[All or Nothing]

(11-15-2016 05:17 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Basically, we have Christians on the Republican side, and Talmudic Jews on the Democrat side.

I do think you are wrong in your characterization of the Jewish people. This line above really truly highlights what you are really talking about. What you are describing with the Talmudic Jews can really truly be better characterized as ethnic dissent.

You have simply embedded the behavior of the Jewish people in the United States into an overarching narrative that paints them as the antagonists (or their culture as antagonistic), when really truly the root of it is ethnic dissent. I think the creation of a narrative around one group of people has ultimately led to a conclusion derived from fallacious reasoning, especially when you can arrive at a totally different understanding of what is going on when the description of Talmudic Jews is stripped of its narrative.

I would draw upon the relationship of Coptic people vs Arabs, Turks vs Armenians, Boers vs African people, Chinese vs Japanese, Mongolians vs Chinese and you would see parallels in the disputes that also happen between Christians and Jews in the United States. The only thing that separates the Jewish people from other ethnic groups in the United States is that they are the second most visible ethnic group following White Christians, so they become an easy target for trying to explain the culture clash that is going on in this country as our demographics evolve.

What you are describing is a global phenomenon and this is one of the things that I have actually found interesting about living a representative democracy is that ethnic dissent comes out through taking sides in political parties and over legislation rather than through violence. Probably one of the things that makes representative democracy superior to other forms of government.

Also, the political dissent you are describing has existed through the history of the United States! I would look into prohibition to see what I am talking about. The core of Prohibition was about white Anglo-Saxon Protestants thinking that the other non-WASP groups of Europeans moving to the US were heathens addicted to alcohol. The period of prohibition was actually identical to this one in terms of the changing demographics, culture clash, and ultimately the assimilation of the migrant groups into one larger majority ethnic group that is now described as "white".

One interesting thing I find now is how "white" is evolving as a modern term as a wider array of migrant groups that includes non-Europeans are beginning to assimilate into the majority ethnic group now perceive themselves as "white". It shows how cultural dynamism, acceptance and assimilation generally wins out in due time.

^I realize the above is a bit of a word salad and is all over the place, just getting out all of my ideas.

[Samseau]

(11-22-2016 10:34 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

(11-15-2016 05:17 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Basically, we have Christians on the Republican side, and Talmudic Jews on the Democrat side.

I do think you are wrong in your characterization of the Jewish people. This line above really truly highlights what you are really talking about. What you are describing with the Talmudic Jews can really truly be better characterized as ethnic dissent.

You have simply embedded the behavior of the Jewish people in the United States into an overarching narrative that paints them as the antagonists (or their culture as antagonistic), when really truly the root of it is ethnic dissent. I think the creation of a narrative around one group of people has ultimately led to a conclusion derived from fallacious reasoning, especially when you can arrive at a totally different understanding of what is going on when the description of Talmudic Jews is stripped of its narrative.

I would draw upon the relationship of Coptic people vs Arabs, Turks vs Armenians, Boers vs African people, Chinese vs Japanese, Mongolians vs Chinese and you would see parallels in the disputes that also happen between Christians and Jews in the United States. The only thing that separates the Jewish people from other ethnic groups in the United States is that they are the second most visible ethnic group following White Christians, so they become an easy target for trying to explain the culture clash that is going on in this country as our demographics evolve.

Your analysis fails here.

Second most visible ethnic group? Only a Talmud would believe this. They are the least visible ethnic group, which is why most Whites barely notice their insidious influence.

Most races are highly visible for their skin color. Jews look like random Whites to most people. You need a trained eye to spot the Jew in most cases, although Jews are well-attuned to seeing other Jews.

Thus only a Talmudic Jew could think what you wrote above, and my guess is you're Jewish.

Quote:

What you are describing is a global phenomenon and this is one of the things that I have actually found interesting about living a representative democracy is that ethnic dissent comes out through taking sides in political parties and over legislation rather than through violence. Probably one of the things that makes representative democracy superior to other forms of government.

Also, the political dissent you are describing has existed through the history of the United States! I would look into prohibition to see what I am talking about. The core of Prohibition was about white Anglo-Saxon Protestants thinking that the other non-WASP groups of Europeans moving to the US were heathens addicted to alcohol. The period of prohibition was actually identical to this one in terms of the changing demographics, culture clash, and ultimately the assimilation of the migrant groups into one larger majority ethnic group that is now described as "white".

One interesting thing I find now is how "white" is evolving as a modern term as a wider array of migrant groups that includes non-Europeans are beginning to assimilate into the majority ethnic group now perceive themselves as "white". It shows how cultural dynamism, acceptance and assimilation generally wins out in due time.

^I realize the above is a bit of a word salad and is all over the place, just getting out all of my ideas.

Everything else here is false because of the false premise above. Jews are the least visible ethnic group in America.

One of the reasons I write about Talmudic Jews is that if people like me did not, most would have no idea of what's going on.

Also the idea that America has some kind of cyclical history is quite frankly nothing but superstition.

[nmmoooreland20]

Quite frankly, I highly doubt the Talmudic jews (i.e. Lubbavitch, Chassidic) vote or bother themselves with politics at all.

The historical recap of Christians and "Talmudic Jews" was interesting however.

One question I've been left with after reading Samseau's thoughts herein is how he reconciles maintaining "love thy neighbor" as his guiding ethos but staunchly rejects globalism. Unless neighbor refers strictly to those in close proximity, and not humans in general, as I've understood the phrase to reference.

Samseau, if you care to elaborate, would be very interested.

[Bear Hands]

^^^^

The point you're asking him about neighbors is literally in the second post under the section, "What the Republican Party Must Do For This Country to Overcome Racial Issues and Survive: Become Better Christians."

A sizable branch of my family is Jewish due to my maternal grandfather. He married a Christian woman, so his children and grandchildren are not Jewish by their criteria. A lot of what Samseau says about brainwashed Jews in the US fits with my experience. They are far more concerned with their Jewish-ness than the rest of the family is with their whiteness or Christian-ness. Judging by their lifestyles and the example set by my great-grandfather who immigrated to the US, they should be conservatives, but they are not. They're obsessed with racism and gender equality, ignorant to the fact that within their own family they treat the non-Jews like servants. They're ready to fight for someone else's cause while their own house is in disarray.

[polar]

^
Bear Hands,

Have you met Paul Ryan?

[Irenicus]

[All or Nothing]

(11-23-2016 05:46 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Your analysis fails here.

Second most visible ethnic group? Only a Talmud would believe this. They are the least visible ethnic group, which is why most Whites barely notice their insidious influence.

Most races are highly visible for their skin color. Jews look like random Whites to most people. You need a trained eye to spot the Jew in most cases, although Jews are well-attuned to seeing other Jews.

Visible as in the Jewish people are a well known ethnic group in the United States. Also, a lot of Jewish people are openly Jewish in the U.S. This year Mark Zuckerberg went onto Facebook to declare he was celebrating Passover, Seinfeld was a comedy show that was largely about New York Jews, John Stewart is known to be Jewish.

If Jewish people are hidden, then why are so many openly and proudly Jewish, and not only that why do so many declare their political views very openly?

Quote:

Thus only a Talmudic Jew could think what you wrote above, and my guess is you're Jewish.

I'm Catholic. Also, this accusation helped me realizes what is driving this aspect of your ideology.

Accusing me of being a Talmud for simply disagreeing with you is the same thing Joseph McCarthy did during the Red Scare or what the accusers did during the Salem witch trials.

Replace Talmud with witch and you sound like someone straight out 1600's Salem. Or try replacing Talmud with Communist and you sound like Joseph McCarthy.

I'm just trying to point out how this line of thinking is limited and provides an easy scape goat. Not broad enough for my tastes personally.

Quote:

Also the idea that America has some kind of cyclical history is quite frankly nothing but superstition.

I did not say America had a cyclical history. I said that certain aspects of human behavior are coming out again because certain environmental factors (like demographic changes) are showing up again.

There is a saying: History doesn't repeat itself but it often rhymes. I am simply looking at the parallels between now and the the past, the rhymes.

[Bear Hands]

(11-23-2016 08:41 PM)polar Wrote:  

^
Bear Hands,

Have you met Paul Ryan?

No. I'd like to box him for charity. I'll study Holyfield vs. Tyson II to prepare.

[Sp5]

(11-19-2016 11:21 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-19-2016 02:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

2. Your distinction about "Talmudic" Jews seems like an evasion, a distinction without a difference. If you blame the Jews, own it, or define more precisely what you mean, citing the Talmud and examples in real life/history.

You're historically ignorant but that's okay, most people are on this issue. Very, very, very few people understand the toxic history of Talmudism, the book written by the surviving Jews of the Roman-Jewish wars who rejected Jesus. This is easily a major thread topic in of itself, which I will write about someday.

I forgot to mention this in the OP. The History of the Jews: Christianity and Talmudism is a separate thread I will create someday.

We Orthodox still know about this history. The executive summary, which can easily be researched yourself on the internet/wikipedia, is that after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the genocide of most of the world's Jewry, the surviving Jews split into two factions.

Those who accepted Christ, and those who rejected him. The ones who accepted Christ and his teachings to love thy Neighbor and went on to become symbiotes to their host cultures, and created Western Civilization as we know it. The ones who rejected Christ only loved their fellow Jew, and went on to become racist parasites to their host cultures who have destroyed many civilizations in their quest for world racial supremacy.

A good tree produces good fruit, a poisoned tree produces no fruit.

Zionism is but one of many logical outgrowths of the Talmudic worldview of Jewish supremacism. As was Communism, Feminism, and post-modernism (all major subjects that would take forever to explain here but rest assured I will in the History of Jews thread) are outgrowths of various Talmudic thoughts.

Pharisaic thought could not reconcile the fact that the Old Testament original covenant promised them worldwide domination with Christ's claim of being the Messiah telling them to Love thy Neighbor instead. For the Pharisees envisioned raw power and control, but the Messiah told them they would rule over others with Love instead. The cognitive dissonance was so great they instead murdered Christ, who also prophesized that not only would Jerusalem be burned to the ground for their sins, but that Jewish families would become divided as a result of Christ himself. Everything Christ said came to pass.

The resulting cognitive dissonance of Christ's teachings against the apparent promises of Jewish supremacy did indeed cause a permanent split within the Jewish world. Those who accepted Christ stopped calling themselves Jews and saw the title as irrelevant, wrote the Bible, called themselves Christians. Those who hated Christ continued to call themselves Jews, focused on racial purity (only marrying women of Jewish descent), and wrote the Talmud.

