Criticism of Jews as a Collective (Not Just as Individuals) is Ethical and Warranted

[Callafangers]

SUMMARY: He is a person self-identifying as ‘jewish’ who felt it was his duty to assist the false narrative that is being used to divide America and justify erosion of civil liberties around effectively a public execution that according to someone in Kirk's entourage, everybody within his team thinks Israel was behind.
If anyone here doesn’t think that is both revealing and troublesome, I respectfully suggest YOU haven’t yet understood the wider perspective of holyH promotion that my post tried to raise.

You may very well be correct, re: Kirk -- I haven't looked into the shooting much at all but I have seen evidence that Kirk's position on Israel has shifted in recent weeks/months, so I find that to be significant support for your overall set of questions. Nonetheless, it does not make much sense to dedicate multiple pages of posts on this thread to such a topic, which is much more niche and focused and likely best suited outside of a Holocaust-specific forum.

Overall, cheers to you for looking into this, I do think it is important work, but I also think others here are not off-base for suggesting it is better to keep the topic somewhat contained outside of this subforum.

As for Nazgul, while your theory is possible, there are other possibilities, like that he is simply convinced by some of the same narratives that millions of other people are also convinced by (including many members on this forum who otherwise agree with you/me/etc.). You will find a range of opinions here on every topic. I have "bumped heads" with some members here on the question of 9/11 and Zionist-Jewish involvement. When such conversations come up, I try to avoid letting them get out-of-hand -- it just isn't the place for it.

Nazgul has made some outstanding contributions to Holocaust revisionism. He was the first to my knowledge who has pointed out the lengthy Fahrplanordnung stops en route to AR camps, which are only reasonably explained by way of human [Jewish] departures/onboarding at these locations, supporting that even schedules showing Treblinka/Malkinia or Sobibor, Belzec, etc. as a "one-way trip" are not necessarily so. Nazgul has also shared lots of other valuable resources and discoveries (e.g. regarding Zwangsarbeitslagers, rail construction, etc.), too many to list here, many of which were unfortunately lost in the earlier RODOH forum which got 'vaporized' similar to CODOH Forum 1.0.

Overall, your suspicions about Jewish activity in general are, I think, warranted, however I would hope you might try to take a more nuanced view of things and be a bit more cautious in drawing conclusions, as well as in choosing the proper venue for any particular discussions/proclamations/etc. Overall, you do great work here, I just think we also need to take measures to maintain a degree of order and also give some grace to members (e.g. Nazgul) who have objectively done good work here and in other revisionist settings.

[Wahrheitssucher]

I don't see a 'jewish conspiracy' here and if it weren't for Netanyahu immediately yelling Israel didn't do it, I would lend the idea absolutely 0 credence.
Currently, I want evidence, so, on other platforms I am asking questions and seeking answers. I'm not doing that here ;because the shooting is not even tangentially related to the Holy H.

I could refute everything you wrote, but …this is NOT about the ballistics or technical details of a public execution.
So I won’t.
I’ll just applaud you for being open and interested to see whether your current view can be credibly refuted. I wish you well doing your own search for refutations of it. Such DO already exist, but you’ll have to wade through all the deliberately confusing, smokescreen speculations that are also out there.

.-.-

This topic is about Jewish collectives clandestinely doing dastardly deeds and whining ‘anti-semitism’ if anyone even mentions them as a possible suspect.

The point being suggested: “is it warranted to criticise collectives of jews for their actions?”.

Where do YOU stand on that question?

.-.-

Here is another assassination where there is considerable compelling, credible evidence that a zionist, jewish collective is guilty of it yet were never investigated for it: the Forrestal killing.
This article about that is by LAURENT GUYÉNOT.

https://www.unz.com/article/fifteen-yea ... forrestal/

There is also a book reaching the same conclusion regarding a zionist jewish collective killing Forrestal then using all their sayanim ‘helpers’ whom are infiltrated throughout society, into suppressing info plus blocking a proper investigation:
https://dukereportbooks.com/books/the-a ... forrestal/


.-.-.-.-

The death of Lady Diana Spencer (and the obviously false patsy in that death of her driver) is another example.



We don’t need to go into the details of these two examples here, either.

But if we are honest and well-informed we can understand that sayanim in police, judiciary, medical staff, etc. ARE able to switch blood-samples, start illegal embalming procedures, block investigations, etc., etc., etc.

Yes, that requires theorising about people conspiring. Of course.
But if after everything we have witnessed in the last few decades we are a person who thinks ‘conspiracies’ NEVER occur, so theorising and investigating their possibility is “crazy”, then sadly I suggest we have become a person who has been successfully duped.

