The Strange Alternate Reality Inhabited by Dennis Marks (Re Obama "Freeing" Gitmo Terrorists)

The truth means absolutely nothing to Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks). If he doesn't like it he simply bends, twists and outright fabricates utter bullshit in order to slander those he dislikes. This time the alternate reality creating has to do with a campaign promise made by Barack Obama in regards to the prisoners being held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp...

Dennis Marks: Freeing the terrorists from "Gitmo" was one campaign promise I think it was good Obama dragged his feet on. (8/25/2014 AT 5:01pm)

First of all, President Obama never said a damn thing about freeing terrorists held at Gitmo. Obama said he would close Gitmo by transferring or releasing those being held there. Transfer those for whom we had evidence for bringing to trial (and then do that), and release those who were cleared for release. Cleared for release because we didn't have the evidence to try them. Or determined they were innocent, as many are.

Suggesting that Obama would actually want to free terrorists is slanderous bullshit. It's an implication that Obama sides with the terrorists. This from someone who SAYS he rejects conspiracy theories of the lunatic Right that say Obama is a Muslim and a "Manchurian candidate" in league with our enemies.

Secondly, Obama did not "drag his feet". This is another lie in which the delusional Dennis blames the President for Republican obstruction. PolitiFact confirms this...

For most of Obama's time in office, Congress has made closing the prison difficult through various pieces of legislation, including bans on sending prisoners to particular countries and tough requirements for the government to meet in order to transfer detainees from the prison. As a result, the prison stayed open, and progress towards closure ground to a halt. (PoltiFact 2/27/2014).

Although PolitiFact does say this is a "broken campaign promise" because they're measuring "outcomes and not intentions"... so they're also blaming Obama for Republican obstruction. As if candidates EVER qualify campaign promises by saying what they're talking about is only possible IF the other side cooperates. Non-idiots know that goes without saying.

But the idiot known as Dennis goes farther than blaming Obama for Republican obstruction, adding lies about him wanting to free terrorists. A "promise" made in order to secure the terrorist-coddling Leftist vote, Right Dennis? Gee, I wonder why Sarah Palin only criticized Obama for his "ties" to domestic terrorist Bill Ayres if he was actually promising to free Muslim terrorists (given the Islamophobia of the Right)?

What a dope Dennis is. And possibly an Islamophobe, which would not surprise me at all. I mean, Dennis does assume that everyone in Gitmo is guilty - without a trial - and should be kept locked up forever. Could this be because they're Muslim?

TADM #55

Vile Liar Dennis Marks On Those Who "Cheered Them On" (Them Being Hamas and ISIS)

As the readers of this blog know, Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) is an a-hole who loves to concoct viscious, vile and utterly ridiculous lies about those he hates. Here he lies about some Jewish people he hates "cheering" for terrorist organization Hamas as well as the jihadist group ISIS, which seeks to overthrow the government "democratically elected" after former preznit bush illegally invaded Iraq...

Dennis Marks: If humans became extinct, it could also be because groups like Hamas and ISIS ultimately became very successful, while those who should have known better ...ranging from Norm Finkelstein to Francis Boyle to WD ... cheered them on as they acted like a sort of political/military Ebola. (8/17/2014 AT 05:31:00 AM EDT).

And, as you see, he throws me into the mix as well. I'm also one of those who "cheer" for Hamas and ISIS. That is, along with two Jews that Dennis really hates. But this is the kind of vile crap one can expect when dealing with the anti-Semitic and racist scumbag known as Dennis; Black people are "racist" (with other Black people or Whites as their victims) and Jewish people are "anti-semites" (with their fellow Jews being the ones they wish to exterminate).

That is how I got labeled a "racist" by this dirtbag; it was due to my support for Affirmative Action, a program that discriminates against Whites, in Dennis' racist mind.

As for cheering on groups that hope to get their way through fear and murder, I think it goes without saying that I absolutely oppose such tactics (terrorism). But Dennis is a sick lying f*ck who ALWAYS resorts to vile (and nonsensical) lies when confronted with anyone who disagrees with his virulent stupidity.

In this case, my disagreement with Lester in regards to his Muslim bigotry... or I think this latest interjection (into a discussion that had nothing to do with terrorism) was prompted by me calling out Lester for bigotry that had him calling for Muslims to denounce their prophet... and for being "infested" with fleas and lice.