Because of the extreme amount of mental gymnastics necessary for Jews to reconcile the fact of Christ not being the Messiah with the fact of Christ correctly prophesying all events that came to pass, virtually all of the Talmud is a work of gibberish and contradictions that cannot be understood logically but instead thematically. Reading the Talmud is like reading the work of madmen who are feverishly trying to rationalize why Jesus was not the messiah and instead why the real messiah is yet to come, and that the real reason for the destruction of Jerusalem was not because they killed the messiah but because they didn't follow precepts 1-10,425 of Mosaic law perfectly enough. The Talmud is nothing more than a Jew running on the Hamster wheel.

Instead, just like with other irrational subject matter such as women explaining their preferences for men, it is best to pay no attention to what they say and instead follow what they do. Which is to say, the Talmudic Jews continued their beliefs in Jewish supremacism, and they prove it to themselves by amassing wealth beyond the other races, getting away with crimes against their neighbors, conspiring against their neighbors, and God would supposedly never care. The Talmud enshrines many things as holy which were are sins within the Old Testament; as such the cognitive dissonance hallucinations of the Talmud became complete.

In order to maintain the illusion Christ was not the messiah, they had to actively become sinners against many of the original teachings of the Old Testament; this hypocrisy was not lost on the early Christian Jews of the time. The ensuing rift between the Christians and Talmudic Jews became permanent in the third century, most accurately chronicled by John Chrysostom, one of the Church's fathers, in his homily Against the Jews. This is so much biting wisdom and criticism of the Talmuds in this homily that the Talmuds continue to slander and defame this homily at any chance they get; even the wikipedia page on it is slanted as all hell.

For now I will end this discussion with a quote from Chrysostom:

Quote:

(2) Since there are some who think of the synagogue as a holy place, I must say a few words to them. Why do you reverence that place? Must you not despise it, hold it in abomination, run away from it? They answer that the Law and the books of the prophets are kept there. What is this? Will any place where these books are be a holy place? By no means! This is the reason above all others why I hate the synagogue and abhor it. They have the prophets but not believe them; they read the sacred writings but reject their witness-and this is a mark of men guilty of the greatest outrage.

(3) Tell me this. If you were to see a venerable man, illustrious and renowned, dragged off into a tavern or den of robbers; if you were to see him outraged, beaten, and subjected there to the worst violence, would you have held that tavern or den in high esteem because that great and esteemed man had been inside it while undergoing that violent treatment? I think not. Rather, for this very reason you would have hated and abhorred the place.

[..]

What else do you wish me to tell you? Shall I tell you of their plundering, their covetousness, their abandonment of the poor, their thefts, their cheating in trade? the whole day long will not be enough to give you an account of these things. But do their festivals have something solemn and great about them? They have shown that these, too, are impure. Listen to the prophets; rather, listen to God and with how strong a statement he turns his back on them: "I have found your festivals hateful, I have thrust them away from myself".

When Chrysostom spoke of Jews he meant the Talmuds; he of course knew that Christ himself was a Jew as were a great many of the original converts, but the Talmud was still a work in it's infancy and completely unknown to him. He did not see Jewishness as a racial entity but a cultural one, this was common as all converts to Christianity, including Jewish ones, became Christians and lost their old identity.

"there is not here Jew or Greek, there is not here servant nor freeman, there is not here male and female, for all ye are one in Christ Jesus;" - Galatians 3:28.

Of course, with today's DNA technology it is easy to identify one's racial origins and separate it from one's culture, but back then it was impossible and as such people did not even think about it. You were a Jew or you were a Christian. Today I use the word Talmud over Jew because it is far more meaningful than mere racial identification; additionally, anti-semites have poisoned discourse to the point that anything racial Jewish is toxic, including Christianity. Therefore in order to deal with the racist Talmudic Jew and the racist anti-Semite, the distinction between Jew and Talmudic Jew must be made.

And that is why your claim of Talmudic Jew being a distinction without a difference is false and historically ignorant, but there is so much more to talk about on this and it deserves it's own thread in the Deep forum.

So if I understand you correctly, "Talmudic Jews" are Jews who have not "accepted Christ." In other words, what most people call "Jews," apart from the small number of Jewish Christian converts, e.g. "Jews for Jesus."

But ok, if you say that's not a distinction without a difference, as I say, it's up to you. I look forward to your exposition on the subject. Since I don't see a difference, I'll just continue to use the term "the Jews" to refer to whom you are talking about.

One issue we have is that many of your beliefs come out of your own religious faith and may not be able to be factually challenged: the Jews are bad because they "rejected" Christ.

In a discussion like this, only historical facts are useful. Faith is not susceptible to factual challenge, whether it be Hindu, Muslim, Judaic, or Christian.

So you say the Jews are "racist parasites to their host cultures who have destroyed many civilizations in their quest for world racial supremacy." Is that based on facts or on your religious faith? If on faith, like the Prophet's (PBUH) ascension to heaven or Mary's Immaculate Conception, there's no basis for discussion: you believe what you believe.

If we can stick to historical facts, which have been more accurately recorded in the last 100 years by film and audio recording, how could you claim that Jews have been "racist parasites" to say, the USA?

We could take the large number of Jewish Nobel prizewinners in physics, chemistry, and medicine, many of them Americans, as a refutation of this.

We could take Seinfield as a benefit to the USA. We could take Col. Aaron Bank, founder of the U.S. Army Special Forces. Einstein, Oppenheimer, Salk, Sabin, Feynman. Bernard Herrman, Danny Elfman.

Do the Jews in America "amass wealth beyond the other races?" Sure. Isn't hard work, entrepreneurial thinking, and the free market a good thing? Your animus against the Jews just seems like the bitter envy I also heard from West Africans about the Lebanese business community, Kenyans about Indians, and Filipinos and Malays about Chinese. Same-o. No need for verbose explication of "Talmudism," just envy!

Under any theory of economics, Jewish business activity (predominantly small business owners) has benefited the USA tremendously over the last 100 years, so I don't get the beef there.

"Getting away with crimes?" Jews don't have a high crime rate, but Bernie Madoff is in jail for a long time, for example. Don't know what you're talking about there.

Again, if your belief is faith-based rather than historically based or empirically-based, let us know. I'm dealing with the real world manifested in the last century.

[Samseau]

(11-24-2016 12:09 AM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

(11-23-2016 05:46 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Your analysis fails here.

Second most visible ethnic group? Only a Talmud would believe this. They are the least visible ethnic group, which is why most Whites barely notice their insidious influence.

Most races are highly visible for their skin color. Jews look like random Whites to most people. You need a trained eye to spot the Jew in most cases, although Jews are well-attuned to seeing other Jews.

Visible as in the Jewish people are a well known ethnic group in the United States. Also, a lot of Jewish people are openly Jewish in the U.S. This year Mark Zuckerberg went onto Facebook to declare he was celebrating Passover, Seinfeld was a comedy show that was largely about New York Jews, John Stewart is known to be Jewish.

If Jewish people are hidden, then why are so many openly and proudly Jewish, and not only that why do so many declare their political views very openly?

You just proved my point. If these people did not proclaim their Jewishness, the average American would have no idea they were.

Quote:

Quote:

Thus only a Talmudic Jew could think what you wrote above, and my guess is you're Jewish.

I'm Catholic. Also, this accusation helped me realizes what is driving this aspect of your ideology.

If you are indeed telling the truth then my second guess is you have many Jewish friends. Either way your belief that Jews are easily identified is completely out of touch with reality.

I have no ideology. Reality is not an ideology. Guessing is not an ideology either.

Quote:

Accusing me of being a Talmud for simply disagreeing with you is the same thing Joseph McCarthy did during the Red Scare or what the accusers did during the Salem witch trials.

Replace Talmud with witch and you sound like someone straight out 1600's Salem. Or try replacing Talmud with Communist and you sound like Joseph McCarthy.

I'm just trying to point out how this line of thinking is limited and provides an easy scape goat. Not broad enough for my tastes personally.

Red scare? Witch trials? Please spare me the hysteria. Particularly hilarious is your lack of historical knowledge: the communists were led by Jews, which slaughtered 10x as many people ever died in a witch trial or holocaust.

Talmuds are not your friends. They are not most people's friends. Of the conservative Talmuds (i.e. the 30% who voted for Trump), the ones with sympathies to Christ, they can be good Neighbors but ultimately they remain rivals who place unjustified importance on their fellow Jew.

[Samseau]

(11-23-2016 07:09 PM)Bear Hands Wrote:  

^^^^

The point you're asking him about neighbors is literally in the second post under the section, "What the Republican Party Must Do For This Country to Overcome Racial Issues and Survive: Become Better Christians."

A sizable branch of my family is Jewish due to my maternal grandfather. He married a Christian woman, so his children and grandchildren are not Jewish by their criteria. A lot of what Samseau says about brainwashed Jews in the US fits with my experience. They are far more concerned with their Jewish-ness than the rest of the family is with their whiteness or Christian-ness. Judging by their lifestyles and the example set by my great-grandfather who immigrated to the US, they should be conservatives, but they are not. They're obsessed with racism and gender equality, ignorant to the fact that within their own family they treat the non-Jews like servants. They're ready to fight for someone else's cause while their own house is in disarray.

You refer to your cousins, yes? Your grandfather's children are Christian, but your cousins stayed Jewish. And you notice the implicit racism that all Jews harbor toward your side of the family (i.e. the gentile side).

Now imagine how this played out 2000 years ago, and eventually culminating in ~380 AD with Against the Jews by Chrysostom. The racism wears on everyone until the final divorce. This is why Talmuds usually get rejected by every society they are part of.

[Samseau]

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

So if I understand you correctly, "Talmudic Jews" are Jews who have not "accepted Christ." In other words, what most people call "Jews," apart from the small number of Jewish Christian converts, e.g. "Jews for Jesus."

But ok, if you say that's not a distinction without a difference, as I say, it's up to you. I look forward to your exposition on the subject. Since I don't see a difference, I'll just continue to use the term "the Jews" to refer to whom you are talking about.

You have presented no argument to defend your claim of why it's a distinction without a difference.

Quote:

One issue we have is that many of your beliefs come out of your own religious faith and may not be able to be factually challenged: the Jews are bad because they "rejected" Christ.

False. They are bad because they are racist, which comes with rejecting Christ's message of Neighbors being anyone.

Quote:

In a discussion like this, only historical facts are useful. Faith is not susceptible to factual challenge, whether it be Hindu, Muslim, Judaic, or Christian.

So you say the Jews are "racist parasites to their host cultures who have destroyed many civilizations in their quest for world racial supremacy." Is that based on facts or on your religious faith? If on faith, like the Prophet's (PBUH) ascension to heaven or Mary's Immaculate Conception, there's no basis for discussion: you believe what you believe.

If we can stick to historical facts, which have been more accurately recorded in the last 100 years by film and audio recording, how could you claim that Jews have been "racist parasites" to say, the USA?

Facts. The parasitical nature of Talmuds is easily observed within the USA. Look at the many industries they have taken over with racism. Look at the schools and universities they have taken over with racism. Look at the real estate markets of NYC and LA that have been taken over by the Talmuds.

