Advanced Search

Jul 14, 2023 at 12:53pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said: "People who" . . . "Their motivations" . . . "They don't help" . . .Your MO is McCarthyism, personal attacks, cancel culture.As much as you try to smear and obfuscate you can't erase the simple fact: you're in bed with Matt Gaetz. People who stay up into the wee hours posting on message boards can find that they're cranky the next day. "People who" . . . 

Jul 14, 2023 at 12:30pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said: nohero said:People who oppose Ukraine being able to defend itself have friends in high places.G.O.P.’s Far Right Seeks to Use Defense Bill to Defund Ukraine War Effort And so do those people who disagree with Biden's policy on cluster bombs: Gaetz co-sponsoring measure to prevent Biden from sending cluster bombs to Ukraine by: Sarah Fortinsky, The Hill Posted: Jul 10, 2023 / 05:52 PM EDT Updated: Jul 10, 2023 / 07:08 PM EDT Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said Monday he will co-sponsor a measure to block President Biden from sending cluster bombs to Ukraine, joining a small group of Democrats on an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). “I will be the Republican co-sponsor on the NDAA amendment introduced by [Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)] to stop the transfer of cluster bombs. These cluster bombs will not end the war in Ukraine and will not build a more stable country,” Gaetz wrote in a tweet, which included a video clip from his podcast. “Children will be left without limbs and without parents because of this decision if we do not work together in a bipartisan fashion to stop it.” “Cluster bombs are features of the world’s bloodiest and most inhumane wars, and some of the longest. It’s hardly the cornerstone of a path to peace,” he said in the video. People who opposed military aid to Ukraine before the recent cluster bomb discussion, have no moral authority to weigh in on this. Their motivations have already become very evident. They don't help the arguments made by people who voice concerns about the cluster bombs because they're cluster bombs. "People who" . . . "Their motivations" . . . "They don't help" . . .Your MO is McCarthyism, personal attacks, cancel culture.As much as you try to smear and obfuscate you can't erase the simple fact: you're in bed with Matt Gaetz.

Jun 12, 2023 at 12:12am
dave said: paulsurovell said: dave said: ridski said: paulsurovell said: ridski said:I may have missed it, but I didn't see a South Mountain Peace Action booth at the big North NJ Pride event at Memorial Park today. How do you feel about the UK ban on puberty blockers? Was there any South Mountain Peace Action presence at Pride? I saw you were there at Memorial Day. No show for Pride?His standing order from Russia was no marching. Losing the argument about Walsh doesn't justify rank McCarthyism.Didn't lose anything, but you just lost face. Daily Wire's Matt Walsh: “Black people committing crimes against white people for sport is common”....Daily Wire's Matt Walsh: “Diversity is an anti-white conspiracy”....Matt Walsh’s violent political worldview: “You have to make people hurt”....Matt Walsh:  “we probably lost our republic after Reconstruction” and that “as the Anglo-Saxons, which were the original Americans, die off, our identity and our culture goes with it.”.....MATT WALSH (CO-HOST): But what I was trying to say, if you want extreme change, you must take extreme action. What you have to do is look at the situation and decide what exactly you want to have happen. And then you have to honestly approach it and say, what do we have to do to make this happen? But it is, in fact, true that you have to make people hurt. And I'm sorry. I'm sorry. But holding signs and yelling loudly will not make anyone hurt.....Walsh and other speakers at the rally used incendiary language directing anger at medical professionals ....Daily Wire's Matt Walsh calls LGBTQ teachers “groomers,” adding, “There is no heterosexual person demanding this sort of thing on the other side”....FIND MORE ABOUT PAUL'S PROUD BOY AT:https://www.mediamatters.org/matt-walsh Was this stuff in the film that we're talking about?

Jun 11, 2023 at 9:54pm
dave said: ridski said: paulsurovell said: ridski said:I may have missed it, but I didn't see a South Mountain Peace Action booth at the big North NJ Pride event at Memorial Park today. How do you feel about the UK ban on puberty blockers? Was there any South Mountain Peace Action presence at Pride? I saw you were there at Memorial Day. No show for Pride?His standing order from Russia was no marching. Losing the argument about Walsh doesn't justify rank McCarthyism.

Nov 8, 2022 at 8:57am
nohero said:Just to correct the record, what Mr. Surovell calls a "personal attack" on the Twitter is the same statement of fact that I and others make here, about trusting his interpretation or summary of what anyone says or writes, especially public figures and news articles. If it's not a "personal attack" here, it's not there.And it's interesting to read Paul's comments on the Twitter (using a web browser, not the Twitter app, which anyone can do), because he's more "MAGA-like" there than he presents himself here. Latest criteria of Mr.Thought Policeman -- "More MAGA-Like Than". Taking McCarthyism to a new level.

