With genuine reluctance, I find myself obliged to ban Larry from St Louis from commenting on this blog.
I am extremely happy for people to comment on this blog who disagree with my views. It makes it much more interesting for everybody. I wish more people who disagree would comment.
But Larry has a different agenda. His technique is continually to accuse me of holding opinions which I do not in fact hold, and which he thinks will call my judgement into doubt.
Take this comment posted by Larry at 9.35 am today:
I’ve re-read your post on the Russian spies, and once again you’ve proven to be a complete dumbass.
I predicted Russia claiming (in some minor way) those idiots. You didn’t. You thought it was a conspiracy.
You’ve once again self-indicted.
In fact my view on the Russian spies was the exact opposite of what Larry claims it was. As I posted:
I don’t have any difficulty in believing that the FBI really have discovered a colony of Russian sleeper spies in the United States.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/06/those_russian_s.html#comments
This is not Larry being mistaken – remember he claimed he had just re-read my posting. It is rather indicative of a very deliberate technique he has used scores of times, that of claiming I hold an opinion which he believes will devalue my other arguments in the mind of other readers, when I do not in fact hold that opinion.
He most often – indeed daily – does this with reference to 9/11. He tries to divert almost every thread on to the topic of 9/11 and to insinuate that I am among those who believe that 9/11 was “an inside job”. In fact, I am not of that opinion and never have been.
I have put up with this now for months, but Larry’s activities have become so frenetic and are so counter-productive to informed debate, I am not prepared to put up with it any more. I am also deeply sucpicious of the fact that he is able to spend more time on this blog than me, and to post right around the clock (often as with this one at 9.35am – think about it – what time is that in the US?).
Anyway, sorry Larry, your derailing days are over.
.
Jaded – “After a while it becomes totally obvious who these people are”
I think that’s it. (I vaguely remember your name from a while back, but can’t remember who said what, why, or about what. but …) Misunderstandings happen, people can make mistakes, sometimes just kind of hang loose and give people rope ? Some people right themselves, others just keep on digging until the drop’s big enough.
As you see from all the above, you’re coming in at the end of a carnival of the trolls. Food fight, custard pie all over the walls, a bit fractious all round …
*shrug* Good night, all.
Technicolour – ‘@jaded: Yes, it’s interesting that you seize the right to ‘insult people’ on this board and ‘boot them off’. I think the latter decision is down to Craig, and I object to both your assumption of power and your insults. Even if, you note, they are directed at someone with whom I have disagreed.
In the meantime, are you this ‘jaded’: yes or no?:
Jaded to eddie (who Craig had not banned) 26 Jan 2010:
“You are a vile, disgusting, little weasel. Get a life. MI5/MI6 are completely corporate now. They have no interest in ‘Defence Of The Realm’. Any agents that think otherwise are grossly deluded. They just represent psychopathic crooks. Do you really not see that or are you accepting of it? Or are you even gladly one of them? Which is it you pile of stinking trash???”
And, ‘jaded’. Do you have any connection to this poster, ‘Apostate’, posting to Craig on the same thread shortly after:
“Your “bollocks” comment re-tungsten’s references to B’nai B’rith show a deep ignorance of history.May I suggest you start by doing some of your own research re-the history of the Lobby.Had you been more aware of the extent of its reach and influence I dare say you might still be in Samarkand or even the Lords today!
The generally vaccuous and ahistorical comments on your message board seem to be a reflection of a generalized knee-jerk phobia re-what elites progamme you to think of as “conspiracy theory. Unfortunately it seems you share this willed blindness to facts and reality.”
And for stylistic comparison, ‘Jaded’, just now:
“For example, idiots who believe in the official narrative of 9/11 are just docile sheep. They wouldn’t cyber fight tooth and nail, 24 hours a day, ad infinitum in defence of the official narrative! It’s ‘beyond obvious’ who these people work for.”
Really, goodnight.’
Strange, I thought you had gone to bed like 3 hour ago? And that’s all you can come up with? That’s very weak technicolour I must say. I will gladly address your post *****in full***** one point at a time for the sake of coherence. We shall see if you really want answers or are just sniping. We really shall.
