Author Topic: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd  (Read 18398 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2012, 06:44:14 PM »
Ben, since the onus is on you to prove your allegation, please post one racist comment from Marrs. I'm referring to a real and true piece of evidence, not a read-between-the-lines suspicion. I'm not referring to a tenuous interpretation or opinion based on your apparent mind-reading capabilities. BTW, opposing Obama's policies does *not* qualify as evidence of racism (in the real world). Ah, forget what I said. Just throw Marrs in a lake. If he floats, he's a racist, and if he drowns, he's not.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #31 on: February 26, 2012, 03:02:33 AM »
A preface for reasonable people:
What follows is my wrap-up of a couple of days of testy exchange with Jethro Capone.
And any Three Stooges fans in here will immediately understand what happened.
I was in the position of the innocent shmo who said "Niagara Falls" and in return I got the "Sloooowly I turn!" routine.   In Jethro's case, the trigger phrase seems to be "Obama" and the Stoogian slaps and kettle-drum stomach punches here take the form of cyber browbeating.   Marrs and my observations about him --which were ostensibly what Jethro was "protesting" or something -- probably have very little to do with this.

Ben, since the onus is on you to prove your allegation...
WRONG.   I bear no "onus of proof" because I have made no "allegation."   I reported my subjective impression in a thread apparently meant to glean posters' less-than-stellar impressions of Marrs.   Maybe you bear some onus for failing to notice the purpose and drift of the thread and allowing the chip to get knocked off your shoulder.
...I'm referring to a real and true piece of evidence, not a read-between-the-lines suspicion. I'm not referring to a tenuous interpretation or opinion
Unfortunately for you, when I'm reporting my opinion, "my opinion" is all you get.   If you've failed to understand it up to this point, I don't know what good this would do, but try once more to read my original post on this matter, and this time, try "reading for comprehension."
I think that most readers will clearly see that not only was I relating my personal, subjective impression of and reaction to that show, but I also acknowledged that I was reading Marrs "between the lines."
Whether you, Jethro, don't understand how common it is to form subjective impressions from people's presentations, or just don't like the particular one I formed about Marrs, I don't know and frankly don't care.

Readers will have noticed that you immediately chose to make this personal, playing the name-calling and sarcasm cards from the start.   So it's quite in keeping, and yet ironic, that you patronizingly refer to my
apparent mind-reading capabilities
What's "apparent" is that you expect people to be mind readers, and to know that you're lurking around with a short fuse, and to steer clear of any topics that may rub you the wrong way.
I have no idea why you got so bent out of shape by my (and only my) reporting of my opinion of Marrs.   I also don't care.   As you said: c'est la vie, which is a nice French way of saying "tough shit."

This may be of some value for anyone trying to figure you out:
BTW, opposing Obama's policies does *not* qualify as evidence of racism (in the real world).
Since I never mentioned anything about that, I have to conclude that you're wrestling with issues of your own, and I just happened to stumble into your path.

Whether or not any of the above satisfies you, I am now officially finished with you.   Rail on and name-call to your heart's content.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #32 on: February 26, 2012, 07:01:02 PM »
IOW, Ben can't admit that his hysterical accusation is baseless and groundless. Owning up to that fact would be much better than posting utter tripe, which likely is just a failed attempt at wit. BTW, you referenced Obama in your first post, which was why I referenced him in my posts (duh). Perhaps *you* need to improve *your* reading comprehension and seek help for your racial paranoia.


Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #33 on: February 26, 2012, 07:57:19 PM »
They've become swollen with all the attention he's been getting.  That's the problem, methinks.

the cajones have spoken.  and alejandro must obey.  maybe if you washed your juevos once in a while you could start thinking clearly


Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #34 on: February 27, 2012, 05:30:18 AM »
IOW, Ben can't admit that his hysterical accusation is baseless and groundless. Owning up to that fact would be much better than posting utter tripe, which likely is just a failed attempt at wit. BTW, you referenced Obama in your first post, which was why I referenced him in my posts (duh). Perhaps *you* need to improve *your* reading comprehension and seek help for your racial paranoia.

