Following Facts Where They Lead
“Said so and so”? . . . that’s one helluva trip you took there, Mr. Sowell.
Stirring Defense!
Anything by Thomas Sowell
Great! Let’s discuss:
Touting technicalities as “facts” doesn’t get it done: Especially when you make a living selling slogans and catchy quotes about careful consideration.
And by the way — I don’t have situational rules . . .
I fail to understand how you think we can solve anything in a country that can’t even get the self-evident straight:
We’re well beyond “disagreement” in America — this is madness (countless millions miserably failing to follow even the most fundamental methods of how understanding works). The second you shun evidence that doesn’t fit the narrative you want — you have contaminated your judgment.
Debunking the WMD delusion & Trayvon tale is a conduit for showing how this nation systematically derails debate. “Everybody believed Iraq had WMD” is not a valid argument any more than “armed only with Skittles.” By the way — how many of you know what Trayvon actually looked like? It’s not the kid on People magazine, I assure you. I’m not interested in defending Zimmerman — my aim is to expose the irrational behavior of blindly defending Martin and the damage you did by doing so.
You want to be taken seriously on race relations when you won’t even concede to what kind of can he was carrying? And the Right wants the Left and the black community to get its act together on matters deeply woven into the fabric of America’s long history of brutality and disgrace: Slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, murder, decades of civil rights violations, questionable shootings, and so on.
While the Right won’t even look at the material properties of a tube. What’s wrong with that picture — and this one?
Hmm, so the dimensions exactly match the tubes used in Iraq’s history of manufacturing the Nasser-81mm artillery rocket (a reverse-engineered version of the Italian Medusa)
America’s gone out of its mind
But this crowd takes the cake . . .
On evidence involving artillery rockets and material properties of centrifuge rotors — the apostles of Sowell smugly cite his books on economics, race, and whatnot: Anything to glorify him as they abandon any notion of accountability:
Butchering his bedrock beliefs as they dance in delight behind their force field of fallacy.
These people do nothing but question my motives, mock my site, and assault my character — then proudly post quotes of Sowell looking stately as he condemns the very thing they’re doing.
- Repeat slogans: “Everybody believed Iraq had WMD”
- Question people’s motives: Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Plamegate & plenty more. Adding to the arsenal of childish crap to continue the tradition: Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
- Bold assertions: Russians said so, British said so, Bill Clinton said so, Leaders of both parties said so . . .
No coherent argument, Repeat slogans, Vent their emotions, Question people’s motives, Bold assertions . . .
I’m practically spit on by people promoting principles I followed to find Sowell didn’t . . .
And that’s a fact:
truth verifiable from experience or observation
In what parallel universe does this even remotely reflect anything like that:
A couple of 2-minute reads that never even mention the tubes that took us to war (or anything else of substance on this endless saga of absurdity). If you only apply the principles you preach when it serves your interests — they’re just empty claims on a cup and a meaningless mantra touted on a T-shirt.
8. Old information at the beginning of the sentence, new information at the end.
— Steven Pinker
How do you feel about no new information — anywhere?
The rotor speed required to separate uranium isotopes doesn’t care who’s president, and when it comes to ascertaining the truth, neither do I. In order to maintain such speeds, the material properties of centrifuges are as critical as it gets. You don’t need to interview a world-renowned nuclear scientist to figure that out — but I like to be thorough. To claim that Iraq WMD wasn’t a lie should be like saying we didn’t land on the moon.
As I wrote and produced the most exhaustive documentary ever done on WMD, I would know.
Compared to What?
That principle is built into the doc imagery staring you straight in the face. And since this issue involves an industry where fractions of a millimeter matter: My answer to “What hard evidence do you have?” is as concrete as it gets. You can’t have “Compared to What?” without comparing what’s in question.
In the aftermath of 9/11, the marquee evidence used to sell a war in the Middle East is as critical as comparison gets.
My surgical specificity in this clip puts this lie in its place in 5 minutes alone. As I said, I’m not out to “DESTROY” Sowell. But lemme put it in terms you’ll understand: If he stepped into a debate with me on this matter, the beating he’d take would be biblical.