The racism of the Talmuds is easily observable which is what fuels most anti-semitism.

Quote:

We could take the large number of Jewish Nobel prizewinners in physics, chemistry, and medicine, many of them Americans, as a refutation of this.

We could take Seinfield as a benefit to the USA. We could take Col. Aaron Bank, founder of the U.S. Army Special Forces. Einstein, Oppenheimer, Salk, Sabin, Feynman. Bernard Herrman, Danny Elfman.

I never said all Talmuds are bad, or do nothing good for their Neighbors. But as a whole they have been toxic. Just look at the Democratic party, and look at who fuels them financially and intellectually.

Quote:

Do the Jews in America "amass wealth beyond the other races?" Sure. Isn't hard work, entrepreneurial thinking, and the free market a good thing? Your animus against the Jews just seems like the bitter envy I also heard from West Africans about the Lebanese business community, Kenyans about Indians, and Filipinos and Malays about Chinese. Same-o. No need for verbose explication of "Talmudism," just envy!

Envy does not explain it at all. All of the groups you've mentioned are distinct from the Talmuds in that they keep to their own geographical area and are expected to be biased towards their own.

Conversely, Talmuds make a habit of spreading to other places, pretend to be impartial, and when anyone calls them out for their behavior they are met with accusations of being anti-semitic racists. This highly irritating and hypocritical behavior is why Talmuds are among the most hated groups in the world (for those who can recognize it).

Most Whites have no idea of what's going on (which is why Dylan Roof famously wrote if all Jews turned blue for a day everyone would understand them), but outside of the West many know: Muslim Arabs, Eastern Orthodox, and the Chinese are among the most Jew-wise in the world.

Quote:

Under any theory of economics, Jewish business activity (predominantly small business owners) has benefited the USA tremendously over the last 100 years, so I don't get the beef there.

Nah, whatever the USA has gained from Talmudic business has been lost in aid to Israeli (hundreds of billions), lost in bailouts to Talmudic banks (Goldman Sachs = usury scam), and lost to cultural degeneracy (promotion of porn, mass immigration, destruction of family, etc).

Quote:

"Getting away with crimes?" Jews don't have a high crime rate, but Bernie Madoff is in jail for a long time, for example. Don't know what you're talking about there.

Again, if your belief is faith-based rather than historically based or empirically-based, let us know. I'm dealing with the real world manifested in the last century.

The real world is all around you, all you need to do is look at it.

[The Beast1]

(11-23-2016 05:41 PM)nmmoooreland20 Wrote:  

One question I've been left with after reading Samseau's thoughts herein is how he reconciles maintaining "love thy neighbor" as his guiding ethos but staunchly rejects globalism. Unless neighbor refers strictly to those in close proximity, and not humans in general, as I've understood the phrase to reference.

Samseau, if you care to elaborate, would be very interested.

The reconciliation here is exactly what you think it is. Neighbor of,"Love thy neighbor" means people that are physically near you.

A family in Africa, Syria, or China isn't my neighbor anymore than someone in california is when I live in Iowa.

[Samseau]

Quote:

Feel free to offer critiques on this. I’m not set on any solutions to solve racial issues in America by any means. Also we don’t need to rush this issue. We have at least 10 years, I think. It takes awhile before those welfare kids grow up to vote, plus they vote at lower rates.

True to my word of not being set on any solutions, I have discovered something that would mean mandatory birth-control in exchange for welfare is not necessary.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db162.htm



We can see there has been a slight decline in the amount of unmarried births since the onset of the 08' crash. However, is this a trend or a mere blip?

If the trend continues to go down, then we know people are moving away from welfare families due to other reasons, such as men not wanting to pay child support and risk jail time for failure to pay.

However, if this is not part of the trend, but just a mere pause in upward trajectory, then I think we'll have no choice to push for a redesign of the welfare system (i.e. mandatory birth control).

Also, one thing I did not make clear in my OP, was that mandatory birth control is not just to check Black welfare families. There are also huge White and Latino welfare farms the Dems have created to get lots of votes, such as in Maine and Mass (White welfare mommas everywhere), and New Mexico and California for Latino welfare farms.

[Samseau]

(11-24-2016 09:46 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(11-23-2016 05:41 PM)nmmoooreland20 Wrote:  

One question I've been left with after reading Samseau's thoughts herein is how he reconciles maintaining "love thy neighbor" as his guiding ethos but staunchly rejects globalism. Unless neighbor refers strictly to those in close proximity, and not humans in general, as I've understood the phrase to reference.

Samseau, if you care to elaborate, would be very interested.

The reconciliation here is exactly what you think it is. Neighbor of,"Love thy neighbor" means people that are physically near you.

A family in Africa, Syria, or China isn't my neighbor anymore than someone in california is when I live in Iowa.

Not true. Neighbors are not just the ones near you which is what Christ made clear in the Good Samaritan parable. This is the difference between lower-case neighbor (neighbors by proximity) and upper-case Neighbors (Neighbors by love).

Your Neighbor could be anyone, but it is not everyone. Both the priest and the Levite walk right by the dying man, but the Samaritan stops to help (Samaritans did not live near Jews). Thus the implication is that the Jews were not Neighbors, but the Samaritan was.

Also, we can apply common sense to this story and think in terms of statistics; while it is true some Muslims will be good Neighbors, the vast majority of Muslims will not be Neighbors, etc.

Likewise in America we can see plenty of fellow patriotic Americans who are good to each other, but there are plenty of selfish pieces of shit who wouldn't do a damn thing to help you in need. Look at how city folk walk right by the homeless without even batting an eye.

Ultimately we must all be the judge of who our Neighbors are, but Christ leaves us with the message, "How you judge others is how God will judge you." So don't be too harsh in judging who your Neighbor is, lest you be judged unworthy as well.

[Sp5]

First, a general observation about your writings on the Jews.
Opinions ≠ facts.
You do not cite any facts in the form of historical examples, living person examples, or statistics, as I have, in your reply to me. It is all feelings and opinion. "Look at the world" and "Everybody knows" are not facts, are not a proof. Your arguments are weak, aka bullshit.

Example of a fact: Jews are disproportionately represented amongst science Nobel Prize winners, by the numbers.

Example of a feeling: "They (Jews) are racist." That is a mirror image of the worst sort of SJW-foolery.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

So if I understand you correctly, "Talmudic Jews" are Jews who have not "accepted Christ." In other words, what most people call "Jews," apart from the small number of Jewish Christian converts, e.g. "Jews for Jesus."

But ok, if you say that's not a distinction without a difference, as I say, it's up to you. I look forward to your exposition on the subject. Since I don't see a difference, I'll just continue to use the term "the Jews" to refer to whom you are talking about.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

You have presented no argument to defend your claim of why it's a distinction without a difference.

You've constructed this false distinction of "Talmudic Jews" to attempt to protect yourself from a self-admission or a charge of crude anti-Semitism. Jews who are Christian converts are not "Talmudic," according to you. They convert, and all of their heritage is wiped out, right?

What is your reasoning here? Is it that there is something in Judaism itself which accounts for bad behavior? Are Orthodox Jews worse or better than other Jews?

Less than 10% of Jews raised in religious Jewish households convert to non-Jewish religions. Among Orthodox, only about 6% http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/jewis...switching/

You have made a construct without explaining it or defending it. The construct makes no sense, but it encompasses at least 90% of what are commonly called "Jews" in the USA. So again, "the Jews" are what you are referring to.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

One issue we have is that many of your beliefs come out of your own religious faith and may not be able to be factually challenged: the Jews are bad because they "rejected" Christ.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

False. They are bad because they are racist, which comes with rejecting Christ's message of Neighbors being anyone.

"They are racist." As I said, a mirror of SJW-speak. Feelings. How are Jews particularly racist? Bring the facts. They favor their own? OK, I'll help you: of course they do. So does every other group. I am a member of a non-Jewish Catholic ethnic group. We are tribal, too. A powerful member of my tribe once gave me a break by saying "you're one of our own." There are plenty of examples of places in America and businesses in which being Italian, Irish, some kind of Hispanic, or even black would be a help and being something else would be a hurt. Think Cubans in Miami, Irish in Boston, Italians in NYC, old-line "Spanish" in Santa Fe. There are networks which are inaccessible to outsiders. Black Masons in the US Army one example.

The USA is founded upon a particularly universalist ideal, which is compounded by a free market economy and a secular legal culture. So ethnic particularism is always struggling against a powerful tide in the USA. For the Jews, this means they are as endangered as a distinct people in the USA as anyone else.

58% of Jews married since 2000 married non-Jews. Intermarriage means less adherence to Judaism and more intermarriage, as the children of mixed marriages are less observant and more prone to marry non-Jews. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/03/infog...americans/

And, of course, Jews have to hire non-Jews, not enough Jews to run their businesses exclusively. Maybe you didn't get hired, but I did, a couple of times.

So how are Jews particularly racist? Bring the facts, not your feelings.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

In a discussion like this, only historical facts are useful. Faith is not susceptible to factual challenge, whether it be Hindu, Muslim, Judaic, or Christian.

So you say the Jews are "racist parasites to their host cultures who have destroyed many civilizations in their quest for world racial supremacy." Is that based on facts or on your religious faith? If on faith, like the Prophet's (PBUH) ascension to heaven or Mary's Immaculate Conception, there's no basis for discussion: you believe what you believe.

If we can stick to historical facts, which have been more accurately recorded in the last 100 years by film and audio recording, how could you claim that Jews have been "racist parasites" to say, the USA?

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Facts. The parasitical nature of Talmuds is easily observed within the USA. Look at the many industries they have taken over with racism. Look at the schools and universities they have taken over with racism. Look at the real estate markets of NYC and LA that have been taken over by the Talmuds.

The racism of the Talmuds is easily observable which is what fuels most anti-semitism.

"Easily observable?" Where? Bring the facts. I see a lot of small business owners, auto parts guys, furniture salesmen, car salesmen. Lawyers and doctors, ok. Old-school haberdashers. Slightly different in style than a WASP or Italian peer in the same business, maybe, but the market rules and success can't be faked.

What "industries have they taken over with racism?" Hollywood? The Jews got in at the beginning. Mayer, Warner, Selznick, Goldwyn. They saw an opportunity. So what? Old Joe Kennedy was there, too, but left after making a bundle and fucking Gloria Swanson and Marlene Dietrich. But even now, it's not like the likes of even Mel Gibson are shut out, although I think Apocalypso is underrated because of his drunking rantings on the Jews.

Banking? Hardly. Look the list of top banking CEOs, in the US and worldwide. Yes, Dimon and Blankfein. But also Moynihan and Corbat. Look at boards of directors, like this one for Citigroup: http://www.citigroup.com/citi/about/our_...fdirectors

Law? Give me a break. I'm a lawyer. White-shoe firms are not even close to being predominantly Jewish or controlled by Jews.

