[Rhadamanthus]

(Original post by ak137)
Well duh, its logic. And lol @ you saying Zionist = Jew. Looooooool.

Please quote me saying that a Zionist is the same thing as a Jew.

[Rhadamanthus]

(Original post by Dog4444)
The simplest one: how the FED was created?

I hope you're trolling.

Through the Federal Reserve Act, passed by the very Jewish president Woodrow Shlomo Wilson.

[ANARCHY__]

(Original post by Rhadamanthus)
Ah, no, I don't. I think using the canard of 'Zionist control' is a very easy way to cover up what is actually a deeper hostility towards Jews or a sense of the conspiratorial. So for people like him, a Jew in Congress is probably in cahoots with AIPAC and the Christian right, because this is the easiest way to explain pro-Israel attitudes - it's not the American people who want their government to support Israel, it's the secret dual-loyalty Zionists pulling the strings (a metaphor that has appeared very often through history with not so appealing consequences).

Thanks for the vote of sanity.

(Original post by Dog4444)
The simplest one: how the FED was created?

I hope you're trolling.

Well, I'm the one asking the questions here. That's why I was asking for the evidence. You tell me how the FED was created.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by ak137)
Well duh, its logic. And lol @ you saying Zionist = Jew. Looooooool.

Correct, but to be more precise it's called a logical fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

[ak137]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
Correct, but to be more precise it's called a logical fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

The irony of you citing me wikipedia. Could you be any more of a joke?

Go on, surprise me.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by ak137)
The irony of you citing me wikipedia. Could you be any more of a joke?

Go on, surprise me.

[Rhadamanthus]

(Original post by ak137)
The irony of you citing me wikipedia. Could you be any more of a joke?

Go on, surprise me.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#GuiltbyAssociation

A good enough source? Also, there is nothing wrong with Wikipedia provided the statements are properly sourced. The association fallacy is well known amongst people who know how to structure proper arguments and not resort to logical fallacies.

[ak137]

(Original post by Rhadamanthus)
http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#GuiltbyAssociation

A good enough source? Also, there is nothing wrong with Wikipedia provided the statements are properly sourced. The association fallacy is well known amongst people who know how to structure proper arguments and not resort to logical fallacies.

Ofc there isnt. A-M was the person saying there was, hence why his posts in here are a joke.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by ak137)
Ofc there isnt. A-M was the person saying there was, hence why his posts in here are a joke.

Where? When I said "a little wikipedia" I meant that as in you don't study **** in-depth rather you merely take a simplistic outlook which is what wikipedia does. It only gives you outlines. I'm not calling it false knowledge rather small knowledge.

[ak137]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
Where? When I said "a little wikipedia" I meant that as in you don't study **** in-depth rather you merely take a simplistic outlook which is what wikipedia does. It only gives you outlines. I'm not calling it false knowledge rather small knowledge.

In the rap thread mate. No point in trying to worm out of this one. I suggest you put up your feet and watch your favourite channel, PressTV.

[Spaz Man]

(Original post by rawkus)
You realise that this sort of language is why most people believe those who don't follow the official narrative on issues such as Syria are Alex Jones-esque conspirary nuts. With such liberal use of wild accusations that you cannot back up, you are effectively destroying the credibillity as well of all those who think intervention in Syria is for geopolitical and not humanitarian reasons.

I think we all know that AIPAC has a stranglehold on American foreign policy. Anyone who thinks otherwise is very naive.

[Rhadamanthus]

(Original post by Spaz Man)
I think we all know that AIPAC has a stranglehold on American foreign policy. Anyone who thinks otherwise is very naive.

A very simplistic view. Israel consumes more attention than other countries, but it is not the sole focus of American foreign policy. The American government deals with a majority of the world's countries, notably China in its current economic boom and also the powerful constituent nations of the EU. The USA does not spend all its time focusing on Israel, and Israel is the only aspect of American foreign policy that AIPAC have influence on. So when you say that the have a 'stranglehold on American foreign policy' you don't really mean that AIPAC control the American government's relations with Latin American countries or their dealings with the Chinese, do you?

[Spaz Man]

(Original post by Rhadamanthus)
A very simplistic view. Israel consumes more attention than other countries, but it is not the sole focus of American foreign policy. The American government deals with a majority of the world's countries, notably China in its current economic boom and also the powerful constituent nations of the EU. The USA does not spend all its time focusing on Israel, and Israel is the only aspect of American foreign policy that AIPAC have influence on. So when you say that the have a 'stranglehold on American foreign policy' you don't really mean that AIPAC control the American government's relations with Latin American countries or their dealings with the Chinese, do you?

I meant Middle East and North and East African foreign policy of course.

Israel does advise the U.S on many other theatres simultaneously.

[ANARCHY__]

(Original post by Spaz Man)
I meant Middle East and North and East African foreign policy of course.

Israel does advise the U.S on many other theatres simultaneously.

Have you got any evidence for this?

