Bendersky devoted ten full years of research to his book, exhaustively mining the archives of American Military Intelligence as well as the personal papers and correspondence no of more than 100 senior military figures and intelligence officers. The “Jewish Threat” runs over 500 pages, including some 1350 footnotes, with the listed archival sources alone occupying seven full pages. His subtitle is “Anti-Semitic Politics of the U.S. Army” and he makes an extremely compelling case that during the first half of the twentieth century and even afterward, the top ranks of the U.S. military and especially Military Intelligence heavily subscribed to notions that today would be universally dismissed as “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.”

Nigga are you gay? Find the exact quote please.

Also Ron Unz is a jew

Also who reported this? A sockpuppet with no recent comments? Or an israel dick rider who didn’t even bother defending their views in the comments?

If we accept that Israel's response is genocidal, then it still wouldn't matter how many were killed, because the issue is the act of genocide. If the response is not genocidal, then it still doesn't matter how many people were killed, because it matters what Israel should be doing in response to some number of Israeli citizens being killed.

The proportion of dead shouldn't matter to what type of response needs to happen, especially if we are asserting that genocides are wholly unethical.

You’re making some good points from the perspective of an individual with a consistent set of views being applied to, I guess, this and other discussions. However I think that perspective misses the point of the article. I’ll try to summarize what I think the point mostly is:

For everyone out there looking at this situation from a perspective which isn’t an israeli or a palestinian there is a different breaking point where they will go from seeing the situation as it’s always been presented in the mainstream media and start to see it for what it is (a genocide).

This breaking point is different for every person. For muslims nearby, they saw the crisis and the refugees first hand and have long hated israel for their actions. But in the West that’s just not the case. The default position is “the jews deserve a homeland, that’s where it has to be”. They don’t see it as a an invasion followed by a colonization amounting to a slow genocide. That is, until they start to see first hand what israel justifies in its pursuit of “a homeland”.

In the last year alone we’ve seen

Tens of thousands of woman and children murdered (war crime)

Thousands of booby trapped (war crime) devices exploded indiscriminately (war crime)

“israeli victims” as often as not being more accurately described as “victims of israeli friendly fire”

Gang rape of prisoners being sanctioned by superiors in the govt and army and supported by mass demonstrations of the population

Severe torture unto death of doctors and other aid workers

Targeted assassinations of the people currently negotiating ceasefires, conducted in other counties, like Syria and Iran

Open discussion by israeli leadership of the “Greater Israel” plan to invade and seize parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, etc based on nothing but their delusional racist fantasies

And on and on and on, the war crimes are almost too many to list - and that’s just in the last year, this has been happening (to various degrees) for 7 decades. The point of the article is that given how insane the zionists have gotten recently, more and more people have been forced to reckon with reality. And this reckoning doesn’t look good for the modern state of israel…

“No…”

The Israel Police issues a statement reacting to a claim in Haaretz that an IDF helicopter that arrived at the site of the Supernova festival near Re’im on October 7 may have killed some Israeli civilians.

The Haaretz article in Hebrew cites an unnamed Israel Police official saying that its investigation of the incident found that an IDF helicopter at the site that was firing at terrorists “apparently harmed a few partygoers who were in the area.”

Even the israelis admit they killed their own. Now they’ll never admit the scale but we already know they lie about casualty counts endlessly, so the important point is they fact they’ve been forced to admit it at all.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israel-police-slams-haaretz-claim-idf-helicopter-may-have-harmed-civilians-on-oct-7/

And from a different article:

The left-wing daily Haaretz said the investigation centred on an incident in Kibbutz Be'eri, one of the worst hit communities, in which a house was shelled by a tank, killing 12 Israeli hostages held by Palestinian Hamas gunmen.

What the fuck does that matter?

The author says exactly what it matters in the next sentence… do you know how reading works lol?

Yes, 0.1% is a big part of any country to lose overnight BUT if israel didn’t try to turn this into justification for a genocide, and instead only responded with a couple weeks of missile strikes and pregnant women sniped, then they would be far better off today than they actually are, which is basically with their back against a chasm and the whole world gradually getting more and more pissed off at them

I’ll just say two things:

I commend Dom for allowing the Unz Review to be posted here, when he could just, like most other forums (like the default communities of .win), issue a blanket domain ban and point to an article or two by a hyperbolic (funny) dick like Andrew Anglin as “justification”.

