Through the Looking Glass

We highlighted Box Boy Gage's current trip to Ireland and the fact that he was sharing a stage with other flavors of Kook Aid: anti-fluoridation nutbars, anti-vaxxers, and mind-control fruitcakes. Of course, part of the reason we highlighted that was because associating Gage with these other nuts just goes to show what a lunatic he is.

So it was kind of amusing to read this post at a pro-vaccine blog.

It’s official: Wakefield joins the ranks of Truthers, New World Order conspiracists.

Andrew Wakefield is the British doctor whose fraudulent study concluded that vaccinations cause autism.

Anyway it occurred to me that it was a little odd that each of us is using the other's foe to bash our particular opponent. "Look at these crazy people Richard/Andrew is hanging around with now!"

Why is it odd? Well, think about it for a second. I know very little about vaccines and next to nothing about the Wakefield controversy. And I suspect that Seth Mnookin is not an expert on 9-11 Truthers and their claims. We each know in a general sense that the other's opponents are generally discredited, and that's about all we need to know.

So why do we do it? That's the question I pondered last night as I trundled off to bed, and here's what I came up with. Those of us who took logic may remember the Venn Diagram, which is a way of representing groups. For example, here's a very simple Venn Diagram showing Truthers:

As you can see, there is a subset of the overall population who are Truthers. Now let's add the Anti-Vaxxers:

So we have two subsets now of the General Population: Truthers and Anti-Vaxxers. But we really haven't represented things quite correctly here, because now there is a third group: The people who are both Truthers and Anti-Vaxxers. There is overlap between the two groups:

But we're still not done yet. Among the Truthers there is some overlap with the Anti-Vaxxers (light blue area). There are also Truthers who are not Anti-Vaxxers (deeper blue area) but who are not concerned about associating with them. And there's a third group: Truthers who are horrified that their movement is being associated with the Anti-Vaxxer contingent, and realize this discredits them:

As you can see, there is a corresponding contingent of Anti-Vaxxers who are horrified that their cause is being associated with the 9-11 nutjobs.

Of course, we haven't really completed all the possibilities. Rather than Truthers and Anti-Vaxxers, substitute "Potential Truthers" and "Potential Anti-Vaxxers". And you'll then see that there's a subset of Potential Anti-Vaxxers who would be horrified to learn that this cause they're curious about is associated with the blackshirts chanting, "9-11 was an inside job!" Who might pause and realize that it's just another bit of crankery.

And, in essence, that's who Seth's post is aimed at:

Memo to the parents (and the press): The next time someone tells you the MMR vaccine causes autism (or pitches you a story on the “controversy” over the measles vaccine and autism), remember — this is the man whose discredited, debunked research is the source for all of that.

When Troofers Attack Their Own

All I can say is, I hope they all brought rusty knives. Donna Marsh O'Connor, who's been hanging out with the Troofer dolts for years, appeared on Keith Olbermann's show the other day in support of the Ground Zero mosque. But she had the temerity to mention the hijackers, and the "Truthers" went batcrap crazy:

The foundation for her entire argument can be heard at minute mark 4:34, where Ms. Connor says:

"...and I have to acknowledge that the pain I am feeling essentially comes from 19 individual criminals who murdered 3,000 people on our soil, and it has left us horrifically scared." [emphasis mine]

But, there is no proof that the FBI's list of ALLEGED hijackers were indeed guilty of the crimes and murders on 9/11/01. Or, indeed if they were even aboard the airplanes that day.

Don't you just love that "alleged" bit? The Troofers are happy to toss charges around willy-nilly, but when it comes time to talk about the actual criminals who were indeed responsible for 9-11 they act like Mohamed Atta is going to sue them for sullying his good name.

As usual, the really fruity stuff comes out in the comments:

She still perpetuates the myth that the 19 Muslim guys with box cutters are the perps. That is not a good thing.

I was pretty surprised when I heard that statement as I watched this piece live. I could've sworn she was supportive of 9/11 truth and was aware of all the evidence against the OCT. I was disappointed. I was hoping she'd appeal to Kieth to look for the truth, not just perpetuate the myth.

NOONE has the right to be ignorant and agnostic as to the crimes committed on 9-11. I read her remarks as a rather clear endorsment of the official story. And that´s a grave betrayal of those slaughtered on 9-11-2001.

While it's polite to be sympathetic to those who lost family members, there's no excuse for Donna's non-factual public opinion - an opinion that hurts the whole movement.