Anyways, in a free-market economy, how can a group "take over" an industry? The market rules. You either sell what the market demands, or you fail.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

We could take the large number of Jewish Nobel prizewinners in physics, chemistry, and medicine, many of them Americans, as a refutation of this.

We could take Seinfield as a benefit to the USA. We could take Col. Aaron Bank, founder of the U.S. Army Special Forces. Einstein, Oppenheimer, Salk, Sabin, Feynman. Bernard Herrman, Danny Elfman.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

I never said all Talmuds are bad, or do nothing good for their Neighbors. But as a whole they have been toxic. Just look at the Democratic party, and look at who fuels them financially and intellectually.

Bring the facts. "Toxic" is just your feelings. Examples, please.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Do the Jews in America "amass wealth beyond the other races?" Sure. Isn't hard work, entrepreneurial thinking, and the free market a good thing? Your animus against the Jews just seems like the bitter envy I also heard from West Africans about the Lebanese business community, Kenyans about Indians, and Filipinos and Malays about Chinese. Same-o. No need for verbose explication of "Talmudism," just envy!

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Envy does not explain it at all. All of the groups you've mentioned are distinct from the Talmuds in that they keep to their own geographical area and are expected to be biased towards their own.

Conversely, Talmuds make a habit of spreading to other places, pretend to be impartial, and when anyone calls them out for their behavior they are met with accusations of being anti-semitic racists. This highly irritating and hypocritical behavior is why Talmuds are among the most hated groups in the world (for those who can recognize it).

Most Whites have no idea of what's going on (which is why Dylan Roof famously wrote if all Jews turned blue for a day everyone would understand them), but outside of the West many know: Muslim Arabs, Eastern Orthodox, and the Chinese are among the most Jew-wise in the world.

First, can't help but notice the citation to Dylan Roof, an incel loser who walked into a Christian church and murdered the good people there studying the Bible because they were black. WTF? Is Dylan Roof a credible source of "fact" or model of opinion for you, the Christian?

Second, I give you a list of ethnic groups who travelled outside the lands of their historic origin, like Lebanese in West Africa and Chinese in the Philippines, and you attempt to distinguish them from the Jews by saying "they keep to their own geographic area." WTF, makes no sense.

Third, you cite to groups who have the least experience of Jews - Muslim Arabs, Chinese, Orthodox - as being the most savvy about them. In truth, these have been the most isolated from Jews and the most exposed to anti-Semitic state propaganda. In the case of Muslim Arabs, Nasserite, Baathist, and Salafist propaganda. Baghdad used to have 200,000 Jews as recently as the 1930s. A combination of anti-Semitic attacks and Israeli false-flags and incentives moved them out. Is Baghdad better now? Was it even better in the 1960s? Similar things in Cairo. Those countries are corrupt, backward and violent, wow the lack of Jews as a business and professional class is really doing it for them.

Chinese and Orthodox were exposed to various forms of Stalinist Communist anti-Semitic propaganda over the last 100 years. They have little or no experience of Jews in person or institutionally. And again, the overseas Chinese are very like the Jews in their cohesion and personal successes.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Under any theory of economics, Jewish business activity (predominantly small business owners) has benefited the USA tremendously over the last 100 years, so I don't get the beef there.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Nah, whatever the USA has gained from Talmudic business has been lost in aid to Israeli (hundreds of billions), lost in bailouts to Talmudic banks (Goldman Sachs = usury scam), and lost to cultural degeneracy (promotion of porn, mass immigration, destruction of family, etc).

Ridiculous. Aid to Israel does total about $200 billion, big deal. I wish it were cut, but it's not much in comparison to the US economy. It is about the same as the total revenue in the same time from one prominent Jewish business, Hasbro toys. It is miniscule in comparison to the total contribution to growth of both Jewish business management and Jewish scientific and medical innovation.

Bank misconduct did cause a loss to the US economy, no doubt. The leveraging of shitty mortgage securities based on subprime loans which were improperly rated as AAA was a scam. There were many parties who took part in the scam. The main subprime lenders were Washington Mutual, Countryside, and Ameriquest. None of these were Jewish-run operations.

The shitty mortgage securities were sold and bought by a lot of institutions. Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns were wiped out by them, hardly a good strategy.

I recommend you read The Big Short or see the movie for an explanation. If you have a better explanation blaming Jews, bring the facts, not your feelings.

Blaming the Jews for immigration is also ridiculous. The two relevant pieces of legislation are the 1965 Immigration Act, which opened up immigration from the third world, and the 1986 Immigration Act, Simpson-Mazzoli, which gave amnesty.

The 1965 vote:

Quote:

The House of Representatives voted 320 to 70 in favor of the act, while the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 76 to 18. In the Senate, 52 Democrats voted yes, 14 no, and 1 abstained. Among Senate Republicans, 24 voted yes, 3 voted no, and 1 abstained. In the House, 202 Democrats voted yes, 60 voted no and 12 abstained, 117 Republicans voted yes, 10 voted no and 11 abstained. One unknown representative voted yes. In total, 74% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans voted for passage of this bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigratio...ct_of_1965

The 1986 vote:

Quote:

Agreed to by the House on October 15, 1986 (238–173) and by the Senate on October 17, 1986 (63–24)
Signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigratio...ct_of_1986

How can you blame the Jews for these votes when Jews have never reached 10% of the US Congress? Ridiculous.

Porn and degeneracy? Let's apply the standard you apply to the Jews to other ethnic groups. For example, how do you weigh the contributions of Italian Americans like Fermi and Scalia against the effect of La Cosa Nostra? How do you weigh the contributions of Irish-Americans vs. histories of Irish machine politics and corruption?

Porn has been around since ancient times, like all vices it is demand-driven, not supply driven. The demand is always there, you bring no facts showing that the torrent of porn available now is predominantly produced by Jews. Seems like there are tens of thousands of porn producers now.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

"Getting away with crimes?" Jews don't have a high crime rate, but Bernie Madoff is in jail for a long time, for example. Don't know what you're talking about there.

Again, if your belief is faith-based rather than historically based or empirically-based, let us know. I'm dealing with the real world manifested in the last century.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

The real world is all around you, all you need to do is look at it.

I do look at the world; I can't look at voices in another person's head. Facts are objective, feelings are subjective. Bring the facts about "Jews getting away with crimes."

Finally, you started with a narrative of your hard work supporting Trump. Good, I sent Trump money, myself.

But how do you reconcile your animus against the Jews with Trump's affinity for the Jews.

Trump's own business practices - hard bargaining, stiffing small vendors, strategic bankruptcy - seem like the stereotype of "sharp" Jewish business practices.

And then there's this: Forbes: How Jared Kushner won the White House for Trump

Kushner (whose own father did not "get away with the crime"), the Talmudic Jew, is a main advisor to Trump. Trump's own beautiful daughter Ivanka converted to Judaism to marry him and their kids - Trump's grandchildren - are Talmudic Jews.

It does not bother me, but how does your head not explode when you contemplate this reality?

[TooFineAPoint]

(11-24-2016 12:09 AM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

Accusing me of being a Talmud for simply disagreeing with you is the same thing Joseph McCarthy did during the Red Scare or what the accusers did during the Salem witch trials.

McCarthy was right; there were commies on the inside.

Comparing that to Salem witch trials is grossly negligent.

[The Beast1]

(11-24-2016 09:59 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-24-2016 09:46 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(11-23-2016 05:41 PM)nmmoooreland20 Wrote:  

One question I've been left with after reading Samseau's thoughts herein is how he reconciles maintaining "love thy neighbor" as his guiding ethos but staunchly rejects globalism. Unless neighbor refers strictly to those in close proximity, and not humans in general, as I've understood the phrase to reference.

Samseau, if you care to elaborate, would be very interested.

The reconciliation here is exactly what you think it is. Neighbor of,"Love thy neighbor" means people that are physically near you.

A family in Africa, Syria, or China isn't my neighbor anymore than someone in california is when I live in Iowa.

Not true. Neighbors are not just the ones near you which is what Christ made clear in the Good Samaritan parable. This is the difference between lower-case neighbor (neighbors by proximity) and upper-case Neighbors (Neighbors by love).

Your Neighbor could be anyone, but it is not everyone. Both the priest and the Levite walk right by the dying man, but the Samaritan stops to help (Samaritans did not live near Jews). Thus the implication is that the Jews were not Neighbors, but the Samaritan was.

Also, we can apply common sense to this story and think in terms of statistics; while it is true some Muslims will be good Neighbors, the vast majority of Muslims will not be Neighbors, etc.

Likewise in America we can see plenty of fellow patriotic Americans who are good to each other, but there are plenty of selfish pieces of shit who wouldn't do a damn thing to help you in need. Look at how city folk walk right by the homeless without even batting an eye.

Ultimately we must all be the judge of who our Neighbors are, but Christ leaves us with the message, "How you judge others is how God will judge you." So don't be too harsh in judging who your Neighbor is, lest you be judged unworthy as well.

Are you sure you remember what the good Samaritan parable actually says? The Samaritan actually walked past the robbed man and took pity on him. Again that Samaritan was physically in the presence of the robbed and injured man.

He wasn't in Jerusalem where somebody told him to donate his money to help save robbed individuals. The parable along with the Golden rule in its complete context:

Quote:

The Parable of the Good Samaritan - Luke 10:25-37

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.”

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

You're looking at this too logically and not using your heart. I really don't understand your reasoning with the statistics and the like, but the parable is quite clear in this matter. Do you have any actual scriptural sources to cite from to back your reasoning?

If globalism truly operated under "love" and had the poor and undeveloped world best interests at heart, globalism would seek to expand elements that make them grow and spread the wealth evenly. This means not using slave labor, onerous labor laws, and would seek to raise the standard of living for everyone. We do not currently see this as wages and monetary policy work against people trying to save.

Secondly, i'm also deeply concerned for your finger point against for the Jews. There are many Jewish elements helping us as well as working against us here. The Jews are not a giant monolithic entity working in complete unison.

There is a deleterious element within Jewish circles that is working against Israel and other Jews. We can properly identify them as the ones who created Marxism, feminism, and the likes of Georges Soros and other Jewish monied elites.

I suggest you take a trip and spend some time in Israel. I believe your opinion of that region and the Jewish people would be changed greatly if you actually met the people on the ground.

[The Beast1]

Part 2:

We really need to be careful with our generalizations. The world isn't too simplistic. Even I fall prey to these traps every now and then and have to catch myself and it would behoove all of us not to take this into consideration when approaching our enemies on the globalist side.

[Bear Hands]

(11-24-2016 09:25 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-23-2016 07:09 PM)Bear Hands Wrote:  

^^^^

The point you're asking him about neighbors is literally in the second post under the section, "What the Republican Party Must Do For This Country to Overcome Racial Issues and Survive: Become Better Christians."

