That presumes that random images from anonymous people should be believed unless proven otherwise. I don't believe that is a correct presumption. That is reversing the burden of proof.
You're still not answering what OP is wrong about in this image.
Because the criticism was aimed at believing this crap. I don't think it's my job to refute a zero-effort image which the retarded OP did not even create.
But if you want. It's incoherent. Suspicious of what? They can never answer.
Imagine blindly believing what you read online.
What is OP believing, and what isn't true?
Not an argument.
What is he believing? Look at the image and see for yourself.
Is it not a little strange to you that the same online Nazis who claim to be "skeptical" blindly believe anything that suits their obsessions?
You didn't answer the question, at all. What shouldn't OP believe in this post?
I don't recognize every image, but all the ones I do are true, although how much significance you read into each can vary:
Sewer Jews.
Bobby "I'll be a great president for Israel" Kennedy.
Trump at the Wall, Elon at Auschwitz.
Antisemitism EOs.
The, uh, controversial religious ceremony, let's say.
USS Liberty.
JFK.
Wooden doors.
Censorship.
Another weird ceremony.
Texas Governor and "Friend of Zion," declaring that "Anybody who is an enemy of Israel is an enemy of Texas."
I've called them out on that repeatedly; it's stupid and obnoxious. You're still not answering what OP is wrong about in this image.
That presumes that random images from anonymous people should be believed unless proven otherwise. I don't believe that is a correct presumption. That is reversing the burden of proof.
Because the criticism was aimed at believing this crap. I don't think it's my job to refute a zero-effort image which the retarded OP did not even create.
But if you want. It's incoherent. Suspicious of what? They can never answer.