Oct 31, 2022 at 6:16pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said: nohero said: paulsurovell said: Are all the McCarthyite smears calling Ilhan "anti-semitic" and a "foreign agent" racist threats?And are you suggesting that Ilhan is incapable of making a McCarthyite smear?Because that is what is at issue here. That's a deliberately stupid response to my post. I have not idea what you think is "at issue here" based on those questions.It's not worth responding to.  Try writing something rational instead of stupid questions like those. I'll take that as a concession.For the record, you disingenuously injected the word "threats" into this discussion to distort what I was saying.And another for-the-record: I stood up for Ilhan against the McCarthyite "anti-semitic" smears against her. I'll bet you didn't. You can take it as not taking you seriously. Especially when you label someone else "disingenuous".You know how to use search functions, and if you did you would know you were wrong about me. I did the search and I found no trace of your standing up for Ilhan when she was accused of anti-semitism.

Oct 31, 2022 at 2:14pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said: Are all the McCarthyite smears calling Ilhan "anti-semitic" and a "foreign agent" racist threats?And are you suggesting that Ilhan is incapable of making a McCarthyite smear?Because that is what is at issue here. That's a deliberately stupid response to my post. I have not idea what you think is "at issue here" based on those questions.It's not worth responding to.  Try writing something rational instead of stupid questions like those. I'll take that as a concession.For the record, you disingenuously injected the word "threats" into this discussion to distort what I was saying.And another for-the-record: I stood up for Ilhan against the McCarthyite "anti-semitic" smears against her. I'll bet you didn't.

Oct 31, 2022 at 11:04am
nohero said:paulsurovell said:nohero said:The statement, "I'm criticizing her Tweet that speaks for itself" says that you didn't listen to what they are saying, nor to her response to them.  In other words, you don't care about the facts. Nevertheless, you smear her for saying, "I have never had the pleasure of responding to Russian ridiculous internet disinformation in person before. Thank you for the opportunity."If you deliberately refuse to find out what was said to her, you have no basis for your criticism. And equating her statement, which you call "McCarthyism" (again, without even bothering to find out what was actually said to her in person) with the racism, xenophobia, and religious bigotry directed at her is classic "clueless suburban white guy" behavior.You should delete your tweet, for your ignorance of what you're criticizing if not for the tone-deaf attitude it demonstrates, that equates criticism of political views and "factual" claims with racist statements.When I accused Ilhan of using a McCarthyite smear when she Tweeted that the antiwar protester was spouting "Russian disinformation" I was 99.999% sure that the protester did not attribute his words to Putin or any other Russian official. So, to make you feel better, I watched the video and now I'm 100% sure. As you know, since you're not naive, just because someone "did not attribute his words to Putin or any other Russian official" is irrelevant. What a stupid argument.Based on the content of your response, you've helped establish the following:Without even bothering to find out what Rep. Omar was responding to, you made a reckless accusation about her behavior.  Furthermore, you demonstrated a clear disregard for her point of view, based on her personal experiences as a war refugee.  It's tantamount to treating her as someone "less than", who can be denigrated by you based on what others say about her, instead of checking for yourself.And that reinforces another point, that you behave like a "clueless white guy" who thinks that what you call "McCarthyite smears" against you are the same as racist threats against a person of color. Are all the McCarthyite smears calling Ilhan "anti-semitic" and a "foreign agent" racist threats?And are you suggesting that Ilhan is incapable of making a McCarthyite smear?Because that is what is at issue here.

Oct 31, 2022 at 2:49am
nohero said:paulsurovell said:nohero said:She accurately described the claims made in front of her as "Russian ridiculous internet disinformation".It's inaccurate -- and dishonest -- to say the claims by protesters are "Russian".  That's a McCarthyite smear. And Ilhan should know better, since she's been the victim of many McCarthyite smears -- especially accusations that she's anti-Semitic because she disagrees with Israeli policies (in addition to the example that I gave where she was called a "foreign agent") nohero said:Maybe you should watch the video, and listen to what they are saying. You can also listen to her response to them. The guy who tweeted the video ignores what she said, also, because he doesn't care why she's so concerned about war refugees (she is one herself, remember).And her response is NOT the same as the racist insults and event threats she has to endure. It's outrageous for you to make that claim. I'm criticizing her Tweet that speaks for itself.Ilhan's smear against the protesters was not motivated by race as are many of the smears that she incurs, but both her smear -- "Russian disinformation" and those used against her -- "foreign agent" and "anti-semitic" are substantively the same in that they both employ the ugly demagoguery of McCarthyism. The statement, "I'm criticizing her Tweet that speaks for itself" says that you didn't listen to what they are saying, nor to her response to them.  In other words, you don't care about the facts.  Nevertheless, you smear her for saying, "I have never had the pleasure of responding to Russian ridiculous internet disinformation in person before. Thank you for the opportunity."If you deliberately refuse to find out what was said to her, you have no basis for your criticism. And equating her statement, which you call "McCarthyism" (again, without even bothering to find out what was actually said to her in person) with the racism, xenophobia, and religious bigotry directed at her is classic "clueless suburban white guy" behavior.You should delete your tweet, for your ignorance of what you're criticizing if not for the tone-deaf attitude it demonstrates, that equates criticism of political views and "factual" claims with racist statements. When I accused Ilhan of using a McCarthyite smear when she Tweeted that the antiwar protester was spouting "Russian disinformation" I was 99.999% sure that the protester did not attribute his words to Putin or any other Russian official. So, to make you feel better, I watched the video and now I'm 100% sure.

