Rynar wrote:
DE:
First, you've distorted everything I've just said. I never said you made "only one valid argument", I said it was the first, and that I'm content to address them all in order of relevance to my position.
I made other perfectly valid arguments before that, which indicates you thought it was the only one. Nothing else I've said has been a distortion.
Quote:
But, given that you'd rather have a TL;DR than a conversation, and have accused me of engaging in intellectual dishonesty, I have to believe that you aren't interested in a discussion, but instead are simply looking for another pulpit from which to scream. I won't give it to you. If you'd like to talk like a grown-up, I'll be right over here. If anyone else is interested, I'm more than happy to have the discussion with them instead.
I have not in any way accused you of intellectual dishonesty, at least not of the intentional sort. I think you are subconciously adjusting your position in order to avoid addressing problems with it, which was signified by your outrageous claim that the United States (or it's government) is a multinational corporation. This is a truely extraordinary claim on your part and requires that you present considerable evidence to back it up - an obligation not satisfied by asking me to answer questions that are obtuse at best.
Second, you have asserted that unspecified multinational corporations have engaged in unspecified "wars" to profit from them. Seeing as you then claimed the U.S. was one of these and the only wars the U.S. has recently engaged in have been Iraq and Afghanistan which have hardly been profitable for the nation at large this also is an extraordinary claim not satisfied by asking me to answer obtuse questions regarding the capitalization of the title of the Constitution.
Third, you have asserted that the "central banks" have not only a high degree of control over their respective economies but have highly precise controls over individual economies, allowing them to specifically target enemies with financial ruin and specifically benefit allies simply by control of the money supply. This is the most extraordinary claim of all; that a blunt instrument allows such precise targeting even in the face of A) the need to avoid public notice B) the need to avoid press notice, C) the need to avoid the notice of the government itself; i.e. to avoid behaving in such a way that the government has no choice but to act D) the aforementioned need to create precise financial effects. Essentially you have argued that a flamethrower can be used as a blowtorch or soldering iron, and that this can be done without anyone noticing that you have set a house on fire trying to sweat some pipe joints. This is not even going into the problems of differing central banks having different aims, and of course the fact that the people running the central banks have to actually live in these countries themselves, and are not cartoon-evil masterminds mad for financial power at all costs. They are real human beings. The problems with this assertion are so myriad as to defy enumeration, and you face a monumental burden of proof here.
By refusing to answer your questions I am hardly demanding a "pulpit from which to scream". The fact that you can even begin to assert that shows just how departed from reality you are on this issue. In point of fact, what's going on is that you have certain ideas to which you have simply gotten married, and you are not willing to entertain discussion in which their problems are actually addressed. This is why you want to play the "Rynar asks questions and DE answers" game; because you know it allows you to control the course of discussion and avoid true examination of your ideas.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