[Martyn*]

(Original post by ANARCHY__)
Cool thanks.



What I'm saying is, they'd have to do that deliberately for them to control the nation. Where is the evidence for this?




*Do you agree with his viewpoint that America is controlled by Jews/Zionists?

You don't understand the nature of Lobbying and the experience of American history. The Israeli Lobby in the US is powerful, as almost every US politican can testify. Not only that, but America and Israel share cultural similarities, including their veneration for the Jewish Bible and fraternity. America swears to protect Israel, and Israel has made America into the new Jerusalem. It is a fact that almost all of the American media (newspapers and magazines) and film industry (i.e., Hollywood, Mayer, Disney) is monopolised by Jews, as are some of the most powerful banks in the world, including Goldman Sacchs, J P Morgan, Chase, and the Federal Reserve. Some of the most savvy economists of the western world are Jews - I've lost count how many times I've seen them invited to talk on the BBC, Sky News, and many American news channels. And they do seem to have a much more broader knowledge of economies work. Two Jewish economists, for example, were invited to discuss the reasons behind the banking collapse and the state of the future world economy...I think it might have been Channel 4.

For those cretins who believe that pointing out this information is some kind of pretext for some masked anti-Semitism would do well to check the facts for themselves. Criticising an ethnic group, or an elite who happen to be part of an ethnic group that monopolises and controls and exerts such immense influence, is not being racist at all. It is not about race, it's about identifying the perpetrators who monopolise culture and subvert it to their own ends. I'm not saying that the Jewish influence is wholly malign either.

[Rhadamanthus]

(Original post by ANARCHY__)
Have you got any evidence for this?

He'll probably cite the unscholarly Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy. (The full version of Benny Morris' critique now requires a subscription, sadly, but the jist of it can be gathered from the link.)

[Martyn*]

(Original post by Rhadamanthus)
A very simplistic view. Israel consumes more attention than other countries, but it is not the sole focus of American foreign policy. The American government deals with a majority of the world's countries, notably China in its current economic boom and also the powerful constituent nations of the EU. The USA does not spend all its time focusing on Israel, and Israel is the only aspect of American foreign policy that AIPAC have influence on. So when you say that the have a 'stranglehold on American foreign policy' you don't really mean that AIPAC control the American government's relations with Latin American countries or their dealings with the Chinese, do you?

AIPAC also influence US foreign policy over Iraq and Iran. Basically, it is Middle East (including Syria) foreign policy where AIPAC exercise their influence. Bringing China into the argument - why?

[ANARCHY__]

(Original post by Martyn*)
You don't understand the nature of Lobbying and the experience of American history. The Israeli Lobby in the US is powerful, as almost every US politican can testify. Not only that, but America and Israel share cultural similarities, including their veneration for the Jewish Bible and fraternity. America swears to protect Israel, and Israel has made America into the new Jerusalem. It is a fact that almost all of the American media (newspapers and magazines) and film industry (i.e., Hollywood, Mayer, Disney) is monopolised by Jews, as are some of the most powerful banks in the world, including Goldman Sacchs, J P Morgan, Chase, and the Federal Reserve. Some of the most savvy economists of the western world are Jews - I've lost count how many times I've seen them invited to talk on the BBC, Sky News, and many American news channels. And they do seem to have a much more broader knowledge of economies work. Two Jewish economists, for example, were invited to discuss the reasons behind the banking collapse and the state of the future world economy...I think it might have been Channel 4.

For those cretins who believe that pointing out this information is some kind of pretext for some masked anti-Semitism would do well to check the facts for themselves. Criticising an ethnic group, or an elite who happen to be part of an ethnic group that monopolises and controls and exerts such immense influence, is not being racist at all. It is not about race, it's about identifying the perpetrators who monopolise culture and subvert it to their own ends. I'm not saying that the Jewish influence is wholly malign either.

I wasn't joking when I asked for evidence.

(Original post by Rhadamanthus)
He'll probably cite the unscholarly Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy. (The full version of Benny Morris' critique now requires a subscription, sadly, but the jist of it can be gathered from the link.)

Thanks. I'll take a look at the abstract or whatever's there. I wouldn't expect much more from the above poster who has yet to provide me any evidence whatsoever.

[Rhadamanthus]

(Original post by Martyn*)
AIPAC also influence US foreign policy over Iraq and Iran. Basically, it is Middle East (including Syria) foreign policy where AIPAC exercise their influence. Bringing China into the argument - why?

Because he said 'American foreign policy', i.e. referring to it as a whole. This obviously includes China.

[Spaz Man]

(Original post by ANARCHY__)
Have you got any evidence for this?

AIPAC is a 100,000-member grassroots movement of activists committed to ensuring Israel’s security and protecting American interests in the Middle East and around the world. - Official website

facilitating U.S.-Israel exchanges of expertise and equipment for homeland security, defense and counterterrorism to collaborating on technology, science and agricultural products, AIPAC is there to encourage the close working relationship between the countries. - Official website