I do find it funny though, because at one point I had a comment removed for bringing up “the ZOG” - in this article, we have (jewish) Ron Unz concurring with two young jewish journalists (Aaron Maté and Max Blumenthal) that “the ZOG” is at this point a reality undeniable by any sane, honest person who looks at the world today

From later in the article:

All of these barbaric atrocities have been justified and encouraged by the sweeping public statements of top Israeli leaders. For example, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly identified the Palestinians with the tribe of Amalek, whom the Hebrew god commanded must be exterminated down to the last newborn baby. Just a few days ago, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that it would be “just and moral” for Israel to totally exterminate all two million Palestinians in Gaza, but he emphasized that world public opinion was currently preventing his government from taking that important step.

I think that popular sentiment is more powerful than we often give it credit, and I think the world’s opinion of israel has never been lower.

I think the greatest threat in the future is what happens if the israelis ever actually feel like they’re going to lose the blind obedient support of the west. Too many nukes and too many anti-human psychopaths in that government.

Today marks the one year anniversary of the remarkably successful Hamas raid on Israel, in which some 1,500 lightly-armed Islamic militants from Gaza so greatly humiliated the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his country’s entire national security establishment. The consequences of these last twelve months have been enormous, not merely for the Jewish State and the rest of the Middle East, but also for America and the entire world.

For many fatal diseases the cause of death is less the result of the infection itself than that of the defensive immune system, whose massive over-reaction destroys vital tissue, killing the entire organism. And I think that the Hamas raid of October 7, 2023 and the Israeli response may eventually be seen in this light.

Some 1,200 Israelis died that day, probably many or most of them killed by their own country’s panic-stricken and trigger-happy IDF forces, whose Apache helicopters were ordered to blast anything that moved. Although such losses were hardly insignificant in a Jewish population of some 7.2 million and the national humiliation was enormous, if the Israeli government had merely been content to launch a few weeks of punitive bombing attacks against Gaza and then grudgingly accept an exchange of prisoners with its Hamas adversaries, I doubt the results would have been too serious.

Israel had held many thousands of Palestinians without charges or trial and often under brutal conditions, so releasing these in exchange for the 200-odd Israelis Hamas had carried back to Gaza would have meant a huge loss of face for the Jewish State, but hardly a threat to the country’s survival. The Israelis could have merely fired a few of their complacent and incompetent local military commanders and strengthened their Gaza defenses, and matters would have probably gone on much like before.

Israel had been riding high at that point, on the very verge of accomplishing its decades-long project of fully normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia, the most powerful Arab state. Israel’s close friends totally dominated the Biden Administration and Donald Trump promised to do even more for that country if he somehow managed to regain the White House. The country had just celebrated the 75th anniversary of its founding, and its international strategic position seemed better than it had been in many years, so it could have easily taken its Hamas debacle in stride.

But after the events of the last twelve months, I tend to doubt that the country will survive much longer in anything like its existing form, and its collapse may also take down with it the entire political structure of organized Jewry worldwide, which today so heavily dominates both America and much of the rest of the world. While Israel may face very serious risks from the major regional war its government seeks to ignite, I think the greatest threat to its existence comes from the massive distribution of devastating information that has taken place during this last year.

If the Israeli government had cut its losses and exchanged prisoners with Hamas, the country might have been humiliated but Netanyahu would have been utterly destroyed. So partly because of his own desperate political situation, he reacted in very different fashion, unleashing massive, relentless attacks against Gaza’s helpless couple of million civilians, clearly hoping to save his own political skin by using the Hamas raid as an excuse to kill or expel all the Palestinians in that enclave and afterwards in the West Bank. This would have allowed him to establish his name in history as Israel’s second founding father, finally creating the Greater Israel that all of his predecessors had failed to achieve. This bold project was certainly spurred on by the small extremist political parties upon whom the political survival of his government depended, whose ideological leadership regarded those territories as their God-given heritage under the fierce version of the religious Judaism that they followed.

Continued in the article

Lmao

the Author is dead. And we have killed him. - communietchze

You’re getting pounded for some reason but I remember exactly what you’re talking about.

At one point, you were woke if you knew 9/11 was an inside job to fuel the perpetual war machine, you were woke if you knew about Tuskegee and the way mental institutions were co-opted by cia experimentation programs.