Firstly, would you care to post a quote where I have ‘seized a right to insult people and boot them off’? I don’t recall saying any such thing. I think you are just wildly speculating again. In my view, I have only stated that this is my ‘personal position’ and I fully stand by it. Like I said before, you feel free to make the trolls welcome. Where have I said I have the ‘power to do boot people off and it’s my decision’? I am completely mythed. Let’s just iron that out and i’ll move on to the next bit of your post. Otherwise, I fear you’ll try to sit behind a mishmash off wild, unsubstantiated accusations. This would be an attempt to descend this debate to a chaotic level in the hope it’s curtailed. To try and save face no doubt. Well, not with me i’m afraid.
I think you need to cool off, eat a dose of humble pie and come back tomorrow with a calm head. You have dug a hole for yourself and don’t like it. Just admit it. You don’t even need to apologise.
Richard, you make some good points. However, you only need to scroll up a few inches to read some of his vile accusations. I’ll happily quote them for you if you want me to? I will not let these vile accusations go unanswered and i’m sure you would be of the same opinion if they were levelled at you. Well, I would be seriously worried if you, or anyone else, were not!
Av,
Why don’t you drop the “pirate English” talk. It does nothing for your case. England is not an independent country and the United Kingdom has been as often dominated by the Scots and the Welsh as by the English. Also remember that India is not the only country burdened by corrupt government subservient to corporate or foreign interests. Tony Blair was probably the most corrupt British Prime Minister in 100 years and is now loathed and despised by the great majority of the British public.
As for India being exploited by Britain, you give no specific examples, and therefore, your charges sound like nothing more than Anglophobia. Globalization has provided India and other Asian nations the opportunity to win the majority of the world’s manufacturing, engineering and IT work. In the future, Asia will become the global center for most R and D. As in England during the industrial revolution, the transition may bring many unpleasant side effects. But the reality is that India will likely be many times wealthier than Britain within a generation. For India, this is surely something to celebrate, not a cause for anger. For Britain it looks increasingly certain that the transformation of the world economy now in progress will create enormous difficulties leading to political instability and possible disaster.
Technicolour,
I’ve found that thread:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/a_politician_sh.html
With respect, Technicolour, I don’t see any anti-Jewish stuff from Jaded there. Jaded was extremely offensive to Eddie, which started basically in defence of Ruth. I note that Jaded accused Eddie of being anti-semitic a number of times, too.
Shortly afterwards there follows a lot of ranting from Apostate / Steelback / Tungsten, ostensibly anti-Israeli, but with the usual Apostate anti-Jewish undertones.
Jaded,
I don’t believe that you are Apostate, but this should be a lesson to you; by being offensive you came to be mistaken for another of Apostate’s sock-puppets.
All,
looking back at the threads is revealing. My feeling is that it was predominantly Larry that incited lots of aggression, and this blog has really taken a bashing from it. The general level of insult and offence greatly increased.
But we should have challenged the Apostate Puppet Show long before that. I wonder if anyone else felt like me. I felt this character’s aggression and did not wish to engage with it, so I let it lurk like an unexploded bomb, and when the temperature rose it went off.
Back when those arguments started I did a lot of calling for civility, just because that was my feeling. Now I feel that my instinct had practical application. You really can’t fight for peace. Rising to provocation always feeds the flames. You just need to keep coming calmly back to the truth, over and over again.
Clark – ‘Technicolour,
I’ve found that thread:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/a_politician_sh.html
With respect, Technicolour, I don’t see any anti-Jewish stuff from Jaded there. Jaded was extremely offensive to Eddie, which started basically in defence of Ruth. I note that Jaded accused Eddie of being anti-semitic a number of times, too.
Shortly afterwards there follows a lot of ranting from Apostate / Steelback / Tungsten, ostensibly anti-Israeli, but with the usual Apostate anti-Jewish undertones.
Jaded,
I don’t believe that you are Apostate, but this should be a lesson to you; by being offensive you came to be mistaken for another of Apostate’s sock-puppets.’
I reiterate, trolls on this blog deserve insults. That is my honest view. You are surely not of the opinion that government agents appearing here from nasty regimes, such as the U.S., U.K. and Israel, aren’t worthy of insults? Or do you actually believe that a government agent has never posted on Craig’s blog? Anyhow, I believe the moral of the story is read carefully; not don’t insult trolls. If people are careless enough to make mistaken assumptions is is their fault. I am a decent person that doesn’t wander around randomly insulting people. I respect all human beings on this planet, unless they have given me cause to disrespect them. I am looking forward to swiftly concluding a ‘factual, civil debate’ with Technicolour later. Hopefully he will realise that he did indeed throw wild, vile, baseless accusations at me.
jaded, it’s called ‘working the night shift’. no accusations of ‘skulking’ or attempts to make it seem mysterious can detract from the fact that people do it.
