Comment Rules, Repeated


If you post a comment that is strictly mockery, with no “point” other than contempt, you may get your comment deleted. If you are calling yourself “Satan’s Tool” while you do it, your chances of getting deleted shoot up to 100%

I am doubling down on abuse, not disagreement.

Now: There were two people who suggested, caustically, that the NYT Antifa ad was an Alex Jones hoax. I proved it wasn’t and asked that those who partook in this distortion return and say: “Roger that.”

This is about correcting the record as we go.

One was David Crowe. I can’t recall the second. I trust you will eventually let us hear from you.


9 thoughts on “Comment Rules, Repeated”

  1. ” I proved it wasn’t and asked that those who partook in this distortion return and say: “Roger that.””

    If you’re here at the Truth Barrier, you should want to have debates to some degree about the stories at hand, but if someone has a theory, it’s like improv… you can’t say “no, I don’t see that”, because that’s not the conversation that’s being had.
    You could present evidence in a non condescending or abusive way. There’s space for humor, but there’s no space for abuse. We all know the difference, I think. I hope.
    Perhaps I’m delusional.

    I just like this website, I like coming here. There’s always something at the very least interesting happening here.

    When you live in times such as there, there’s no moral high ground from which to rain scorn on conspiracy theorists anymore. That dam broke a long time ago. If you buy the news, any of it, you’re a dupe. We all know that.
    The funny thing about Alex Jones is how often he’s right, give the subject matter. There’s a LOT of made up bullshit on the news these days, it’s worse than ever but it was always there. Why single out Alex? You’re saying that it would be dangerous if people believed “everything”, or worse “anything”?
    That’s true. That’s why it feels so good when a (for theory lack of a better word) conspiracy theory turns out the be true. That’s to say when a lie is revealed to be what it is.

    Why not look closely? If I’m insane and paranoid because the L.V. shooter did what he did and the official story has collapsed…at least 3 times now, then I say that that’s a good thing to be insane and paranoid about. They’re raining bullets on crowds of people. Am I supposed to say I’m sorry that it’s not more bland? What am I supposed to think?

    “Mental note, don’t be in crowds”

    Antifa are violent in the extreme and they don’t seem to know the meaning of the word fascist, they seem to think it means racist, which it doesn’t. They’re mad at Trump, who a lot of people don’t care for just probably less so, and the media ignores their violence. The simple fact that Trump has been deemed unpopular by a media that’s out to destroy him is reason enough for them to ignore Antifa violence? The riots were happening across the country and I’d talk to liberals who claim to follow politics who didn’t know who Antifa are. That happened to me three times. Three different liberals.

    Were they lying? We’re they just lying and therefore distancing themselves from something insane because they knew that they couldn’t morally defend it?

    Do Trump voters follow his twitter account as closely as the readers of Salon?
    I’d wager no, we don’t. I don’t know of his day to day follies. I’m to busy doing my patriotic duty hoping the guy can get some good things done. So far, and I think because I ignore his twitter account, I think he’s doing a good job. I choose that ignorance. There’s a reason for that…

    Because something essential is listing starboard. The official narrative is peeling like poorly glued wall paper. I wonder if we even believe ourselves anymore? How sure can you be that you’re that right about anything? If you’re a Hillary enthusiast, how completely sure can you be that she’s not lying when she says that her role in the Russian collusion story is just a ‘big fat lie”. Being a Trump supporter means never having to care. They call every word out of his mouth a lie, or worse a conspiracy theory, but they don’t pause when those things turn out to be true. They really did wire tap his home for example. That happened. ? The difference is, I never held him up as a paragon of virtue in the first place. And in light of all that we’ve found out about how Hollywood treats women, I’m flabbergasted that something more substantial didn’t take him out earlier. Something like a rape with some evidence. The simple fact that that doesn’t exist, like it did for Bill Clinton, kind of shines it’s own light on the fact that he’s actually a fairly classy person when you think about how messed up he COULD have been. When you consider the exploits of the company that he kept. So far there’s no dungeons, ect.

    Anyhow, sorry for the rant.

    Be cool at the Truth Barrier, let us have the conversation at hand, or just leave. This is a cool website. Celia Farber is a great reporter, we all know that. More people should come here and share their POV on the subjects at hand without sneering condescension. I mean, if that’s how you feel, it’s a big internet…go.

    1. Well-stated.

      There is a natural transparency that comes across in Celia’s posts. One is pretty much never confused as to what is fact and what is opinion. And the opinions are very educated and that comes from a depth of experience. She follows her intuition where it leads, and it’s almost always enlightening and worthwhile.

      It is a unique opportunity – it would be a shame to let anything (like shallow trolling) ruin it – so let’s enjoy it while we can.

  2. Since “This is about correcting the record as we go” let it be recognized that word writ by you and by he you defend admitting behavior defined as irrational inspired my luciferian nom-de-plume.
    Wrestled with demons of less dignified reference to satan’s appendage but thought better.
    Let me get the rules straight.
    Self referential sardonic witticism mocking slanderous accusatory statements are forbidden but miss krabgrass may scribe Shakespearean sonnet maligning my existence and if former coworkers arrive to spew racist rants as well as mockery of the name Kurt Vonnegut gave me they are welcomed by your gracious hospitality and warm remembrances?
    Rules rules rules.

  3. The ad existed. Just like the Pizza restaurant existed. But you referred to antifa as “ultraviolent”. Yet, according to an organizer, ““The goal of this is start a peaceful protest and to begin to get large numbers of people out on the street,” Zee explained. “There is a fascist in the White House in Trump. That is who this person is.”

    I was not reacting to the possibility of antifa running an ad, or calling for peaceful protest, or calling for people to assert their first amendment rights.

    But why describe it as ultraviolent, when there’s no evidence for this?

    1. David Crowe has agreed the Antifa NYT ad was real. “Existed.” Asks now: Why describe Antifa as “ultraviolet,” and says there is “no evidence for this.”

      So: Now I will present my evidence that Antifa is ultra-violent. I don’t understand why I have to do this, when the evidence is abundant and all over the Internet, but I will.


      1. Basically if you disagree you will get censored . My guess is you listen to fox news all day and study alex jones as if it was the bible. You live in a constant state of anger and paranoia fueled by a underlining racist tendencys. Have fun with that. My guess is you also cant pay your own rent. (Parental socialism) lol

        1. “Basically if you disagree you will get censored .”

          Or if you’re a jerk. Be part of the discussion or just ruin everything, those are the choices. Pick one. Why are you here? For the sake of being disruptive?

          You’re a troll then. What happens to trolls troll?

  4. Thank you. Just think it’s important that once a fact is a fact we all sign off on it, not obsessively. Just as best we can.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.