According to its mission statement, the World Jewish Congress' main purpose is to act as "the diplomatic arm of the Jewish people". Membership in the WJC is open to all representative Jewish groups or communities, irrespective of the social, political or economic ideology of the community's host country.
According to its mission statement, WJC exists to serve the racial interests of Jews around the world.
The First Preparatory World Jewish Conference was held in Geneva in August 1932. A preparatory committee was headed by Zionist Nahum Goldmann, who was one of the leading advocates of the establishment of an international Jewish representative body. Goldmann defined the purpose of the World Jewish Congress as follows:
It is to establish the permanent address of the Jewish people; amidst the fragmentation and atomization of Jewish life and of the Jewish community; it is to establish a real, legitimate, collective representation of Jewry which will be entitled to speak in the name of the 16 million Jews to the nations and governments of the world, as well as to the Jews themselves.
Looks like a Jewish identity Zionist organization to me /shrug
Probably a really bad date to admit to, considering less than half a year later Hitler was able to start convincing people the Jews were conspiring across the world in their own interests. Including doing things like organizing international counter-protests in the US/Britain against Germany because Nazis bad, an event that certainly helped exacerbate all the following events leading to WW2.
Why did you Leftists also tell hasidic jews whom were being hunted in the streets by both Black National Socialists and NYC Bill "The Jew Hunter" DeBlasio that they need to shut up and know there place?
Is it because you're Leftists that like to claim ownership of demographics, and then use them as human shields to die for your insane causes?
You are still doing it. Just spouting off your soapbox rant about a group you don't like without responding to anything posted or said. Clearly they've even got you so mad you skipped even rereading your sentence for grammatical errors.
I thought we were talking about Leftists, I didn't realize you were trying to address me, that's why I didn't respond to challenge you: I agreed with you, and I didn't think I was making "broad generalizations".
Those specific things I mentioned actually happened. BLM literally attacked jews in the street. DeBlasio explicitly targeted the jewish community with extreme Covid measures.
It is absolutely common-place for Leftists to claim ownership of demographics and claim that they, alone, speak for them. This happens all the time: with women, with millentials, with zoomers, with the poor, with the middle class, with the working class, with blacks, with jews, with muslims, etc.
What's the grammar issue you have with my previous reply?
The BLM attacking people in the streets part. Probably the whole, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. The cause or a handful of no names?
The spike in "anti-semetic hate crimes" was driven almost entirely by black-on-jew violence. The one that sticks out in my mind the most was when a Black Nationalist broke into a jewish house with a machete, screamed about needing to kill all the jews, slashed at several of them, got arrested, and was photographed with a huge smile on his/her face when they were let out of jail. It was a problem that started getting ugly back in 2018 & 2019, but by 2020 it was reaching a boiling point.
What's the grammar issue you have with my previous reply?
Useful Idiots who believe you into the machine guns
You fucked up a word somewhere, hombre.
I thought we were talking about Leftists
The problem with lazily copy/pasting from other threads is that the context is gone. So the assumption from your initial post is that you are calling the Stormfags Leftists for doing things you dislike. In which I was making a joke about how you were doing a very Leftist thing in trying to criticize them.
If I was mistaken in my reading there, then I suppose that's on me.
The most Leftist thing, to me, is feeding the Useful Idiots who believe you into the machine guns of people defending themselves from your aggression.
You're removing the whole front of the sentence.
"Useful Idiots who believe in you" is a group of people, I will now label X.
"The most Leftist thing, to me, is feeding X into the machine guns of people defending themselves from your aggression.
It's a bit of a run-on sentence, but I don't see why it's this big of an issue.
The problem with lazily copy/pasting from other threads is that the context is gone
It's the same context. There was no parent content. I was replying to the video, not to the OP, nor to the tweet.
So the assumption from your initial post is that you are calling the Stormfags Leftists for doing things you dislike.
No! Not Stormfag Leftists! I'm talking about Leftist Jews. Look:
Why did you Leftists also tell hasidic jews whom were being hunted in the streets by both Black National Socialists and NYC Bill "The Jew Hunter" DeBlasio that they need to shut up and know there place?
When was the last time you heard the alt-right tell jews to "know their place" after being attacked by black people?
It wasn't a big issue, it was a lighthearted joke about how your sentence is hard to parse because of a minor grammatical error exacerbated by it being such a run-on.
When was the last time you heard the alt-right tell jews to "know their place" after being attacked by black people?
Many times. Always a lot of "you voted for this" and "you deserve this for what you've done" and "these are your pet monkey/golem, suck it up."
Either way, it seems this was entirely a misread of your intent and as such I rescind any problem I had with it.
Now now. It's rude to point out that the stormfags are so fond of the BBC that they will literally side with black nationalists and child-raping Muslims if it means they can have one up inside them.