Or it could simply be more of the same, in that these vile lies from Dennis have been spewing from his dissembling maw for some time now (lies concerning me "praising" Stalin, being another example).

TADM #54. See also SWTD #269.

Dennisism #6: Neologism

The following is the definition of "neologism" according to the dictionary...

Dictionary.com, neologism: [1] a new word, meaning, usage, or phrase. [2] the introduction or use of new words or new senses of existing words. [3] a new doctrine, especially a new interpretation of sacred writings. [4] Psychiatry. a new word, often consisting of a combination of other words, that is understood only by the speaker: occurring most often in the speech of schizophrenics.

It is the 4th definition that applies to Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks). A Dennisism *is* a neologism, or a word that is only understood by the speaker (in this case, Dennis). But that is NOT how Dennis defines "neologism".

A while back I used the word "truthy" in a conversation with Dennis. Dennis objected to the word, declaring it to be created by Stephen Colbert, and therefore new and a "neologism".

But, as it turns out, Dennis was wrong, as I pointed out to him originally, the term "truthiness" existed before Stephen Colbert used it. In regards to "truthiness", Wikipedia notes the following...

Linguist and OED consultant Benjamin Zimmer pointed out that the word "truthiness" already had a history in literature and appears in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), as a derivation of truthy, and The Century Dictionary, both of which indicate it as rare or dialectal, and to be defined more straightforwardly as "truthfulness, faithfulness" (Source: Wikipedia/Truthiness.

Therefore "truthy" is not a new word because it has had a dictionary entry for quite some time. And, therefore, it is also not a "neologism".

So, when Dennis claimed that "I avoid trendy neologisms", he must have been talking about "new words" created or used by others (or words he incorrectly perceives to be new, even when they are not). I say this because he surely comes up with a LOT of his own. Specifically I refer to the neologisms of Dennis I have documented here (using the term "Dennisism").

But I didn't know until now that the schizoid was redefining neologism as a putdown that only applies when people use words he doesn't like in arguments against him. "Truthy", in the example previously cited. But Dennis thinks coming up with his own new words and redefinitions is just fine. Although, in regards to the redefinitions, I'm just about positive he does not even know he's doing it. He actually believes that the dictionary agrees with him!

However, in regards to these invented words - the ones based on "canard" that I covered in my last Dennisism installment - those he has got to know aren't real.

Or, maybe he does think they're real. Apparently his buddy Lester Nation does, because when I pointed out that "canardo" is not a real word, Lester responded with the American Heritage Dictionary definition for "canard".

And, in response to that, the delusional Dennis imagined a victory (Lester proving to me that "canard" is a word, when we were actually talking about "canardo"), and voiced his agreement with Lester's imagined victory... exchange as follows...

rAtional nAtion: American Heritage Dictionary: ca·nard: Top Home >Library >Literature & Language >Dictionary (kə-närd') pronunciation n. An unfounded or false, deliberately misleading story. A short winglike control surface projecting from the fuselage of an aircraft, such as a space shuttle, mounted forward of the main wing and serving as a horizontal stabilizer. An aircraft whose horizontal stabilizing surfaces are forward of the main wing. [French, duck, canard, probably from the phrase vendre un canard à moitié, to sell half a duck, to swindle, from Old French quanart, duck, from caner, to cackle, of imitative origin.] Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/canard#ixzz38Qcj71sQ Well Dervish, looks like there is a reality here you wish not revealed eh? :-) (7/24/2014 06:44:00 PM EDT). dmarks: Enlightening, RN. I expect a lot more self-righteous whining in reaction to this... (7/24/2014 07:34:00 PM EDT).

Obviously Dennis the dumb thinks Lester got the better of me with his response proving that canard is a word, even though I never said it wasn't. What I think we're actually dealing with here is a reality that Lester and Dennis "wish not revealed". Not even to themselves.

That reality? That they're both nuts. Enlightening? Not really, no. Those of us who aren't nuts realized this about Dennis and Lester long ago. This is nothing to whine about, however - self righteously or otherwise. It is simply a fact I have discerned by (perhaps foolishly) engaging these two in conversation.

TADM #53

Dennisism #5: Canard, Canardo, Canardish, Canarding, Canard-bait, El Canardo

This is the fifth installment that examines words or phrases that Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) has rewritten to serve his own purposes. See here for the first installment and here for the post in which I explain (in greater detail) what a "Dennisism" is.

