It’s good to see that I’m hitting a few raw nerves from the frothing and foaming extreme right-wing lunatics that go to roost at the infantile blog that is Tim Blair’s. Here they are able to offer each other a few smug and self-congratulatory pats on the back in the course of their childish self-righteous dialogue that they call ‘commentary’.
They seem to have got upset over comments I made suggesting that the two so-called Downs Syndrome bombings in Iraq are more than likely the false-flag work of the US/Israelis who are well known for launching false flag attacks. These are the same people that are still labouring under the illusion that 9/11 happened exactly the way the US government told us it happened. They still believe the fairy story of ‘al Qaeda in Iraq’ and that ‘Osama bin Laden’ said he did it. Even ‘Blind Freddy’ can see that the person making the ‘confession’ on the video the US government released was not Osama bin Laden.
The extreme right-wing must be getting really desperate if they feel they have to resort to using the lunatic inmates at the right-wing Tim Blair asylum. Apparently Blair’s comments came via ‘Eliot R’. Now, I wonder who Eliot R could be?!
Bang goes any credibility that Tim Blair may have had left. Even Blair should be able to recognise a fraudster when he sees one.
Standby to see the most childish of responses to this post from the intellectually hapless loons from Blairland. Fortunately there's only a few of them but they have a habit of making multiple comments due to their inability to fully think out their argument logically. Should be good for a laugh.
AUSTRALIANS AT WAR
THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.
5 comments:
Read this:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23203875-663,00.html
Perhaps the good Iraqi Doctor is Jewish? He might be had the Iraqi Jews not been driven out of their homeland.
Anonymous, do you really expect anyone to believe this nonsense? Dumb and gullible people like you are likely to believe anything a media outlet owned by the neoconservative Murdoch writes. Par for the course with you people; you’ll believe absolutely anything.
I am of the opinion that you are a coward -- an academic coward -- who lacks both courage and wit to respond to comments that a far from "frothing".
Why else delete this, posted yesterday?
"There are so many obvious patterns of deviation in judgement and examples of cognitive bias that occur in your "Telling the History of the 21st Century as it Really Is" that I find myself at once agog and aghast that such muddy thinking is passed on -- even as opinion, much less as "truth".
Indeed there are so many fallacies and cognitive biases apparent in your posts that I am recommending this site to a Professor of Psycholgy whose fields of expertise include Social and Cognitive Psychology.
There is enough material here -- anchoring, attentional and selection biases; availability heuristics and Ludic fallacy; observer-expectancy and subjective validation effects; to name but a few -- that one might devote an entire thesis to the contents of this site alone.
I am an historian, however, and will leave the above (and so much more) to those better qualified to analyse and offer hypotheses and interpretations of the irrational pseudo-certainty found here.
As an historian, however, I take extreme umbrage at the subtitle of your blog.
Whether you count yourself among those who believe, in some Hegelian transcendent teleological sense, that history has to have a progressive direction leading to an eschatological end; or you view history as a series of discontinuities; ruptures, if you will, measured in various time-scales -- that which you term "History...as it Really is" is, in fact, nothing more than your twisted interpretation of a momentary Zeitgeist. It is not History.
Even were one to give you benefit of doubt regarding your self-styled "History", you have no more chance -- on this day and in this place -- of getting it right than Heisenberg had in telling both position and momentum of any given particle -- less chance, in fact, because of the blatant cognitive biases of observer-expectancy and subjective validation effects noted above.
What is written here is not History, and you make a mockery of the term and yourselves by calling it such.
MentalFloss"
I don't expect you will permit this to survive the scrutiny of your peers.
Is it true that 'Arafat', the previous commenter, actually swallowed a dictionary as a baby and has suffered from incurable verbosity ever since?
You certainly get 'em on your blog, Damian!
Well, he's certainly swallowed something David! He's trying to pass himself off as an historian but so far all I've heard from him is a lot of pseudo-intellectual garbage that means absolutely nothing. Nowhere amongst his nonsensical verbiage is there any argument that rebuts my assertions. Methinks he's just a wannabe neocon intellectual - long on words, short on evidence that supports... well, whatever argument he's proposing, but he hasn't even said what that is yet.
He needs to get back amonst the kiddies that assemble at Tim Blair's lair - they actaully look up to him there. I'm sure he'll feel more at home there.
Post a Comment