The Muslims are the group whose entire leadership have openly declared their desire to utterly subsume and wipe out what's left of Western society and convinced their believers that it is their sacred and holy mission to do so. They are the ones who are regularly permitted by Western authorities to use our countries as staging grounds for their violence, to keep marrying off their underage daughters to fully grown men, to mutilate the genitals of girls so young even the trannies would think twice, to force women and children into sexual slavery, to put together rape gangs that systematically target white children simply because they're white, and to engage in every facet of societal sabotage and degeneracy so vile they make the LGBT movement look like monks.
The Muslims are the ones who are allowed to get away with all of that in our countries while posing as cringing minorities living in fear of persecution. They are literally everything you collection of intellectual feces claim the joooooz are, and yet you will still take their side, because you have absolutely no principles, no redeeming virtues, and you lack the cognitive and moral capacity to think about anything beyond your single-minded, infantile jew obsession. Even those of you who aren't feds act exclusively in the service of globohomo. The fact that you're too stupid to realize it only makes you pathetic as well as a fifth column.
The fact that they were prepared to side with Milo, Yee, and Fuentes to damage the populist right tells me all I need to know. I don't buy that whole "well but at least people were talking about joos" nonsense. Sounded a lot more the bottom crab in the bucket clamping down.
It tells me that you failed in your assessment because Trump converted me onto his base because of all of his domestic policies that improved our economy, kept us out of wars, and actually resisted the establishment.
Trump managed to build large sections of the wall, significantly increase deportations, and limit immigration.
Trump bombed Syria in regards to the suspicion that they may deploy chemical weapons. You can consider that one of the many psy-ops waged against both him and the American people.
We were never "on the way" to a war with Iran. The most that Trump did was kill their Special Operations commander who had been spending a fuck-load of time attacking American troops and interests abroad. He retaliated, and did so in a good way.
The border was in complete chaos by 2019, and Trump was running around saying we needed people to fill jobs at the time. It's on Trump not to fall for said psyops. If we plebes can figure it out, he should have been able to.
Are you shitting me? Running up to the election he was working on actual peace between arabs and israel, and making more gains towards finally ending our presence in that region and leaving it stable than any time in american history. Which is why one of the first things done was destroying any progress with the pull out of afghanistan. Globalists love the forever wars.
Inflation is what you get when you have to send stipends to people for shutting the economy down.
So who in DC was balking at shutting down the economy from day 1, because Trump left that up to the states, and was one of the earliest people to recommend re-opening after coming around to the claim that 20 million people were not going to die by December 2020
When the topic of jewish organisation talking mad shit, I knew there was going to be usual suspects whining about stormfags, nazi and whatnot. Jews in the media totally knew what they were doing when they were repeating the rhetoric, nazis are ultimate evil that should never be repeated while severely downplaying what the communists were doing. And all the associated groups that wants to fix the issues without resorting to violence even get slandered as nazi and issues never get fixed because sometimes violence is necessary to properly remedy the problem. The constant reminder of nazi and their activities poisoned the well so much talking about the current issues is just impossible and anglo-western culture is on its way to complete recession or destruction. Like it or not, it's a fact there are just some powerful elite jews in the current times that have the messiah complex even the old testament clearly documented how some of them become arrogant and meet the wrath.
And if we are talking about pedo organisation, can't forget about Helmut Kentler experiment. Totally not a coincidence how all these groups were found by gay men. This one was particularly nasty to me, the government allowed the sexual abuse taking in place excusing it as a psychological experiment and letting it continue for decades.
There is no rule violating commentary in the video or tweet.
If someone other than a jewish organization were to make these claims, wouldn't that count as demarking jews as 'conspiring,' per rule 16? Anyone other than a jewish group themselves pointing out that jews are counting coup over the successes of civil rights movements would be considered an attack on jewish identity, correct?
Per our prior exchanges, I understand why you draw and police this line.
I don't approve, but I understand your motives and unenviable position as a moderator trying to keep the forum civil.
If someone other than a jewish organization were to make these claims, wouldn't that count as demarking jews as 'conspiring,' per rule 16?
If a Rabbi came on and said that jews, as a racial cabal went out to destroy other nations outlined in Judeo-Bolshevist rhetoric, I would absolutely remove that post. I have removed posts like that where some fringe rabbi was saying that the jews deserved the holocaust.
Anyone other than a jewish group themselves pointing out that jews are counting coup over the successes of civil rights movements would be considered an attack on jewish identity, correct?
No.
The issue is not if there are jews present in some movement, the issue is why.
For example blacks have also been present in every civil rights movement. This is not because there is a black racial conspiracy to undermine all nations and bring about black-bolshevism which will destroy civilization. The New English Protestants have also been involved in all civil rights movements. Again, this is not a protestant religious cabal to destroy civilization and kill nations.
Disparity is not evidence of discrimination. The issue is the discrimination. The presence of jews means nothing. It's when you are asserting that the presence of jews is the evidence of a racial cabal. That is the line.
Hence why, despite claims to the opposite by local stormfags, calling someone a jew, or identifying someone as a jew is not an issue. Saying that they are jewish to indicate that they are part of a racial cabal is the issue.
