll always exist. But they will never ever get as close to being seen as zeitgeist as they did just a few years back.

Like TLNL put it, this is a hobby. That's why no donations are asked for. There was a time I thought I'd make it as a blogger. But that was when I still believed there was even a small part of the blogosphere that was legit. I was at BradBlog and I had info on some dude named Steven Hertzberg. Brad Friedman ignored the finds. That didn't make sense. So I turned my hobby's attention to him and that led me to Brett Kimberlin productions.

Then I got into figuring out the satanic panic. Recently I got into movies. I'm pretty much cooked as a blogger. I now realise I either write this schtick up as a book, or I'm running around in circles like a chicken with its head chopped off.

socrates said...

That's why I'm content with interacting with TLNL and a few others and no longer trying to paddle upstream into a void. I have even gotten to the point where I am censoring pesky trolls who won't leave me alone. If folks can't deal with the content and are merely out to post confusion and make me feel like dirt, they can go somewhere else. It's a different form of censorship than the one I have railed against. I know I run the risk of sounding like a hypocrite, but I concede the war is over. I think it died when Dave Weintraub did. He was our best chance for a good super blog being formed.

TLNL, I definitely feel we have reached a detente on our differences. I believe we did so actually a few years back when you returned to aircraft wings. I had overreacted and taken your criticism too personally. We just had too much in common to let differences overwhelm that which had drawn us together in the first place, our awareness of some fool named Michael Rivero.

I concede it's a goose chase to nail internet cointelpro, despite there being small pieces of evidence here and there.

It's not that I think there is one centralised black op program behind this. Some people are just fake lefties and opportunists. Huffington is an obvious fake lefty. I would never claim Moulitsas' Daily Kos is a CIA front, though it's intriguing he is closely tied to them. Hal Turner was a big catch. However, it's tough to find out what was really up with his visit to Brazil.

Ok, I know how to get myself out of this indulgent post. TLNL, it was Chip Berlet who I think coined the phrase right woos left. He is right up your alley.

You should ask Trausti for all your materials. It's only fair of him to give them to you. You can save them to your computer. Then you have them.

I'm not sure what you mean by creating a template or image of connections. If you want to, there is aircraft wings to organise it. We could start another free forum for a fresh start or if you have a different one you like better, we could go there. Blogger is kind of limited. Forums are nice, because old threads can be bumped up. It wouldn't be tough to put all our various findings together in index or template whatever form. I mean, it would take a bit of work, but it could be done.

Yet to be honest, I don't think it might be that important to do. Look at Tinoire and Andy Stephenson. They are blogging history. Rivero has now been marginalised into the neonazi side of the conspiracy theory world. I'm not sure how important it is to keep paddling upstream to expose him. Though I do think that stuff we came up with on the Dandelion Publishing and PMC4 connection was cool. My memory is fading on me. I write this stuff down and then start to not be sure if I'm getting the names correct. Well, I'll shut up for now. Sorry for going on and on and on.

the_last_name_left said...

Yeah S, these peeps probably are marginalised and of little consequence. I hope so. Still, I do keep seeing their stuff making inroads into more mainsteam discourse - there does seem to be an effect from the drip-drip of crypto-nazi propaganda.

I think the impetus of 911 Troof has largely exhausted itself as a vehicle. It's slipping away and joining the firmament of conspiracism, along with JFK, the Illuminati, the moon landings, whatever. Conspiracism needs to expand its appeal and faces a challenge to co-opt the Troofers into a wider movement - which they have clearly been trying to do. I imagine anti-semitism is one of the ways they're trying to do it - consciously or not. It's been a common enough vector for conspiracism previously. Indeed, it's arguable conspiracism is intrinsically anti-semitic, so we shouldn't be surprised to see an effort at remotivating and realigning Troof around more generally anti-semitic lines.

