|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:29 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| RufusW wrote: |
| The book vistiorq sourced has Obama on the cover next to Mussolini in the same pose.... ah... now I understand you visitorq. |
No you don't. I doubt you even read books. |
About a month ago, you dismissed a post of mine, claiming that I was blindly appealing to authority by quoting Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Niall Ferguson. I would now turn that objection on you, except that Webster Tarpley has NO AUTHORITY for you to appeal to. He is not a serious source. Anyone who doubts this, go play on google for a bit.
And anyway, Webster Tarpley's "description of how Jimmy Carter was selected by a group of bankers to become the president of the United States with their decisive financial support" is just not convincing. I get that the trilateral commission exists and that it has influence. I get that the Rockefellers and Brzezinskis of the world use it to draw together politicians and academics on the make to serve their interests in government and out. What I don't get is how such a group selects people to become president and then renders them mere puppets. |
Yeah, you've got nothing. That's all. |
you make me nostalgic for IGTG. |
Never heard of it.
Anyway, some people on here are so daft on here that you can cite a source, containing a DIRECT QUOTE from the actual people being discussed (in this case, Zbigniew Brzezinski, founding member of the Trilateral Commission, discussing his support for Carter) and they'll still go and call the SECONDARY SOURCE (in this case, Tarpley) "unreliable".
There's really nothing for such people, except to write them off as hopeless. |
But Brzezinski says absolutely nothing which would lead us to the conclusion that Tarpley wants us to make: that Carter was a puppet. Absolutely nothing!
Last edited by ubermenzch on Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:36 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| RufusW wrote: |
| The book vistiorq sourced has Obama on the cover next to Mussolini in the same pose.... ah... now I understand you visitorq. |
No you don't. I doubt you even read books. |
About a month ago, you dismissed a post of mine, claiming that I was blindly appealing to authority by quoting Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Niall Ferguson. I would now turn that objection on you, except that Webster Tarpley has NO AUTHORITY for you to appeal to. He is not a serious source. Anyone who doubts this, go play on google for a bit.
And anyway, Webster Tarpley's "description of how Jimmy Carter was selected by a group of bankers to become the president of the United States with their decisive financial support" is just not convincing. I get that the trilateral commission exists and that it has influence. I get that the Rockefellers and Brzezinskis of the world use it to draw together politicians and academics on the make to serve their interests in government and out. What I don't get is how such a group selects people to become president and then renders them mere puppets. |
Yeah, you've got nothing. That's all. |
You claimed he was a puppet. As evidence you supply us with the work of Webster Tarpley. I have nothing? |
As evidence I supplied you with a source containing a very accurate argument based on the facts, and including direct quotes from Brzezinski himself.
That's right, you've got nothing. Nothing at all. Hopefully this will change if you actually try reading sometime... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| But Brzezinski says absolutely nothing which would lead us to the conclusion that Tarpley wants us to make: that Carter was a puppet. Absolutely nothing! |
Just forget it... I can't reduce these things down to comic book form in order for you to get it. Sorry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| But Brzezinski says absolutely nothing which would lead us to the conclusion that Tarpley wants us to make: that Carter was a puppet. Absolutely nothing! |
Just forget it... I can't reduce these things down to comic book form in order for you to get it. Sorry. |
Oh that's fine. I found Tarpley's crayola scribblings simple enough to grasp, just transparently silly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Summary:
Ubermenzch, erroneously thinking he was being pretty clever, spouted off:
"YAY!! More silliness from the dean of silly! I'd like to hear how Carter was a puppet. I bet it involves that charming Rockefeller and this New World Order thingy, or maybe that dastardly United Nations! Do tell us visitorq!"
I then went on to cite a source, including a DIRECT QUOTE from Zbigniew Brzezinski (long-time and close friend with David Rockefeller, and co-founder with him of the Trilateral Commission) discussing his role in advising and supporting Carter, even before he was elected, supporting him in the media, and ultimately acting as his chief foreign policy adviser from 1975 on.
Ubermenzch : 0
Me: 1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ubermenzch began the descent of this thread into ad hominems when he wrote: |
| YAY!! More silliness from the dean of silly! I'd like to hear how Carter was a puppet. I bet it involves that charming Rockefeller and this New World Order thingy, or maybe that dastardly United Nations! Do tell us visitorq! |
As any high school debater knows, if you can get your opponent to attack you instead of your argument, you've won the debate.
Ubermenzch, in the past you have not exactly been the greatest judge of credibility. So why don't you tell us, just how do you decide if something is credible?
Edited for error in quote. Sorry!