OP didn't violate any rules here because all he did was re-iterate what a bunch of jewish racialists want to emphasize for their Leftist credentials, as they use jewish people as a shield for criticism against their Leftism. The racialists themselves are not admitting to a racial cabal.
And yes, all the same things go for non-jews. White racial cabals still violate Rule 16, and a bunch of white people admitting that they are part of the White Supremacist Cisheteronormative Patriarchy cabal would violate that. But since nobody on here believes that, I don't get to remove those posts. Instead we get videos of crazy white Leftists explicitly saying that, and then making fun of them. Accusations of world-wide racial cabals deserve to be mocked, and that is our fundamental basis, because Kotaku was absolutely doing that.
All in all, I also don't see any jews claiming that they have coup'd any races in this video either.
All in all, I also don't see any jews claiming that they have coup'd any races in this video either.
They aren't counting coup against a race explicitly. They are claiming participation as jews on behalf of each intersectional element's victory against western society, which is (per intersectionalist ideology) implicitly understood as cis-hetrosexual white male Christian patriarchy, or are you claiming not to understand that?
I'm explicitly stating that "civil rights" is not an explicitly intersectional ideology, that the participation of jews in movements is not evidence of a racial cabal, and that being wrong-headed is not the same as conspiring to destroy western subversion.
For example, I find zero evidence that Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater wanted the the utter annihilation of western civilization. I will not cite this as evidence that the white race is operating a white racial cabal to destroy western civilization, nor will I claim that they were seeking the annihilation of western civilization as supporters of the Civil Rights movement, even when both had that very movement turn against them.
Intersectionality was also invented far later than any part of the Civil Rights movement.
The civil rights movement was certainly supported by more than bolsheviks and jews, but that doesn't keep members of the aforementioned parties from using it as a foundation to pursue further revolution.
We don't get to 'Trans Rights are human rights' and Queering without Civil Rights first. I keep that in mind when I see a tribal revisionist history of Civil Rights, like the one in the video.
I don't think there's a Jewish Cabal or Conspiracy, either. I just notice the tribalism and the alignment with the minority against the host country's status quo, for better (as in the case of Civil Rights, broadly speaking) and for worse (as in the case of the Intersectionalism which has followed.)
We don't get to 'Trans Rights are human rights' and Queering without Civil Rights first.
Anti-Socialism was used by Bolshevics to further revolution. Meanwhile, Democratic Socialists used anti-Communism to further their revolution (this is what the 3rd arrow represents in 3 arrows). The use of a philosophical concept is irrelevant, as the concept itself is irrelevant. It is merely a tool. Claims about basic human liberty and freedom of speech are also wielded against us by Leftists.
There is no concept that will not be used by a Leftist as a means to power, hence there is no point citing one idea, and claiming that that is inherently Leftist.
If you've read Queer Theory, you would see it's not based in Civil Rights, it's based in Marxism. Queer Theory never needed Civil Rights, but it was an easy avenue of attack. Same with Freedom of Speech. Queer Theory doesn't even rely of Civil Rights to propagate itself, but a form of Cultural Marxism by doing everything in it's power to subvert and destroy familial and romantic relationship. Civil Rights is simply a single avenue of approach, whereas the real damage is entirely done outside of the bounds of Civil Rights: outside any legal framework. The destruction and poisoning of interpersonal relationships with family and lovers is the primary act of revolutionary terror.
I just notice the tribalism and the alignment with the minority against the host country's status quo, for better (as in the case of Civil Rights, broadly speaking) and for worse (as in the case of the Intersectionalism which has followed.)
Again, if you read the actual work of Intersectionalists, they specifically cite the Civil Rights constructs as a major impediment. Because the concept of Civil Rights along a Liberal framework promotes a rejection of both positive and negative incentive; meaning that no revolutionary class can form because there is no system of oppression to address. Worse, the Civil Rights laws also required the specific identification of what discrimination was being done. Intersectionality was invented to get around Civil Rights law by creating infinite classes and groups, being able to demand infinite rights, and turning each "intersection" as another revolutionary class, and then demanding that the revolutionary coalition be formed from there. Intersectionality rose as blow back to Civil Rights, not out of them.
And that's even assuming your presupposition of "minority against the host" is true, which it's not. The host is simply not damaged by removing legislation that is racially targeting that group for sanction, and separating them out (rather than allowing them to integrate) from the host community. I do not recognize the moral value of Zimbabwe's racial laws.
I think that Liberalism itself will fail, though, because no bargain can be kept with the leftist elements, especially if they educate new revolutionaries against every status quo. This is a problem with revolutionaries and bargain-making as a response to them.
Civil Rights is something I agree with in principle because there isn't good moral warrant for the use of oppressive force on Racial grounds, but take issue with as a bargain struck with revolutionaries. The revolutionaries will absolutely continue agitating along different grounds while using our morality itself against us.
The reality is that the policing of anti-social behavior among Blacks continued to the Justice System in America after Civil Rights, with mixed results. I look at NYC halting 'stop and frisk' laws in much the same way: "So the old model's gone. Fine. Now we have more crime. What are we going to do about it?"