Jethro, can you really be this wound up about Jim Marrs, of all people? Frankly, Ben impresses me as a most NON-hysterical sort. I saw the Marrs-man live in Del Rio, Texas, earlier this year, while I was lecturing at Laughlin AFB. He made repeated references to the people (you know who  ;)) who are behind everything. In the Q&A, I asked him to stipulate exactly who these people were, but he took one look at the kippah on my head, and refused to go further. Yes, he is a bigot, simply because it sells his nonsensical books and because he was trained to be. Does he really believe the crap he spouts? I doubt it. Like Alex Jones, he knows (consciously or not) that the human brain is more easily convinced by detailed, complex, narrative BS. Don't get all up in Ben's grille because your hero is a huckster, please.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #35 on: February 27, 2012, 07:44:51 AM »
Jethro, can you really be this wound up about Jim Marrs, of all people? Frankly, Ben impresses me as a most NON-hysterical sort. I saw the Marrs-man live in Del Rio, Texas, earlier this year, while I was lecturing at Laughlin AFB. He made repeated references to the people (you know who  ;)) who are behind everything. In the Q&A, I asked him to stipulate exactly who these people were, but he took one look at the kippah on my head, and refused to go further. Yes, he is a bigot, simply because it sells his nonsensical books and because he was trained to be. Does he really believe the crap he spouts? I doubt it. Like Alex Jones, he knows (consciously or not) that the human brain is more easily convinced by detailed, complex, narrative BS. Don't get all up in Ben's grille because your hero is a huckster, please.

He's not my hero, and I'm not "all up in Ben's grill". Ben alleged that Marrs is a racist, and I asked him to back up his allegation. What's wrong with that? I don't accept accusations without proof. For instance, I could call bullshit on your story, but I have no right to do so because I didn't witness the interaction between you and Marrs. Frankly, I don't know whether or not your claim is true. If it is, shame on Marrs. If it isn't, shame on you.   

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #36 on: February 27, 2012, 08:13:08 AM »
Yes, he is a bigot, simply because it sells his nonsensical books and because he was trained to be.

BTW, what did you mean by "trained"? Do I hear the tinkling of shattered glass houses?

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #37 on: February 27, 2012, 08:13:49 AM »
He's not my hero, and I'm not "all up in Ben's grill". Ben alleged that Marrs is a racist, and I asked him to back up his allegation. What's wrong with that? I don't accept accusations without proof. For instance, I could call bullshit on your story, but I have no right to do so because I didn't witness the interaction between you and Marrs. Frankly, I don't know whether or not your claim is true. If it is, shame on Marrs. If it isn't, shame on you.

Dude, you don't have to believe me. Read his books. Stevesh makes them available for download, free, from his signature line. Marrs frequently refers to the secret cabal ;) which runs the planet, unbeknownst to the rest of us - supposedly. Yes, I saw him at an appearance in Del Rio, Texas, approximately one year ago and I faithfully described our interaction. He was very cagey and wanted to know who I "represented." Uh, me?

Still, you seemed awfully twisted up about Ben's doubts, which I can't understand. I think he made it very clear it was his opinion about the impression he took from Marrs. Surely you don't think Marrs has nailed it? Reptilians, coached by you-know-who? Really? 

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #38 on: February 27, 2012, 08:16:45 AM »
BTW, what did you mean by "trained"? Do I hear the tinkling of shattered glass houses?

I think he borrows from other authors in the NWO theory camp, and borrows heavily. Lyndon La Rouche and Jordan Maxwell each have input, as do later arrivals like Alex Jones. That's the 'training' to which I refer.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #39 on: February 27, 2012, 12:53:57 PM »
Interesting. I get quite annoyed when people accuse David Icke of anti-semitism - simply because, if he's not, then it's a terrible thing to be accused of.

Yet for some reason I seem to have no problem with the idea that Jim Marrs is a closet racist - why is that? Is it his accent? Am I, in my lefty liberal Guardian-reading way, being racist myself?

Enquiries are continuing.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #40 on: February 27, 2012, 04:21:36 PM »
Dude, you don't have to believe me. Read his books. Stevesh makes them available for download, free, from his signature line. Marrs frequently refers to the secret cabal ;) which runs the planet, unbeknownst to the rest of us - supposedly. Yes, I saw him at an appearance in Del Rio, Texas, approximately one year ago and I faithfully described our interaction. He was very cagey and wanted to know who I "represented." Uh, me?