[Stubble]

.-.-

This topic is about Jewish collectives clandestinely doing dastardly deeds and whining ‘anti-semitism’ if anyone even mentions them as a possible suspect.

The point being suggested: “is it warranted to criticise collectives of jews for their actions?”.

Where do YOU stand on that question?

.-.-

You know where I stand on this.

Of course it is.

I've been very clear on this point.

Furthermore I've pointed at the conditions as they existed in Weimar and the parallels to where we are today with the degeneracy and social subversion, the endless parroting of impossible equality etc.

I will let the painter say this again;



The term 'sayanim' was used above. For those unwise to the sayanim, I present this short video to you.

[Wahrheitssucher]

Criticism of Jews when they are acting criminally and/or immorally as a collective (not just as individuals) DEFINITELY is both ethically required by decent humans and is also warranted.

Because if we don’t do that now, we are all going to be gagged and prevented by law from combatting any negative activities by jewish collectives in the future:

[Eye of Zyclone]

We don’t need to go into the details of these two examples here, either.

But if we are honest and well-informed we can understand that sayanim in police, judiciary, medical staff, etc. ARE able to switch blood-samples, start illegal embalming procedures, block investigations, etc., etc., etc.

Yes, that requires theorising about people conspiring. Of course.
But if after everything we have witnessed in the last few decades we are a person who thinks ‘conspiracies’ NEVER occur, so theorising and investigating their possibility is “crazy”, then sadly I suggest we have become a person who has been successfully duped.

If Freemasons could do it in the inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic as now conceded, considering the possibility that Zionists & other influential groups did it in other cases seems pretty fair if not logical if I'm asked.

[Nessie]

...

If Freemasons could do it in the inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic as now conceded, considering the possibility that Zionists & other influential groups did it in other cases seems pretty fair if not logical if I'm asked.

...

Freemasons, Jews, the UK aristocracy, wealthy business people, the Roman Catholic Church, all sorts of groups seek to influence others to make improvements for themselves. Anti-Semites target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.

[Hektor]

...

If Freemasons could do it in the inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic as now conceded, considering the possibility that Zionists & other influential groups did it in other cases seems pretty fair if not logical if I'm asked.

...

Freemasons, Jews, the UK aristocracy, wealthy business people, the Roman Catholic Church, all sorts of groups seek to influence others to make improvements for themselves. Anti-Semites target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.

Jew critics are generally aware that there are other groups following agendas as well. So that dog won't hunt, Nessie.

[Nessie]

...

If Freemasons could do it in the inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic as now conceded, considering the possibility that Zionists & other influential groups did it in other cases seems pretty fair if not logical if I'm asked.

...

Freemasons, Jews, the UK aristocracy, wealthy business people, the Roman Catholic Church, all sorts of groups seek to influence others to make improvements for themselves. Anti-Semites target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.

Jew critics are generally aware that there are other groups following agendas as well. So that dog won't hunt, Nessie.

Is it ethical and warranted to criticise them as a collective?

[Wahrheitssucher]

Freemasons, Jews, the UK aristocracy, wealthy business people, the Roman Catholic Church, all sorts of groups seek to influence others to make improvements for themselves. Anti-Semites target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.

Jew critics are generally aware that there are other groups following agendas as well. So that dog won't hunt, Nessie.

Is it ethical and warranted to criticise them as a collective?

There we have it: judged and condemned by her own words.

1. For only a deeply immoral person would need to ask if it is “ethical and warranted to criticise” other collectives besides jews for engaging in criminal, treasonable and immoral actions and plots.

2. And for being of such want of wit and wisdom as to write such incoherent witterings.
The following incoherent words seek to relentlessly defend nefarious actions, but only when they are done by jewish collectives. A shameful mind-set.

Read this sentence and pity Nessie for her weak mental capacity and woeful lack of moral compass:

“[People] target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.”

[Eye of Zyclone]

...

If Freemasons could do it in the inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic as now conceded, considering the possibility that Zionists & other influential groups did it in other cases seems pretty fair if not logical if I'm asked.

Freemasons, Jews, the UK aristocracy, wealthy business people, the Roman Catholic Church, all sorts of groups seek to influence others to make improvements for themselves. Anti-Semites target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.

And Jewish supremacists systematically claim to have psychic powers making them able to know the alleged secret thoughts of "antisemites" (that is, anyone who said something some Jews didn't want to hear or be disclosed) in order to deflect criticism away from the colonial state of Israel and organized Jewry in general. Claming without a proof that a groundless hatred is always the only reason for criticism against the activities of Yahweh's aristocracy, is a gross trick, but also a great classic of Jewish rhetoric & self-delusion...

[Eye of Zyclone]

Read this sentence and pity Nessie for her weak mental capacity and woeful lack of moral compass:

“[People] target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.”