I also disagree here:
The host is simply not damaged by removing legislation that is racially targeting that group for sanction, and separating them out (rather than allowing them to integrate) from the host community.
Cultural integration cannot be assumed. A lack of integration is precisely the cancer afflicting the host.
The type of freedom we could agree on is only possible when the institutions of education are used for acculturation and immigration is kept low-- neither of which is happening in modern day America. The cultural and intellectual legacies which make the US individualist (and thus free) are being actively eroded.
Without integration the US's Rainbow future accelerates along the same course as South Africa's vibrant democracy, just at a slower velocity.
If someone other than a jewish organization were to make these claims, wouldn't that count as demarking jews as 'conspiring'
Not really. It's the further step that they take, by saying that "Jews are always undermining their host societies" that does that.
The fact that many Jewish activists were involved in these causes, and that they are disproportionately active in them, is not controversial. The further step of claiming that an entire ethnic group is bad based on an infinitesimal number does it.
I don't approve, but I understand your motives and unenviable position as a moderator trying to keep the forum civil.
There are more important reasons than keeping things 'civil'.
The fact that many Jewish activists were involved in these causes, and that they are disproportionately active in them, is not controversial. The further step of claiming that an entire ethnic group is bad based on an infinitesimal number does it.
Can you show me the meaningful difference between those cases? If you have a significant Jewish elite in your nation then you end up with communist agitation no matter how you slice it.
Are you worried about people persecuting individual Jews on this forum or elsewhere?
He can tell you that Jews are disproportionately represented in leftist movements and leadership, and he can tell you that Jews survive via strong community and in-group biases, but he can’t connect these two dots and declare the possibility of an inherently problematic demographic.
Because collectivism is a parasitic leftist ideological failing, that leads midwits to utter insanity. The inability to recognize individuality makes the collectivists themselves irrational to the point of being subhuman.
Some X people bad - all X is this! Makes the person saying it retarded.
He’s literally the cartoon of the guy who refuses to take cover among his people and then immediately gets hit in the chest with a spear.
He also sounds exactly like most Jews when they speak about how non-Jews must reject collectivism… while Jews embrace it more fiercely than any other group.
China. Every arabic nation. Every african nation. Most slavic nations. "Gentiles" are not just western europeans. You done being retarded yet in your quest to blame all the worlds' evil on a specific ethnic group?
Confront the reality that evil exists in many forms instead of hiding behind your pathetic mental safety blanket that "it's just da jooz, if we kill all da jooz everything will be fine".
Apparently, Israel is an ethostate because it lives in peace with Arabs, but if 'Gentile elites' were to support one, it necessitates the expulsion of any Jew or anyone who is slightly darker.
I don't see much of a difference between elites who are Jewish, and those who are not. Both are rotten to the core.
The Jewish network muscles out dissenters, so that's related. Also, many "firsts" or pioneers of modern lib thinking were Jewish and motivated specifically by their background, like the father of anthropology Boaz for instance.
No, more that the place will be turned into another Stormfront that no one wants to join.
That's neo-Nazism. When you oppose people who are simply discussing things then you push people to the extremes.
The Jewish network muscles out dissenters, so that's related
Hold on, so Jews are to blame for non-Jewish elites are rotten? With no evidence to back it up? Yeah, this is getting into crazy territory.
Also, many "firsts" or pioneers of modern lib thinking were Jewish and motivated specifically by their background, like the father of anthropology Boaz for instance.
What of it?
That's neo-Nazism. When you oppose people who are simply discussing things then you push people to the extremes.
The thing is that a lot of these people are not interested in 'discussing' things. They're just spreading propaganda. It is very rare to have a productive discussion with one of that lot. Last time I tried, I was told that "the Holocaust didn't happen, but I wish that it did and hope for one in the future". Not even joking. And that guy was very, very mad about people calling him a Nazi.
But, why did the video get cropped? You probably could have just linked it from their website.
Videos often show up cropped for me on this website unless I click on show in new tab wherein the video file is opened directly. Not that you are the right person to complain about it to; just sayin.
The stormfags are at it again trying to tie to jooz to every event in history. Take the hint stormfags. The joos aren't behind thee things and they won't admit to something they didnt do.
Most people don't know much about Judaism the religion, including most "born non-practicing Jews", which means its actual practices sound like a antisemitic conspiracy when you talk about it. Same with things like Taqiyya in Islam. Not helped by both groups giving a lot of weird denials when asked about it.
Its not like Christianity is much better about some of its fucked up Biblical things, but few people actual practice them and would probably acknowledge it being written about problems we no longer have.
Is this about every event or are they specifically claiming to be behind certain things you're against, leaving you to employ a logical fallacy to brush it off for comfort?
Bitch have you read the books of Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles?
She is proud. Just like Barbara Lerner Spectre.
who elected you to do any of those things?
Oh, and they are still a bunch of Leftist race baiters.
2 second internet search
According to its mission statement, WJC exists to serve the racial interests of Jews around the world.