Oct 30, 2022 at 12:08am
nohero said:paulsurovell said:nohero said:paulsurovell said:nohero said:I think the "antiwar protesters" who don't want Ukraine to be able to defend itself are even worse than the soup-throwing "climate activists". No people or artworks are harmed by throwing soup.  I actually replied to this on Twitter: Words fail me in trying to describe how scummy your response is.  I'll think about it some more and get back to you. She smeared the protesters just like the racists smear her. She should know better. You don't like to hear that because you smear protesters the same way she did in this instance. Think about it and get back to me. She accurately described the claims made in front of her as "Russian ridiculous internet disinformation". It's inaccurate -- and dishonest -- to say the claims by protesters are "Russian".  That's a McCarthyite smear. And Ilhan should know better, since she's been the victim of many McCarthyite smears -- especially accusations that she's anti-Semitic because she disagrees with Israeli policies (in addition to the example that I gave where she was called a "foreign agent")nohero said:Maybe you should watch the video, and listen to what they are saying. You can also listen to her response to them. The guy who tweeted the video ignores what she said, also, because he doesn't care why she's so concerned about war refugees (she is one herself, remember).And her response is NOT the same as the racist insults and event threats she has to endure. It's outrageous for you to make that claim. I'm criticizing her Tweet that speaks for itself.Ilhan's smear against the protesters was not motivated by race as are many of the smears that she incurs, but both her smear -- "Russian disinformation" and those used against her -- "foreign agent" and "anti-semitic" are substantively the same in that they both employ the ugly demagoguery of McCarthyism.

Oct 2, 2022 at 2:00am
jamie said:Good rebuttal to all of the Russia myths Paul and Nan spew on an hourly basis https://voxukraine.org/en/the-corrupt-mirror-of-russian-propaganda-words-that-kill/ It's a propaganda piece disguised as an anti-propaganda piece. It's a fraud -- and petty McCarthyism -- to dismiss arguments made by Western experts as "Russian propaganda".

Aug 14, 2022 at 11:39am
Jaytee said:On 22 July 2022, The New York Times announced the opening of its bureau in Kyiv to keep covering Russia’s war against Ukraine. But there are indications that the head of the bureau Andrew Kramer was involved in the information and psychological operations of the Kremlin, the Ukrainian OSINT project Informnapalm says.Ukraine has the right to figure out who is for them, and who is against them. In case you propagandists haven’t noticed….Ukraine is fighting for its very survival. They have been attacked by some of the most vile, evil people on earth, and you maroons have the audacity to find fault with them being “nationalist”? Isn’t there any level of filth you people won’t go down to in order to convince us that you were right about Putin’s invasion of these peoples land?  The claim that NYT Ukraine bureau chief Andrew Kramer "was involved in the information and psychological operations of the Russians" is perhaps the most deranged statement to emerge from the Russian invasion of Ukraine thus far.The reason why it's important to call this out is because McCarthyite accusations like this are used to obscure the truth through intimidation -- including intimidation of reporters. And if we can't read and speak the truth we are doomed.And Yes, I find fault with the accusation, and I don't care who made it.

Jul 11, 2022 at 2:09am
drummerboy said:"He says he heard that the West wants to fight "until the last Ukrainian" which is a tragedy for the Ukrainian people."Yeah, he's heard it from people like you and paul and the rest of the Russian apologist gang. You guys are the only ones who use this phrase. You and Putin are in a feedback loop. Congratulations. The phrase "Fight to the last Ukrainian" was coined by Chas Freeman, former assistant Secretary of Defense under Clinton, popularized by Noam Chomsky and employed by many others to accurately describe US/NATO policy. And you really need to curb your enthusiasm for McCarthyite smears. Not good for the @drummerboy brand.