Still, you seemed awfully twisted up about Ben's doubts, which I can't understand. I think he made it very clear it was his opinion about the impression he took from Marrs. Surely you don't think Marrs has nailed it? Reptilians, coached by you-know-who? Really?

I *have* read some of his books. "Alien Agenda" and "Rule By Secrecy" were great IMO. I'm referring to Jim Marrs BTW. It sounds like you have him confused with David Icke. I read one or two books by the latter. We might be on the same page when it comes to him. I think that he took some of his ideas from the original season of "V" and combined them with old stuff about cabals. He might have put a new spin on an old tale. I think that he's in the same category as Texe (not Jim) Marrs and Steve Quayle. If you consider this trio to be charlatans, you'll get no arguments from me. However, I don't put Jim Marrs in their group. I like Jim Marrs, and I've never heard/read any ethnic insults from him. He probably would laugh at Icke's strange take on Jews(?) and reptilians. Okay, I'm with you on that one. LOL I'm laughing at the thought that you might have thought that I rushed to the defense of David Icke. BTW, I apologize if I was rude in my other replies. I rushed this morning, and I don't think that my tone was the best it could have been. I believe your story, and I wouldn't be shocked and stunned if *Icke* did and said all kinds of weird things when you saw him. I'm a bit embarrassed at the thought that you might have been referring to Icke, as well (hee). 

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #41 on: February 27, 2012, 04:32:45 PM »
actually it was me that brought up Icke, for tangential purposes.

are tex marrs and jim marrs two different people, then? weird.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #42 on: February 27, 2012, 04:48:08 PM »
I think he borrows from other authors in the NWO theory camp, and borrows heavily. Lyndon La Rouche and Jordan Maxwell each have input, as do later arrivals like Alex Jones. That's the 'training' to which I refer.

Thanks for the explanation. IMO, Icke did his own thing. He's a bit like La Rouche when it comes to his take on the Queen, but he's not the exact same flavor of crazy. Speaking of queens, Maxwell is a drama queen stuck in his own version of a Dan Brown novel. Jones' modus operandi is to take real stories and put his own spin on them. You can confirm that they exist, but you can't confirm that his explanations of them are correct. It would be very naive to believe most conspiracy theories, just as it would be very naive to believe many Establishment accounts of world events. You sometimes find the truth in the middle of the nexus between the entertaining carnies and the state propagandists. One need only start at 1920s eugenicists, proceed to MK Ultra, travel to Operation Northwoods, and go from there to the next "this can't be true" event to see that alternative voices should be heard, no matter where they fit on the political spectrum. Jim Marrs is my exception to the rule when it comes to this kind of thing. I find him to be credible and straightforward. It's fine if your mileage varies.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #43 on: February 27, 2012, 04:54:02 PM »
Interesting. I get quite annoyed when people accuse David Icke of anti-semitism - simply because, if he's not, then it's a terrible thing to be accused of.

Yet for some reason I seem to have no problem with the idea that Jim Marrs is a closet racist - why is that? Is it his accent? Am I, in my lefty liberal Guardian-reading way, being racist myself?

Enquiries are continuing.

You're not being racist. You're just basing your view on caricatures and stereotypes, which might be what fueled this thread. I need more than an accent before I accuse someone (not saying you did) of being a racist. I also think this thread shows that none of us like it when our oxen are gored.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #44 on: February 27, 2012, 05:03:46 PM »
actually it was me that brought up Icke, for tangential purposes.

are tex marrs and jim marrs two different people, then? weird.

I understand that. I think that Avi confused Icke with Marrs, though. He brought up reptilians, which have zilch to do with Marrs AFAIK. I never heard Marrs say a thing about them, one way or the other.

Jim Marrs and Texe Marrs aren't the same person. They might be distantly related, though. Texe is a straight-up anti-Jewish crank, which can be confirmed by checking out his screeds (warning: reading them may impact your mental health). It's unfortunate that the two Texas conspiracy theorists share the same last name.


Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #45 on: February 29, 2012, 10:48:02 PM »
I saw the Marrs-man live in Del Rio, Texas, earlier this year, while I was lecturing at Laughlin AFB. He made repeated references to the people (you know who  ;)) who are behind everything. In the Q&A, I asked him to stipulate exactly who these people were, but he took one look at the kippah on my head, and refused to go further. Yes, he is a bigot, simply because it sells his nonsensical books and because he was trained to be. Does he really believe the crap he spouts? I doubt it.