So, I'd agree that 911Troof is a spent force, but I think far-right forces are working to transform it into something wider. I don't think they're having enormous success. Still, I can't feel thoroughly at ease about it. Anti-semitism and a general wild fury over Israel seem quite prevalent atm - and it's far less radical than 911 Troof on the face of it and far less easy to dismiss. The Troof is dead - long live the Troof! ;)

On that thing of our differences before - iirc i said at the time to watch me over time, and make your conclusions. One can't really trust people over the net, certainly not easily if one is wise. But one does have time and content, and people should be assessed on that. We share a lot of views, generally - and time has shown that to be true. One difference between us is chemtrails, which I don't venture into. I don't see any need to raise it, as a matter of politeness/respect/tolerance. We can disagree, even as we largely agree? Over time, that has to be recognised? You are sometimes quick towards suspicion though, and it can really irritate me. But like I say, time and content. I don't think I've strayed from consistency - I can't see why I would. If I am, or have been, I wish people would say. (I don't get as much criticism as I used to now that I am IP banned across 00s of IPs at all these places. lol. I'm sure I have never had two sympathetic figures to converse with either. It's a real novelty ;)

Man, it was hard-going when Nazis were showing at Trausti's. Someone had "kindly" put the link up at Stormfront. Everyday was suffering a personal character assassination, lies, hate, deception, barely suppressed violence..... a forum war. Odd to become so isolated when all that shit was going down. What an education that was. Horrible, and yet it was all supposed to be my fault (because I opposed nazism lol)

Martin Firestein said...

Could it be that Hal Turner was simply a way to get the worms of the extreme far right out in the open and take them down as some sort of terrorist/violence risk? I could kinda go along with that if it helped weed out people like those who did Columbine or the OKC bombing. I haven't followed the Hal Turner thing too closely, so maybe I'm wrong about that, but it's just a thought.

Yeah, I .... I think I told Socrates before, I find it hard to believe that Rivero is a disinfo agent. I really feel that he believes all the Jew hatred he spews. Is there any way to investigate the claim I read on another Jooo paranoia website that Rivero is friends with Ernst Zundel and his wife? If so, that would explain a lot.

"My position is that if people are going to rant on about zionism, they have a responsibility to repeatedly attempt to put it beyond doubt that they are not anti-semites."

I don't think they feel the same way. To someone on the left who views this, the Palestinians are the downtrodden, much like Native Americans, African Americans, poor people around the world, etc. They feel the urgent need to stand up for the oppressed and the Palestinians fit that description to them. So while others see Zionism as a legit expression of a Jewish need/desire for a homeland, more leftist types see Zionism as imperialism, just like global capitalism. So they're going to criticize it, and criticize Israeli influence in the government (AIPAC, etc.) without really considering, or caring about the implications for anti-semitism. The Counterpunch website is a leftist site, yet links to a website called Konformist, which clearly has anti-semitic materials on it. Now in that particular case, the webmaster, Andrew Cockburn, said something to the effect that the plight of the Palestinians is so dire, that if he has to raise the specter of anti-semitism to address it, then so be it. Now I don't think all leftists who oppose Israeli actions in the Middle East are quite like that. They're not deliberately (I don't think?) raising the specter of AS to address the Palestinian issue, but I do think they're either unaware of just how easily the two blend together, or else they're overconfident in the idea that AS was discredited forevermore by Hitler and the Holocaust, and thus Israeli/Jewish fears of it are unfounded and simply a way to deflect criticism from the Palestinian issue.

the_last_name_left said...

Rivero and Zundel as friends? I don't know. Wouldn't surprise me. If true, and they try to hide it, one wonders why? [fascists know they are despised?]

Left does seem to view zionism as imperialism rather than nationalism.

That's why I mention Lenin's stuff on nationalism. it seems to me people ignore what lenin said, or maybe i misunderstand it. (I don't claim to understand lenin on nationalism, i find it very difficult, complicated, nuanced. it seems to be an explanation of how to treat nationalism, which is a contrary impulse to internationalism of socialism. even though international socialism is seemingly antagonistic towards nationalism lenin isn't entirely hostile to it - at some level it represents emancipation from imperialism etc. Supporters of Palestine wouldn't have a problem seeing Palestine like that, whilst anti-semitic opinion prevents Israel/Judaism being seen in the same positively-nationalist manner because they see Judaism/Israel as [super] powerful and imperialist - world jewish conspiracy.] The left too, as you say Martin, sees Israel as (regular) Imperialist rather than minority nationalist (which Islam does seem to benefit from, somewhat oddly but in regular left vein.)

I think this is happening because of people missing Lenin's sentiment. But like I say, I don't claim to understand it, and my understanding is surely crude and perhaps just my own. ;)

I'd like to read some views on such a topic. But where is it? I have no idea. I can find anti-semitism within seconds, but a discussion of Lenin's nationalism re Israel/Palestine can't be found.