Looks like a Jewish identity Zionist organization to me /shrug
Probably a really bad date to admit to, considering less than half a year later Hitler was able to start convincing people the Jews were conspiring across the world in their own interests. Including doing things like organizing international counter-protests in the US/Britain against Germany because Nazis bad, an event that certainly helped exacerbate all the following events leading to WW2.
Exactly: Leftist race baiters.
Man, they created a whole country just to race bait. That's some serious commitment to the bit.
It's as if they are racists.
Oy vey
Imagine the outrage if you put out "I am #WhiteAndProud because Whites have always done what's right".
Or #ChristianAndProud, #CatholicAndProud, #AnythingElseAndProud.
"You're pathological." -- Jordan Peterson
It's an evil eye amulet, magic symbol to protect them from curses. Another pagan practice from the Talmud.
Hmm. Guess I'll just copypasta from previous:
Why did you Leftists also tell hasidic jews whom were being hunted in the streets by both Black National Socialists and NYC Bill "The Jew Hunter" DeBlasio that they need to shut up and know there place?
Is it because you're Leftists that like to claim ownership of demographics, and then use them as human shields to die for your insane causes?
Its also pretty Leftist to say nothing about the topic beyond using it to springpad dunk on <group I don't like> using very broad generalizations.
The most Leftist thing, to me, is feeding the Useful Idiots who believe you into the machine guns of people defending themselves from your aggression.
That's a very common thread.
You are still doing it. Just spouting off your soapbox rant about a group you don't like without responding to anything posted or said. Clearly they've even got you so mad you skipped even rereading your sentence for grammatical errors.
I thought we were talking about Leftists, I didn't realize you were trying to address me, that's why I didn't respond to challenge you: I agreed with you, and I didn't think I was making "broad generalizations".
Those specific things I mentioned actually happened. BLM literally attacked jews in the street. DeBlasio explicitly targeted the jewish community with extreme Covid measures.
It is absolutely common-place for Leftists to claim ownership of demographics and claim that they, alone, speak for them. This happens all the time: with women, with millentials, with zoomers, with the poor, with the middle class, with the working class, with blacks, with jews, with muslims, etc.
What's the grammar issue you have with my previous reply?
The BLM attacking people in the streets part. Probably the whole, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. The cause or a handful of no names?
The spike in "anti-semetic hate crimes" was driven almost entirely by black-on-jew violence. The one that sticks out in my mind the most was when a Black Nationalist broke into a jewish house with a machete, screamed about needing to kill all the jews, slashed at several of them, got arrested, and was photographed with a huge smile on his/her face when they were let out of jail. It was a problem that started getting ugly back in 2018 & 2019, but by 2020 it was reaching a boiling point.
You fucked up a word somewhere, hombre.
The problem with lazily copy/pasting from other threads is that the context is gone. So the assumption from your initial post is that you are calling the Stormfags Leftists for doing things you dislike. In which I was making a joke about how you were doing a very Leftist thing in trying to criticize them.
If I was mistaken in my reading there, then I suppose that's on me.
You're removing the whole front of the sentence.
"Useful Idiots who believe in you" is a group of people, I will now label X.
"The most Leftist thing, to me, is feeding X into the machine guns of people defending themselves from your aggression.
It's a bit of a run-on sentence, but I don't see why it's this big of an issue.
It's the same context. There was no parent content. I was replying to the video, not to the OP, nor to the tweet.
No! Not Stormfag Leftists! I'm talking about Leftist Jews. Look:
When was the last time you heard the alt-right tell jews to "know their place" after being attacked by black people?
And the missing word appears!
It wasn't a big issue, it was a lighthearted joke about how your sentence is hard to parse because of a minor grammatical error exacerbated by it being such a run-on.
Many times. Always a lot of "you voted for this" and "you deserve this for what you've done" and "these are your pet monkey/golem, suck it up."
Either way, it seems this was entirely a misread of your intent and as such I rescind any problem I had with it.
*You're
*sentence
Ah, like the Libertarian Left, or Socialist Gun clubs.
Now now. It's rude to point out that the stormfags are so fond of the BBC that they will literally side with black nationalists and child-raping Muslims if it means they can have one up inside them.
Lol you must think this is 2008 where Murica and Israel vs the moozlums.
Nice try rabbii.
Damn Iraqis trying to pump their own oil! Don't they know that's Jewish oil!
Alhamdullilah, Imam Fedbot.
The Muslims are the group whose entire leadership have openly declared their desire to utterly subsume and wipe out what's left of Western society and convinced their believers that it is their sacred and holy mission to do so. They are the ones who are regularly permitted by Western authorities to use our countries as staging grounds for their violence, to keep marrying off their underage daughters to fully grown men, to mutilate the genitals of girls so young even the trannies would think twice, to force women and children into sexual slavery, to put together rape gangs that systematically target white children simply because they're white, and to engage in every facet of societal sabotage and degeneracy so vile they make the LGBT movement look like monks.