I finally read your earlier posts in this thread, and I take back what I said since you *were* referring to Marrs, not Icke. I don't buy the claims that he's racist or anti-Jewish. No sale! Like I said, I need proof before I believe such accusations. Post something that proves that Marrs slurred Jewish people (or any other ethnic group, for that matter). I find him and his books to be very informative, and I'm not one to believe many conspiracy theories. The fact that you referenced reptilians shows that you might not be all that credible when it comes to explaining Marrs' views. The bottom line is that I'm still a Marrs fan, and I don't care what anybody here thinks about it.   

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #46 on: February 29, 2012, 10:59:01 PM »
I understand that. I think that Avi confused Icke with Marrs, though. He brought up reptilians, which have zilch to do with Marrs AFAIK. I never heard Marrs say a thing about them, one way or the other.

Jim Marrs and Texe Marrs aren't the same person. They might be distantly related, though. Texe is a straight-up anti-Jewish crank, which can be confirmed by checking out his screeds (warning: reading them may impact your mental health). It's unfortunate that the two Texas conspiracy theorists share the same last name.

Right, but I don't have Jim Marrs confused with anyone else. He is just more careful, playing on certain themes that are well-understood by fellow-travelers. Nothing has to be stated outright. We will wait in vain for Marrs to declare himself. I don't expect to persuade you, Jethro, that's cool. I just couldn't understand the over-the-top anger you directed at Ben Shockley. Just as he expressed his opinion, this is mine: Marrs makes me decidedly uncomfortable. He has appeared with known Holocaust-deniers, when the deniers were the ones extending the invitation. Should we not judge a person by the company they consent to keep, ever? After seeing him in person, my conclusion is that, yes, Marrs is a turd.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #47 on: February 29, 2012, 11:30:36 PM »
It sounds like you have him confused with David Icke. Jim Marrs probably would laugh at Icke's strange take on Jews(?) and reptilians. Okay, I'm with you on that one. LOL I'm laughing at the thought that you might have thought that I rushed to the defense of David Icke.
Avi, since you really were writing about Marrs rather than Icke, I take back what I said. I don't agree with your claim that he pushes anti-Jewish propaganda. Marrs mentions Gentile, as well as Jewish, bankers when he covers the rise of banking titans. This is about as anti-Jewish as showing Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel in the gangster movie, "Mobsters". Marrs lists all the major players when he writes about the activities of such early power brokers as Morgan, Warburg, Bush, etc. He'll mention Baptists (Rockefeller), as well as Jews (Rothschild), so I don't accept the premise that he's a charter member of the "Blame the Jews Club". Perhaps he acted strangely towards you because you acted strangely towards him. I'll give both of you the benefit of the doubt since I was not there when the incident took place. 


Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #48 on: February 29, 2012, 11:57:42 PM »
Right, but I don't have Jim Marrs confused with anyone else. He is just more careful, playing on certain themes that are well-understood by fellow-travelers. Nothing has to be stated outright. We will wait in vain for Marrs to declare himself. I don't expect to persuade you, Jethro, that's cool. I just couldn't understand the over-the-top anger you directed at Ben Shockley. Just as he expressed his opinion, this is mine: Marrs makes me decidedly uncomfortable. He has appeared with known Holocaust-deniers, when the deniers were the ones extending the invitation. Should we not judge a person by the company they consent to keep, ever? After seeing him in person, my conclusion is that, yes, Marrs is a turd.

To say that I expressed over-the-top anger in my reply to Ben is, well, over the top. I was fairly measured and restrained in my response to him. Marrs has a Southern accent. He dared criticize Obama. That was all it took for Ben to call him a racist, and I rightly called him on it. I asked for evidence and proof of his charge. I again ask: what's wrong with that? Yes, Ben certainly is entitled to his opinion, but why should such opinions go unchallenged? What if Ben painted Black people or Jewish people with the same broad brush if they didn't tow his political line? My guess is that you might have had a different take on my reaction if I had responded in a similar way to those hypotheticals. As for Holocaust-denial, it's despicable and detestable. I would bet any amount of money that Marrs isn't a revisionist. 