If you think you can challenge me on that, I invite you to try. I’ve been inviting you for a really long time.
Trillion Dollar Tube
To take a story this complex and convoluted and boil its essence down to a few minutes was no small feat:
Imagine what I did with 160
“There is no skimming over the surface of a subject with [Hamilton]. He must sink to the bottom to see what foundation it rests on.”
— Major William Pierce (Ron Chernow, Alexander Hamilton)
Wouldn’t it be absurd to share that quote if my clip contained nothing but trite talking points? Some circles are not burdened by squaring their walk with their talk. They seem to think that advertising virtue equates to embodying it.
Case in point
People who talk glibly about “intelligence failure” act as if intelligence agencies that are doing their job right would know everything.
— Thomas Sowell
D.O.E’s standard is to spin a tube at 20% above 90,000 RPM before failure — so 48,000 short is a pretty loose definition of “rough indication.”
And since the entire point of testing should be to replicate the conditions of centrifuges, one would think that the full-blown testing would be performed before the N.I.E. was completed.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
Between Sowell’s words and mine
Which ones strike you as glib?
And these are on the mild end of the savagery I’ve seen.
You couldn’t carry Sowell’s jockstrap!
Seriously? Get a life. It doesn’t matter what you say, he’s better than you basically in everything.
You deserved to be treated that way! You’re a moron and pathetic character assassin
Holy shit…. a video of a circle jerks with a nut in the center talking about RPMS. Yet somehow Thomas Sowell is a liar.
How do you reconcile that with this?
You introduce statements and arguments of people who aren’t Thomas Sowell
As this story is also
About the behavior of the echo chamber around Sowell — it’s kinda necessary to include other people to properly illustrate the problem. And I wouldn’t mind explaining everything — if you thought about anything.
Putting aside Bill Cosby’s fall from grace, he was a universal icon of goodness growing up. In just this 5-second scene from Picture Pages — a parallel can be drawn to everything I advocate on this site:
The.Deal.Is.That.We.Connect.These.Dots . . .
You see
There are powerful forces that make damn sure you don’t!
And it shows
Taking on the entire country by myself is worlds away from what everyone else is doing. That makes it exponentially more complex to explain: Not because it really is that complicated, but rather because human nature goes out of its way to obfuscate the obvious: Gleefully gutting the truth and getting applauded for it to boot.
And then there’s this endless charade:
As Sowell peddled partisan hackery on the biggest & most costly lie in modern history. Flagrantly ignoring irrefutable evidence of mathematical certainty (deception that shaped everything you see today): And you refuse to look at the details (just as he did), condemn the person presenting them (just as he did), and keep on quoting that crap . . .
By someone who carved out a career telling people what they wanna hear (while engineering language to disguise what I spotted in seconds):
It’s impossible for you to fathom how laughable that Tweet is to me.
Adding to your egregious breach in the standards Sowell espouses: You sling assumptions & insults at the only person on the planet who told this story in full (in exhaustive detail from every angle that matters most). And since I take both parties to task on that issue and more (including where Sowell and I are in sync) — you don’t know what to do (as objective scrutiny just doesn’t compute with you people):
Or anyone else in this fantasyland
Without whataboutism — you’ve not nothing!
Except for flooding the internet with quotes that clearly don’t mean shit to you or Sowell (except for selling an image and you buying it):
To incessantly bitch about the Left — much of which we agree on.
The liars who led you to believe . . .
Not only got off scot-free (but are richly rewarded for breathlessly bitching about problems they helped create with your help). Just how much of an “Intellectual Giant” could you be and blow it on something this big and glaringly obvious?
Sowell’s second article on the subject is a 2-minute read at 752 words — not one of which addresses the tubes that took us to war. And yet this mountain of information below was publicly available before he wrote that article:
How do you reconcile that?
