I rarely look at Twitter, but I glanced at the Twitter app on my phone as I made a rare personal tweet supporting the waffle I was eating at Waffle House. There I saw a post directed @DrConspiracy from none other than Ron Polland, the person behind one of the first two birther document examiner Internet characters who concluded that Obama’s short form was a forgery back in 2008.
Polland, who has a doctorate in instructional media, made a couple of YouTube videos claiming all sorts of criminality at the Hawaii Department of Health, but I have not really noticed him in years. The tweet that came my way wasn’t interesting, and I think I must have gotten it by being added earlier in the conversation (which I have not been able to decipher). Of more note was a comment from Polland, not directed to me:
Obama committed SABOTAGE & ESPIONAGE against Israel & Democrats bitched over Bibi’s talk?
Polland is an ardent supporter of Israel and comments by him over the years suggest that he also believes Obama is bad for Israel. Did this combination lead Polland to become a birther? The historical record doesn’t answer that question, but we can see similar birtherism in others who believe Obama is bad for Israel, such as Orly Taitz who daily attacks all things Muslim, and claims Obama is one of them. Here we have the “chicken and egg” question. Did Polland’s belief lead him to become a birther? Did Orly Taitz hatred of Muslims lead her to become a birther? I think the answer is yes, at least for Polland.
The early publication of birth certificate forgery claims came via the Israel Insider web site (the site is no longer active). Here is a sample of their friendly reporting of anti-Obama claims:
Meanwhile, yet another front as opened up as a strong attack video shows Obama in 2006 mocking the Bible — Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and the Sermon on the Mount — and argues that Obama himself is an alien to the Judeo-Christian tradition — that his speech reveals him, not just the Reverend Wright, as anti-Jewish and anti-Christ. Islam, not surprisingly, is spared his mockery.
The Israel Science and Technology web site carried claims that Obama’s long form was a forgery, along with expressing a views antithetical to Obama’s more balanced approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict, for example:
Is improving economic conditions for Palestinian Arabs conducive to peace?
No, the opposite is true! A landmark study on the subject indicates that the prerequisite for Peace-seeking is not better economic conditions but rather democratic forms of government. Since most Arab countries are far removed from multi-party democracy (see table above), the conditions are not ripe for overall peace in the Middle East. The study concludes that "making inherently aggressive dictatorships of the region more prosperous will not make them more pacific only more powerful" and more willing to pursue armed violence (see article). This is true not only for conflict with Israel but for Intra-Arab conflicts as well (see most recent examples of Iran-Iraq war, Gulf War, etc.).
I confess that I am not expert enough to spot subtle spin on this issue, but I get the impression that the site is trying to sound balanced, while not being so.
I think someone needs a little push to start believing in nonsense, some sort of bias. A person who is strongly pro-Israel and believes Obama is bad for Israel, might just have that push.