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #49 on: March 01, 2012, 12:30:36 AM »
Don't you folks love it when someone claims to infer another person's "political line" based on essentially nothing, and particularly when totally ignorant of the other person's socio-demographic characteristics and actual political beliefs?   That seems almost like someone claiming mind-reading ability.
On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen the idiom "painting with a broad brush" applied to making a narrow observation about an individual; in fact, that use might be "over the top."

Don't you love how the irony of obvious self-projection is lost on some people?

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #50 on: March 01, 2012, 03:15:50 AM »
Jim Marrs is a revisionist, but I doubt that he is a WWII revisionist.*  He thinks that because there was an ancient Sumerian poem that mentioned clay pots in one verse and women and babies in another verse that the Sumerians were engaged in advanced genetic manipulation…

Excuse me for interrupting your private argument, but didn’t Jim Marrs write some book about “the Fourth Reich” in which his main claim is that the Nazis survived the war and are still ruling the world?  And that they were/are the most evil thing ever?  And that is why everything seems so messed up now?  Doesn’t this tend to put him more on the pro-Jewish side rather than the anti-Jewish side?

Personally, I think Marrs is a total turd.  But I admit I am not being at all rational here.  Both his c2c interviews and his book on giants (which had very little about giants in it) just caused me to have a visceral feeling of strong dislike towards him.  I am not sure why, but he is one of the c2c guests I just can’t stand!

* In the conventional sense anyway, I suppose claiming that the Nazis had flying saucers, anti-gravity devices, and particle rays is a sort of revisionism.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #51 on: March 01, 2012, 04:29:12 AM »
Don't you folks love it when someone claims to infer another person's "political line" based on essentially nothing, and particularly when totally ignorant of the other person's socio-demographic characteristics and actual political beliefs?   That seems almost like someone claiming mind-reading ability.
On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen the idiom "painting with a broad brush" applied to making a narrow observation about an individual; in fact, that use might be "over the top."

Don't you love how the irony of obvious self-projection is lost on some people?

You said that you weren't going to further discuss the matter. In any event, you painted people with a broad brush in your first post. You know Marrs' "type". To wit, any criticism of Saint Barack from a "good ole' boy" (your phrase) must be indicative of said critic's racist mindset. That's a pretty broad brush, no?  As for demographics, you're an Alabaman whose politics skew left. I read your posts, so no psychic powers are needed on my part. Thanks for mentioning self-projection, though. It likely explains your first post very well, as well as the baseless accusations and needless paranoia of many PC leftists. BTW, that Three Stooges skit you mentioned was the only bit they ever did that sucked. It was like some sketch from a parallel vaudevillian universe. You should have gone with "Who's On First" instead. That routine better describes this thread. 

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #52 on: March 01, 2012, 04:45:36 AM »
Jim Marrs is a revisionist, but I doubt that he is a WWII revisionist.*  He thinks that because there was an ancient Sumerian poem that mentioned clay pots in one verse and women and babies in another verse that the Sumerians were engaged in advanced genetic manipulation…

Excuse me for interrupting your private argument, but didn’t Jim Marrs write some book about “the Fourth Reich” in which his main claim is that the Nazis survived the war and are still ruling the world?  And that they were/are the most evil thing ever?  And that is why everything seems so messed up now?  Doesn’t this tend to put him more on the pro-Jewish side rather than the anti-Jewish side?

Personally, I think Marrs is a total turd.  But I admit I am not being at all rational here.  Both his c2c interviews and his book on giants (which had very little about giants in it) just caused me to have a visceral feeling of strong dislike towards him.  I am not sure why, but he is one of the c2c guests I just can’t stand!

* In the conventional sense anyway, I suppose claiming that the Nazis had flying saucers, anti-gravity devices, and particle rays is a sort of revisionism.

Exactly. I was referring to Holocaust revisionism, not general revisionism. There's little to no doubt that Marrs is a historical revisionist in the broad sense of the term. Do you recall the title of his book about giants? I thought that was more Quayle's territory. I also don't recall Marrs claiming that stuff about ancient Sumerians. I'm not saying he didn't. I just never read or heard anything like that from him. Maybe I just forgot what he said/wrote about it (shrug). It almost sounds like something from a Sitchen book. I don't buy it, regardless of who came up with it. 

