Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
:We could try to get some Jews mad at this article. In my experience, the best sign of a balanced article is drawing fire from both sides. --[[User:Kizor|Kiz]]<font color="black">[[Special:Contributions/Kizor|o]]</font><font color="green">[[User_talk:Kizor|r]]</font> 16:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC) |
:We could try to get some Jews mad at this article. In my experience, the best sign of a balanced article is drawing fire from both sides. --[[User:Kizor|Kiz]]<font color="black">[[Special:Contributions/Kizor|o]]</font><font color="green">[[User_talk:Kizor|r]]</font> 16:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
''"zog is not necessarily an antisemitic theory"''.... erm, with all due respect, LOLLLLLL. [[User:Hairhorn|Hairhorn]] ([[User talk:Hairhorn|talk]]) 01:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC) |
''"zog is not necessarily an antisemitic theory"''.... erm, with all due respect, LOLLLLLL. [[User:Hairhorn|Hairhorn]] ([[User talk:Hairhorn|talk]]) 01:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC) |
||
Actually Zog is not necessarily an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory. One can not the heavy influence the Zionist Movement has on Western Governments without hating Jews. In fact this article in it's 3rd paragraph: ''"As the conspiracy theorists chiefly name countries outside that area, the usage of Zionist in this context is misleading, and intended to portray Jews as conspirators who aim to control the world, "'' makes a big mistake in saying because the areas are outside [Israel] they don't mean Zionists they mean Jews. This is absolute nonsense as Zionists can exist out side of Israel and indeed most of them done. This article terrible and needs rewording to remove the imbalance. [[User:Vexorg|Vexorg]] ([[User talk:Vexorg|talk]]) 19:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:07, 21 October 2009
![]() | Religion: Interfaith Unassessed | ||||||||||||
|
![]() | Jewish history Unassessed | |||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 45 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
anyone ever hear of gaza? current events —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.8.37 (talk) 23:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- There is a marked difference between a paranoid antisemitic conspiracy theory that states that teh j00 b@nk0rz secretly control western states from within and the actual occupation conducted by the state of Israel.
24.47.154.230 (talk) 04:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- One might well say the same thing about your use of diminutive text. But then it's a matter of style, isn't it? A little flourish meant to convey tone. Ah! You see what I did there? But then, I'm sure that anyone having difficulty with my little stylistic flourish will be able twig the meaning of the phrase from the sentence that surrounds it. Nevertheless, we thank you for your vigilance! 24.47.154.230 (talk) 20:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
what precisely makes a conspiracy theory "antisemetic"?
- Generally the people who invent the antisemitic conspiracy theory. It's funny that way. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Also, the content of the theory itself. If it is a bizarrely contrived one that attempts to place teh 3vi1 j00 b@nk0rz at the head of a worldwide cabal, then it is most likely an antisemitic conspiracy theory. 24.47.154.230 (talk) 20:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy
The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy is an academic book about Zionist influence in American politics. Has this book ever been cited by proponents of the ZOG theory ? It would appear that the book merely says what some of the ZOG people have been talking about, but in a more intelligent and acceptable way. ADM (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes and no. Since they are focussed on Israel, their point is, as far as I know, that support for Israel is kept up against US interest, which is not necessarily the case. To which extent they are actually arguing of a conspiracy effectively controlling the government, I do not know. Some closeness in argument may be given, but the appropriation of their thesis for support of ZOG seems a bit far-fetched.
Also: as is to be expected, there are constant attempts at deleting references to the antisemitic and neo-nazi character of the ZOG-'theory'. Can anything be done about that, other than repeated reversions? Is this what WP-people call edit-war? 92.76.116.148 (talk) 18:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- Nah. It's just vandalism, so we keep an eye on the article and fix it when someone messes it up. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 21:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
zog is not necessarily an antisemitic theory201.218.76.109 (talk) 00:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I would disagree. 78.48.177.208 (talk) 06:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
This is probably the most unbalanced article in this entire site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.84.234 (talk) 21:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, the entry about the Nazis is pretty unbalanced too. I mean, it even mentions that Hitler was a Nazi. I call Godwin's law! 24.47.154.230 (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- We could try to get some Jews mad at this article. In my experience, the best sign of a balanced article is drawing fire from both sides. --Kizor 16:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
"zog is not necessarily an antisemitic theory".... erm, with all due respect, LOLLLLLL. Hairhorn (talk) 01:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually Zog is not necessarily an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory. One can not the heavy influence the Zionist Movement has on Western Governments without hating Jews. In fact this article in it's 3rd paragraph: "As the conspiracy theorists chiefly name countries outside that area, the usage of Zionist in this context is misleading, and intended to portray Jews as conspirators who aim to control the world, " makes a big mistake in saying because the areas are outside [Israel] they don't mean Zionists they mean Jews. This is absolute nonsense as Zionists can exist out side of Israel and indeed most of them done. This article terrible and needs rewording to remove the imbalance. Vexorg (talk) 19:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)