A sizable branch of my family is Jewish due to my maternal grandfather. He married a Christian woman, so his children and grandchildren are not Jewish by their criteria. A lot of what Samseau says about brainwashed Jews in the US fits with my experience. They are far more concerned with their Jewish-ness than the rest of the family is with their whiteness or Christian-ness. Judging by their lifestyles and the example set by my great-grandfather who immigrated to the US, they should be conservatives, but they are not. They're obsessed with racism and gender equality, ignorant to the fact that within their own family they treat the non-Jews like servants. They're ready to fight for someone else's cause while their own house is in disarray.

You refer to your cousins, yes? Your grandfather's children are Christian, but your cousins stayed Jewish. And you notice the implicit racism that all Jews harbor toward your side of the family (i.e. the gentile side).

Now imagine how this played out 2000 years ago, and eventually culminating in ~380 AD with Against the Jews by Chrysostom. The racism wears on everyone until the final divorce. This is why Talmuds usually get rejected by every society they are part of.

The behavior and attitude seems ingrained into my mother's cousins, but I do not know where the attitude comes from. My grandfather was not that way, and his still-living brother is not that way. The common link amongst the cousins is attendance at Ivy League or pseudo-Ivy League universities.

Their treatment of the non-Jewish family members appears to the product of narcissism more than racism. It's contextually racist when one notices who feeds the narcissism and who gets little in return from the narcissists. They express love for all family members in their words but their actions do not match up in degree or quantity to what my Christian relatives will do, even those Christian relatives who are much more distantly related.

I don't mean to play both sides on this argument but I'd rather people actually talk about it than say we have to be more careful how we talk about Jews than any other tribe. I can't be the only member with a mixed-Jewish family to anecdotally support these arguments.

[Samseau]

(11-25-2016 07:18 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(11-24-2016 09:59 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-24-2016 09:46 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(11-23-2016 05:41 PM)nmmoooreland20 Wrote:  

One question I've been left with after reading Samseau's thoughts herein is how he reconciles maintaining "love thy neighbor" as his guiding ethos but staunchly rejects globalism. Unless neighbor refers strictly to those in close proximity, and not humans in general, as I've understood the phrase to reference.

Samseau, if you care to elaborate, would be very interested.

The reconciliation here is exactly what you think it is. Neighbor of,"Love thy neighbor" means people that are physically near you.

A family in Africa, Syria, or China isn't my neighbor anymore than someone in california is when I live in Iowa.

Not true. Neighbors are not just the ones near you which is what Christ made clear in the Good Samaritan parable. This is the difference between lower-case neighbor (neighbors by proximity) and upper-case Neighbors (Neighbors by love).

Your Neighbor could be anyone, but it is not everyone. Both the priest and the Levite walk right by the dying man, but the Samaritan stops to help (Samaritans did not live near Jews). Thus the implication is that the Jews were not Neighbors, but the Samaritan was.

Also, we can apply common sense to this story and think in terms of statistics; while it is true some Muslims will be good Neighbors, the vast majority of Muslims will not be Neighbors, etc.

Likewise in America we can see plenty of fellow patriotic Americans who are good to each other, but there are plenty of selfish pieces of shit who wouldn't do a damn thing to help you in need. Look at how city folk walk right by the homeless without even batting an eye.

Ultimately we must all be the judge of who our Neighbors are, but Christ leaves us with the message, "How you judge others is how God will judge you." So don't be too harsh in judging who your Neighbor is, lest you be judged unworthy as well.

Are you sure you remember what the good Samaritan parable actually says? The Samaritan actually walked past the robbed man and took pity on him. Again that Samaritan was physically in the presence of the robbed and injured man.

You failed to read the parable correctly, even as you bolded it. As he traveled, i.e. he was not from the area.

Quote:

He wasn't in Jerusalem where somebody told him to donate his money to help save robbed individuals. The parable along with the Golden rule in its complete context:

Quote:

The Parable of the Good Samaritan - Luke 10:25-37

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.”

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

You're looking at this too logically and not using your heart. I really don't understand your reasoning with the statistics and the like, but the parable is quite clear in this matter. Do you have any actual scriptural sources to cite from to back your reasoning?

As he traveled, i.e. the samaritan was a foreigner. Jesus choose a foreigner nominally hostile to Jews to make the example of the Neighbor being anyone.

The parable is very clear. Thus everything else I wrote in the post above follows logically.

Quote:

If globalism truly operated under "love" and had the poor and undeveloped world best interests at heart, globalism would seek to expand elements that make them grow and spread the wealth evenly. This means not using slave labor, onerous labor laws, and would seek to raise the standard of living for everyone. We do not currently see this as wages and monetary policy work against people trying to save.

No disagreements here. Moreover it's not possible to help other countries without fixing their political situations. Either work to create political governments that work for their people there, or refuse to do business with them.

Quote:

Secondly, i'm also deeply concerned for your finger point against for the Jews. There are many Jewish elements helping us as well as working against us here. The Jews are not a giant monolithic entity working in complete unison.

Jews != Talmudic Jews

Quote:

There is a deleterious element within Jewish circles that is working against Israel and other Jews. We can properly identify them as the ones who created Marxism, feminism, and the likes of Georges Soros and other Jewish monied elites.

Nope, it's all mixed. Lots of Marxist, Feminist, Left-wing Zionists as well.

Quote:

I suggest you take a trip and spend some time in Israel. I believe your opinion of that region and the Jewish people would be changed greatly if you actually met the people on the ground.

Actually it's from being around them that my opinion of them has decreased significantly. Both Israeli and otherwise.

[Irenicus]

Samseu, you are very wrong about many things.



First of all, you claimed, both in public, as well as private, that you only care about the Truth. Which is commendable, of course, and any reasonable person should. But...many of your opinions, especially concerning Jews are full of emotion. And you, who is without a doubt a smart individual (I am not kissing your ass, just stating the facts) should know that Truth does not care about your emotions or your opinions.


Or mine. Or Trump's.



It only cares about facts that can be proven. Like Sp5 did. Who is, by the way, not Jewish, so you can't call him a "Talmud". Speaking of myself, only my paternal grandfather is Jewish, so I can't be Jewish no matter what, despite my first and second name. Hence, you can't call me a "Talmud" or whatever either.



Turn off you emotions. You know full well that the Manosphere in general is all about preventing emotions guiding your mind, and finding the Truth (aka the Red Pill). And you, my friend, did not do that most crucial step. To quote Trump:

Quote:

I know. You know it. Everyone knows it.

Second, you contradict yourself on many things. One one hand, you obviously hate Jews (don't deny it, it it plainly obvious). But you:




1. Support The Donald , who has been, for a long time, a supporter of Israel, and has many Jews as advisors (Miller, Kuchner and others) or even family members (Ivanka and her kids). All of that did not stop you for volunteering in NH for him, and applying to his campaign (which are the things everyone in the fucking planet should be thankful), didn't you?


Think for a moment. What would Donald think of you if he sees some of your posts? Or some of his staff, who is in charge? You know too well what would happen, man. I know you do!




2. Read Breitbart (you quote it a lot) which was funded by a Jew, has many Jews in his staff such as Joel Pollak (who was pro Trump since day one), Aron Klein (many things regarding our good friend Palpatine were uncovered by him) and others. And the most important thing of all, it gave us Bannon!




3. Your support for Gabriel Nadaf.


Quoting you:

Quote:

Good old fashioned Orthodox Christian. Tells it like it is. Says if someone tries to kill you, self-defense is justified. Also praises God for giving us Trump at the 7 min mark.

Orthodox are based, contrast that with the Muslim loving Pope.

thread-50253...pid1449904


For your information, that guy is a Zionist (notice Israeli flags), encourages local Christians to enlist in the IDF (successfully), knows about your faith and Bible more than you do and,the most important thing...he is a local. He knows more about problems the local Christians face than you. Oh, by the way, Israel is the first country in the Middle East that recognized Arameans as a distinct ethnicity. And who was one of it's main proponents? Gabriel Nadaf , along with some now Aramean officers (yes, they exist) in the IDF.


In short, he is not a marginal figure, as some of his critics would say.





Think for a second man. Turn your emotional chip off. Drop your ethnic prejudices aside. Stop using SJW shaming language (you tend to call people "ignorant", not good). Nobody on the forum, on in real life, wants your head on a plate. I certainly do not, as you can see. MOSSAD does not as well.




Listen what TheBeast1 said. Save your money and take a trip to Israel. It will change you. It did me. Before I lived (and served a few years there), I hated Arabs and had the exact same opinion about them like the one you have against Jews. Although I certainly have more reasons to hate them than anyone on the forum (I can't list them due to security reasons, sorry), I realized how wrong I was. Despite everything, Arabs are normal people. As Zelscorpion and Tommy Robinson say, Islam≠ Muslims.




Again, turn your emotions off, set your ethnic prejudices aside, read this post (as well as Sp5's posts) 10 times. And drop the SJW language as well.




You are smart individual. You can do it.

[Agastya]

What are some examples of societies ruined by Talmudic Jews? This topic has been repeated so many times that I am actually curious about it. I am a history major and have spent countless hours reading about the histories of various cultures. I have yet to come across any mention of something like this...anywhere.

[Samseau]

(11-25-2016 01:38 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

First, a general observation about your writings on the Jews.
Opinions ≠ facts.
You do not cite any facts in the form of historical examples, living person examples, or statistics, as I have, in your reply to me. It is all feelings and opinion. "Look at the world" and "Everybody knows" are not facts, are not a proof. Your arguments are weak, aka bullshit.

You are going to feel very foolish for writing this.

Quote:

Example of a fact: Jews are disproportionately represented amongst science Nobel Prize winners, by the numbers.

Example of a feeling: "They (Jews) are racist." That is a mirror image of the worst sort of SJW-foolery.

Not even close to what I've written.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

So if I understand you correctly, "Talmudic Jews" are Jews who have not "accepted Christ." In other words, what most people call "Jews," apart from the small number of Jewish Christian converts, e.g. "Jews for Jesus."

Small number? Try a HUGE number, one that no one even has an accurate count of. I estimate Jewish converts were at least 50% of the surviving Jews of the Roman empire (given at how fast it spread), and this could be easily confirmed with DNA tests of many clergy of Eastern Churches as well as within the population of the Middle Eastern area. Similar to how we can still see neanderthal DNA, although a tremendous amount of eastern Christians have Jewish DNA in them.

Unfortunately is no real research on this, but I am 100% confident if the DNA tests were performed on wide enough level everything I say would be confirmed true. I would bet every dollar I own.

Unfortunately, there are far less Christians with Jewish DNA left today after ISIS have genocided god knows how many hundreds of thousands in Syria.

Quote:

But ok, if you say that's not a distinction without a difference, as I say, it's up to you. I look forward to your exposition on the subject. Since I don't see a difference, I'll just continue to use the term "the Jews" to refer to whom you are talking about.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

You have presented no argument to defend your claim of why it's a distinction without a difference.