Instead of answering my original question, you keep asking for a quote. So, please, dear jaded, do keep your promise and answer at least this:
Are you the ‘Jaded’ questioning whether any Jewish people were directly murdered in what is described as the ‘Holocaust’ (their inverted commas) on this board in January, as follows:
“The Jews, other groups too, suffered dreadful persecution in the years leading up to the war and during the war. It was all terrible and shocking. The question of planned total extermination is a pertinent one though. They were certainly used as a source of labour in some camps. Why would the Nazis brand with numbers, absolutely disgusting I know, people they were going to kill? Admittedly, every Jew that died from malnutrition, illness etc. may as well have been murdered. Furthermore, the Nazis may well have tested gas on the Jews. If the Nazis had won maybe their fate would have been genocidal, I don’t know.”
Is this you? If you don’t want to answer, which I can understand, that’s fine; just say so.
No fight, here, on my side, by the way. Happy to apologise if I’ve got you confused with another ‘Jaded’, as I said originally.
Technicolour – ‘jaded, it’s called ‘working the night shift’. no accusations of ‘skulking’ or attempts to make it seem mysterious can detract from the fact that people do it.
Instead of answering my original question, you keep asking for a quote. So, please, dear jaded, do keep your promise and answer at least this:
Are you the ‘Jaded’ questioning whether any Jewish people were directly murdered in what is described as the ‘Holocaust’ (their inverted commas) on this board in January, as follows:
“The Jews, other groups too, suffered dreadful persecution in the years leading up to the war and during the war. It was all terrible and shocking. The question of planned total extermination is a pertinent one though. They were certainly used as a source of labour in some camps. Why would the Nazis brand with numbers, absolutely disgusting I know, people they were going to kill? Admittedly, every Jew that died from malnutrition, illness etc. may as well have been murdered. Furthermore, the Nazis may well have tested gas on the Jews. If the Nazis had won maybe their fate would have been genocidal, I don’t know.”
Is this you? If you don’t want to answer, which I can understand, that’s fine; just say so.
No fight, here, on my side, by the way. Happy to apologise if I’ve got you confused with another ‘Jaded’, as I said originally.’
So, you were wishing people good night when going to work the night shift and have repeatedly come back? That’s bizarre. For starters, I can’t answer if I am ‘the Jaded’ in relation to anything without seeing specific quotes. You have blatantly tried to avoid my previous question, and all previous questions, I have posed to you. Still, you will end up just looking worse and worse to your 110,000 fans. Never mind eh.
In relation to this ‘specific post’ you have made, I can categorically state that I am not the ”Jaded’ questioning whether any Jewish people were directly murdered in what is described as the ‘Holocaust’ (their inverted commas) on this board in January’. Do you have any quotes that this Jaded made for my perusal?
You oddly seem to then attach a quote that has absolutely nothing to do with ‘questioning whether any Jewish people were directly murdered in what is described as the ‘Holocaust’ (their inverted commas) on this board in January’. Again, bizarre. The quote you have highlighted clearly questioned whether ‘all’, not ‘any’, Jewish people were directly murdered in the ‘Holocaust’. For the record, that text was indeed mine. I was taught in school that 6 million Jews were directly murdered, predominantly through gassing, and it just doesn’t seem to be true. I think it has been cynically exaggerated and used for political capital by the Isreali governemnt. I think that’s a sick slur on the poor, innocent Jews that did die, whether through direct murder or not.
You are increasingly coming across as being ill in the head. You seem incapable of reading posts properly and make one mistake after another, as has already been pointed out by others. Are you one of those crazy people who really thinks that ‘all Jewish people’ who died in the ‘Holocaust’ were directly murdered? Are you one of those that blindly repeats the mantra of 6 million? You are simply beyond belief. Unless you don’t think that pray tell?
Seriously, keep your mind on work and don’t give up the day job. Actually, truth be told, you are ‘beginning to sound like’, not saying you definitely are, one of the thousands of Zionist bloggers that the Israeli government even admits troll the internet on their behalf. I still await your response to my previous measured post, probably too measured for you…
P.S. Right, i’m off to scour Craig’s blog for 5 hours to see if I can find any posts of yours that I blatantly can misquote. That’s while sleeping, working and having sex too I might add. 🙂
Clark, I think you’re right (0411am – God’s sake, talk about owls and larks; I’m definitely the latter!) re. ‘trolls’ raising the aggression level. What happens then is that people who have genuine disagreements with one another about things begin to assume that one another are also trolls and so the aggression gets directed internally.