This isn’t about intelligence, it’s about ulterior motives. But wouldn’t an intellectual giant have the foresight to see the inherent holes in his motives? That however well-intentioned they might be, catastrophic consequences tend to come with endless lying and ineptitude. Not to mention the poison of partisanship to absolve it all — running the nation into the ground while you’re at it. At what point does it dawn on you and your beloved Sowell — that blind loyalty to that cause would predictably damage your others?
Ya know, like creating the conditions for the rise of the Rock Star you all spent the next 8 years railing against (who took race relations totally off the rails — paving the way for woke as well).
Some genius!
As disgusted as I am by it all: I feel sorry for the lives of hermetically sealed minds. You’ll never know how much more the world had to offer you — and how much more you had to offer it.
Now, if you don’t have any sincere questions or you’re unwilling to put in the time & effort it takes to understand a story of this magnitude: Take your “TL;DR” and politely move along (and please block me on your way out). I’m not here to f#%k around on Twitter to explain my arguments 280 characters at a time for your entertainment.
I know the program . . .
Anything Goes for apologists trying to preserve what they perceive. I know your Rolodex of Ridicule rabbit-hole routine — all too well:
And Now for the Weather
Same goes for this crowd:
Untold millions marching to a Twitter-rage parade on WMD — dishing on the deaths of Rumsfeld and Powell (and whatever anniversary marks the moment):
But too lazy to get off your ass to see what we can do about it:
Same goes these crowds and all those like ’em:
V for Victory — How Fitting . . .
A world where you can win an argument without even knowing what the issue is about. How you behave in denying the undeniable daily would be unthinkable for me to do ever.
“Wut?”
In my youth, I could not have imagined a world in which even people with PhDs would debase themselves in such ways. That an entire country could take satisfaction in insulting your own intelligence on a daily basis just astounds me.
I beat the hell out of both sides:
So if you can’t take a hit — you might as well bail right now. I’m looking for fiercely independent thinkers for an idea that could turn the tide, and if you can’t handle some heat — you don’t qualify (so I don’t need ya). If you’re not interested in hearing me out and having meaningful conversation — we have nothing to talk about and I wish you well. I’d just ask that you block me and politely move along. But if you’re game for good old-fashioned conversation — please contact me through the site, Anchor.Press.gg@gmail.com, or DM (Direct Message) on Twitter:
As I no longer respond to Tweets or superficial fragments of any kind.
Anyone entering this discussion with sincerity — would come away realizing that there is no debate, and there never was.
They just made it up
Funny thing about information
It can seem incoherent when you don’t take any of it into account.
Would you browse a textbook then blame the teacher for your failure to understand the material? If you’re not gonna watch clips at the crux of the story, what’s the point? That the decline of America over the last 30 years in the Gutter Games of Government — doesn’t unfold for standard scrolling with ease, is not a flaw in my argument and array of illustrations:
It’s a flaw in your willingness to work through it — absorbing each building block of information your brain is well-equipped to handle.
Or at least it used to be before information became so funneled in a fashion to your liking — you don’t even know what to do with anything that isn’t. It astounds me that wading through unfamiliar territory on this site is somehow seen as complicated as quantum physics. I assure you: What it took to acquire this information was infinitely more demanding than anything you face here — let alone the complexities in exposing systematic deception at the core of our country’s ills.
What I do takes work — time and effort to think it through.
This — is entertainment
Not long before this Tweet — this Sowell supporter was condemning my efforts like all the rest that day (and every day).
And then he opened the doc . . .
In response to my appreciation, he replied with a sincere question that’s central to the whole story. Imagine — asking questions in the pursuit of truth & understanding. Not to mention the importance of politeness and the courtesy in following up (as I had missed it the first time):
Glad to help. I don’t know if you saw my other comment — so I’ll post it again here. Why is it you chose to take Sowell to task on the WMD issue? Sowell is more well known for his positions on economics and sociology than he is for foreign policy. I was just curious.
“I was just curious” . . .
“To learn to ask: ‘Is that true?’” . . .
Maybe there’s something to what she just said. Let me think about it. That’s interesting. Maybe I should change my mind.’” . . .
When is the last time you can honestly remember a public dialogue — or even a private conversation — that followed that useful course?