In this case, the term "Canardo" originated with the blogger Lester Nation. (AKA "rAtional" nAtion uSA). This blogger is the one who originally came up with the term (in reference to yours truly). Or he was the first to use it in regards to me. He claims he read it elsewhere, but refuses to cite a source. (Note: see update below. The source has now been discovered).

None-the-less I am attributing "canardo" to Dennis, as he took Lester's creation and ran like the wind, making it his own, as well as coming up with MANY derivatives. Variations on the word such as "canardish", which is an adjective to describe something that has the characteristics of a lie or the quality of one who is a liar; "canarding", which is the act of lie telling; "canard-bait", which is a "truth" that might elicit lies from another; "El Canardo", which is an insult name you might call someone you're accusing of lying, and, finally, the term "frying up in canardo oil", which (I guess) would be the same as telling someone you caught them red-handed lying.

All these variants of the word "canard" - all to accuse ME of being a liar - which is ironic, given the fact that it is Dennis who lies (as documented on this blog)... and which is why I recently declared Dennis to be the King Canardo.

Given Dennis' status as the king of canards, it is quite LOL-able that he is always complaining about ME starting a "crap-fest" (which is another neologism Lester invented and and Dennis ran with). A "crap-fest" being back and forth insult-trading, as opposed to healthy constructive debate.

But, that one person works so hard to invent his own "canard"-based pseudo neologisms in order to call another person a liar; is that not crap-festing of the highest order? Anyway, what this points to, I think, is that Dennis is QUITE obsessed with lying. Falsely calling others on it when he's the the one who is actually guilty of it (in that he lies all the time).

(for the record "canarding" might not be a variant that Dennis actually used, as I could not find an example; which is why there is no link. I could swear I saw him use it somewhere, however. Possibly in a deleted comment. Dennis has a habit of deleting comments whenever he notices me linking to them).

6/19/2015 Update: rAtional nAtion said previously (in a 7/25/2014 comment)... "In was in that context that the word Canardo, picked up from another fine wordsmith and operator of another blog was used. ... RN did not create Canardo, I, the owner of RN, simply borrowed and used Canardo in the manner it was intended".

I did not, at the time, know who the hell he was referring to... so I ignored what he said. Only recently, whilst visiting the blog Who's Your Daddy, did I notice another blogger using "canardo" (another blogger beside Lester and Dennis). In fact, this other blogger used/uses it quite frequently. That blogger? FreeThinke (see here for one example of a Freethinke use of "canardo").

What is odd about rAtional borrowing this pseudo neologism is that, while rAtional compliments FreeThinke, FreeThinke hates rAtional's guts (here Freethinke refers to rAtional as "Nursie Pooh"... because RN, while standing for "rAtional nAtion" also is an abbreviation for "Registered Nurse").

Anyway, the mystery is now solved. rAtional, the dude who refers to FreeThinke fawningly as "another fine wordsmith", was originally coined by Freethinke (although he may have picked it up elsewhere). I will continue to refer to "canardo" as a "Dennisism", however, due to the many (and I'm talking MANY) variants Dennis came up with (on his own). Neither rAtional nor Freethinke have (to my knowledge) used any of these other variants.

TADM #52

In Regards to Deleted Comments by dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks)

Dissembling Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) is obviously upset by my truth-telling about him, as the dumbass often deletes his delusional comments whenever I link to them. Be it here or on other blogs, which I sometimes do when making a point in regards to him lying or saying something hypocritical (which is something that occurs quite frequently).

Obviously Dennis was so embarrassed when I highlight his nuttery (and/or hypocrisy and/or lying) that he has to remove his insane comments out of shame. That, or the paranoid nutter thinks he can claim I "lied" and he never authored the demented and or false comment.

Problem is, when this happens my links go to Dennis comments that say "this comment has been removed by the author". So, even if I save them and restore them after he deletes, or even if I link to the Google cached page, he can claim I "lied" (because Google cache pages are eventually updated with new information. They do not last forever).

That is the reason behind this commentary. I'm NOT going to stop linking to comments by Dennis which prove his his nuttery (and/or hypocrisy and/or lying) simply because he deletes them when I do. Because that is what he wants. He absolutely can not stand that I dare call him out on his nuttery (and/or hypocrisy and/or lying).

