Elections Don't Exist

[Skywatcher]

@detour1111

The Semitic race includes both Jews and Arabs. Someone who is anti-Semitic would therefore be one who hates Jews and Arabs equally.

What I am consistently amazed about is that if, in fact, Zionist extremism is in control of the world’s infrastructure - money, credit, politics, manufacturing, the media and war machines… and it can be demonstrated that this is true, for Zionists can be either Jews or Christians - then what kind of a mind is willing to reduce/rationalize this entire issue to a simple pornographic hatred of Jews?

I’ll tell you: The mind of a coward. Have a nice day, gentlemen.

Stormfront sent you here to mess with us, right?

[Darth_Panda]

@BrainGlutton

Ah, yes. A truly fascinating read on this topic is Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From, by Daniel Pipes. He traces the whole history of conspiracy-theorizing in modern Western Civ back to the 18th Century; and also recounts how the tradition (yes, it deserves to be so characterized) has had its anti-semitic* and its non-anti-semitic (just as paranoid, but positing very different sorts of demons) branches almost from the beginning, and how the two don’t always get along.

First time I’ve encounterd a live example.

• Pipes also recounts who the word “anti-semitic” was coined by Jewish-conspiracy-theorists as a name for themselves. Before the mid-19th-Century, the entirely traditional hostility to Jews in Europe was called in German Judenhaas (“Jew-hate”), and was essentially religious in nature (i.e., a Jew could in theory escape it by converting). But to the self-ID’d antisemites, Jews had an evil, parasitic, string-pulling nature by heredity.

Where the fuck do people get the time to come up with this shit?

The blind moogles.

[BrainGlutton]

@FinnAgain

Speaking of which, our racist OP still hasn’t pointed out a single paragraph in his former cited book about how the Jews had the nerve to exist in China which shows they were in control of it. I’m sure he’ll get around to that sooner or later.

Well, for Heaven’s sake, what more do you want? They’re always in control of a country if they live there! (Don’t let the pogroms and holocausts fool you, the Elders of Zion are behind all of those; protective coloration is important when your people are not numerous.)

[BrainGlutton]

@FinnAgain

I’m still amazed that people use the word “Zionist” as if it meant something other than “person who thinks that the state of Israel should, ya know, exist”. It’s pretty clear that it’s being used to mean “person in thrall to Dah Joooz!”

Be fair now, be fair. detour1111 is not talking about Zionism, he is talking about “Zionist extremism,” which obviously is something essentially different.

[FinnAgain]

He’s conflating Zionism as a whole and Zionists as individuals with his paranoid conspiracy fantasy and calling it all “Zionist extremism”. Emphasis mine.

@detour1111

Zionist extremism is in control of the world’s infrastructure - money, credit, politics, manufacturing, the media and war machines… and it can be demonstrated that this is true, for Zionists can be either Jews or Christians

This is someone who believes that Jews and/or Israel are at the heart of a plot which has been controlling the United States (and the world) for at least a century and a half. Under such a situation it’s pretty much physically impossible to have a view of Zionism which is at all distinct from “Zionist extremism”.

[BrainGlutton]

@FinnAgain

He’s conflating Zionism as a whole and Zionists as individuals with his paranoid conspiracy fantasy and calling it all “Zionist extremism”. Emphasis mine.

This is someone who believes that Jews and/or Israel are at the heart of a plot which has been controlling the United States (and the world) for at least a century and a half. Under such a situation it’s pretty much physically impossible to have a view of Zionism which is at all distinct from “Zionist extremism”.

Actually, there are such things as Christian Zionists. But, I’ve always read them as thinking too differently from Jewish Zionists to really be in cahoots with them.

[BrainGlutton]

@Darth_Panda

Where the fuck do people get the time to come up with this shit?

The blind moogles.

[shrug] Same place they find the time to make revolutions. All this conspiracy-theorizing got its start as a way to explain the French Revolution.

[FinnAgain]

@BrainGlutton

Actually, there are such things as Christian Zionists. But, I’ve always read them as thinking too differently from Jewish Zionists to really be in cahoots with them.

You’re not grokking. Of course there are Christian Zionists. The point is that he conflated Zionists as a whole with “Zionist extremism” and has put all of that into the context of claiming a global conspiracy. He’s also made it quite clear who the ‘bankers’ he’s talking about are. And that means that even when we’re talking about CZ’s, in his paranoid fantasyscape, they’re pawns of the Jews.

[BrainGlutton]

@FinnAgain

You’re not grokking. Of course there are Christian Zionists. The point is that he conflated Zionists as a whole with “Zionist extremism” and has put all of that into the context of claiming a global conspiracy. He’s also made it quite clear who the ‘bankers’ he’s talking about are. And that means that even when we’re talking about CZ’s, in his paranoid fantasyscape, they’re pawns of the Jews.

Oh, of course! I get it now! They’re Shabbes goyim!

[Monty]

Hey, detour, tell us about the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001. Go ahead.

[BrainGlutton]

@Monty

Hey, detour, tell us about the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001. Go ahead.

:dubious: You know perfectly well that was a Mormon job.

[Punoqllads]

@Alessan

There’s this guy I know, who is not only both Jewish and a Mason, but is also a Israeli Army veteran, an employee of the U.S. State Department, and - no joke - a Bonesman. We’ve been thinking what else he can join to make sure his domination is complete.

Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission.

[BrainGlutton]

@Punoqllads

Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission.

Nah, they ain’t nuttin’, he should join the Elks and the Rotarians!

[trabajabamos]

I think the important takeaway from this thread is that I need to file the phrase “international money interests” away next to the lizard men and the Bilderberg Group in my “frothing wildman lexicon” for future use.

[FinnAgain]

@trabajabamos

“international money interests”

Nah, racist conspiracy nuts generally use “international bankers” instead.

[trabajabamos]

@FinnAgain

Nah, racist conspiracy nuts generally use “international bankers” instead.

I just feel like “money interests” sounds crazier than “bankers” and is well suited to the fun internet game of “say something crazier than the crazy guy.”

[Monty]

Wait a moment, here. I was born in Germany, am American, live in Korea, and I’m interested in money. Oh, no! They got to me, too!

[clairobscur]

@detour1111

The Talmud also endorses having sex with three year-old girls .

I’m intrigued by this one. On what is this based on?
Not asking the OP, but rather someone knowledgeable who would know the origin of this statement.

[tomndebb]

@clairobscur

I’m intrigued by this one. On what is this based on?

Not asking the OP, but rather someone knowledgeable who would know the origin of this statement.

There are various passages in the Talmud that discuss fairly arcane issues with very detailed hypotheticals. In one of them, a discussion of dowries involves determining the value to be calculated for a woman, with a higher value being ascribed to a virgin vs a non-virgin. In the midst of that discussion, one author* put forth (in rather metaphorical terms) that having sex with a child who was only three would not result in the loss of virginity. However, nothing in that passage or any other actually condones sex with a three-year-old and other passages addressing actual sexual behavior, per se, rather than the social effects of a hypothetical, condemn any sexual activity with children.

*The Talmud is written as a collection of arguments, in which multiple authors may have contributed to any number of discussions. The discussions were written down and collected as they were argued, not simply as the ultimate decision was rendered. Thus, many hypotheticals are included with both the “winning” and “losing” sides presented. Most of the really stupid claims made about the Talmud are taken from hypotheticals in which both the overall context and the final result of the discussion are excluded.

[BrainGlutton]

BTW, tomndebb, would Board rules allow someone like detour1111 to start a Pit thread baldly labeled “I Pit Jews”? (Or negroes, or whatever.) Or is some kind of euphemism always necessary?