You've constructed this false distinction of "Talmudic Jews" to attempt to protect yourself from a self-admission or a charge of crude anti-Semitism. Jews who are Christian converts are not "Talmudic," according to you. They convert, and all of their heritage is wiped out, right? [/quote]

No, you still don't get it. Jew is the race. Easily identified with DNA testing. Talmud is a culture, which was created in the aftermath of the Roman-Jewish wars around 70 AD. The Talmudic culture holds that they are still God's chosen people, that they are still awaiting the messiah, and that they must follow all of Mosaic law or face hell.

Quote:

What is your reasoning here? Is it that there is something in Judaism itself which accounts for bad behavior? Are Orthodox Jews worse or better than other Jews?

Yes, Talmudic teachings are inherently racist and hold that Jews must attend to Jews over non-Jews, and give special privileges to Jews over non-Jews.

Quote:

Less than 10% of Jews raised in religious Jewish households convert to non-Jewish religions. Among Orthodox, only about 6% http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/jewis...switching/

That's per generation, in addition to the big mass of Jewry that converted back around 70-100 AD. There are plenty of Christian Jews out there, but most of them do not even know they are racially Jewish!

Quote:

You have made a construct without explaining it or defending it. The construct makes no sense, but it encompasses at least 90% of what are commonly called "Jews" in the USA. So again, "the Jews" are what you are referring to.

Nope, Jewishness is a specific breed within the Caucasian race, Talmudism is a religion with a specific culture.

Quote:

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

One issue we have is that many of your beliefs come out of your own religious faith and may not be able to be factually challenged: the Jews are bad because they "rejected" Christ.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

False. They are bad because they are racist, which comes with rejecting Christ's message of Neighbors being anyone.

"They are racist." As I said, a mirror of SJW-speak. Feelings. How are Jews particularly racist? Bring the facts. They favor their own? OK, I'll help you: of course they do. So does every other group. I am a member of a non-Jewish Catholic ethnic group. We are tribal, too. A powerful member of my tribe once gave me a break by saying "you're one of our own." There are plenty of examples of places in America and businesses in which being Italian, Irish, some kind of Hispanic, or even black would be a help and being something else would be a hurt. Think Cubans in Miami, Irish in Boston, Italians in NYC, old-line "Spanish" in Santa Fe. There are networks which are inaccessible to outsiders. Black Masons in the US Army one example.

First of all, it would be nice if Talmudic Jews came out and admitted their racism. But they don't, and they are always pretending to fight against racism when in fact it is part of the Talmudic religion. The hypocrisy is one of the more infuriating parts of their culture.

This isn't to say that racism or excessive tribalism is not part of other cultures either. But other groups aren't as good at the tribal game as Talmuds, nor are they as interested, nor are they as much of a threat to America. Ideally, in a world of Neighborly love people should be able to see past their tribes when necessary. And to a large extent, Talmudic Jews do this quite often, especially the orthodox Talmuds. They are far more charitable to the gentiles than the left-wing variants who won't even talk with someone if they disagree politically. And politically, Orthodox Talmudic Jews will vote to not destroy their host country either.

I do not consider Orthodox Talmudic Jews to be enemies.

But for proof of the racism inherent to Talmudism, it's not hard to find if you'd bother to look for it. You can read their own 613 Mitzvot.





Notice the 58 compared with 171. Jews do not loan to each other at interest, but they must when dealing with gentiles. Banking is literally inscribed within their religious code. Additionally, they are only allowed to marry each other, thus preserving their racial purity. When you combine their marriage rules with their banking rules, it ensures that all money Jews accumulate only stays within the family. They hoard it from everyone else and it has stockpiled tremendously over time.

Jesus of course was revolted by this, and threw the money-changers out of the Temple.

Moreover, if Whites carried the rules of only marrying fellow Whites as well as only lending at interest to non-Whites, you'd never hear the end of the racism and Nazi charges. But like I've said, double-standards are so common to Talmudic Jews we could spend all day talking about this subject.

However, these two are by far the most egregious examples of their racism.

Quote:

The USA is founded upon a particularly universalist ideal, which is compounded by a free market economy and a secular legal culture. So ethnic particularism is always struggling against a powerful tide in the USA. For the Jews, this means they are as endangered as a distinct people in the USA as anyone else.

But Talmuds are far more resistant because the incentive to stay within the family comes with huge $$$$ bonuses. All of the centuries of lending to non-Talmuds at interest paid off handsomely. And being part of the family means you get access to that cash with fewer strings attached.

Quote:

58% of Jews married since 2000 married non-Jews. Intermarriage means less adherence to Judaism and more intermarriage, as the children of mixed marriages are less observant and more prone to marry non-Jews. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/03/infog...americans/

First, I will admit that Talmudic racism is on the downswing compared to what it was centuries past. This is true for all races in America, things used to be 10x worse 500+ years ago.

Second, I know the outmarriage of Jews is very high and this is a good sign at ending the terrible culture promoted by the Talmudic religion. But we don't know if the people are converted to Talmudism as they marry, or if it is pure outbreeding.

Still, there is a long way to go. We can still see the toxic effects of Talmudic racism in their voting patterns, with 70-80% of Talmudic Jews voting for mass immigration of Hillary Clinton to ensure their hegemony in a multicultural society.

Quote:

And, of course, Jews have to hire non-Jews, not enough Jews to run their businesses exclusively. Maybe you didn't get hired, but I did, a couple of times.

Sure, goyim at the bottom, Talmuds at the top.

Quote:

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

In a discussion like this, only historical facts are useful. Faith is not susceptible to factual challenge, whether it be Hindu, Muslim, Judaic, or Christian.

So you say the Jews are "racist parasites to their host cultures who have destroyed many civilizations in their quest for world racial supremacy." Is that based on facts or on your religious faith? If on faith, like the Prophet's (PBUH) ascension to heaven or Mary's Immaculate Conception, there's no basis for discussion: you believe what you believe.

If we can stick to historical facts, which have been more accurately recorded in the last 100 years by film and audio recording, how could you claim that Jews have been "racist parasites" to say, the USA?

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Facts. The parasitical nature of Talmuds is easily observed within the USA. Look at the many industries they have taken over with racism. Look at the schools and universities they have taken over with racism. Look at the real estate markets of NYC and LA that have been taken over by the Talmuds.

The racism of the Talmuds is easily observable which is what fuels most anti-semitism.

"Easily observable?" Where? Bring the facts. I see a lot of small business owners, auto parts guys, furniture salesmen, car salesmen. Lawyers and doctors, ok. Old-school haberdashers. Slightly different in style than a WASP or Italian peer in the same business, maybe, but the market rules and success can't be faked.

What "industries have they taken over with racism?" Hollywood? The Jews got in at the beginning. Mayer, Warner, Selznick, Goldwyn. They saw an opportunity. So what? Old Joe Kennedy was there, too, but left after making a bundle and fucking Gloria Swanson and Marlene Dietrich. But even now, it's not like the likes of even Mel Gibson are shut out, although I think Apocalypso is underrated because of his drunking rantings on the Jews.

Banking? Hardly. Look the list of top banking CEOs, in the US and worldwide. Yes, Dimon and Blankfein. But also Moynihan and Corbat. Look at boards of directors, like this one for Citigroup: http://www.citigroup.com/citi/about/our_...fdirectors

Law? Give me a break. I'm a lawyer. White-shoe firms are not even close to being predominantly Jewish or controlled by Jews.

Anyways, in a free-market economy, how can a group "take over" an industry? The market rules. You either sell what the market demands, or you fail.

Hollywood is a big one, but you've failed to mention REAL ESTATE. The biggest sector of the US economy. Doctors, yes. Tech, yes. Law not so much because there isn't enough money or control for Talmuds to care. But also much more importantly is their intellectual influence coming from the Frankfurt School, which then leaks out across the educational system into everyone else's minds doing the bidding of what is good for Mr. Talmud with very little work needed.

Going through the influence of the intellectual history of Talmudic Jews is well explained by Keven MacDonald's Culture of Critique but also by Allan Bloom's Closing of the American Mind.

Quote:

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

We could take the large number of Jewish Nobel prizewinners in physics, chemistry, and medicine, many of them Americans, as a refutation of this.

We could take Seinfield as a benefit to the USA. We could take Col. Aaron Bank, founder of the U.S. Army Special Forces. Einstein, Oppenheimer, Salk, Sabin, Feynman. Bernard Herrman, Danny Elfman.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

I never said all Talmuds are bad, or do nothing good for their Neighbors. But as a whole they have been toxic. Just look at the Democratic party, and look at who fuels them financially and intellectually.

Bring the facts. "Toxic" is just your feelings. Examples, please.

Please explain to me how Democratic policies have been good for America? Multi-culturalism, reliance on sweatshop labor for cheap goods, high taxes, heavy regulations which lead to anemic business growth, a foreign policy that is incoherent at every level... the political influence alone is toxic enough.

Quote:

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Do the Jews in America "amass wealth beyond the other races?" Sure. Isn't hard work, entrepreneurial thinking, and the free market a good thing? Your animus against the Jews just seems like the bitter envy I also heard from West Africans about the Lebanese business community, Kenyans about Indians, and Filipinos and Malays about Chinese. Same-o. No need for verbose explication of "Talmudism," just envy!

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Envy does not explain it at all. All of the groups you've mentioned are distinct from the Talmuds in that they keep to their own geographical area and are expected to be biased towards their own.

Conversely, Talmuds make a habit of spreading to other places, pretend to be impartial, and when anyone calls them out for their behavior they are met with accusations of being anti-semitic racists. This highly irritating and hypocritical behavior is why Talmuds are among the most hated groups in the world (for those who can recognize it).

Most Whites have no idea of what's going on (which is why Dylan Roof famously wrote if all Jews turned blue for a day everyone would understand them), but outside of the West many know: Muslim Arabs, Eastern Orthodox, and the Chinese are among the most Jew-wise in the world.

First, can't help but notice the citation to Dylan Roof, an incel loser who walked into a Christian church and murdered the good people there studying the Bible because they were black. WTF? Is Dylan Roof a credible source of "fact" or model of opinion for you, the Christian?

Just because Roof was a sick, sick man, does not make his observations any less accurate. The same is true of the unabomber.

Quote:

Second, I give you a list of ethnic groups who travelled outside the lands of their historic origin, like Lebanese in West Africa and Chinese in the Philippines, and you attempt to distinguish them from the Jews by saying "they keep to their own geographic area." WTF, makes no sense.

Makes perfect sense - they travel as foreigners, they are recognized as such, and act as such. Conversely we have Talmudic Jews living in many nations that behave as citizens, are recognized as such, but primarily act for each other's self-interest against the rest of the nation.