I find it quite disturbing that such hostility is shown towards well-intentioned concerns that supposed "mere anti-Israelism" is problematic and sometimes anti-semitic. Why the hostility? If Lenin says anything like what I think he does then the left might need a rethink. that shouldn't be any surprise? :D

Martin Firestein said...

I thought I'd post this here. I found a socialist forum:,2601.0.html

It's a criticism of Zionism and Israel, but it links to a website called Jews Against Zionism, and an article on their website, which promotes the idea that zionists instigated a "war against Germany" to force Hitler to launch a Holocaust against the Jews, which in tern, forced the Jews to flee Germany and settle in Palestine, thus fulfilling the zionist prophecy of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East:

Nevermind that this boycott was a very small response to German anti-semitism in the first place, and could hardly be considered a "war". It's sad and fascinating to me that the same boogeyman of "Jews declare war on Germany" can simultaneously be used to justify the Holocuast, defend German aggression in World War 2, AND be used to discredit the idea of a Jewish state (that's not to say that Israel shouldn't be criticized for its policies against the Palestinians).

socrates said...

This is cool. We're each opening up a bit. Blogger is limited, in that it's tough to keep track of new posts. I like it when the dialogue camps out on one specific thread for a while.

TLNL, the thing about our earlier spat is that it was unique. We hardly knew each other. I wqas getting my arse cybersmeared in the craziest ways. I didn't realise you were making thousands of posts over the years at Trausti's version of a WRH forum. I ass-umed you were part of the crowd going after me.

It took time to see we have more in common than not, and that one of the things we have in common is a propensity to playing fair in debate.

I have had my moments. I admit it. I do think it's blown out of proportion. If only people knew how much shit has been heaped on me, they'd understand.

As for chemtrails, it's a two-way street of tolerance, imho, that we do not go into it together. I can understand why someone would think the fake clouds are being generated as a result of ordinary air traffic. I can understand how one might think it's off the wall.

One of your best arguments has been for the "troofer" people as you call them to clean up their own acts. This goes beyond the actual debates. I haven't had much to say on 9/11 or the conspiracy theory surrounding it. Here and there but not much. I too have a dislike for everything having a conspiracy theory angle. Of course we're obviously both intrigued by this development in regards to its propagation on the net. Hopefully that explains any apparent contradictions. E.G. If we are so averse to conspiracy theory, why do we talk about them so much?

I respectfully disagree with you about so-called chemtrails. I encourage anyone interested in the best presentation about them to check out the forum to be found in my blogger profile. Not DFQ2 but the other link TLNL humorously referred to once as Aircraft Wings. I liked that one a lot better than AAANI for a nickname.

I have clearly shown that the idea of a "chemtrail" program is not ludicrous. I won't reinvent that wheel here. I understand that it would take a lot of effort on TLNL's part to try to debunk what is in the top section. Maybe that's why I don't get too much into 9/11 or let's say health care reform. We can't cover everything.

I agree with TLNL that blogging is a hobby. Thus it's our own personal preferences how we spend our internet time. The best is when the dialogue merges into mutual interests. That's what's so nice about this specific thread. A common interest has arisen.

I've got a bit more to say. There's a method to my madness. I'll run through the rest of the new comments and see if I have any cents lying around to share.

socrates said...

The neonazi forces are marginalised, imho. I guess in a way it's still bad, for it allows still bad philosophy to seem to have merit.

Here's an analogy. I'll use the moral from the film Gentlemen's Agreement.

Many characters in that one felt they were over being bigots, in this case, Jooo haters. The phrase Gentlemen's Agreement refers to the idea of a wink-wink more subtle form of prejudice which survives the outcasting of the obvious stuff by society.

Here's another example. You have blatant wingnuts like Rush Limbaugh and Fox News who are so over the top, that it makes lefties look good. The problem, however, is that stereotypes and bad arguments against liberalism and socialism somehow survive.

I think it's inevitable that America will lean left. There will be socialised health care. There will be more equality. One way to ensure that would be to enact a decent minimum wage which is tied in with inflation. Something will also have to be done concerning schools being funded according to each town's and city's property taxes. The other problem and the biggest impediment to America being a fair society is its dependence on having a military economy. That budget will have to be drastically reduced.