Jul 5, 2022 at 5:30pm
DaveSchmidt said:paulsurovell said:nohero said:Maybe he's going full MAGA, ranting about cancel culture now.Does this suggest you're into cancel culture? Exactly the sort of astute question that an anti-McCarthyist can ask without regret. Cancel culture, like McCarthyism, is a major social phenomenon in the US today, especially in social media. I think it's OK to ask and talk about both, without regret. @nohero's comment, which suggested that my pointing out the literal cancelation of all things Russia was going "full MAGA," begged the question I asked.

Jul 4, 2022 at 1:18pm
DaveSchmidt said:paulsurovell said:DaveSchmidt said:Did she follow up that comment by suggesting a change in Western sanctions policy against Russia? She did not. She called for a German energy price cap for households.Of course I did. I read the (mixed) comments, too. But surely you realize that when I use the term "Putin apologist" it's intended to mock the term itself, which, as I've pointed out, is a McCarthyite slur used to shut down discussion of the facts. Sorry, I’m not following: Of course you did what?My error. I should have said "Of course I did read the follow up". The "(mixed) comments" remark refers to the comments on the Tweet.

Jul 4, 2022 at 1:08pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said: Of course I did. I read the (mixed) comments, too. But surely you realize that when I use the term "Putin apologist" it's intended to mock the term itself, which, as I've pointed out, is a McCarthyite slur used to shut down discussion of the facts.  Just because it’s inappropriate in your example doesn’t mean it’s always inappropriate.When you find an example, please post with explanation of why you think it's appropriate.

Jul 4, 2022 at 11:21am
DaveSchmidt said:paulsurovell said:Putin apologist.https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-03/germany-s-union-head-warns-of-collapse-of-entire-industries Did she follow up that comment by suggesting a change in Western sanctions policy against Russia? She did not. She called for a German energy price cap for households. https://www-bild-de.translate.goog/politik/inland/politik-inland/dgb-chefin-der-staat-muss-die-energiepreise-jetzt-deckeln-80581544.bild.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp Of course I did. I read the (mixed) comments, too. But surely you realize that when I use the term "Putin apologist" it's intended to mock the term itself, which, as I've pointed out, is a McCarthyite slur used to shut down discussion of the facts. 

Jun 29, 2022 at 1:45pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said: nohero said: paulsurovell said:nohero said:You just described those Grayzone apologists whom you cite regarding China's policy in Xinjiang. It's like citing Charles Lindbergh during the 1930s. In Nohero World an "apologist" refers to someone who refutes with facts and logic a narrative that @nohero embraces to foreclose discussion on the merits. It's an old, tired, anti-intellectual tool of McCarthyism. I'm quite comfortable that my description is both factually and morally accurate.  If you were, you wouldn't have to use smear words like "apologist". "Apologist" is a very accurate designation for their positions, and being accurate isn't a "smear". "Apologist" labels the individual instead of rebutting their arguments. Here's a backgrounder on how it has been a key rhetorical weapon of McCarthyism, along with other similar ad hominem labels:https://www.cato.org/commentary/mccarthyism-re-emerging-stronger-ever-ukraine-policy-debates#

Jun 29, 2022 at 12:03pm
nohero said: paulsurovell said:nohero said:You just described those Grayzone apologists whom you cite regarding China's policy in Xinjiang. It's like citing Charles Lindbergh during the 1930s. In Nohero World an "apologist" refers to someone who refutes with facts and logic a narrative that @nohero embraces to foreclose discussion on the merits. It's an old, tired, anti-intellectual tool of McCarthyism. I'm quite comfortable that my description is both factually and morally accurate.  If you were, you wouldn't have to use smear words like "apologist".

Jun 29, 2022 at 11:23am
nohero said: nan said:nohero said:Your source is an apologist for authoritarians. See, e.g. - nan said: You might all find this interesting -- the Uyghurs!     Inside the World Uyghur Congress: The US-backed right-wing regime-change network seeking the ‘fall of China’   https://thegrayzone.com/2020/03/05/world-uyghur-congress-us-far-right-regime-change-network-fall-china/ Q.E.D.Your sources are apologists for murder and destruction and don't give a crap about ordinary people.  You just described those Grayzone apologists whom you cite regarding China's policy in Xinjiang. It's like citing Charles Lindbergh during the 1930s. In Nohero World an "apologist" refers to someone who refutes with facts and logic a narrative that @nohero embraces to foreclose discussion on the merits. It's an old, tired, anti-intellectual tool of McCarthyism.