It's obviously driving him (even more) crazy. And so I shall continue to do it. And when he deletes I'll restore his comments when I feel it is appropriate. And link to this commentary to explain what is going on. That way, if anyone clicks on a link to a Dennis comment (provided by me in a comment or blog post), they'll know what's going on.

I did not lie, Dennis did. And he deletes to cover up his lies. Although he says he does it "for the amusement factor", but I know that is complete bullroar. In his mind, perhaps he does it "for the amusement factor", but unconsciously he does it to cover up his lies. Or the "amusement factor" is an outright lie and he knows it.

Although, one would think that if he believed what he wrote then why delete it? It does not look good no matter the excuse. It makes him look like a liar... which he is. And perhaps that is why I maintain this blog, because calling out scumbag liars provides amusement FOR ME... and has nothing AT ALL to do with delusions of Dennis that his deleting results in "whines and cries over [him] having done so".

By the way, Dennis, if you should read this... I take deletions as retractions. If you delete I will assume you are admitting what you wrote was wrong and, in deleting your comment, you are admitting this (you were wrong or you lied). Make any excuse you like (that you are deleting for the "amusement factor" or any other BS reason), I do not give a shit. A deletion is an ADMISSION that what you wrote was wrong (and/or a lie) and that you removed/retracted it FOR THAT REASON.

Which, I believe, is a completely rational and reasonable interpretation of such actions.

TADM #51

Dennis Marks: King Canardo & Old Bones Champion

Acorn-Style (Old Bone/Canard #1)

"Old Bones" is the term Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) likes to use when he wants no dissent to his tired old lies. For example, Dennis recently brought up the long-debunked nonsense concerning ACORN participating in "election theft".

Dennis Marks: [The Koch Brothers] haven't tried to suppress in real vote. But those who engage in and support election fraud (ACORN etc) are understandably defensive when people try to end their crimes. (7/12/2014 AT 04:10:00 PM EDT).

Dennis is referring to "crimes" that ACORN was cleared of by Congress.

The Seattle Times: The Congressional Research Service says in a new report that it couldn't find any instances in which people improperly registered to vote by the activist group known as ACORN showed up at the polls on Election Day. The report also found no instances in the past five years of the group misusing federal funds. Both houses of Congress voted to cut off money to the group after the release of videotapes showing employees advising two conservative activists posing as a pimp and prostitute. (Congressional report clears ACORN of voter fraud by Jonathan D. Salant, 12/24/2009).

After my comment disputing the Dennis' canard concerning the Koch's "ending of crimes" by a community organizing group that "filed for Chapter 7 liquidation on November 2, 2010, effectively closing the organization", Dennis responded with ad hominens and further canards...

Dennis Marks: I see WD is frying up old bones in canardo oil. In a kettle heated by his own pants-on-fire. I am not interested in a taste of this sordid brew. The record and facts on ACORNs voter fraud racket, and the Koch Bros' lack of any voter suppression are well established. (7/12/2014 AT 11:08:00 PM EDT).

Dennis was the one who brought up the "old bone" canard of ACORN being involved in "election theft", not I... yet this fool has the audacity to accuse me of "frying up old bones in canardo oil".

If anyone's pants are on fire, they are the pants of the lying Dennis. And, as we know the term "old bones" is an ad hominem Dennis brings up when someone calls him on his bringing up old topics and spinning his old canards in regards to them (TADM #49). Old canards he demands go unchallenged... because he can't handle the cognitive dissonance such challenging (with FACTS) produces in his addled brain.

Pro-Khmer Rouge Views (Old Bone/Canard #2)

And the exchange above is but one example of why Dennis is surely the King Canardo as well as the "old bones" champion. But that isn't the end of the "old bones" hypocrisy! A few hours prior to Dennis accusing me of "frying up old bones in canardo oil" he posts the following old lies on the blog of Willis Hart (in response to a blog post about yours truly titled "On the Assertion that Bowles-Simpson is a Conservative Plan").

Dennis Marks: Don't forget his defense of Noam Chomsky's pro-Khmer Rouge views. You left out one of the extremes. (7/12/2014 AT 3:30 PM). Dennis Marks: ...you can also remember WD's defense of Mao worshipper Van Jones..in which WD equated Maoism to ending police brutality. I did look it up, and police brutality under Mao was, by the numbers, worse than anything in history. (7/13/2014 AT 2:55 AM).

Note that the hypocrite submitted that first "old bone" to Willis' blog a few hours before he made the "frying up in canardo oil" comment, and the second one was submitted a few hours after.