The Muslims are the ones who are allowed to get away with all of that in our countries while posing as cringing minorities living in fear of persecution. They are literally everything you collection of intellectual feces claim the joooooz are, and yet you will still take their side, because you have absolutely no principles, no redeeming virtues, and you lack the cognitive and moral capacity to think about anything beyond your single-minded, infantile jew obsession. Even those of you who aren't feds act exclusively in the service of globohomo. The fact that you're too stupid to realize it only makes you pathetic as well as a fifth column.
The fact that they were prepared to side with Milo, Yee, and Fuentes to damage the populist right tells me all I need to know. I don't buy that whole "well but at least people were talking about joos" nonsense. Sounded a lot more the bottom crab in the bucket clamping down.
What does the fact that Trump did everything Israel wanted but nothing his 2016 base wanted tell you?
It tells me that you failed in your assessment because Trump converted me onto his base because of all of his domestic policies that improved our economy, kept us out of wars, and actually resisted the establishment.
Trump bombed Syria and had as well on the way to war with Iran. When did Trump fix immigration? I must have missed that.
Was well on his way to war with Iran? Didn't the hordes say the same thing about Trump/North Korea? Maybe you're right about that?
Trump killed that Iranian general. He was also cozy with Netanyahu who is an Iran Hawk.
Trump managed to build large sections of the wall, significantly increase deportations, and limit immigration.
Trump bombed Syria in regards to the suspicion that they may deploy chemical weapons. You can consider that one of the many psy-ops waged against both him and the American people.
We were never "on the way" to a war with Iran. The most that Trump did was kill their Special Operations commander who had been spending a fuck-load of time attacking American troops and interests abroad. He retaliated, and did so in a good way.
The border was in complete chaos by 2019, and Trump was running around saying we needed people to fill jobs at the time. It's on Trump not to fall for said psyops. If we plebes can figure it out, he should have been able to.
Trump was also cozy with Netanyahu, an Iran hawk.
Are you shitting me? Running up to the election he was working on actual peace between arabs and israel, and making more gains towards finally ending our presence in that region and leaving it stable than any time in american history. Which is why one of the first things done was destroying any progress with the pull out of afghanistan. Globalists love the forever wars.
Israel is beating the drums of war for Iran right now. Even Biden pulled out of Afghanistan.
Ya cause Israelis never cause unnecessary wars...
Ya the hyper inflation was fun. Thanks turmp. At least he commuted the sentence of some nigger rapper
Inflation is what you get when you have to send stipends to people for shutting the economy down.
So who in DC was balking at shutting down the economy from day 1, because Trump left that up to the states, and was one of the earliest people to recommend re-opening after coming around to the claim that 20 million people were not going to die by December 2020
Nothing?
When the topic of jewish organisation talking mad shit, I knew there was going to be usual suspects whining about stormfags, nazi and whatnot. Jews in the media totally knew what they were doing when they were repeating the rhetoric, nazis are ultimate evil that should never be repeated while severely downplaying what the communists were doing. And all the associated groups that wants to fix the issues without resorting to violence even get slandered as nazi and issues never get fixed because sometimes violence is necessary to properly remedy the problem. The constant reminder of nazi and their activities poisoned the well so much talking about the current issues is just impossible and anglo-western culture is on its way to complete recession or destruction. Like it or not, it's a fact there are just some powerful elite jews in the current times that have the messiah complex even the old testament clearly documented how some of them become arrogant and meet the wrath.
Allen Ginsberg founded NAMBLA, similar people but not the same person.
And if we are talking about pedo organisation, can't forget about Helmut Kentler experiment. Totally not a coincidence how all these groups were found by gay men. This one was particularly nasty to me, the government allowed the sexual abuse taking in place excusing it as a psychological experiment and letting it continue for decades.
Just for you, Telia: Post Approved.
There is no rule violating commentary in the video or tweet.
But, why did the video get cropped? You probably could have just linked it from their website.
If someone other than a jewish organization were to make these claims, wouldn't that count as demarking jews as 'conspiring,' per rule 16? Anyone other than a jewish group themselves pointing out that jews are counting coup over the successes of civil rights movements would be considered an attack on jewish identity, correct?
Per our prior exchanges, I understand why you draw and police this line.
I don't approve, but I understand your motives and unenviable position as a moderator trying to keep the forum civil.
If a Rabbi came on and said that jews, as a racial cabal went out to destroy other nations outlined in Judeo-Bolshevist rhetoric, I would absolutely remove that post. I have removed posts like that where some fringe rabbi was saying that the jews deserved the holocaust.
No.
The issue is not if there are jews present in some movement, the issue is why.
For example blacks have also been present in every civil rights movement. This is not because there is a black racial conspiracy to undermine all nations and bring about black-bolshevism which will destroy civilization. The New English Protestants have also been involved in all civil rights movements. Again, this is not a protestant religious cabal to destroy civilization and kill nations.
Disparity is not evidence of discrimination. The issue is the discrimination. The presence of jews means nothing. It's when you are asserting that the presence of jews is the evidence of a racial cabal. That is the line.
