Saturday, December 27, 2008

Regarding the aptly titled post, "Disinformation."

I want to caution people about putting too much stock in assorted rumors about the Obama Eligibility Controversy. As in, please don't listen to the rumors that there's a controversy over Obama's eligibility. The people (and the Electoral College) have spoken, all these lawsuits alleging otherwise have been laughed out of court, and conservative lawyers (Federalist Society, etc.) and conservative media (Fox News, etc.) have refused to touched this one. Only your crazy Uncle Charlie living in your aunt's basement believes this one (but he also believed that Ron Paul would be the next president, that the Federal Reverse is unconstitutional, and that the jooooooooos are responsible for 9/11, so what can you really expect?).

But at that other site, they breathlessly report that there are "active efforts by Obama supporters, and even reportedly paid Obama operatives spreading disinformation on the internet." Nevermind the failure to specify exactly what "disinformation" is being spread (and by whom), or identifying who these "reportedly paid Obama operatives" are or how they are paid (by the hour? by the piece? by search query hits?). More importantly, Team Orly fails to specify who is paying them, because we over here are working for free and baby needs some new shoes, knowwhatiamsaying?

First they complain about the lawsuit alleged filed by "Wild Bill" in Virginia. (Query: Did the docketing clerk enter "Wild" as his first name?) While patting themselves on the back for noting there was no such lawsuit filed, they miss the rather obvious point: THE INTERNET IS FILED WITH DISINFORMATION. Amazing how if someone says something you disagree with, there's a professional psych-ops disinformation campaign at work, but if you find something on the Internet you agree with -- no matter how improbable -- it is of course true. Of course Obama was born in Kenya; that fact is "widely known" (at least by the people of Kenya, as reported by the Kenyan Tourism Minister, as stated by Philip Berg ... all of whom are completely above reproach and aren't motivated by self-interest at all (or perhaps just mistaken)).

Then they note how stories about Obama's grandmother's death were "partially faked." Shooooowhaaaaa? Like she's only partially dead? She is dead, but the dreaded MSM ("mainstream media," for the conspiracy-theory challenged) only reported that she was suffering from mild numbness in her left foot? That she did die, but found a "1UP" in the princess's castle, and can thus continue on?

Then they report "Of course, the Certificate(s) of Live Birth [of Obama] that were released appear to be fakes or at least altered in various ways." Nevermind, as any birfer will tell you, Obama released his certification of live birth; whatever what was released, it was fake. And in support of this astonishing revelation, they cite yet another anonymous "expert", as well as a named expert who boldly opined that, in order to give an accurate assessment, one would need to see the original documents. In other words, there's no proof supporting their assertion, but have no problem acting like there is.

Team Orly then notes that the statements that "Hawaiian Health Department had confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii" were fake. Nevermind that department officials confirmed they had Obama's "original birth certificate" on file; it is of course entirely plausible and likely that Obama's parents turned over to Hawaii his birth certificate from Kenya (or Indonesia, or Canada) to Hawaii so they could turn around and issue him a certification of live birth listing his place of birth as Honolulu. And, please, ignore William of Ockham as he turns over in his grave.

They then smirk at reports of recent polling indicating that Obama has been favorably received by the public as of late, but can't in fact point to any specific statement that the press got wrong. Oh, they do complain about small, unrepresentative samples, but seem to overlook the whole "MARGIN OF ERROR" concept (or the mathematics behind it).

Then there's the complaints about the false stories about the WND. This is in the dog-bites-man category: Where are the complaints about the false stories in the WND? Very highly selective reading going on over there.

This all leads to the grand conclusion that the media, as well as Congress and the judiciary all buying the hype about Obama. Nevermind all those adverse court decisions were based on the application of well-settled law to the facts presented, and not what might have been said during the overnight slot on some mid-market AM radio station.

To their credit, Team Orly notes the conservative media, the independent journalists (independent from the liberal media elite and the regular liberal media), and other investigative journalists have been silent on all these issues. Although one would think that exposing the biggest news story of a generation would be enough motivation for someone to look into this glaring controversy of Obama's eligibility, Team Orly lamely concludes there must be a disinformation campaign afoot because they've scratched and scratched their heads and can't fathom why Obama might be ignoring them.

Here is the delicious irony: In a posting that starts off with cautioning people about putting too much stock in rumors due to the effect of misunderstandings, and mistakes, and "Chinese Whispers," it has no problem repeating they "even heard a rumor that hackers have altered some online versions of the Kenyan grandmother recording." Seriously: Do as I say, not as I do.

It is a punchline unto itself: The "Disinformation" posting is nothing but disinformation.

Normally, it would be no problem to poke holes in their precious little "theories," but we at Team Oily HAVE BEEN BANNED from that site. Yes! It is true! They encourage members to speak, but only as long as that speech kisses the Ass of the Dear Leader of the Revolution or otherwise promotes inaccurate or incredible "information" lacking any basis in truth or common sense.

If you think Orly Taitz is a great American patriot fighting for justice, then why on earth does she stifle dissent like the former Soviet Union? If the cause is so just, why stifle dissent while complaining about dissent being stifled?

UPDATE: The "Disinformation" posting has been "temporarily" taken down. (For remodeling?) Quel suprise.

No comments:

Post a Comment