Quote:

Third, you cite to groups who have the least experience of Jews - Muslim Arabs, Chinese, Orthodox - as being the most savvy about them. In truth, these have been the most isolated from Jews and the most exposed to anti-Semitic state propaganda.

Not true for two of the groups. Both the Arabs and Orthodox have been exposed to Jews for thousands of years. Chinese recognize the game Talmuds play and actually write books all about them.

Quote:

In the case of Muslim Arabs, Nasserite, Baathist, and Salafist propaganda. Baghdad used to have 200,000 Jews as recently as the 1930s. A combination of anti-Semitic attacks and Israeli false-flags and incentives moved them out. Is Baghdad better now? Was it even better in the 1960s? Similar things in Cairo. Those countries are corrupt, backward and violent, wow the lack of Jews as a business and professional class is really doing it for them.

Of course not. As bad as Talmudism is, Islam is still much worse and I would take a cousin Jew over the death-cult any day of the week. Islam was not always at such strong odds with Talmudic Jews, however, there is a long and complex history between the two.

Quote:

Chinese and Orthodox were exposed to various forms of Stalinist Communist anti-Semitic propaganda over the last 100 years. They have little or no experience of Jews in person or institutionally. And again, the overseas Chinese are very like the Jews in their cohesion and personal successes.

While many Russian orthodox may not know much about Talmuds, the Greeks, Syrians, and many other mediterranean Orthodox know all about them.

Quote:

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Under any theory of economics, Jewish business activity (predominantly small business owners) has benefited the USA tremendously over the last 100 years, so I don't get the beef there.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Nah, whatever the USA has gained from Talmudic business has been lost in aid to Israeli (hundreds of billions), lost in bailouts to Talmudic banks (Goldman Sachs = usury scam), and lost to cultural degeneracy (promotion of porn, mass immigration, destruction of family, etc).

Ridiculous. Aid to Israel does total about $200 billion, big deal. I wish it were cut, but it's not much in comparison to the US economy. It is about the same as the total revenue in the same time from one prominent Jewish business, Hasbro toys. It is miniscule in comparison to the total contribution to growth of both Jewish business management and Jewish scientific and medical innovation.

Bank misconduct did cause a loss to the US economy, no doubt. The leveraging of shitty mortgage securities based on subprime loans which were improperly rated as AAA was a scam. There were many parties who took part in the scam. The main subprime lenders were Washington Mutual, Countryside, and Ameriquest. None of these were Jewish-run operations.

The shitty mortgage securities were sold and bought by a lot of institutions. Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns were wiped out by them, hardly a good strategy.

I recommend you read The Big Short or see the movie for an explanation. If you have a better explanation blaming Jews, bring the facts, not your feelings.

No one is "blaming the Jews," and using such hysterical language just shows you're suffering from cognitive dissonance. I said Talmudic Jews have done more harm than good, and they certainly have played a big role in creating the subprime crisis, as well as...

Quote:

Blaming the Jews for immigration is also ridiculous. The two relevant pieces of legislation are the 1965 Immigration Act, which opened up immigration from the third world, and the 1986 Immigration Act, Simpson-Mazzoli, which gave amnesty.

The 1965 vote:

Quote:

The House of Representatives voted 320 to 70 in favor of the act, while the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 76 to 18. In the Senate, 52 Democrats voted yes, 14 no, and 1 abstained. Among Senate Republicans, 24 voted yes, 3 voted no, and 1 abstained. In the House, 202 Democrats voted yes, 60 voted no and 12 abstained, 117 Republicans voted yes, 10 voted no and 11 abstained. One unknown representative voted yes. In total, 74% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans voted for passage of this bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigratio...ct_of_1965

And who was one of it's biggest proponents?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_K._Javits#Legacy

Quote:

Javits played a major role in legislation protecting pensioners, as well as in the passage of the War Powers Act; he led the effort to get the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act passed. He reached the position of Ranking Minority Member on the Committee on Foreign Relations while accruing greater seniority than any New York Senator before or since (as of 2007). He was also one of the main forces behind the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 that removed immigration quotas that favored Western European nations. Along with Dwight D. Eisenhower, he was among the first and most important statesmen in passing legislation promoting the cause of education for gifted individuals, and many know his name from the federal Jacob Javits Grants established for this purpose.

Quote:

The 1986 vote:

Quote:

Agreed to by the House on October 15, 1986 (238–173) and by the Senate on October 17, 1986 (63–24)
Signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigratio...ct_of_1986

How can you blame the Jews for these votes when Jews have never reached 10% of the US Congress? Ridiculous.

Again, you completely fail to understand how Jews operate and how Talmudic Jews in particular will push for specific agendas.

Jews have some of the highest naturally occurring verbal IQ in the world. I believe this occurred because of their location in the Middle East, which meant that being able to translate many languages helped the smartest grow very rich.

The high verbal IQ is also why Christianity, Talmudism, and (strongly rumored by many historians) Islam were all written down in books by Jews. Jews do not control people by force, but instead through intellect and cunning.

So many of the terrible politics we see today are a result of Talmudic influence, but that does not mean we need to "blame the Jews." Attributing influence is much more subtle than that.

Quote:

Porn and degeneracy? Let's apply the standard you apply to the Jews to other ethnic groups. For example, how do you weigh the contributions of Italian Americans like Fermi and Scalia against the effect of La Cosa Nostra? How do you weigh the contributions of Irish-Americans vs. histories of Irish machine politics and corruption?

Porn has been around since ancient times, like all vices it is demand-driven, not supply driven. The demand is always there, you bring no facts showing that the torrent of porn available now is predominantly produced by Jews. Seems like there are tens of thousands of porn producers now.

No one is saying that Jews have a corner on vice, but I am saying Talmudic Jews are more likely to engage in selling vice because they feel less attachment to the outgroup than most other cultures do.

Quote:

But how do you reconcile your animus against the Jews with Trump's affinity for the Jews.

Trump's own business practices - hard bargaining, stiffing small vendors, strategic bankruptcy - seem like the stereotype of "sharp" Jewish business practices.

This doesn't bother me about anyone.

Quote:

And then there's this: Forbes: How Jared Kushner won the White House for Trump

Kushner (whose own father did not "get away with the crime"), the Talmudic Jew, is a main advisor to Trump. Trump's own beautiful daughter Ivanka converted to Judaism to marry him and their kids - Trump's grandchildren - are Talmudic Jews.

It does not bother me, but how does your head not explode when you contemplate this reality?

This I have my eye on, but I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I do not believe the conservative Orthodox Talmuds are particularly malicious unlike the left-wing Talmuds. I view the right-wing Talmuds as Neighborly yet also rivals, and I see the left-wing Talmuds as straight up dangerous.

[Sp5]

Part One of my reply.

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-25-2016 01:38 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

First, a general observation about your writings on the Jews.
Opinions ≠ facts.
You do not cite any facts in the form of historical examples, living person examples, or statistics, as I have, in your reply to me. It is all feelings and opinion. "Look at the world" and "Everybody knows" are not facts, are not a proof. Your arguments are weak, aka bullshit.

You are going to feel very foolish for writing this..

Once again, your reply is bereft of facts and is often wrong on the facts you do state. I don't feel foolish at all, au contraire your reply is weak.

I appreciate the Talmudic/Socratic dialogue or dialectic we are having but you make many bald assertions not based on reality.

(11-25-2016 01:38 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Example of a fact: Jews are disproportionately represented amongst science Nobel Prize winners, by the numbers.

Example of a feeling: "They (Jews) are racist." That is a mirror image of the worst sort of SJW-foolery.

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Not even close to what I've written.

"They are racists" is a direct quote of you. Right out of SJW playbook.

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

So if I understand you correctly, "Talmudic Jews" are Jews who have not "accepted Christ." In other words, what most people call "Jews," apart from the small number of Jewish Christian converts, e.g. "Jews for Jesus."

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Small number? Try a HUGE number, one that no one even has an accurate count of. I estimate Jewish converts were at least 50% of the surviving Jews of the Roman empire (given at how fast it spread), and this could be easily confirmed with DNA tests of many clergy of Eastern Churches as well as within the population of the Middle Eastern area. Similar to how we can still see neanderthal DNA, although a tremendous amount of eastern Christians have Jewish DNA in them.

Unfortunately is no real research on this, but I am 100% confident if the DNA tests were performed on wide enough level everything I say would be confirmed true. I would bet every dollar I own.

Unfortunately, there are far less Christians with Jewish DNA left today after ISIS have genocided god knows how many hundreds of thousands in Syria.

First, the descendants of Jews who converted in the 1st Century have such an attenuated connection to both the original Jewish DNA and the Jewish tradition that they could never be considered Jews, "non-Talmudic," or not. You and I might both be such descendants, as could almost anyone with European origins. Would we be Jews?

Second, you "estimate" Jewish conversation to Christianity as 50%. Based on what? Estimating a shift in a population 2000 years ago takes research; even then it is questionable because of the lack of data. I have no opinion on the subject. I prefer to say that these groups (Levantine Arabs, Jews, Assyrians, Chaldeans) are related by DNA and the Semitic language group. I found one study which says the rate of Jewish conversion to Christianity was very low (pdf). http://www.hts.org.za/index.html/HTS/arti...le/430/329

Quote:

How many Jews became Christians in the first century? The failure of the Christian mission to the Jews
David C Sim
Australian Catholic University

Abstract
This study examines the early Christian mission(s) to the Jews, and attempts to determine, albeit speculatively, the number of Jews in the
Christian movement in the first century. It is argued that the combined
Christian mission was marked by a distinct lack of success. Neither the Law-observant gospel of the Jerusalem church nor the Law-free
gospel of the Hellenists and Paul made much impression upon the people of Israel. Throughout the first century the total number of Jews
in the Christian movement probably never exceeded 1 000 and by the end of the century the Christian church was largely Gentile.

The Assyrians and Chaldeans were distinct peoples from the Jews in ancient times, long before Christ.
You present no evidence that the people now calling themselves Assyrians and Chaldeans in Syria and Iraq, who are the Christians there, are descendants of Jewish converts. The area in which they live now was at the center of the pre-Christian Assyrian Empire.

You have a feeling that 50% of Jews converted about 2000 years ago, nothing more.

So, you stick to your construct of a huge "Jewish" population which includes anyone with Jewish DNA from the 1st Century, with a much smaller subset of "Talmudic Jews" who are not Christian converts. I will stick to describing the people who are descended from the historical Jews and identify themselves as Jews as "the Jews" and not "Talmuds." That's what most people think of as "the Jews."

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

First of all, it would be nice if Talmudic Jews came out and admitted their racism. But they don't, and they are always pretending to fight against racism when in fact it is part of the Talmudic religion. The hypocrisy is one of the more infuriating parts of their culture.

