The Instigator
AngryHermit
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Ozymandias_King_of_Kings
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

Jews are Naturally Sneaky

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
Ozymandias_King_of_Kings
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/22/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,381 times Debate No: 38011
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (6)

 

AngryHermit

Pro

Hitler knew it and I know it. The jews are destroying America with their bankings!
Ozymandias_King_of_Kings

Con

I accept your debate.
Debate Round No. 1
AngryHermit

Pro

Stabbed in the back! Germany at the close of the first world war? Destroyed by the Jewish conspiracy. The brave man known as Adolf Hitler who tried to stop them? Killed by the Russian Jews and passed off as a suicide. The global financial crisis? A Jewish conspiracy to drive up the cost of their gold so that they could finally build their mind control devices.
Ozymandias_King_of_Kings

Con

While I could just not go into each of the statements that my opponent has made and state the has provided no arguments for how all people of the Jewish race are "sneaky", I will get to that later. For now I will break down each of the individual statements made and disprove them.

1 - "Stabbed in the back! Germany at the close of the first world war? Destroyed by the Jewish conspiracy."

This is not really expanded upon by the Pro position, so I will try to explain this to the viewers.

Taken From Wikipedia:

The stab-in-the-back myth is the notion, widely believed in right-wing circles in Germany after 1918, that the German Army did not lose World War I but was instead betrayed by the civilians on the home front, especially the republicans who overthrew the monarchy. Advocates denounced the German government leaders who signed the Armistice on November 11, 1918, as the "November Criminals."

When the Nazis came to power in 1933 they made the legend an integral part of their official history of the 1920s, portraying the Weimar Republic as the work of the "November criminals" who used the stab in the back to seize power while betraying the nation. The Nazi propaganda depicted Weimar as "a morass of corruption, degeneracy, national humiliation, ruthless persecution of the honest 'national opposition'"fourteen years of rule by Jews, Marxists, and 'cultural Bolsheviks', who had at last been swept away by the National Socialist movement under Adolf Hitler and the victory of the 'national revolution' of 1933".

Scholars inside and outside Germany unanimously reject the notion, pointing out the German army was out of reserves and was being overwhelmed in late 1918. To many Germans, the expression "stab in the back" was evocative of Richard Wagner's 1876 opera G"tterd"mmerung, in which Hagen murders his enemy Siegfried with a spear in his back.

As can be seen by this article, the "stab-in-the-back" myth is nothing more than early German right-wing propaganda, and should be treated as nothing more than a lie, unless the pro can give an exceptional amount of evidence to prove this conspiracy theory then it should be completely discarded.

2 - "The brave man known as Adolf Hitler who tried to stop them? Killed by the Russian Jews and passed off as a suicide."

I can find no articles that talk about this conspiracy theory, and for it to be taken seriously the Pro must prove this. And Adolf Hitler was not brave, he was a psychopath.

3 - "The global financial crisis? A Jewish conspiracy to drive up the cost of their gold so that they could finally build their mind control devices."

Again, no backing this claim up.

In Conclusion.

Unless my opponent can back up any of his claims, I have won this debate.

3 -
Debate Round No. 2
AngryHermit

Pro

Pertaining to the financial crisis.
The high-profile role played by Jews on Wall Street has never been a secret. Many of the wheelers and dealers responsible for shaping the current US financial system are Jewish, including former AIG CEO Hank Greenberg, former Citigroup CEO Sandy Weill, recently-retired Lehman Bros. CEO Richard Fuld, former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, former Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin, current Fed chairman Ben Bernanke,etc. One of the "weapons of mass destruction" described by the legendary investor Warren Buffet is the Credit Default Swap. Greenberg's AIG is the biggest purveyor of CDS. In spite of the warnings by Buffet in 2006, Greenspan and his successor Bernanke argued against regulating derivatives such as credit default swaps. Unregulated financial derivatives are now considered the biggest cause of the financial collapse.

Credit derivatives is one of the most successful innovations of financial engineering over the last ten years. The current active credit derivatives market has produced an array of new products. For example, credit-default swaps are an indicator of the cost of bond "insurance" that varies with the risk of bond default. Credit default swaps are privately traded derivative contracts usually bought by bond holders from CDS issuers like AIG, Ambac, FGIC, and MBIA and other entities. Like other derivatives, CDS are not regulated by government agencies. The CDS issuers are expected (not guaranteed or back-stopped by governments) to reimburse bondholders in case the bond issuing companies or governments default. A basis point on a credit-default swap contract protecting $10 million of debt from default for five years is equivalent to $1,000 a year. The buyers of CDS do not have to be bondholders. Any one can buy a CDS to bet on the probability of default by debt issuers. Many of these derivative contracts were bought to bet that the housing bubble would pop and many homeowners would default on their mortgages. That is exactly what happened this year. Once issued, the credit default swaps are bought and sold like any other contract. These derivative contracts have produced enormous profits for Wall Street firms in the last decade. But now the Fortune magazine calls these derivatives "a $55 trillion problem".