I think sometimes – usually (though I’ve certainly not adhered to this, myself, partly because I was being personally attacked) – it is best to ignore trolls and their attempts to stir. But sometimes, I do think that one has to confront them – not address their ‘points’, but attack them head-on and deconstruct their methods, for everyone to share that deconstruction. It’s a balance, I guess; they keep changing tactic and so must we, to not be caught off-balance!
I’m not sure why the two topics which seem to pop up with stoic and tedious regularity specifically in such circumstances seem to relate to the terrorist attacks on US cities in late 2001 and The Holocaust. Why don’t, say, the Balkan Wars of the 1990s, or Indonesia/ East Timor, or Diego Garcia or Kashmir or Tibet or US/UK militarism or Venezuela or Iraq or Afghanistan or Haiti or… arise as points of argumentation when either trollery, or the subject of trollery, comes up?
It’s an observation.
Sandcrab, I’m really glad you’re enjoying ‘The Spanish House’ and thanks for writing that. The tale goes well with some Andalusian sherry!
Anyway, get some rest, guys.
—–“As for India being exploited by Britain, you give no specific examples, and therefore, your charges sound like nothing more than Anglophobia. “—–
Jeez, has this guy never read anything? I’ll tell you what, Alfred, let’s do this bit by bit. Google “salt, Raj” then when you’ve read up on that for a week come back and we’ll give you another clue.
‘jaded’: you complain of being ‘attacked’ and yet the only thing I’ve remotely accused you of is being a ‘friend of apostate’. The rest were questions. You can, of course, to chose to call me ‘ill in the head’ and accuse me of being a Zionist agent as a result, but then earlier you were accusing me of being BNP.
So you are the Jaded who wrote this: (my emphasis)
The *question* of planned total extermination is a pertinent one though. They were certainly used as a source of labour in *some* camps.
Admittedly, every Jew that died from malnutrition, illness etc. may as well have been murdered. Furthermore, the Nazis *may well have tested gas* on the Jews. If the Nazis had won *maybe their fate would have been genocidal*, I don’t know”.
You are not questioning whether precisely 6 million Jewish people were murdered. You are questioning whether there was a ‘Final Solution’ at all. You are suggesting that Jewish people were merely used as labour in *some* camps. You insinuate that instead of gassing Jewish people the Nazis *may have tested gas* on Jewish people. Finally you suggest that there was no genocide.
So I think you’ve answered my questions, thanks. Otherwise, if you know of any Zionist agents, or, for that matter, BNP stooges, who had friends on the convoy to Gaza and who defend the Palestinian people at any opportunity, do let me know. In the meantime, I guess we can wait for the IP addresses when Craig gets back, can’t we.
In the meantime zillions of apologies if you’re just a really nice bloke whose history is utterly confused and whose random insults are just the product of an over enthusiastic defence of Craig, rather than a concerted attempt to scare people off the board. Of course.
that was me (above). oh, and i know you did not directly accuse me of being a Zionist agent. ‘jaded’; that’s not your style. Insinuate, I should have said. Strange, because I thought you read this board.
where did i misquote you, by the way?
Clark, thanks, it’s interesting looking back at the threads. I ignored the apostate thing because, at the time, I was just dabbling in the board, and frankly, their posts were too long, dense and dull to read. It was only when angrysoba started screaming that I started reading them, and realised he was right.
Of course civility’s the way to go, you’re quite right. Was on a tight deadline (which got done) so may have slipped a bit. Now to catch up with some sleep.
Jaded, you cant demand to be directed to a contentious post and then complain youve been ‘blatantly misquoted’ when you are :p
Jaded – “Richard, you make some good points. However, you only need to scroll up a few inches to read some of his vile accusations”
Yes, I do see what you mean. My points would, perhaps have been better made if I’d remarked that they cut both ways. Food fight, tears before bedtime. At least there could be worse threads for it.
Challenging trolls … yes, but. Much righteous fun to be had, but there’s an infinite supply of them, thus a potentially infinite amount of distracting noise to be generated by anybody that isn’t actually bothered about the subjects in question. This can make the whole thing into like a frustrating dead loss to anybody that is – who would, after all, be the people Craig actually intends this blog for.
To look back afterwards, sometimes we see that our guts did lead us right, sometimes we see that our egos weren’t the most important thing; difficult is, to do that in real time.