Congressman Alan Grayson, Truther

Well, we have a new candidate for the Troofer with the highest office in the land: Congressman Alan Grayson of Florida comes out in favor of the LIHOP theory. He's a freshman, was swept into office with 52% of the vote in 2008. Expect him to be dragged out to sea with the tide in November, but in the meantime he's got some 'splainin' to do.

Sander's Song

Sander Hicks has released a new single which is zooming up the Conspiracy Theory chats, called "No Conspiracy Theory". It sounds rotten. And no, I don't mean Johnny Rotten.

Lyrics here if you want to save your ears.

How did those Towers fall?
Were there bombs in the walls?

What melted all that steel?

Ed Driscoll Nails It

Perhaps a bit broad brush here; while it is certainly true that wide swaths of the Left are involved in "Trutherism" it's important to note that we're talking about the Left, not mainstream liberals/Democrats. He's absolutely right about how the paranoia shifted from the right wing after the JFK assassination, but to say that led directly to the Reverends Wright and Pfleger is a bit of a stretch. Still an entertaining and well-produced video.

The State Senator Is a Troofer

Since Jesse Ventura hasn't been a governor for several years, I'm going to guess that Karen S. Johnson, a State Senator from Mesa, Arizona, is the highest-ranking elected Troofer. And no, she's not a Democrat, a Green or a Libertarian; she's a Republican.

This one requires a little background. A few years ago, Arizona decided to have a little memorial built to 9-11. It's a circular steel monument with holes cut in it to reveal phrases on the concrete below when the light hits it. Most of the phrases are non-controversial, but some are a little annoying, such as "You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles." Another claims to tie 9-11 to the Gulf of Tonkin incident. So the memorial has been something of a cause celebre in Arizona for the last several years. But it hasn't been changed, so far, which is fine with Karen Johnson:

But legislators who voted against altering the memorial said they believe it needs to represent various viewpoints and feelings about the events leading up to and following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And that, according to Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, includes the still-open possibility that Americans have yet to learn the full story.

"There's many of us," she said, "that believe there's been a cover-up," ranging from who was really behind the attacks to questions about whether what flew into the World Trade Center towers were pilotless drones and the passengers had been taken off beforehand.

"And there's a lot of statements on that 9/11 memorial that reflect a lot of our views that we have about it," Johnson said. "And I think all of those need to be represented."

What a maroon! Johnson's what I would call a paleo-conservative of the Pat Buchanan ilk; in fact, she chaired Buchanan's campaign in Arizona in 1996. She's also a North American Union fruitcake, and is very concerned that gays are ruining marriage. And she's a big believer in the sanctity of marriage, having exchanged eternal vows with five different men so far. And yes, she supported Ron Paul this year.

It's been a while for the old Nutbar-O-Meter, but if Karen Johnson doesn't deserve it, who does?



Hat Tip: Mr Right and National Review Online.

Rosie O'Donnell Returns!

In what very much smells like a planned video. Let me get this straight, the Troofers have Rosie O'Donnell in front of them and they ask her to give a statement about a first responder? That's not MIHOP, that's not LIHOP, that's not even LIHOI. That's Arabs did it and the government lied about the air quality. Daniel Sunjata (boy is his career going to tank) comes on afterwards to talk about how obviously Rosie is still endorsing the movement, even though in all honesty there's nothing to object to in this video from Rosie--apparently.

But like I said, this smells. Luke is not a nobody, he's well known in the NY Truther community, to which Rosie obviously belongs (although I doubt she spends any real time on it). This is not a happenstance meeting, it was choreographed. Rosie lends her support to the WAC jobs while still managing to claim plausible deniability; who among us does not support the first responders?

Troofer Oscar Winner?

Yawn.

But the actress faces a potential backlash in the US over comments she made in an interview in France. Footage which surfaced on the internet showed her questioning the New York terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the 1969 moon landing.

"I think we’re lied to about a number of things," she said, singling out September 11.

Referring to the two passenger jets flown into the World Trade Centre, Miss Cotillard said: "We see other towers of the same kind being hit by planes, are they burned? There was a tower, I believe it was in Spain, which burned for 24 hours.

Okay, so she's a famed actress who's a nut besides. Sheesh, not like we've never had one of those. Shirley McLaine, anybody? She apparently buys into the notion that the property was a terrible investment:

Miss Cotillard suggested that the towers, planned in the early 1960s, were an outdated "money sucker" which would have cost so much to modernise that it was easier to destroy them.

Yes, it's lots cheaper to cause a trillion-dollar hit on the US economy than it is to tear down a couple buildings.