I don't know when things will get better. We could be talking years to decades to centuries. But eventually there will be social and environmental justice. It is inevitable.

socrates said...

Marty, I do not believe the means justify the ends. Columbine doesn't seem to be a good example. That was more to do with potential results of school bullying going unchecked.

I see your point about the OKC bombing. The problem is who is going to police the police? It's reaching surreal proportions, when one hears of the Quakers being infiltrated by modern day cointelpro. And even if the Hal Turners of the world haven't been posing a personal threat of violence, could he not have been creating Hal Turners in that process of trying to flush out the crazies?

Of course Rivero has been plugging Zundel, though I don't follow him enough to know if he is actually friends with his family. There's no way to know if Rivero is a paid disinfo agent or not. You don't think he is. I do. I think fake clouds are being deliberately produced. TLNL doesn't. That's how it goes sometimes.

There's no doubt that there are two de3finitions of zionism. That is where the confusion is. Zionism in its true form was about giving the Jews their own state after the Holocaust. There's nothing wrong with that. Zionism is a word like liberalism and socialism. It gets distorted. Why even use the words, if there isn't going to be an effort to research and write with some depth of ideas?

The website TLNL recently went to is not worth the time. The blog owner admitted that his family was KKK or something. All those douchies clearly are tied to Holocaust denial and the demonisation of Israel.

Now the problem here is that the Israeli government does treat the Palestinians like dirt. This isn't genocide. It's still bad. Sure, the Israelis won a lot of land after being attacked. I do understand that many in that region would like to obliterate Israel. But, what Israel is doing to Palestine can never be justified. I wish I had the time to research and rehash what I've come up with before on specific crimes Israel has committed against Palestinians. This isn't Jooo hate. Israel needs to grow up and do the right thing.
You and TLNL would serve your causes better if you actually showed how to criticise Israeli policies against Palestinians. I haven't seen either of you do that. Maybe you guys could come up with a "pro-Palestinian" thread showing the way. Marty, you point out that critiques of Israel can blend or merge in with anti-semitism. I believe the same can be said of yourself, that without any actual critique of Israeli policy, you are actually supporting it, as you say the non-prejudiced critics of Israel are somehow aiding anti-semitism.

Martin Firestein said...

Hi Socrates:

"Columbine doesn't seem to be a good example. That was more to do with potential results of school bullying going unchecked."

Good point. I should've thought of a better example.

"could he not have been creating Hal Turners in that process of trying to flush out the crazies?"

That's a very good point, and quite possible.

"zionism in its true form was about giving the Jews their own state after the Holocaust. There's nothing wrong with that."


"Now the problem here is that the Israeli government does treat the Palestinians like dirt. This isn't genocide. It's still bad."

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't followed this issue very closely. That might seem strange, considering the stuff I'm posting here, but my interest is mainly on American history. I really am only focusing on the anti-semitic part of the discussion. And again, I'd like to emphasize that it clearly IS NOT anti-semitic to criticize Israeli policies. Although I don't know the exact details of the atrocities Israel has committed, I don't doubt that they exist.

"This isn't Jooo hate."

Not at all.

"I believe the same can be said of yourself, that without any actual critique of Israeli policy, you are actually supporting it, as you say the non-prejudiced critics of Israel are somehow aiding anti-semitism."

I can see your point here, especially when I talked about how maybe people on the left might be overconfident as to the demise of anti-semitism. I hope you understand I don't mean to say that everyone on the left is anti-senmitic, or that criticism of Israel is wrong. This is why this is such a tough issue and why I've tended to avoid it. Where IS the line between legit criticism and anti-semitism, and how can we possibly get into the minds of people to know if they're genuinely trying to raise the world's awareness of the plight of the Palestinians or deliberately trying to raise the dead body of anti-semitism? Very tough questions, and I'm certainly not qualified to have an answer.

Is this a good enough answer? I kinda lost my train of thought as I was writing this....

socrates said...

Hi Marty, thanks for taking my criticism as a good sport. I get where you're coming from. I've looked into Israel-Palestine a bit, and it doesn't look pretty. I go to sources like The Guardian. I try to find objective articles.

Other than that, I too don't follow it that closely. I was just playing devil's advocate. Of course the crowd we are going after are a joke.

That Ryan kid doesn't look too healthy. I finally watched that donation video. It looks like he has two black eyes. Maybe that's how his camera got broken. Maybe someone beat up on both him and the camera.

