Discussion: Naomi Wolf: Media 'Distorts' My Questions About ISIL Beheading Videos

Discussion for article #228507

She asked good questions. She made good points. Let’s chill the hysteria.


Two points, sweetie…

  1. You ARE the ‘media’

  2. By showing Exactly What You Said On TAPE, your own words are what hung you by your petard…

1 Like

You also asserted that the troops being sent over to fight Ebola are going to bring it back to the states in order to take over the country. So excuse us sane folks for once again pointing out how much of a crackpot loon you are.


I would suggest that everyone so consumed with outrage never wear earth tones again in protest.

There are indeed many unanswered questions. She is correct to point out that these hostages appeared out of nowhere – they had not been reported as hostages allegedly under a media blackout.

Why there was a blackout when other hostage-taking is reported is totally unclear, and a decidedly incurious corporate media is more consumed with fanning the flames of support for more slaughter, while dutifully ignoring reporting on the consequences of our own actions. It strikes me that the CIA does a lot of “humanitarian” work as well.

I find these beheadings distinct from the babies-pulled-from-incubators meme only to the extent that these individuals were indeed brutally murdered. Meanwhile, Chelsea Manning rots in prison for showing Americans just one rather sanitized example of the murder we conduct. And our panties are all jammed up our asscrack over this distraction. Please.


In other words, you’re saying – as she is – “maybe they were staged. Who knows?”

I don’t think that constitutes “chilling the hysteria.”


Years ago when she was working hard to legitimize her status, I saw Ms. Wolf speak at a University. Her topic was feminism, etc. At the end of her talk, she took questions and there was one from a foreign exchange student from the 3rd world who was learning English as he went. His question was awkwardly worded with regard to women’s rights, but his intention was earnest and honest. Unfortunately, Ms. Wolf lashed out at this evil misogynist for his words and quickly put him in his place. To wit, I quickly realized what a sad, pathetic fraud Ms. Wolf was and is, and was greatly disheartened when upon hearing she was advising Al Gore. Instead of the message, its all about her. How typical in today’s Amurca.
You were doing just fine being out of the spotlight. Do us all a favor and stay there. I just wish your opposites like Rush Limbaugh would join you.


A question that is wildly implausible to the point of being ridiculous, unprompted by any conflict or piece of missing information, that doesn’t suggest a better explanation for a set of circumstances than we already have, a question motivated by obsessive mistrust of the U.S. government and reflexive sympathy for any of its antagonists, however vile they may generally be considered, is not in my humblest of opinions a good question. And I don’t remember any “hysteria” over it. What we’re trying to do is not indulge our own fantasists and hysterics as much as the other side does theirs. It’s a good thing not to do.


She’s as big an idiot as Ted Cruz—and they’re both drinking from the same poisoned well.


Naomi, the deleted tweet was not only insensitive, it was insane to suggest that the parents were not the parents of the murdered journalists. If you truly ever believed that there was any chance of that you should seek help. If you won’t seek help, you should check out the matter yourself and spare the rest of us your delusions.


Any good conspiracy theory raises more questions than it answers. Conspiracy theories are where the far left and the far right overlap. It’s the ‘Paranoid Style in American Politics’ and it’s been with us a long time.


Some recent conspiracy theories pushed by corporate Democrats and their corporate Republican twins.

  • Putin bares primary responsibility for the war in Ukraine.

  • Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack in Damascus.

  • Pro-Russian rebels were responsible for downing flight MH17.

These conspiracy theories were howled endlessly by Democrat and Republican media.

Despite an almost total lack of independently verified evidence to back up their assertions D’s and R’s pushed their fact-free coverage on these topics nonstop for weeks.

Whatever questions Naomi Wolf posed about the beheading videos pales in comparison to the propaganda superstorm unleashed by U.S. partisan media outlets regarding Ukraine and Syria.

1 Like

What you mean is Naomi Wolf’s beheading conspiracy theory pales in comparison to other conspiracy theories you believe in. Some people swim in conspiracy theories.


She’s still an idiot.

You do realize that your argument amounts to claiming that because you believe those positions you oppose were accepted were based on blindness it’s okay for her to be blind?


Shorter Naomi Wolf: “I’m not actually saying anything of import. I just wanted attention. Don’t mind me.”


I don’t think Naomi Klein appreciates being mistaken for Naomi Wolf. Klein is a smart progressive hero who should be taken seriously, I’ve seen her go off on people on twitter for mistaking her for Wolf.


If you read carefully what Naomi Wolf wrote she drew no conclusions about the beheading videos.

She only asked questions.

You either misinterpreted her questions as conclusions or you so very much hate anyone who asks questions that you began attacking her before reading what she actually wrote.

Likewise, you attempt to label me a conspiracy theorist on Syria and Ukraine when every position I’ve taken is backed up by a link to a reputable source.

You use the words “conspiracy theorist” to silence questioning and dissent. Such a tactic won’t work on me.

Ending her innuendo with a question mark doesn’t make it any less offensive. I dismissed Naomi Wolf as a serious person a long time ago.

Here’s a sample of her paranoid style bullshit from three years ago.

On Bullshit

Frankfurt argues that bullshit either can be true or can be false; hence, the bullshitter is a man or a woman whose principal aim — when uttering or publishing bullshit — is to impress the listener and the reader with words that communicate an impression favorable to the speaker, with no concern for the truth of what they’re saying. Likewise, the bullshitter is not concerned with consistency between what they’re saying at the moment, and anything they’ve previously said. Consequently, “the bullshitter is faking things, but that does not necessarily mean he gets them wrong.”[2] He simply doesn’t care. In contrast, the liar must know the truth of the matter under discussion in order to better conceal it from the listener or the reader being deceived with a lie, while the bullshitter’s sole concern is personal advancement and advantage to his or her agenda. Bullshit thus is a greater enemy of the truth than are lies.


This is a good read by Dave Weigel.

Naomi Wolf and the Search for American Fascism

An Al Gore consultant-turned-Ron Paul supporter accidentally becomes an ISIS truther.


“taken down”

Twitter posts or careers?