Last edited by bacasper on Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Ubermenzch began the descent of this thread into ad hominems when he wrote: |
| But Brzezinski says absolutely nothing which would lead us to the conclusion that Tarpley wants us to make: that Carter was a puppet. Absolutely nothing! |
As any high school debater knows, if you can get your opponent to attack you instead of your argument, you've won the debate.
Ubermenzch, in the past you have not exactly been the greatest judge of credibility. So why don't you tell us, just how do you decide if something is credible? |
This coming from Bacasper. Hilarious!
I read over the link visitorq kindly supplied, and found nothing that Brzezinski said supported visitorq's representation of Carter as a puppet. Visitorq would now all like us to forget that he ever used this word, but it was what caused our disagreement in the first place. Visitorq now wants to make it appear that I deny that Brzezinski had a "role in advising and supporting Carter, even before he was elected, supporting him in the media, and ultimately acting as his chief foreign policy adviser from 1975 on." I don't deny this at all. It's all perfectly true. But how does this prove Carter to have been a puppet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
This coming from Bacasper. Hilarious! |
Damn, that has got to be the fastest I ever won a debate! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| ubermenzch wrote: |
This coming from Bacasper. Hilarious! |
Damn, that has got to be the fastest I ever won a debate! |
I admit defeat, dear Bacasper. You proved to be my better.
But as for visitorq...
Last edited by ubermenzch on Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| ubermenzch wrote: |
This coming from Bacasper. Hilarious! |
Damn, that has got to be the fastest I ever won a debate! |
I admit defeat, dear Bacasper. You proved to be the my better.
But as for visitorq... |
I erred in my quote above. I fixed it now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| I erred in my quote above. I fixed it now. |
Makes no difference. Only further serves to remind us of the original disagreement, over the use of the word puppet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I will not read this thread in its entirety. I imagine a collection of the usual diatribes, ignorant allegations, etc.
For a good look at the J. Carter administration, see the relevant sections in R. Gates's memoirs as well as R. Pastor's Not Condemned to Repitition. Conservatives gave Carter a bad rap and it seems to have stuck. If professionals such as Gates, not to mention Moscow at the time, can respect Carter and praise his intelligence, that is enough for me.
On the other hand, I completely disagree with him on "Apartheid in Palestine" and on this latest caper. For if assaulting a sitting president with hyperbolic discourse, as well as comparing him to the Nazis and calling him "a liar" conclusively indicates racism, then all the W. Bush haters are racists, too. And I do not think they are racists.
Hotheads unite. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
For if assaulting a sitting president with hyperbolic discourse, as well as comparing him to the Nazis and calling him "a liar" conclusively indicates racism, then all the W. Bush haters are racists, too. And I do not think they are racists.
Hotheads unite. |
I'd agree with you if it stopped at Nazi and communist. (How a guy can be both at the same time still confuses me...) However, there are lots of people adding racial elements. Especially the leaders of these movements. You got this guy who refers to Obama as an Indonesian muslim
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200909150021
You got Glenn Beck heading up the 9-12 project who already called Obama a racist and claimed the president hates white people (I am sure you have seen it so I won't look it up. If you haven't I can find it for you)
Then you have Limbaugh talking about Obama's America when talking about the recent school bus beating of a white kid. What, if anything, it has to do with Obama and his policy's I don't know but Limbaugh's response strikes me a good example of race baiting.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200909150017
These are the leaders of this movement, not just fringe guys with signs but people with websites, tv shows, and radio shows that have millions of followers. I didn't want to believe all this outrage was at all racially motivated but I am quickly starting to have second thoughts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You know, it is an interesting phenomenon, Shifter2009.
Bernard Lewis cites this and that violent radical Islamic incident and paints all of the Arab Middle East with that brush. People shrilly allege "essentialism!" "reductionism!" "he merely wants to show them in a negative light!"
Comes now Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh saying this and that. And this represents all of Barack Obama's opposition...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
You know, it is an interesting phenomenon, Shifter2009.
Bernard Lewis cites this and that violent radical Islamic incident and paints all of the Arab Middle East with that brush. People shrilly allege "essentialism!" "reductionism!" "he merely wants to show them in a negative light!"
Comes now Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh saying this and that. And this represents all of Barack Obama's opposition...? |
No, that certainly is not the case. I think there are plenty of conservatives out there who oppose the president strictly on policy. John McCain comes to mind. What I am concerned with is these voices forcing otherwise moderate republicans in congress and else where to take more radical stances. Not only that, they embolden the elements that are already radical. Yell "You lie!" at the President and get a million in campaign donations and t-shirts with your name on um. ( I am aware that the opposition candidate also got a swell in campaign funding as well.) It's be great and politically suicidal for the moderates in the right to call these guys out for this stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