His eyes in general along with his facial expressions also don't seem normal. Maybe he is very young, and I am jumping to conclusions. I don't want to slander anyone, but he doesn't look and act right. If I was a blog meter maid, I'd be thinking he needs a ticket for blogging under the influence of undetermined substances.

Your avoiding discussion of the I/P topic on the net makes better sense now. Thanks.

As to your question about how do we know if someone is legitimately questioning Israel policy or is some form of Joooooo hater, I think it's fairly obvious. You can tell by who they link to and how they respond to people who don't agree.

Some like this guy and the last one TLNL tried to talk with are obvious wastes of time, as is Michael Rivero. Some take a bit more time to figure out. A guy like Rivero is thoroughly finished. You can't link and plug Carto, Maynard, Zundel, and many others like them and get away with having any base beyond including KKK members and total idiots.

Alex Jones made the right move cutting off Rivero. Alex Jones does somewhat remain a threat. Rivero doesn't, imho.

The I/P issue is a tough one to follow precisely because of how you put it. To paraphrase or put it in my own words, the signal to noise ration is waning.

That it also gets loud at some of the so-called "normal" blogs, normal compared to the obvious fruit loop nature of the ones we've been discussing, shows there must be another way to figure out the story. We do have to.

It's confusing why things never seem to get better in the Middle East. You'd think it'd be in the interests of each side to compromise and hammer out an agreement.

Many decades have passed. The time to solve this is now. Unfortunately, the US government is not one to be trusted. I'm referring to the Military Industrial Complex. They make money off of death and destruction. It's in their greedy interests for conflict to never end.

That's what I think is the root of the problem. Rivero worked for them. McDonnell Douglas. That's a smoking gun for him being a disinfo agent. It doesn't prove it, but it helps my opinion a lot.

The kid in the above video is what is referred to as a useful idiot. Hal Turner was a disinfo agent. Hal Turner is the story the ptb's don't want to be well known.

the_last_name_left said...

S: You and TLNL would serve your causes better if you actually showed how to criticise Israeli policies against Palestinians. I haven't seen either of you do that. Maybe you guys could come up with a "pro-Palestinian" thread showing the way.

There's something to your point perhaps, but I don't think it's equivalent to expecting Israeli critics to take steps to tackle and disavow anti-semitism. I mean, one could wholly support Israel's policies as they are and still legitimately insist critics disavow anti-semitism.

Legitimate criticism of Israel surely covers a wide spread of views and agreeing with any particular one needn't necessarily be proof of having eschewed anti-semitism.

How to criticise Israel/Palestine properly? The usual, I suppose - various sources, as impeccable as possible. I'm reluctant to offer any solutions (and extremely reluctant to insist on any) because I see every view being bitterly opposed by someone somewhere. It's an absolute quagmire and a graveyard for peoples' solutions.

I'd like I and P (the people there too) to chill out a take constructive steps at confidence...get to know each other...I dunno. I don't feel remotely qualified to insist that xyz *must* be part of a solution. I'm no more able to suggest anything much for Chechenya either....or N Ireland. Or Tibet. Or Kurdistan. or....

Nationalism and independence movements are complicated. There's always another bit of history to learn which can show another side. I wouldn't imagine telling people involved in such conflicts what they must and must not do, aside from the obvious like killing people, stealing land, taking hostages, firing guns, blah blah.

I'd like it all to stop. I don't know how to achieve it though.

So, I dunno... :D

the_last_name_left said...

engageonline, interesting

Martin Firestein said...

I don't have the know how to do this, but I'd like to know who's running the Jewsagainstzionism website. To oppose zionism or Israel is one thing, but to use the same "Jews declare war on Germany" baloney that anti-semites use to justify the Holocaust strikes me as a bit .... uncomfortable, and it leaves me wondering if there isn't more going on with them.

the_last_name_left said...

I bet Socrates can have a good guess who holds the registration for that domain name.

Yes, it's Godaddy and their proxy-registrar scam.

Domain name registration is supposed to hold the owners details, but godaddy circumvented this requirement by assigning the domains to themselves and only holding the true registrants details in private, thus providing a layer of secrecy/privacy. I thought this was illegal, but.....

anyway - seemingly every dodgy website is signed through godaddy now, and takes advatage of their "privacy" option. it's an obvious avenue for mis/dis info

wouldn't surprise me if it was run by some white supremacists or something. it could easily be. Stromfront run a big MArtin Luther King

the_last_name_left said...