Then one day, all of a sudden, woke meant “aMeRiCa iS fOuNdEd oN rAciSm”

It sure as hell wasn’t the people talking about 9/11 and the control of the banking cartels that caused this switch to occur…

If we wash our hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless we side with the powerful - we don't remain neutral

I’ll start by saying thank you, for your words and for what you freely admit in the hopes of common understanding. I too freely admit I’ve taken a somewhat defensive posture in this thread to what I’ve perceived as much unjustified hostility (though I understand where you’re coming from if you were to say something like “as the person presenting an idea which is quite far outside of the mainstream, it’s incumbent upon you to explain things and facilitate a smooth discussion” - you’re totally right, and I admittedly failed at / neglected to adequately explain the status of the “Hard Problem” of consciousness - I just think that on top of that there was unjustified hostility, terseness, dismissiveness, etc)

So with all that being said, thanks again for the genuine attempts at discussion. Even if we don’t always start on common ground, you’re obviously not being trying to be dismissive which I appreciate.

So, to the crux:

it all rests on the assumption that consciousness must be a special irreducible parameter that matter does or doesn't have

Right - and so, the question becomes “what does the data/observations say about consciousness?”

It should go without saying that by suggesting a non-physical aspect of consciousness (non-“materialist”), one is by no means denying the material aspects of consciousness right. Of course, you know, brain trauma leading to brain-damage, brain-death, or death itself are obvious realities. Same with brain scans and our attempts to “map the brain”/“map our consciousness in the brain”, and a million other clear indications of the materialist nature/aspects of consciousness. That all goes without saying, and everything in this discussion is (ideally) taking that as a foundation to build on.

However - I think that same acknowledgement should, simultaneously, recognize that while we’ve kind of… “mapped the shores of the lake called consciousness” through the last hundred years of research and advancements, we still fundamentally understand very little. Y’know? We aren’t even sure if it’s water in this lake (I.e. what is the “material” of consciousness), we aren’t sure the source of the lake (underground spring? Mountain runoff? Rain? Etc - to continue the analogy is the source just…”random chance”? A panpsychic universe? God? Etc).

Also, I think consciousness must be recognized as a “special” state of matter. Special in the sense that we have no clear theories on the “switch” so-to-speak which delineates “conscious matter” and “unconscious matter” (even just saying “electrical impulses” misses important nuances of the cutting edge research in the field). Many recent mainstream theories suggest the existence of quantum processes underlying consciousness (you’ve likely heard something about this, “microtubules” as these quantum-processors are called). Also, as sheldrake points out in the above linked video iirc, to call consciousness an “illusion” or “delusion” doesn’t cut it - those notions, comically, presuppose a consciousness to be deluded and thus can be rejected as “explanations” or “solutions” to the Hard Problem.

We can talk about “speech centers” of the brain, “motor centers” and so. But we can also survive a hemispherectomy (i.e. leaving the patient with just a single functioning hemisphere of the brain - and according to reports he was still “him” after the procedure). Yes of course the “seat” of consciousness is by all indications “the brain”, but I don’t think there is justification to claim that consciousness is an exclusively material thing local to, limited to, constrained to - the brain. For a bunch of reasons which people far smarter than me have theorized about and scientifically demonstrated, some of which I hoped to expose people to through these two lectures/videos.

I feel like we all conceptually understand that our consciousness is non-physical (the famous line about “how much does a thought weigh?”) - it seems obvious (to me atleast) though that our thoughts / consciousness / feelings are not strictly “physical”, “material” things, thus the need for an explanation for the non-material aspects of the phenomena we call “consciousness”

TLDR - Just to boil that all down (sorry for the ramble it’s just how I communicate lol):

Operating under the best mainstream theories of the day, consciousness appears to have non-materialist aspects. Even if we imagine consciousness is nothing more than the “interference pattern” (trying to analogize) of billions or trillions of neuronal logic gates, we still observe non-local, seemingly non-material/non-physical aspects of consciousness which can’t (currently, according to some perspectives) be explained with a materialist model. Lastly and most importantly, consciousness is a “special” state of matter which can’t be dismissed as “illusion” because, as Sheldrake deftly points out, illusion presupposes a consciousness to experience the illusion

Again, sorry for the fkn novel lol. Heavy rain got in the way of anything more productive lmao.

Well I guess the answer must be over 9000

The plot of the 2019 movie Joker having marxist revolutionary messages…basically the thing you said…how many dildos to the head have you taken?

It's literally a series for liberals

That’s an interesting point/observation because even what I saw in the movie was basically just I thought it was asking “we all know people can fall through the cracks, what if society was nothing but a gaping pit?” - which, of course, feeds into the “revolutionary” narratives…and the one in the movie certainly seems a lot more like the Bolshevik Revolution than, say, the American Revolution lol

Which is just so lame and gay, especially when you consider that Quinn was fine when she was The Joker’s Robin (like in BTAS), and (this is reaching deep into the recesses of minutiae) weren’t the witches introduced as somehow being involved in forcing the birth of Darth Maul with their dark force magic?