The world of finance is not unique in the dominant role played by Jews. Other businesses including media and entertainment and professions such as medicine, law and accounting have powerful Jewish presence. American Jews are disproportionately over-represented in the US Congress, the Senate and the Supreme Court as well. US policies in all spheres are heavily influenced by the Jewish minority in the United States. The exclusive club of Nobel laureates is dominated by its Jewish members, a testament to Jewish culture of hard work, commitment and achievement. Many significant levers of power are controlled by American Jews, a constant that does not change with election winners or losers in Washington. Both Obama and McCain teams boast of powerful Jews as key policy advisers on foreign affairs, finance and national security. Robert Rubin and Dennis Ross are advising Obama. Joe Lieberman is advising McCain.

When former President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan addressed a dinner meeting of the American Jewish Congress in September 2005, his Jewish audience were described as the American business, political and social elite.

When things go wrong in any of the major US businesses or institutions, people looking for scapegoats often blame influential Jews because of the large Jewish presence in each of them. The current financial crisis is no exception.

And perhaps germany hadn't been stabbed in the back, but the mere existence of the theory prove's the world's approval of the jewish sneak.
Ozymandias_King_of_Kings

Con

Since this is the final round I will go into detail about how my opponent has failed to even remotely defend his claim.

The topic in this debate is this: "Jews are Naturally Sneaky" not only has my opponent failed to cite any evidence of this claim, but he has barely given any conjecture to suggest such a claim. He has diverted to racism, conspiracy theory, and he has claimed that rich Jewish people are destroying Americas banking, but instead of debating this poorly explained argument, I will simply state that that does not mean that all Jewish people are that way, even if the claim you make is remotely true.

My opponent has delivered nothing in anyway to support any of the claims he has made and I would not be surprised if he fits in with the uneducated, slack-jawed crowd that is exhibited in such films as "American History X".

I ask the voters to vote Con, and to not reward the ignorant, racist, Hitler-supporting Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
Tulbakra

I know how easy it is to hate Pro... Obviously. But in NO debate do you votebomb out of solid hate of his opinion. I reported your vote, "I'm sorry, just no. Just shut up angryhermit." is not an appropriate RFD. Vote based on the arguments, not your emotions towards the argument, regardless of their stance.
Posted by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
Pro is clearly anti-atheist
Posted by TJTretman 4 years ago
TJTretman
What kind of stupidity is this?
Posted by Biochemistry92 4 years ago
Biochemistry92
In regards to the guy known as Angryhermit, yes Jews do own the banking interest.... Yes they do intend on taking over the world.... And yes the Jews have demolished that which is our economies for the sake of a few. But no this by no means is a natural quality, see what i did there ;0
Posted by Biochemistry92 4 years ago
Biochemistry92
In regards to the guy known as Angryhermit, yes Jews do own the banking interest.... Yes they do intend on taking over the world.... And yes the Jews have demolished that which is our economies for the sake of a few. But no this by no means is a natural quality, see what i did there ;0
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by 2-D 3 years ago
2-D
AngryHermitOzymandias_King_of_KingsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro plagiarized a racist rant that did not support his position. Thanks for the links airmax.
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
AngryHermitOzymandias_King_of_KingsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con clearly failed to prove any of his assertions.
Vote Placed by yay842 3 years ago
yay842
AngryHermitOzymandias_King_of_KingsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided no legit argument and no burden of proof.
Vote Placed by Lordgrae 3 years ago
Lordgrae
AngryHermitOzymandias_King_of_KingsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: I gave conduct to pro because he did not insult con. Regardless, spelling was tolerable on both sides but Con clearly had the better arguments. I lost a couple great 2nd cousins and my great great grandfather to the holocaust. F you.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 3 years ago
airmax1227
AngryHermitOzymandias_King_of_KingsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: The burden of proof here is naturally on Pro and since he failed to prove any of his assertions, argument points go to con. Con did a decent job refuting Pro's arguments in R2 (and provided a good explanation of the "Stabbed in the back myth") and pointing out that Pro needed to back up these arguments, which he did not. Pro seems to have entirely ignored Cons R2. Conduct points go to Con as Pro plagiarized his entire R3. Paragraphs 1, 3, 4 and 5 can be seen in this link: http://www.zimbio.com/Ben+Bernanke/articles/324/Jews+Responsible+Financial+Meltdown (Though it's unclear if this is the original source) Paragraph 2 can be seen at this link: http://southasiainvestor.blogspot.com/2008/10/credit-markets-bet-on-pakistan-deafault.html
Vote Placed by tylergraham95 4 years ago
tylergraham95
AngryHermitOzymandias_King_of_KingsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: First of all, AngryHermit is just being straight up anti-Semitic which I don't appreciate, but that is besides the point. Pro totally failed to carry the burden of proof, which con pointed out. Pro lacks understanding of Jewish culture and history regarding banking. Handling money was seen as the work of the lesser in medieval cultures, and since the Jews usually draw the short straw, they were forced into banking. Thus it was embedded in the Jewish culture.