How's this for a Conspiracy Theory?

Jeffrey Goldberg is a moron. This is the guy who wrote the now infamous New Yorker article claiming that Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons and was getting ready to use them against the US (baloney). He also claimed that Saddam was in league with al Qaeda (Saddam despised al Qaeda and would have nothing to do with Osama bin Laden), and he urged GW Bush to attack Iraq. Which, of course, Bush did.
And we all know what a great idea that was.

I thought you told Mike you wouldn't be usng that New York Post as a source anymore, Bob.  Have you been forgetting to take your Ginkgo biloba?

He cited several facts. These facts can be checked. Are the facts he cited false?

Bob

Yes, the reports are basically correct. But the accusation is also basically true. Stewart has been cooperating with the State Department to direct a pro-Israel/anti-Iran propaganda film. Goldberg wants to dismiss it as a preposterous conspiracy.

Amr did misquote Stewart, but he did not claim that Stewart was trying to take over Egypt. What he said was that there are forces (the US State Department and the Israeli Government) trying to undermine Egypt and bring about an insurrection of sorts, and that one of the people involved in this subversion is Jon Stewart. He's quite correct.

Well, it's easy to make a joke of something. The point is you posted an article by a well-known propagandist (in fact that article was obviously commissioned by the Pentagon). Are you saying that the US State Department and Israeli Mossad weren't actively involved the revolution in Egypt? Or are you saying that Jon Stewart hasn't, and isn't, cooperating with these agencies?

No one has to do anything, Bob. One can just express their opinion and you can like it or not.  What you might want to think about is being grateful that anyone posts on the politics board or FACTS itself at all. Maybe say thanks once in a while instead of sounding so arrogant. 

Was there a politics board at the very beginning? Nevertheless. NO ONE HAS DO ANYTHING. Do you understand that or not? You can disagree with an opinion or position all you want, but NO ONE HAS TO DO ANYTHING!!! 

But you are the one making the claim in this case, Bob. You claimed - or at least agreed with the claim - that Amr Ammar's comments added up to the "Most Convoluted Conspiracy Theory to Emerge from the Egyptian Fever Swamp". You posted a link to an article which quoted *selected bits* of a TV interview given by Ammar. The clear aim of the article was to ridicule and discredit him. In other words, you reposted State Department propaganda.
A quick Google search showed me that the same article had appeared simultaneously on hundreds of websites, carried by multiple press agencies - the kind of reach and coordination that is the hallmarks of State Department propaganda. The fact that the article carried the byline of Jeffrey Goldberg, one of the "journalists" who cooperated with the Bush administration in promoting the falsehood that Iraq had WMDs and was planning to attack the US, nails it as a piece of anti-Iranian propaganda.

So. What Ammar was actually saying was that Jon Steward is part of a State Department plan to influence or stage-manage the outcome of events in Egypt (and other ME countries) in a way that protects Israel's interests. And of course this is true.

Ammar misquoted Steward, but the main thrust of his comments were correct. Ammar was also aware that Stewart had agreed to cooperate with the State Department by directing an anti-Iran movie called Rosewater. www.imdb.com/title/tt2752688/

Like the previous two propaganda films (Argon, which set out to demonize the Iranian government and the Iranian people in order to garner support from the American public for a US/Israeli attack on Iran, and Zero Dark Thirty, a propaganda film designed to elicit support for the use of torture), the aim of Rosewater is to break down public resistance to military intervention in Iran.

In other words Amr Ammar was merely drawing attention to the facts, and the claim - made or supported by you - that his comments amounted to a convoluted conspiracy theory is itself nonsensical. Even the CIA itself does not deny that US and Israeli agents are actively involved in controlling the outcome of the present chaos in the Middle East. Indeed, the US is providing weapons, money and training to al Qaeda "rebels" in Syria, and financial support to the military in Egypt. To dismiss these facts as a "conspiracy" is ridiculous.

Apart from all that, Lily is quite right. An opinion can have validity in its own right; and sometimes the truth of a situation can be self-evident, without specific facts to support it. Obviously it is preferable to be able to argue with facts, but surely you must have noticed by now that it is nearly always possible to find facts to support an opinion. For instance, one can find as many facts to support global warming as one can find to dismiss it as a scam. The same applies to almost any proposition. Individual, selected facts don't ever prove or disprove anything. Different experts can look at the same facts and arrive at different - even opposite - conclusions. In the end, the person looking at the (often conflicting) facts has to make a judgment call based on their own intelligence, experience, gut feeling and overall grasp of a situation.

Evidence of what, exactly?

You didn't "refute" anything. You simply claimed you made a "refutation."

 

Your personal word is not "information." It is merely your unsupported opinion.



And anyone can claim that their opinion is "information" which is what you have done.



Red Herring. None of this has anything to do with Stewart's appearance on Egyptian TV and the ridiculous comments made by Ammar about Stewart "asserting dominion over Egypt."



All of what you say here is totally irrelevant to the original post. And none of it is evidence that John Stewart is trying to dominate Egypt.

Bob Marks