As for the comment concerning "Noam Chomsky's pro-Khmer Rouge views", this is an old bone Dennis has been gnawing on for years... as this comment from 2012 shows...

Dennis Marks: Noam Chomsky is a real piece of work. I recently dug into his writings in which he revealed himself to be just about the only person in the civilized world who supported Pol Pot's "Killing Fields" genocide. (1/18/2012 AT 7:17am).

But Noam Chomsky never supported "Pol Pot's Killing Fields genocide". Michael Brull, writing for "The Drum", says "the boring truth about Chomsky [is that] he does not support Pol Pot". [What he did do was say] that the US had no right to invade a country on the other side of the planet to install its own preferred puppet government... (Source: The Drum website. "The Drum" is an Australian enterprise).

Chomsky, in other words, focused his criticism on HIS OWN government... because as a US citizen and journalist, it was more likely he could get his own government to listen than the Cambodian government to listen (BOTH governments were killing Cambodian citizens).

Both regimes were killing Cambodian citizens, but Chomsky felt that those who focused on the atrocities of Pol Pot were doing so in order to provide cover for OUR government's atrocities against the Cambodian people.

Between 1970 and 1973, during the Vietnam War, the United States bombed much of the countryside of Cambodia and manipulated Cambodian politics to support the rise of pro-West Lon Nol as the leader of Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge used the United States' actions to recruit followers and as an excuse for the brutal policies they exercised when in power. (Source: The Holocaust Museum Huston website).

This is why Chomsky is attacked by the Right (and these vile lies told about him)... because he had the audacity to speak against the US government's bombing of Cambodia (Nixon's Cambodian Campaign).

It was the United States bombing of Cambodia under then-president Nixon that gave rise to the Khmer Rouge and THAT is why the Right attacks and lies about Mr. Chomsky. Not because he ever supported Pol Pot, but because he spoke against our bombing of Cambodia.

To say that Chomsky supported genocide is a canard, and, in regards to Dennis bringing it up - and lying about my "defense of Noam Chomsky's pro-Khmer Rouge views" - it is an old bone that is a huge canard.

So I never defended Mr. Chomsky's "pro-Khmer Rouge views" - because HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY!! And for this reason (as well as the other canards and old bones discussed above) I crown Dennis Marks the king canardo and the old bones champion.

TADM #50. See also SWTD #266.

Dennisism #4: Old Bones

Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) frequently objects to discussing topics he deems to be "old bones". What he means by this is that, in his estimation, the topic at hand has previously been discussed, an impasse was reached, and therefore further discussion is pointless.

Or, that is what he would like you to believe. That way he can continuously refer to old topics, spew his lies about them, and go unchallenged. He'll lie about Russ Feingold being in favor of infanticide, for example... and if you call him on it by presenting him with the truth, Dennis pulls the "old bones" card (or canard).

He can lie, but nobody can call him on his lies. I mean, HOW DARE anyone call Dennis out for the liar that he is? "Old bones", in other words, is a deflectionary phrase that means "how dare you call me on my spewing of lies"?

In addition, as I previously revealed on this blog, "old bones" is a coping mechanism that allows Dennis to deal with the cognitive dissonance that hurts his head.

As per this prior example, Dennis lied about Russ Feingold, and when presented with the truth (Russ Feingold saying "once a child has been born, there is no conceivable argument that would suggest a woman's life or health would any longer be at risk or an issue") he simply continued to lie.

Then, when I pressed the issue, Dennis said "I hear the sound of old bones being knawed, and... this time, turn away".

Dennis turned away because his mind couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance his insisting Feingold wants to murder babies and this statement by Feingold caused.

"Dennisism", BTW, refers words or phrases that Dennis Marks has rewritten to serve his own purposes (see here for the post in which I explain in greater detail what a Dennisism is).

Here the "Dennisism" is his rewriting of "old bones" to mean [definition 1] "how dare you call me on my lies! I get to lie with impunity. If not, I shall whine about bogus old bones".

And, [definition 2] "how dare you cause me cognitive dissonance! I shall now distract from you revealing me to be a liar by calling your pointing to facts as old bones, thus eliminating the cognitive dissonance".

Is this not sad and pathetic? Obviously it is both. Unfortunately the proprietors on the blogs Dennis frequents support their delusional buddy due to them having cognitive dissonance issues of their own.

TADM #49