As someone with a mental illness (depression), and as the granddaughter of a woman with a mental illness (paranoid schizophrenia), and as the big sister of a terrific kid with a mental illness (Tourette's and related disorders), I try to be patient with those who suffer mental illness - myself included (and that's not easy). But this week, my patience is JUST ABOUT at its maximum capacity.
First there was the Nutter Down Under. Then there was this pleasant exchange on an anti-9/11-conspiracy blog:
Me (commenting anonymously so as not to be spammed/trolled): As someone who is on the fence about the 9/11 attacks (but recognizes the global threat posed by militant Islamism), I'm patiently waiting for the matter to be settled once and for all. While I'm not convinced by the conspiracy evidence, I'm not convinced by the official story either, because it has left behind more questions and doubts than it originally answered. After the disaster of Iraq, the lies of Chalabi and the INC, and the obfuscations of the Bush administration, I have NO doubts that Bush's people would lie about just about anything. So I'm waiting. Waiting for someone to PROVE, beyond a reasonable doubt, what really happened on 9/11. But, both sides of the issue (conspiracy/anti-conspiracy) are wasting so much time slinging mud and making snide comments to their detractors that nothing is getting resolved. Maybe it's time to forget about what the other guy's doing, and focus on proving your own case with rock-solid, indisputable evidence, including point-by-point analysis of WHY the various conspiracy theories are incorrect. Not why the other guy is "stupid", but why the THEORIES THEMSELVES are unsound. Stop making it personal, and start making it matter. I, and all the other fence-sitters, would be very grateful for that. We're waiting.
Ron somebody-or-other (not the site owner, but a frequent commenter): Another anonymous fraud is pretending to be reasonable. Tell us why you have "no doubts" that Bush would lie. Show us a single unambiguous example of a lie he told.
Pretending to be reasonable? Either I'm reasonable or I'm not. You can't fake a thing like that.
Why do people have to be so bloody nasty when you're just trying to have a civil, interesting conversation? Ask a simple question, and some folks get snarkier than the Desperate Housewives!
Then there was the case of the missing boy who isn't really missing, because he doesn't exist. It's a reeeeaaalllyyy long story, and some day I may go into it, but for now all you need to know is this: An Iowa woman named Noreen Gosch believes that her son, Johnny, was abducted by a pedophile ring in 1982 and is still alive today, operating within the ring. She had a brief conversation with him in 1999, she says. Just a few weeks ago, she received a set of very upsetting photographs in the mail, seemingingly of Johnny and two other boys bound and gagged on a bed. This week, a woman claimed her son David was one of those boys. He was abducted from a Washington town in 1985. Mrs. Gosch was very happy about this, needless to say, as it proved the photo was not just a joke. The only problem is, there is no child named "David Leonard Johnson" in the database of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, nor in any other online database of missing children. There's no mention of him anywhere, period. I've checked newspapers from his hometown and surrounding areas, too. Zip. So I wrote a short email to the mother of the missing boy/man, informing her that her son has been removed from the database. Hours later, she cheerfully informed me that the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children refuses to list her son as missing because of his "genetic makeup". No, he's not black or Hispanic. He's the last heir to the House of Stuart.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
THAT woman has been reading way too many historical novels! She gives a whole new meaning to "Charles across the water".
The discussion you described is EXACTLY why DHG was kicked off Zombieslayer's blog. The basic rules of debate and logic FORBID the use of personal attacks. Stick to the FACTS.
Am I commenting on the right post. I'm kinda confused. heehee
Some people can be like milk well passed its use by date. There's no point dealing with it, it's just nasty and needs to be cast aside like overdone assumptions.
It is important to remember in online exchange, that each side can be insulated from the reality of the other. We might be who we say we are in name and location, but often aren't as we type behind an information superhighway fence of estrangement. Maybe Ron whatsaname is a mommas boy who's current maternal figure never lets him get a word in edgewise, leaving him feeling socially impotent. Thus he needs to get his frustrations out on you because you're anonymous and unlikely to make him put his money where is keyboard is.
So it's best to make every effort not to take these things personal, for the sake of those who may come in the name of reason.
This post was brought to you by the letters M and D, and by the number 3.
Kudos to you, my friend, kudos.
I wouldn't be half as bothered if this particular dude hadn't once publicly debated Sam Sloan. He'll argue with Sam Sloan, but I'M crazy?
No, seriously, this guy was actually rather nice in his 2nd response, and remarked that since I was civil to him despite his attack, he felt he should respond in kind.
Tread lightly with this one kid. Smells like spoiled milk to me. ;)
Oh, I gave up on that "discussion" anyway. Wasn't going anywhere, obviously.
I emailed you!
I think you have a very balanced view, definitely!
As to some comments - My ol' 101 year old grandma had a saying "Don't stir in a turd, it just makes it smell worse!" Unfortunately that is sort of what the Bush administration's view of 9/11 was - keep it hush hush. But as to the commentor in question, not sure it deserves a response.
Maybe this will be like the Kennedy Assasination or Marilyn Monroe's death - we'll never know....although I would really like to read the study that was promoted by the relatives of the folks killed in the collapse of the towers. Anyway.....
I feel so much better knowing that I am not the only one having travails with the nutty side of the right wing spectrum.
Diana, I tend to agree - the truth may always be out of reach. But I certainly don't blame anyone for wanting answers to their questions.
GWB, you're definitely not the only one. Richard's site, in the last few days, has gotten visits from the Canadian gov, Fox News, and the Pentagon. It seems only people who want to squash curiosity about 9/11 are visiting the site.
Post a Comment