In over 3 years of telling this story on Sowell, the Tweet below is the only instance of a fan seeing his hypocrisy plain as day from the get-go. But I’m not writing off his whole career (and never even hinted anything of the kind). On what basis did she come to that conclusion?
None — she just assumed it (as you all do):
And this — is just priceless:
Even if he said that stuff, your entire diatribe smacks of the now classic modern progressive tactic of taking a single mistake by anyone whose views they don’t like and using that one error in judgement to try and discredit ALL their work. Everyone is human and at least occasionally shows poor judgement.
Who said I disagreed with his work?
Outside of butchering the debate on WMD — and his partisan hackery in flagrantly ignoring his own camp’s abominable behavior, record of recklessness, systematic lying, and hypocrisy that knows no bounds: I haven’t come across anything I object to.
As for economics, I’m not qualified on that front. Imagine — there are still people who measure their knowledge in such ways.
The rolodex of excuses around Sowell is off the charts. There’s a faction for forgiveness — by people who have nothing of the kind for their enemies.
Everyone is human and at least occasionally shows poor judgement.
That doesn’t cut it when you miserably fail to acknowledge that poor judgment: Particularly when you make a living pouncing on others about theirs. On top of all that — they have no idea of the depths of deception involved here:
But have no qualms about issuing instant forgiveness for it.
Faction for the hybrid model . . .
- No big deal
- No authority
- Forgiveness
If your strongest criticism of him is that he was wrong on the Iraq war, I’d frankly say “big deal.” Millions of people were wrong about that shit back then. He had no political authority or say on the matter, so I think he could be forgiven for that mistake. (Assuming that you’re right of course, I’m still waiting for you to supply the evidence).
He has no idea what the deal is — but is perfectly satisfied in blowing it off as “no big deal.”
And right on cue:
I’m still waiting for you to supply the evidence
Half the country took the word of professional know-it-alls over nuclear scientists. And when your camp came up empty on WMD — you just bought more bullshit from the same people who sold you the first batch:
Shrewd!
Preach responsibility and take none
The question comes down to whether or not you’re basing your belief on something in the realm of reason — not some fail-safe fantasy that allows you to believe whatever you want.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act III
Hide and Seek
At every turn . . .
The faithful tap dance around reality — oily evading anything that requires them to hold Sowell to his own standards.
Hard to Imagine:
That I have to explain that quote to people who seemingly live to flood the internet with his words.
He and his flock incessantly complain about the media — and they don’t make policy. But the second I scrutinize Sowell — suddenly you have new standards.
180 — how fitting
Adulthood is about spending the time to think before talking . . . Adulthood is about controlling our emotions, learning to take a deep breath and modulating our moments of anger or frustration.
–Kalev Leetaru, Social Media Is Reverting Society From Adults Back Into Children
When you have no idea what the argument is:
Making no effort or inquiry to understand, no less: Wrapping quotes around “argument” is as ridiculous as using air quotes incorrectly. If you make an attempt to debate in good faith, I don’t give a shit if you can spell your arguments.
But Jesus, just act your age — because this childish crap is killing us (and countless are already dead because of it).
That you even think that a story so complex and convoluted could be explained away so easily — is a monumental problem all by itself. And without even the most basic insight into anything on this story:
That camp has a habit of glossing over global issues of catastrophic consequences with . . .
“Seems”
I’m not just taking Thomas Sowell to task because he’s got it comin’ — I need this guy for what I have in mind to right this ship. The ultimate irony is that blind loyalty limits him — while my criticism could elevate him to heights that hero-worship ensures he’ll never go.
So, you’re saying that your plan will elevate Sowell to worldwide recognition — by holding him accountable? That if he comes clean — he could be the catalyst to turn the tide?
That’s exactly what I’m saying
It won’t matter that he blew it on WMD or why — all that matters is having the guts to say: “I was wrong and I’m trying to make it right.” In a culture consumed with feeling right, wouldn’t it be refreshing to talk about the immeasurable value in the willingness to be wrong?