Jaded,
please try to chill out. If you read enough posts you will see that Technicolour makes some cutting criticism of the Israeli regime. Technicolour does not support Israeli attrocity, quite the opposite, and certainly seems sane enough to me.
And incidentally, ‘Holister’ is a spambot, not human. It just qoutes bits from previous comments and links to a website.
Technicolour,
Jaded seems to me to be suggesting exaggeration in the mainstream account of the Jewish Holocaust under the Nazis, rather than promoting Holocaust denial. I think it would be more constructive to link to reputable sources of data rather than to classify Jaded as a denialist. It is a principle of mine that nothing should be beyond being questioned, because if it is, it becomes merely dogma.
Both,
I think you two have more in common than you realise. Beware ‘Divide and Conquer’! Your major difference seems to be that Technicolour is always civil whereas Jaded regards insults as sometimes appropriate.
Suhayl Saadi,
it is no coincidence that the two subjects you mention are favourites for trolling. They carry great emotional charge, and thus can be used to start arguments and fragment a community such as ours. This is a prime example. This argument started months ago, and here it is still, poisoning the threads.
Richard Robinson,
yes, I’m reminded of “Please ensure that brain is properly engaged before attempting to move off with mouth (read ‘keyboard’).
Jaded,
I’m re-posting Ruth’s link (July 10, 2010 10:00 PM)
http://thecurrentaffairs.com/disinformation-tactics-the-methods-used-to-keep-you-in-the-dark.html
THIS is why insults and abuse need to be avoided. Derailing rational conversation is one of the objectives of the trolls. We really have to be careful not to manufacture ammunition that can be fired from troll weapons. If we descend to launching insults, the trolls have scored a point.
“Please ensure that brain is properly engaged before attempting to move off with mouth (read ‘keyboard’).
grin. My parents used to quote that to me when I was younger. … worth reminding myself, I am aware I do it too. Ingo said it nicely in a thread somewhere up above.
As to why some troublesome subjects keep recurring – it doesn’t take very much reading here to see that, simply, they work. If somebody feels like winding people up, and sees that people get wound up on subject X … no-brainer.
Jaded,
sorry, I looked back and saw that I hadn’t answered some direct questions of yours.
My position is that we cannot tell whether some commenter is a ‘government agent’ or not. Someone like Eddie seems to me to be blinded by his tribal support of New Labour. We know that Larry has worked for a company that does Karimov’s PR, rather than a government.
Etc, I’ve got to go. More later.
Stephen said:
“Jeez, has this guy never read anything? I’ll tell you what, Alfred, let’s do this bit by bit. Google “salt, Raj” then when you’ve read up on that for a week come back and we’ll give you another clue.”
Stephen I would wager I have read a great deal more of the history of the Raj and many other topics than you. And one thing I know that you seem not to is that the Raj died more than 60 years ago.
My point was and is that the Avatar has not cited any evidence of of English pirates exploiting India today, or if he has the evidence is not clearly and specifically presented.
And why be so thoroughly ill-mannered in making what you consider to be a point?
It seems to me that banning Larry is not an ethical issue but a purely practical matter: how to maintain a civilized discourse, which means excluding so far as possible comments that are intemperate, ill-mannered, irrelevant or mendacious.
I don’t see that permanently excluding one or two individuals assuming that that can be done, however annoying or insincere those particular persons may be, is going to solve the problem.
One must either moderate comments, which may require user registration, or continue to rollick along as now. Moderation is not a simple matter. Will it be done 24/7? If so there is a huge cost. If comments are queued for moderation, the cost in time of volunteer or hired help will be less, but the flow of discussion will be more or less disrupted. If moderation is delegated to volunteers, its effectiveness will depend on what might prove to be the difficult task of finding individuals with the necessary experience and soundness of judgment.
If discussion on the blog continues unmoderated then it will continue to have a high noise to information content, and may as on this thread, sometimes generate some very ill-natured comments that can leave any participant, however sincere or qualified, well and truly smeared. For example, the absurd allegation that Technicolor is a BNPer. This is not an environment to attract the best contributors but rather one that will repel most sensible people.
I know, Alfred, but of course this thread is about trollery and all things trolleresque, so perhaps it’s inevitable that the ‘mood music’ is not so unlike that of ‘modulated troll’ (or ‘homeopathic troll’, perhaps – though that’s another debate entirely!).