Easy to see how they're of such use to the far-right (even if they're genuine)

socrates said...

Go Daddy is run by a right wing creep named Bob Parsons. It is not the only anonymous registrar service, but it was probably the biggest at least at one point in promoting that practice of hiding.

That's a different form of hiding than say the way nobodies like myself and TLNL use pseudonyms.

Nonetheless, knowing some names doesn't mean much. Suppose Mike Rivero didn't use a name. We'd be like who runs that WRH. We still don't even know who he really is as in a complete background. Influential bloggers simply emerged. Look at Brad Friedman of BradBlog. He's the frontman for a convicted bomber, drug smuggler, con artist, and one-time suspected pedophile and murderer. They set up hoaxes surrounding electtonic voting tabulations. For many years, Brad had a Jooo hater as his moderator, an Agent 99 who used to pal around with someone called Big Dan. That's when myself and TLNL really started to click again since we first did going after Rivero in 2007. The truth eventually gets out, but it's hard work by a few who blog as a hobby. I was only playing devil's advocate in regards for the need to set up a pro-Palestinian thread. Not that I wouldn't be into it. However, of course the people we have gone after are blatant anti-semites and dumbasses, easy pickings to dissect as hatemongers.

Look at Jeff Rense. Try finding out anything about him. There's nothing. Knowing names can be overrated. My main curiosity has always been about how do untalented hacks emerge to become vital cogs in an idiotic zeitgeist. Nobodies like myself and TLNL have had to be persistent with researching and presenting our finds on hostile blogs. At some point it becomes clear that only the creation of pockets of awareness is truly possible. Jokes like Brad Friedman get published by Huffington and the Guardian blog, while people like myself and TLNL get cybersmeared.

And not many really care about the true nature of the blogospheric zeitgeist, for ultimately it's all seen as just part and parcel of that wacky internet.

There are learning curves too. Not many are going to take the time to check out what I've said about Tinoire and Rivero, or how they are tied to Desertpeace, Wayne Madsen, and other fools. Brad Friedman and Brett Kimberlin are tied to them also. To this day Progressive Independent lists Velvet Revolution as an affiliate. That's where right woos left can most easily be seen. Rivero, Tinoire, Friedman, Kimberlin, and many more.

I guess the disinfo agent versus grifter debate ultimately doesn't matter. I concede that. Lyndon Larouche probably can't even be proven to be a disinfo agent working for 'Intel'. Hal Turner gets spinned as being a dimestore informant rather than perhaps a tip of the iceberg disinfo writer. So be it. It happens.

the_last_name_left said...

on chemtrails - i see every single plane as guilty of producing chemtrails. I call them exhaust fumes. the chemtrail thing seems to distract from this essential, simple, indisputable fact. my view is "get out of the fucking sky!"

what are people doing up there? criss crossing the globe for what? get down on the floor for god's sake!? :D

socrates said...

Of course that's how you see them. I understand that.

There is access to balloon readings which give relative humidity numbers. On a bunch of occasions, the necessary physics wasn't present to account for any presence of synthetic clouds or cirrus aviaticus as they are labelled.

I trollbusted this guy Patrick Minnis of NASA who used to anonymously astroturf at Chemtrail Central. I found quotes from him explaining how the balloon (radiosonde) readings can give a skewed result for relative humidity. Taking his margin of error into consideration, physics still could not explain what was seen in the skies.

There have been patents for this sort of thing. It is not crazy science fiction such as with Dr. Frankenstein bringing the dead back to life, or that the moon landing was a hoax.

I realise now that you are a sincere person. I am willing to blog alongside in detente with you regardless of how you feel about my hobby horse. You are registered at Aircraft Wings, so if you ever wish to discuss it, you're more than welcomed. It is the top section in which the subject is fully explored. The bottom one has mostly to do with cleaning house of kooks, like you have advised the "troofers" to do. That's another thing we agree on.

I also recognise there are only a certain amount of minutes in each day, so if we never get into it, it's ok by me.

For what it's worth, I also agree with your Luddite-like stance about the lack of a need to be in the skies in the first place. If some kind of clean energy could be discovered, then fine, no problemo.