Don’t just tell people how to behave: Lead by example — especially when it comes at a cost! Compelling him to admit where he’s wrong will work wonders for where he’s right. There are far worse culprits on all-things Iraq, but I’ve been down that road for decades. Discovering Sowell and the underworld of absurdity that shields him — makes him ideal to put these lies in their place once and for all:
And change the dynamic of debate to boot.
Elevating him is not my aim, but I can live with it to stem the systematic self-delusion that’s taken this nation totally off the rails:
Left & Right
If you don’t want to take the time to understand my idea and how Sowell is central to it — that’s your prerogative. But to assume bad motives before you understand anything (not to mention issuing rapid-fire ridicule for satisfaction in full): Is in gross breach of the standards Sowell espouses.
Ya know — like all these quotes coating the internet every single day:
So you found one small crack in Sowell’s character where he defended Iraq having WMD, does that hurt his credibility?
This man muddied the waters of debate to serve himself: On a little matter of war in the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11. On top of unconscionably ignoring irrefutable evidence of world-altering consequence, he has a habit of toeing the party line. Not only did Sowell flagrantly fail to follow the facts on all-things Iraq — he brazenly ignored the debauchery in his own party to politely pounce on the other. In light of his history being wildly out of sync with his sanctimonious claims:
That “one small crack” is a wide-open window into his character and credibility.
I wouldn’t care if Sowell cured cancer:
You don’t get a pass for basking in baseless beliefs that cripple the country — and have the bottomless nerve to preach responsibility & accountability to boot. That is a cancer of its own. The poison he pumped into the atmosphere helped destroy the internal organs of America. So we have very different standards as to what qualifies as a “National Treasure.”
This is a case built on concrete evidence of mathematical certainty: Supported by exhaustively detailed arguments (of which you have exactly zero chance of refuting).
But to the “logic lovers” — it doesn’t matter:
love to use “logic” to win an argument, and then disappear before they can find out they’re wrong
Oh yeah — I know the type, all too well!
I point you to a 7-part, 2 hours and 40 minutes doc — that distills a story that demanded a massive amount of effort, thought, research, and writing: And you tap a Tweet with a talking point or two — thinking you can inform me.
I don’t know how people find the path of least resistance so satisfying — as I love the demands of difficulty and discernment. To not step up my game in the midst of opportunity or challenge: Would be tantamount to treason upon my very existence.
Wherever we stand on anything:
It’s in everybody’s best interests to discuss issues in an intelligent and intellectually honest manner — welcoming knowledge and insight to light our way to what’s real and what’s not.
This is not that . . .
Not to mention this
I defy you to find a single instance of anyone on the Right even attempting to make an argument on the dimensions, material, and quantity of the tubes. You’ll be lucky to find them mentioned at all.
You think it’s just a coincidence that all the “arguments” on the Right just happen to follow the same pattern (conveniently leaving out the marquee claim on a mushroom cloud)?
That — all by itself, speaks volumes:
To anyone who thinks world-altering wars are more important than whining about websites that expose painfully obvious lies, anyway.
If only you’d laid it all out exactly as I like it — then I’d abide by the principles I preach
Is that how it works?
That’s about the size of it. I guess I figured that if you didn’t understand something — you’d try this on for size, but I’m old-fashioned that way:
Funny how there’s always an excuse . . .
Back in the day — there was no website with an array of illustrations to gripe about. I was just sharing Trillion Dollar Tube to all these fine folks flaunting their badge of beliefs so F.A.I.R.
Showing some courtesy for a 5-minute excerpt doesn’t seem like much to ask such bastions of virtue. But without watching one second — self-satisfied scorn was your gold standard for gleefully gutting the truth.
And why mess with tradition?
If you don’t like my illustrations, go read the bone-dry reports for yourselves: And I’ve got plenty more material to add to your reading list. But that takes work — and why bother when you can just ridicule those who did it for you.
One picture is worth a thousand words:
When you don’t want the pictures and you don’t want the words — what would you have me do?
And once I did it
We both know your next move . . .
One Voice Became Two 