This isn't to say that racism or excessive tribalism is not part of other cultures either. But other groups aren't as good at the tribal game as Talmuds, nor are they as interested, nor are they as much of a threat to America. Ideally, in a world of Neighborly love people should be able to see past their tribes when necessary. And to a large extent, Talmudic Jews do this quite often, especially the orthodox Talmuds. They are far more charitable to the gentiles than the left-wing variants who won't even talk with someone if they disagree politically. And politically, Orthodox Talmudic Jews will vote to not destroy their host country either.

I do not consider Orthodox Talmudic Jews to be enemies.

But for proof of the racism inherent to Talmudism, it's not hard to find if you'd bother to look for it. You can read their own 613 Mitzvot.





Notice the 58 compared with 171. Jews do not loan to each other at interest, but they must when dealing with gentiles. Banking is literally inscribed within their religious code. Additionally, they are only allowed to marry each other, thus preserving their racial purity. When you combine their marriage rules with their banking rules, it ensures that all money Jews accumulate only stays within the family. They hoard it from everyone else and it has stockpiled tremendously over time.

Jesus of course was revolted by this, and threw the money-changers out of the Temple.

Moreover, if Whites carried the rules of only marrying fellow Whites as well as only lending at interest to non-Whites, you'd never hear the end of the racism and Nazi charges. But like I've said, double-standards are so common to Talmudic Jews we could spend all day talking about this subject.

However, these two are by far the most egregious examples of their racism.

1. If that's all ya got as evidence of Jewish racism, ya ain't got much. An ancient text which also says adulterers should be stoned. OK. What is the reality now and for the last 200 years or so?

Where are all the Judaic banks lending to Jews without interest? When was the last time that happened? I see Islamic banks who lend in a kind of equity partnership structure which somehow is not "interest" based on the same Bible passages. I do not see Jews in today's world lending to each other without interest. Buying equity in a project is not lending without interest. Change your name to Saul Goodman and try asking a Jewish banker for an interest-free loan because tribe, see how that goes.

You acknowledge that Jews are marrying outside their tribe in large numbers. OK.

Can you distinguish between campaigning against racism in the public sphere vs. maintaining a degree of racism in the private sphere? It's not hypocrisy.

Against racism in the public sphere: Black people should have full rights to vote, hold office, work, go to school, and use public accommodations equally.

Racism in the private sphere: I don't want my daughter or son to marry a black person. I prefer to lend money only to people closest to me, who share my traditions, congregation, and networks. I trust them more.

Are these hypocritical? No. Whether they are racists in the private sphere more than other white people (highly questionable, I see many Jews in racially mixed marriages), Jews did not just "pretend" to campaign against racism in the public sphere. Jews did contribute and campaign in the 1960s Civil Rights movement disproportionately. This was to achieve public rights for black people.

(11-25-2016 01:38 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

The USA is founded upon a particularly universalist ideal, which is compounded by a free market economy and a secular legal culture. So ethnic particularism is always struggling against a powerful tide in the USA. For the Jews, this means they are as endangered as a distinct people in the USA as anyone else.

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

But Talmuds are far more resistant because the incentive to stay within the family comes with huge $$$$ bonuses. All of the centuries of lending to non-Talmuds at interest paid off handsomely. And being part of the family means you get access to that cash with fewer strings attached.

Ridiculous. Where was the huge store of cash which American Jews accessed when they arrived in the USA? They mostly arrived without two nickels from Russia and EE. Their main asset was hard work and smarts. The assets of the Jews in Germany and Eastern Europe, such as they had assets, were almost all wiped out in WWII, along with a lot of the Jews.

Take the Kushners as an example. Jared's grandfather Joseph Kushner arrived from Poland after WWII, the assets of the family and much of the family itself had been wiped out. Joseph worked as a construction worker, saved, and used the path of leveraged real estate purchases to build equity. That is a well-known path to riches. It takes work, saving, balls and the luck of growing RE prices, that's all.

Mortimer Zuckerman's parents ran a grocery store. You might not be old enough to remember the large number of single grocery stores, hardware stores, clothing stores, cobblers which were staffed by their Jewish owners. This was classic American Dream stuff. They are still there, but less common as the children and grandchildren have moved on to bigger or more professional things. The founders arrived 100 or 50 years ago with nothing.

(11-25-2016 01:38 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

And, of course, Jews have to hire non-Jews, not enough Jews to run their businesses exclusively. Maybe you didn't get hired, but I did, a couple of times.

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Sure, goyim at the bottom, Talmuds at the top.

First you say Jews don't hire goys, now you say they hire goys to subjugate them. Looks like butthurt. In a free market economy, the person doing the hiring is known as "the boss." That's the way it is. I wasn't only hired by Jews, I hired a Jew. To him, I was the boss. If you build a business, you can hire, too.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Facts. The parasitical nature of Talmuds is easily observed within the USA. Look at the many industries they have taken over with racism. Look at the schools and universities they have taken over with racism. Look at the real estate markets of NYC and LA that have been taken over by the Talmuds.

The racism of the Talmuds is easily observable which is what fuels most anti-semitism.

(11-25-2016 01:38 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

"Easily observable?" Where? Bring the facts. I see a lot of small business owners, auto parts guys, furniture salesmen, car salesmen. Lawyers and doctors, ok. Old-school haberdashers. Slightly different in style than a WASP or Italian peer in the same business, maybe, but the market rules and success can't be faked.

What "industries have they taken over with racism?" Hollywood? The Jews got in at the beginning. Mayer, Warner, Selznick, Goldwyn. They saw an opportunity. So what? Old Joe Kennedy was there, too, but left after making a bundle and fucking Gloria Swanson and Marlene Dietrich. But even now, it's not like the likes of even Mel Gibson are shut out, although I think Apocalypso is underrated because of his drunking rantings on the Jews.

Banking? Hardly. Look the list of top banking CEOs, in the US and worldwide. Yes, Dimon and Blankfein. But also Moynihan and Corbat. Look at boards of directors, like this one for Citigroup: http://www.citigroup.com/citi/about/our_...fdirectors

Law? Give me a break. I'm a lawyer. White-shoe firms are not even close to being predominantly Jewish or controlled by Jews.

Anyways, in a free-market economy, how can a group "take over" an industry? The market rules. You either sell what the market demands, or you fail.

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Hollywood is a big one, but you've failed to mention REAL ESTATE. The biggest sector of the US economy. Doctors, yes. Tech, yes. Law not so much because there isn't enough money or control for Talmuds to care. But also much more importantly is their intellectual influence coming from the Frankfurt School, which then leaks out across the educational system into everyone else's minds doing the bidding of what is good for Mr. Talmud with very little work needed.

Going through the influence of the intellectual history of Talmudic Jews is well explained by Keven MacDonald's Culture of Critique but also by Allan Bloom's Closing of the American Mind.

First, you asserted that "Talmuds" had taken over industries "by racism." You have presented no facts to support that argument.

I can quote Roosh here:

Quote:

The proper response to when they call you a racist is “So what?”

but I also don't see the racism or the takeovers.

Real estate is close to a pure market. Supply/demand, location, location, location, market timing are all important. So what if Jews dominate the NYC and LA RE market? That's still a small fraction of total US RE holdings, which are held overwhelmingly by single building owners.

In addition, a lot of RE is held in publicly owned REITs, which of course diversifies ownership greatly beyond Jews.

Again, Kushner and Zuckerman are examples. They had the balls to buy risky property, and the luck that it was at the right moment. Rather than whining about their success, you should seek to emulate them. "Climbing the property ladder" is a well known path to riches, I did it to some extent after the 2008 crash, wish I had bought more.

You sound like an intersectional SJW activist complaining about "White Privilege," except you say "Talmudic Privilege." Nobody is stopping you from getting a job, saving a down payment, and buying property to rent or flip, then repeating that x X. Joseph Kushner did.

Also, your assertion of medicine being dominated by Jews is flat wrong. There are more Catholic doctors than Jewish ones. This 2005 study, a bit outdated but not likely to be much different now, says only 14% of US physicians are Jewish: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article...able/tbl1/

You cite Kevin MacDonald, and you do the same thing as Kevin MacDonald: you cite the very Jewy Jew Allan Bloom in support of your argument, as he did, along with other Jews.

MacDonald's book is one long defective argument based on cherry-picking (Marcuse was a Jew, Friedan was a Jew, that proves it!).

If Jew Allan Bloom, supported by Jew Saul Bellow, Jew Michael Medved (also cited by MacDonald), Jew David Horowitz, and other Jews were in the revolt against Marcusean theory in academia, and other Jews like Norman Mailer and Harold Bloom led related pushbacks against feminism and anti-intellectualism, how valid can you or MacDonald be? MacDonald is full of shit, but the gullible and ignorant are susceptible to his cherry-picking, because they don't know the full story of Western intellectual thought in the last 75 years.

Again, I bring the facts, you bring the feelings.

Quote:

(11-24-2016 04:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

We could take the large number of Jewish Nobel prizewinners in physics, chemistry, and medicine, many of them Americans, as a refutation of this.

We could take Seinfield as a benefit to the USA. We could take Col. Aaron Bank, founder of the U.S. Army Special Forces. Einstein, Oppenheimer, Salk, Sabin, Feynman. Bernard Herrman, Danny Elfman.

(11-24-2016 09:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

I never said all Talmuds are bad, or do nothing good for their Neighbors. But as a whole they have been toxic. Just look at the Democratic party, and look at who fuels them financially and intellectually.

Bring the facts. "Toxic" is just your feelings. Examples, please.

(11-25-2016 05:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Please explain to me how Democratic policies have been good for America? Multi-culturalism, reliance on sweatshop labor for cheap goods, high taxes, heavy regulations which lead to anemic business growth, a foreign policy that is incoherent at every level... the political influence alone is toxic enough.

Anyone who has bought into either party in the USA is a fool. True, the Democratic Party is a collection of poverty pimps, race hustlers, city machine politicians, greedy government workers, and rabid feminists. They also stand for some good things, like workers' right to organize and bargain collectively, and not shitting on the Commons. There are a few ones who are OK, like Tulsi Gabbard, Jim Webb, and Bernie to some extent.

Similarly, the Republican Party is a collection of crony corporatists, looters, polluters, Bible-beaters, police-statists, and warmongers. They also stand for some good things, like cultural conservatism and devolution to local governments. There are a few ones who are OK, like Mike Lee, Walter Jones, and Justin Amash.

Trump will succeed only insofar as he rebels against the Establishment.

Ironically, the most obvious example of Jewish ethnocentrism in American politics was from within the Republican Party: the war on Iraq. This was promoted by the hard-core Israel Firsters in the neoconservative movement within and without the Bush Administration, along with oil and defense contracting interests (e.g. Halliburton). The war achieved Israel's aims of shattering the Iraqi military threat, but was a disaster for the USA.

The same Republican crew (Kristol, Bolton, Ledeen, Gaffney) still wants to bomb Iran. This will remove a regional threat to Israel, but be a disaster for the USA.

Your adherence to the Republican Party is naïve.