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #53 on: March 01, 2012, 05:15:16 AM »
Avi, since you really were writing about Marrs rather than Icke, I take back what I said. I don't agree with your claim that he pushes anti-Jewish propaganda. Marrs mentions Gentile, as well as Jewish, bankers when he covers the rise of banking titans. This is about as anti-Jewish as showing Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel in the gangster movie, "Mobsters". Marrs lists all the major players when he writes about the activities of such early power brokers as Morgan, Warburg, Bush, etc. He'll mention Baptists (Rockefeller), as well as Jews (Rothschild), so I don't accept the premise that he's a charter member of the "Blame the Jews Club". Perhaps he acted strangely towards you because you acted strangely towards him. I'll give both of you the benefit of the doubt since I was not there when the incident took place.

No, he doesn't push anti-Jewish propaganda, but he treads very close to that line. As I said, his fellow-travelers knew exactly to whom he was referring. I did not act strangely toward him. I simply asked, much as you do here, for him to name names (provide proof of his claims). His response was that I must be representing "somebody." Chuckle, chuckle. He then condescendingly referred to me as a member of the "Hebrew race," which made my skin crawl. You may not want to believe these things, or see them the way I see them, but I can't help that.

Excuse me for interrupting your private argument, but didn’t Jim Marrs write some book about “the Fourth Reich” in which his main claim is that the Nazis survived the war and are still ruling the world?  And that they were/are the most evil thing ever?  And that is why everything seems so messed up now?  Doesn’t this tend to put him more on the pro-Jewish side rather than the anti-Jewish side?

It's not a private argument. Welcome. I do believe that Jim Marrs is anti-Jewish, just from the way that he addressed me. Hebrew race? Really? Some of his best friends are Jewish, right? So, it can't be all of us at the sneaky, devilish Rothschild level, right? Obviously, Jethro was looking for someone with Southern-Man prejudice, but had to re-think once he read Ben's posts. Still, I don't have a hope in hell of persuading Jethro of anything, and like Ben, I'm not sure why I bothered.

Don't you love how the irony of obvious self-projection is lost on some people?

Yeah, but I think we're fighting a losing battle. Poor Jim is just a misunderstood freedom-fighter for Truth!

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #54 on: March 01, 2012, 01:27:47 PM »
Avi, you might be interested to know that I've been to Israel, long ago.   I didn't spend much time there, but it gave me some memorable anecdotes to talk about.
...I think we're fighting a losing battle. Poor Jim is just a misunderstood freedom-fighter for Truth!
Marrs might actually be a great guy, but having "defenders" like he has in here makes him a turd by association.

When a person who claims to be a fan of a public person lurks around a forum thread whose title indicates that it's a solicitation of negative- or unflattering commentary about that public person, and then posts overblown, unnecessarily angry, untrue or pejoratively speculative comments to and about other people who are posting according to the thread's purpose-- is that trolling?
When a person like that described above targets a particular poster for special abuse, and in his zeal to discredit that poster, willfully, knowingly, and materially mis-characterizes that poster's words (as was done about mine, in Reply #48 above), is there a special Internet term for that ("harassment" perhaps), or is that just plain old lying?
Obviously, Jethro was looking for someone with Southern-Man prejudice, but had to re-think once he read Ben's posts.
I'm not sure what kind of would-be cyber-bully is a bigger, more-ridiculous pain in the ass:  one trying to insult me without knowing anything about me, or one trying it while thinking he's really got a line on me.   As a little side note, it's ...mildly entertaining ...to see what kind of terms some people think are "insults."   Still, it's a little chilling to imagine a monomaniac researching me; there's probably an Internet word for that, too.
Somehow, I smell a "violation of terms of service" coming.
...I don't have a hope in hell of persuading Jethro of anything, and like Ben, I'm not sure why I bothered.
You're right.  I only came back in because I get bugged when people mis-characterize what I write, which apparently is a reflex for some people.   I really don't enjoy being made to play with the mean kids.   So don't mention my name in here and maybe it'll go to sleep.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #55 on: March 02, 2012, 02:13:36 AM »
No, he doesn't push anti-Jewish propaganda, but he treads very close to that line. As I said, his fellow-travelers knew exactly to whom he was referring. I did not act strangely toward him. I simply asked, much as you do here, for him to name names (provide proof of his claims). His response was that I must be representing "somebody." Chuckle, chuckle. He then condescendingly referred to me as a member of the "Hebrew race," which made my skin crawl. You may not want to believe these things, or see them the way I see them, but I can't help that.