It’s literally just “ok take that cool, established element from the story and crank the lame to 10 and the gay to 11”

When you make more than 5 posts a year each one can’t please everyone

Yeah, and I suppose the character is ultimately somewhat meaningless without his role as anchor/mirror/foil to Batman…

Though with the first movie I almost thought they pulled off an “antihero for our societal collapse” / “a sick society will breed sick citizens” angle, if they absolutely had to “make their own ‘real’ movie and just call it Joker to get it made” (like the video reveals was a motivation of the director, I had never heard any of that). But you’re right lmao the musical numbers and the spirit cooking lady didn’t bode well for this one.

>The chuds cost us our Harley Quinn spin off!!!!

So you admit you have no theory as to how consciousness arises from unconscious matter? Where is the issue with Sheldrake’s observation?

The “h8rs”, for the most part (certainly when I wrote that) weren’t in the sub thread where I wrote that. The haters were the people outwardly hostile and dismissive off the bat - what I was disappointed in and trying to improve in this sub thread were the opinions of the people who were merely dismissive with no justified rational other than “that’s not the mainstream view”. That’s why I wrote relatively long and not (on purpose) too “defensively” like i may have with some of the absolute cunts in other sub threads. In fact, that faggot at the bottom, Lauri, is literally downvoting his own comments {+0, -1} to try and frame me even more as a “defensive douchebag” - edit - crazy he just read this and went back and changed it. Doesn’t get more bad faith than that lmfao

In fact, I’ve mostly upvoted or not voted, despite the RAMPANT and BLATANT vote manipulation occurring ITT

Anyway - Thanks for sharing your views instead of just keeping up the dog pile, too bad though that there probably won’t be any discussion on them

You’re taking issue with a description of a YouTube video posted by some random guy who uploaded a video of a lecture from the same guy as in the OP. Neither of those people are me you drooling mongoloid, which would be obvious if you were a real, good faith user of the site.

I’ve been disrespectful of you?! Lmao - I've done nothing but try to engage with your points intellectually as opposed to the reactionary means used ITT which you just dogpiled onto. Your very first comment was just dismissing the entire discussion (in a chain of people dismissing the discussion), for no evidentiary reason beyond “I believe the materialists are right”. Like I said before, that’s great, but it’s not a theory.

Imagine not being able to count nor tell the difference between a molecule with 3 constituent atoms and an ion with two constituent atoms

Oh wait, I don’t need to imagine, it’s been yapping at me for 12+ hours now

Ironic, because everyone crying about trying to start a discussion on panpsychism is making blind appeals to the authority of the field of consciousness studies, which is hilarious because, again, the actual experts will be the first to admit they don’t have a fucking clue as to the roots of consciousness

peddling spiritual woo woo in their later years.

Lmao. Your ancestors knew panpsychism was true. It’s so funny that you cap off your dismissal of an “appeal to authority” with “woo woo”, the most base and disingenuous appeal to the authority of the scientific establishment that exists. You’re right though I should know my audience better, I always forget how many angsty atheists made their way here from reddit because they weren’t allowed to call stuff gay anymore lol.

Anyway, I won’t waste any more of your time with such worthless ideas. Enjoy your Tuesday champ.

Lmfao? You mean your snide statement that H2O and -OH have “the same atoms”? First of all, you aren’t even right about that lmfao and second of all such a vapid and facile statement misses Sheldrake’s point in delineating conscious and unconscious matter entirely.

There is no special consciousness field.

You, and other materialists, will assert this. Fine, that’s the commonly accepted paradigm that modern science operates in. That doesn’t change the fact that, just as the panpsychist asserts the field as the beginning of an explanation, the materialist asserts the field as a (d)illusion. Or an epiphenomenon of layered, but purely material process. Great, whatever, I would have welcomed people trying to make the case for that world view, especially if they were capable of admitting their view is, much like the panpsychists, an assertion, not in evidence (maybe if we spend another hundred years doing brain scans it will be, but it currently isn’t, and personally I doubt it can even be discovered in a materialist framework).

But that’s not what’s happened. All the people taking issue are just spitting on the ideas presented, as if they’re fucking geniuses and the Oxford PhD biochemist with 300 peer reviewed papers and 2 dozen books is a drooling idiot. Well, chances are they just didn’t understand what was being said, frankly. It was so far over their heads they somehow mistook it for something beneath their consideration.