Dumb and Stupid Quotes Thread: Idiotic Source and Context are Key.

[Arakhor]

Presumably he wasn't actually talking about house-destroying arthropods?

 

[Farm Boy]

This one of those "Death to Juice" moments?

 

[Angst]

"I have a natural instinct for science" - Donald Trump

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...ld-trump-natural-instinct-science/1674336002/

 

[Traitorfish]

"I'm not an anti-Semite. I’m anti-Termite." - Louis Farrakhan, a man who has met with countless Democrats (including Bill Clinton) and was praised by the leaders of the women's march.

It was yesterday on Twitter, in case you're thinking he's just a 'hidden' anti-Semite.

The Nation of Islam are notoriously anti-Semitic, nobody is surprised by this.

 

[Hygro]

Louis Farrakhan is still alive?

 

[Mouthwash]

The Nation of Islam are notoriously anti-Semitic, nobody is surprised by this.

Yes, I'm simply pointing out how he can get away with it and still remain popular with certain segments of the left.

Also, Twitter seems to have a pretty draconian policy against conservatives (such as banning LifeSiteNews for sharing an article on STDs - four years ago), but apparently calling Jews termites just isn't quite enough.

 

[Cutlass]

Yes, I'm simply pointing out how he can get away with it and still remain popular with certain segments of the left.

Also, Twitter seems to have a pretty draconian policy against conservatives (such as banning LifeSiteNews for sharing an article on STDs - four years ago), but apparently calling Jews termites just isn't quite enough.

It isn't conservatives being banned from social media. It's fascists and bigots.

 

[Mouthwash]

No, Richard Spencer is not associated with LifeSiteNews.

 

[Traitorfish]

Yes, I'm simply pointing out how he can get away with it and still remain popular with certain segments of the left.

It's not my impression that the Nation of Islam is popular with anyone. Their only popular figures, Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali, famously disassociated themselves from the group over forty years ago.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

apparently calling Jews termites just isn't quite enough.

Perhaps it would be enough if it actually happened.

 

[Traitorfish]

"Unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? Hopefully, they will disappear, that is, move from the ranks of the petted and cosseted bum class to the ranks of the productive members of society."

- Murray Rothbard, father of """"anarcho""""-capitalism

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Presumably he wasn't actually talking about house-destroying arthropods?

No, he was talking about people replacing themselves with a term. Like when @Mouthwash claims that anyone who doesn't like him is antisemitic, as if he is the very definition of Semite so disliking him is never personal, but bigotry. There are Jews who are very outspoken in their dislike for Farrakhan who do the same thing. If he responds in any way, they say "Ohhhhh! Antisemitism." Of course those people are now yanking it out of context and running around screaming that he called them termites, as in little arthropods. The guy says plenty of stuff that is genuinely antisemitic, but that's apparently insufficient so there has to be a giant howl about this because it makes a punchier soundbite.

 

[Mouthwash]

No, he was talking about people replacing themselves with a term. Like when @Mouthwash claims that anyone who doesn't like him is antisemitic, as if he is the very definition of Semite so disliking him is never personal, but bigotry. There are Jews who are very outspoken in their dislike for Farrakhan who do the same thing. If he responds in any way, they say "Ohhhhh! Antisemitism." Of course those people are now yanking it out of context and running around screaming that he called them termites, as in little arthropods. The guy says plenty of stuff that is genuinely antisemitic, but that's apparently insufficient so there has to be a giant howl about this because it makes a punchier soundbite.

Tell me, why is it that the left always demands a far higher standard of proof for antisemitism than any other taboo belief? (Reminds me of someone though.)

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Tell me, why is it that the left always demands a far higher standard of proof for antisemitism than any other taboo belief? (Reminds me of someone though.)

When you pretend to be asking why as a means to make an unsupported claim you open yourself up to being made to look stupid. Can you substantiate your claim that "the left" (who exactly are you referring to there anyway?) always demands a higher standard of proof (on what scale?) for antisemitism? Or are you, as I suspect, trying to just shove that BS through in a typical intellectually dishonest fashion?

 

[Cutlass]

Tell me, why is it that the left always demands a far higher standard of proof for antisemitism than any other taboo belief? (Reminds me of someone though.)

Tell me, why does the right always demand a far higher standard of proof for racism, or any other belief?

 

[Lexicus]

Tell me, why is it that the left always demands a far higher standard of proof for antisemitism than any other taboo belief? (Reminds me of someone though.)

This is funny because I pointed out a textbook example of antisemitism in the Clown Car thread and you rapidly showed up to deny it was any such thing.

 

[Traitorfish]

Tell me, why is it that the left always demands a far higher standard of proof for antisemitism than any other taboo belief?

From a previous thread,

The Hungarian government is pretty aggressively anti-Semitic (...)

[D]espising George Soros, even unreasonably, does not automatically make one 'aggressively antisemitic'.

So in this case, the error of the Bolshevik rabble was to over-diagnose anti-Semitism. So the running disagreement is not that the left fails to recognise anti-Semites, but that it fails to recognise the same anti-Semites as you, that it fails to support your diagnoses in some cases, while making diagnoses that you reject in others. And on at least the most superficial level, that sounds less like a soft spot for Jew-haters, and more like... disagreement between rational adults?

 

[Mouthwash]

When you pretend to be asking why as a means to make an unsupported claim you open yourself up to being made to look stupid. Can you substantiate your claim that "the left" (who exactly are you referring to there anyway?) always demands a higher standard of proof (on what scale?) for antisemitism? Or are you, as I suspect, trying to just shove that BS through in a typical intellectually dishonest fashion?

It's that every time I see this demand being made, it's always by leftists. "If he didn't explicitly say 'I hate Jews' you can't prove antisemitism!"

This is funny because I pointed out a textbook example of antisemitism in the Clown Car thread and you rapidly showed up to deny it was any such thing.

I'm perplexed at how Protestants not giving children up for adoption to non-Protestants is antisemitic (is a mass shooter also an anti-Semite if one of his dozens of victims is Jewish?), but whatever floats your boat.

So in this case, the error of the Bolshevik rabble was to over-diagnose anti-Semitism. So the running disagreement is not that the left fails to recognise anti-Semites, but that it fails to recognise the same anti-Semites as you, that it fails to support your diagnoses in some cases, while making diagnoses that you reject in others. And on at least the most superficial level, that sounds less like a soft spot for Jew-haters, and more like... disagreement between rational and adults?

Yeah, that's an important caveat. Leftists twist around the definition of antisemitism so it becomes nothing more than a rhetorical strategy. When actual anti-Semites are around (you know, the ones the Jews themselves recognize as antisemitic) you're all about caution and standards of proof. But when your political opponents use phrases with any parallel to antisemitism you can possibly connect them to, you simply report him as an anti-Semite.

It's no different from how certain parts of the right refuse to call anything except explicit declarations of "I hate blacks" racist, while at the same time feeling free to call Obama racist because he doesn't have enough sympathy for white people.

 

[Traitorfish]

Yeah, that's an important caveat. Leftists twist around the definition of antisemitism so it becomes nothing more than a rhetorical strategy. When actual anti-Semites are around (you know, the ones the Jews themselves recognize as antisemitic) you're all about caution and standards of proof. But when your political opponents use phrases with any parallel to antisemitism you can possibly connect them to, you simply report him as an anti-Semite.

So that's a thumbs down on "disagreement between rational adults", huh.

 

[Mouthwash]

Please don't flatter yourselves.