It's not a private argument. Welcome. I do believe that Jim Marrs is anti-Jewish, just from the way that he addressed me. Hebrew race? Really? Some of his best friends are Jewish, right? So, it can't be all of us at the sneaky, devilish Rothschild level, right? Obviously, Jethro was looking for someone with Southern-Man prejudice, but had to re-think once he read Ben's posts. Still, I don't have a hope in hell of persuading Jethro of anything, and like Ben, I'm not sure why I bothered.

Don't sell yourself short, Avi. You *persuaded* me....that you're full of crap. Each new installment of "My Encounter With Jim Marrs" was quite *persuasive*. Next, you'll tell me that Marrs beat you about the head and neck with his new book while shouting the K-word. It's telling that you didn't post the whole tall tale at one time, but you can take solace in the fact that Ben believes you. You claim that  Jim Marrs is a huckster; I suppose it takes one to know one. You're no more credible than Icke and Quayle. Enough said.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2012, 02:35:44 AM »
Genial Uncle Jim is, after all, "a good ol' boy," and give one of those guys enough room, and a racist will usually be revealed.*   Feeling his oats on the air with Inattentive George, he was waxing racist on Pres. Obama in a wink-wink, he-ain't-one-of-us kind of way [snip]Yes, I know what I'm talking about.  A White male, born in and long-time resident of Alabama, is perceived as a "safe audience," and gets to hear it all.[/i][/size]

I didn't lie or exaggerate, Ben. Here's the quote from your first post in case you feel the need to accuse me of dishonesty again. I'll leave it at that because I don't want you to tattle on me (rolls eyes). You're obviously too fragile to defend your comments in a robust way.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2012, 02:36:45 AM »
Do you recall the title of his book about giants? I thought that was more Quayle's territory. I also don't recall Marrs claiming that stuff about ancient Sumerians. I'm not saying he didn't. I just never read or heard anything like that from him. Maybe I just forgot what he said/wrote about it (shrug). It almost sounds like something from a Sitchen book. I don't buy it, regardless of who came up with it.

Sorry!  I was thinking of Genes, Giants, Monsters, and Men: The Surviving Elites of the Cosmic War and Their Hidden Agenda by Joseph Farrell, (not Marrs).  I was looking for something bogus, but entertaining like Nick Redfern.  Unfortunately it was only bogus.  So my view of Jim Marrs as a turd comes solely from his interviews on c2c.  I will go hide in shame now.

P.S.:  I very much like Nick Redfern, but serious researcher?  No.

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2012, 03:08:19 AM »
Sorry!  I was thinking of Genes, Giants, Monsters, and Men: The Surviving Elites of the Cosmic War and Their Hidden Agenda by Joseph Farrell, (not Marrs).  I was looking for something bogus, but entertaining like Nick Redfern.  Unfortunately it was only bogus.  So my view of Jim Marrs as a turd comes solely from his interviews on c2c.  I will go hide in shame now.

P.S.:  I very much like Nick Redfern, but serious researcher?  No.

Thanks for the explanation. I feel better now. I feared that Marrs wrote a new book on the Nephilim and assorted reptilians. To my knowledge, and despite what others claim, he's not into those kinds of things. We agree on Redfern. He was like Coleman and Redfern in that the subject matter he discussed was always entertaining, the bread and butter classic Coast. It's a shame that such guests seldom appear on the show now, but who can blame them.     

Re: Jim Marrs - mostly a turd
« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2012, 04:23:36 AM »
Don't sell yourself short, Avi. You *persuaded* me....that you're full of crap. Each new installment of "My Encounter With Jim Marrs" was quite *persuasive*. Next, you'll tell me that Marrs beat you about the head and neck with his new book while shouting the K-word. It's telling that you didn't post the whole tall tale at one time, but you can take solace in the fact that Ben believes you. You claim that  Jim Marrs is a huckster; I suppose it takes one to know one. You're no more credible than Icke and Quayle. Enough said.

Yep, that's me: full of crap. So, why are you bothering? I heard Jim Marrs speak, I asked him a question, and he creeped me out. I am entitled to my opinion, as you are to yours. Say, can I interest you in an abandoned FEMA camp land deal? No? You should get in on the ground floor of this amazing opportunity!