Hence why, despite claims to the opposite by local stormfags, calling someone a jew, or identifying someone as a jew is not an issue. Saying that they are jewish to indicate that they are part of a racial cabal is the issue.
OP didn't violate any rules here because all he did was re-iterate what a bunch of jewish racialists want to emphasize for their Leftist credentials, as they use jewish people as a shield for criticism against their Leftism. The racialists themselves are not admitting to a racial cabal.
And yes, all the same things go for non-jews. White racial cabals still violate Rule 16, and a bunch of white people admitting that they are part of the White Supremacist Cisheteronormative Patriarchy cabal would violate that. But since nobody on here believes that, I don't get to remove those posts. Instead we get videos of crazy white Leftists explicitly saying that, and then making fun of them. Accusations of world-wide racial cabals deserve to be mocked, and that is our fundamental basis, because Kotaku was absolutely doing that.
All in all, I also don't see any jews claiming that they have coup'd any races in this video either.
They aren't counting coup against a race explicitly. They are claiming participation as jews on behalf of each intersectional element's victory against western society, which is (per intersectionalist ideology) implicitly understood as cis-hetrosexual white male Christian patriarchy, or are you claiming not to understand that?
I'm explicitly stating that "civil rights" is not an explicitly intersectional ideology, that the participation of jews in movements is not evidence of a racial cabal, and that being wrong-headed is not the same as conspiring to destroy western subversion.
For example, I find zero evidence that Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater wanted the the utter annihilation of western civilization. I will not cite this as evidence that the white race is operating a white racial cabal to destroy western civilization, nor will I claim that they were seeking the annihilation of western civilization as supporters of the Civil Rights movement, even when both had that very movement turn against them.
Intersectionality was also invented far later than any part of the Civil Rights movement.
The civil rights movement was certainly supported by more than bolsheviks and jews, but that doesn't keep members of the aforementioned parties from using it as a foundation to pursue further revolution.
We don't get to 'Trans Rights are human rights' and Queering without Civil Rights first. I keep that in mind when I see a tribal revisionist history of Civil Rights, like the one in the video.
I don't think there's a Jewish Cabal or Conspiracy, either. I just notice the tribalism and the alignment with the minority against the host country's status quo, for better (as in the case of Civil Rights, broadly speaking) and for worse (as in the case of the Intersectionalism which has followed.)
Anti-Socialism was used by Bolshevics to further revolution. Meanwhile, Democratic Socialists used anti-Communism to further their revolution (this is what the 3rd arrow represents in 3 arrows). The use of a philosophical concept is irrelevant, as the concept itself is irrelevant. It is merely a tool. Claims about basic human liberty and freedom of speech are also wielded against us by Leftists.
There is no concept that will not be used by a Leftist as a means to power, hence there is no point citing one idea, and claiming that that is inherently Leftist.
If you've read Queer Theory, you would see it's not based in Civil Rights, it's based in Marxism. Queer Theory never needed Civil Rights, but it was an easy avenue of attack. Same with Freedom of Speech. Queer Theory doesn't even rely of Civil Rights to propagate itself, but a form of Cultural Marxism by doing everything in it's power to subvert and destroy familial and romantic relationship. Civil Rights is simply a single avenue of approach, whereas the real damage is entirely done outside of the bounds of Civil Rights: outside any legal framework. The destruction and poisoning of interpersonal relationships with family and lovers is the primary act of revolutionary terror.
Again, if you read the actual work of Intersectionalists, they specifically cite the Civil Rights constructs as a major impediment. Because the concept of Civil Rights along a Liberal framework promotes a rejection of both positive and negative incentive; meaning that no revolutionary class can form because there is no system of oppression to address. Worse, the Civil Rights laws also required the specific identification of what discrimination was being done. Intersectionality was invented to get around Civil Rights law by creating infinite classes and groups, being able to demand infinite rights, and turning each "intersection" as another revolutionary class, and then demanding that the revolutionary coalition be formed from there. Intersectionality rose as blow back to Civil Rights, not out of them.
And that's even assuming your presupposition of "minority against the host" is true, which it's not. The host is simply not damaged by removing legislation that is racially targeting that group for sanction, and separating them out (rather than allowing them to integrate) from the host community. I do not recognize the moral value of Zimbabwe's racial laws.
Your argumentation makes sense.
I think that Liberalism itself will fail, though, because no bargain can be kept with the leftist elements, especially if they educate new revolutionaries against every status quo. This is a problem with revolutionaries and bargain-making as a response to them.
Civil Rights is something I agree with in principle because there isn't good moral warrant for the use of oppressive force on Racial grounds, but take issue with as a bargain struck with revolutionaries. The revolutionaries will absolutely continue agitating along different grounds while using our morality itself against us.
The reality is that the policing of anti-social behavior among Blacks continued to the Justice System in America after Civil Rights, with mixed results. I look at NYC halting 'stop and frisk' laws in much the same way: "So the old model's gone. Fine. Now we have more crime. What are we going to do about it?"
I also disagree here:
Cultural integration cannot be assumed. A lack of integration is precisely the cancer afflicting the host.