You’re right, though, that sometimes this happens on other threads as well. I guess we all – me included – need to remember to keep our heads, as Clark/Richard/ingo suggested.
And Alfred, you and Clark are right, Technicolour is a lucid, humane and completely genuine contributor who clearly has expressed their critical views on, for example, Israeli state policy many times. Clark, thanks again for your cool-headed even-handedness (or even-handed cool-headedness). I am in awe. Technicolour, really glad you met your nail-biting deadline! Good luck with it, whatever it was…
Suhayl,
You raise the question, why do 9/11 and the Holocaust come up with such regularity and generate such heat.
In part, as you suggest, they may be raised merely to provoke discord. However, there is a more fundamental reason why these topics are so often raised: they are both pivotal events in recent history, and the way they are interpreted is thus bound to be polarizing.
Nine-eleven was either the opening assault in a Muslim war against the West, or it was a false flag attack to justify an American-led war for oil, and global hegemony.
The Holocaust was either a crime against humanity without compare in the history of the world and for which all the World is in part to blame — a view with many political consequences, or it was merely one of a many twentieth century state-sponsored mass murders in which Jews have been involved not only as victims but also as perpetrators.
Since so much hinges on the view you take, the debate is inevitably subject to every kind of distortion and misrepresentation, which makes discussion of such subjects on an unmoderated blog highly inflammatory. But does that mean that the subjects should never be raised?
Of course, Alfred, they are important subjects. And you’re right that the reason for raising them so often out-of-context is that they’re bound to provoke emotive responses/ distortions/misrepresentations. Indeed, my point was simply that all-too-often they seem to be used as levers to disrupt discussions about other subjects entirely, rather than to stimulate discussion in and of themselves.
Of course, they need to be discussed. But there is so much discussion about them on the web, much of which seems to me to proceed backwards from predetermined fixed end-points and/or in pursuance of vested political interests of one sort or another. They come with immense emotional and historical baggage and that’s unavoidable. In some ways, for some people (in perhaps I should say, in the cultural discourse of our times) they’ve become almost like ciphers – or hinges, as you say. Please note, though, I do not wish to provoke discussion of them right now! It was merely an observation. Thanks.
Alfred,
I agree that those two events are pivotal. However, I do not see them in an either / or fashion. We take events, and try to fit them into a mental model. But the events consist of the actions of many people, each with their own outlook, motivations, prejudices, misapprehensions, and personal motivations etc, more than would ever fit into a human brain.
Essentially, I think that it is vanishingly unlikely that we could ever discover all the circumstances behind any ‘event’. Hell, quantum physics has taught us that we can’t even do that for the interaction of a pair of fundamental particles. These things we call ‘events’ are massive conglomerates of many people’s actions, plus a load of circumstances and a mass of coincidences.
In one very important respect it does not matter. Done is done. We need to concentrate upon how the present will affect the future. I’m undecided on some aspects of 9/11, but even if evidence does emerge to make up my mind, I’m not going to start believing that drone attacks in Afghanistan are justified, nor that war should be declared upon Iran.
Precisely, Clark.
I sense the spambots will arrive soon… They seem to pick up phrases from here and there and fuse them together in ways which would give Edward Lear apoplexy.
Dr Vandana Shiva has been fighting big corporate exploitations of agriculture and ‘biopiracy’ in India and the third world.
http://www.navdanya.org/news
Suhayl,
I have no desire to discuss the details of 9/11 or the Holocaust here. The latter has lost much interest since the Industry, if not bust, looks in even worse shape than BP. It may not be too long, it seems to me, before it is acceptable to discuss the Holocaust in the same way that it has long been discussed by Jewish scholars such as Raoul Hilberg, i.e., as a historical event or process.
An interesting point about the discussion of 9/11 is this: if it was an inside job (note I say “if,” though I have an opinion which I will not mention), can it nevertheless by morally justified? That seems to me to be a horrific question. Yet in the context of a technological society, hurtling from one humanitarian outrage or catastrophe to another, it must be possible to make a strong case (not that I say I would agree with it) for killing a few thousand of your own citizens in order to bring about a global transformation that will bring the world under a unifying and thus more stable system of government.
But this argument cannot be made publicly by those who accept it since it would negate the effectiveness of 9/11 as a catalyzing event! But in due course, perhaps, the victims of 9/11 will be honoured for their part, albeit involuntary, in the salvation of civilization.
Clark,
Even though I’m not talking to you, you …, I seem to have responded to your point in my comment to Suhayl!