The type of freedom we could agree on is only possible when the institutions of education are used for acculturation and immigration is kept low-- neither of which is happening in modern day America. The cultural and intellectual legacies which make the US individualist (and thus free) are being actively eroded.
Without integration the US's Rainbow future accelerates along the same course as South Africa's vibrant democracy, just at a slower velocity.
Blah blah blah you are so fucking annoying.
Not really. It's the further step that they take, by saying that "Jews are always undermining their host societies" that does that.
The fact that many Jewish activists were involved in these causes, and that they are disproportionately active in them, is not controversial. The further step of claiming that an entire ethnic group is bad based on an infinitesimal number does it.
There are more important reasons than keeping things 'civil'.
Can you show me the meaningful difference between those cases? If you have a significant Jewish elite in your nation then you end up with communist agitation no matter how you slice it.
Are you worried about people persecuting individual Jews on this forum or elsewhere?
He can tell you that Jews are disproportionately represented in leftist movements and leadership, and he can tell you that Jews survive via strong community and in-group biases, but he can’t connect these two dots and declare the possibility of an inherently problematic demographic.
Because collectivism is a parasitic leftist ideological failing, that leads midwits to utter insanity. The inability to recognize individuality makes the collectivists themselves irrational to the point of being subhuman.
Some X people bad - all X is this! Makes the person saying it retarded.
Humans are social. Work in groups or die in your cave alone.
He’s literally the cartoon of the guy who refuses to take cover among his people and then immediately gets hit in the chest with a spear.
He also sounds exactly like most Jews when they speak about how non-Jews must reject collectivism… while Jews embrace it more fiercely than any other group.
He could be arguing for recognizing strict hierarchical relations. "Submit your group to my command or you don't get my cave."
Nothing you just said has any salience to my post whatsoever.
You have a point as far as people who talk trash about Stephen Miller because he's Jewish, but that isn't happening in this thread.
I don't see much of a difference between elites who are Jewish, and those who are not. Both are rotten to the core.
No, more that the place will be turned into another Stormfront that no one wants to join.
Gentile elites don't support ethnostates for their people. Let's start with that.
China. Every arabic nation. Every african nation. Most slavic nations. "Gentiles" are not just western europeans. You done being retarded yet in your quest to blame all the worlds' evil on a specific ethnic group?
Confront the reality that evil exists in many forms instead of hiding behind your pathetic mental safety blanket that "it's just da jooz, if we kill all da jooz everything will be fine".
Let's find some common ground. No where in this comment do you say that Jewish elites don't support an ethnostate. Do you think they do?
What makes an ethnostate?
Apparently, Israel is an ethostate because it lives in peace with Arabs, but if 'Gentile elites' were to support one, it necessitates the expulsion of any Jew or anyone who is slightly darker.
The Jewish network muscles out dissenters, so that's related. Also, many "firsts" or pioneers of modern lib thinking were Jewish and motivated specifically by their background, like the father of anthropology Boaz for instance.
That's neo-Nazism. When you oppose people who are simply discussing things then you push people to the extremes.
Hold on, so Jews are to blame for non-Jewish elites are rotten? With no evidence to back it up? Yeah, this is getting into crazy territory.
What of it?
The thing is that a lot of these people are not interested in 'discussing' things. They're just spreading propaganda. It is very rare to have a productive discussion with one of that lot. Last time I tried, I was told that "the Holocaust didn't happen, but I wish that it did and hope for one in the future". Not even joking. And that guy was very, very mad about people calling him a Nazi.
You are unaware that Jews tend to network heavily with other Jews and promote globohomo?
Nothing to see here? Just some of the most destabilizing movements in the 20th century being invented by Jews.
Wow so gracious of you to approve our speech
keep it kosher
As if you would tolerate the reverse.
Videos often show up cropped for me on this website unless I click on show in new tab wherein the video file is opened directly. Not that you are the right person to complain about it to; just sayin.
Well, at least I know about it now.
The stormfags are at it again trying to tie to jooz to every event in history. Take the hint stormfags. The joos aren't behind thee things and they won't admit to something they didnt do.
Edit: this is sarcasm holy shit lmao 😅🤣
I don't think its the Stormfags trying to tie them in, when they themselves say they were behind it.
Unless somehow the World Jewish Congress is a really good troll organization.
Most people don't know much about Judaism the religion, including most "born non-practicing Jews", which means its actual practices sound like a antisemitic conspiracy when you talk about it. Same with things like Taqiyya in Islam. Not helped by both groups giving a lot of weird denials when asked about it.
Its not like Christianity is much better about some of its fucked up Biblical things, but few people actual practice them and would probably acknowledge it being written about problems we no longer have.
Is this about every event or are they specifically claiming to be behind certain things you're against, leaving you to employ a logical fallacy to brush it off for comfort?
The only people who use 'jooz' unironically are jews and golems. Which are you?
Not a joo lol. Its sarcastic but people can't read apparently. I was mocking the JIDF trolls on here.