He or she has a moral compass, but double standards are just the very essence of chosenness and so of Jewishness itself.

Freemasons, Jews, the UK aristocracy, wealthy business people, the Roman Catholic Church, all sorts of groups seek to influence others to make improvements for themselves. Anti-Semites target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.

Jew critics are generally aware that there are other groups following agendas as well. So that dog won't hunt, Nessie.

But normies don't and can't know that Jews also have an agenda, and a far-reaching hegemonic one on the top of that.

[Nessie]

Jew critics are generally aware that there are other groups following agendas as well. So that dog won't hunt, Nessie.

Is it ethical and warranted to criticise them as a collective?

There we have it: judged and condemned by her own words.

That you need to bully me, shows how weak your argument is.

1. For only a deeply immoral person would need to ask if it is “ethical and warranted to criticise” other collectives besides jews for engaging in criminal, treasonable and immoral actions and plots.

2. And for being of such want of wit and wisdom as to write such incoherent witterings.
The following incoherent words seek to relentlessly defend nefarious actions, but only when they are done by jewish collectives. A shameful mind-set.

Read this sentence and pity Nessie for her weak mental capacity and woeful lack of moral compass:

“[People] target criticism against Jews for criticism, often to deflect criticism away from other groups.”

The form bully, has nothing constructive to say.

[Nessie]

Criticism of Jews as a collective is not ethical or warranted. There are admissions by forum members that Jews do not always act collectively, and as soon as that admission is made, criticism of them as a collective is wrong.

For example, on X, I see a lot of attacks on Jews, as a collective, for their supposed collective policy to have a multi-ethnic West, to bring down the West, whilst keeping Israel Jewish. That is based on some dubious quotes attributed to Jews. They cannot explain how the destruction of the West would negatively affect the millions of Jews living there and evidence that they think the same as the Jews who are quoted.

It is an anti-Semitic trope to believe that Jews act collectively. All groups, religious, ethnic, political can, at times act collectively, but at the same time, there will be disagreement and dissent, so that collectiveness will never be 100%. To single out Jews is wrong. There are clear and obvious divides between Jews, over support for Zionism, between the different factions, nationally and politically.

A favourite of so-called revisionists, is the alleged collective Jewish boycott of Germany in the 1930s, that was in fact opposed by many Jews, particularly German Jews. Then there is the ridiculous claim that a Daily Express headline about Judea declaring war on Germany, was a collective, genuine, declaration of war. As if wars are declared because a journalist decided on an attention grabbing headline, based on what one Jewish group in the US had said.

The arguments put forward here, are so weak, that disagreement now results in bullying. Jews have, because of their separateness, which has often been due to anti-Semitism from the nation they resided in, historically been scapegoated by governments. The Nazis sought to blame economic problems in Germany, caused by Germans, on Jewish Germans in particular and Jews in general. But, as the Nuremberg Laws proved, they knew that Jews did not act collectively, as there were "good" Jews, half Jews, lapsed Jews, people who could be considered German. If the Nazis knew that Jews were not an actual collective, then it is wrong to treat Jews as a collective.

[Nazgul]

as the Nuremberg Laws proved, they knew that Jews did not act collectively, as there were "good" Jews, half Jews, lapsed Jews, people who could be considered German. If the Nazis knew that Jews were not an actual collective, then it is wrong to treat Jews as a collective.

The Reichstag was burned 27 February 1933 4 weeks after Hitler was declared Chancellor, alleged communists were arrested, a month later the follow occurred.
The paper below was published in March 1933

The Nuremberg laws were enacted 15 September 1935, a few years later.

[Callafangers]

as the Nuremberg Laws proved, they knew that Jews did not act collectively, as there were "good" Jews, half Jews, lapsed Jews, people who could be considered German. If the Nazis knew that Jews were not an actual collective, then it is wrong to treat Jews as a collective.

The Reichstag was burned 27 February 1933 4 weeks after Hitler was declared Chancellor, alleged communists were arrested, a month later the follow occurred.
The paper below was published in March 1933
[...]
The Nuremberg laws were enacted 15 September 1935, a few years later.

Nessie is clinging to a false dichotomy, here: "well, they're clearly not a collective since Jews are also individuals!"

I and others have made clear multiple times that Jews, like everyone else, are capable of being both a collective and individuals. It is not "one or the other". But the question is/are:

- whether there is a considerable degree of collective unity and ambitions
- whether these ambitions are good for national (non-Jewish) interests

Are Jews a strong collective (unity/cohesion)? Indisputably, yes, demonstrable by the size/number and strength of their organizations. Has it been reasonably demonstrated that these collective ambitions are quite concerning and problematic for the national interest(s)? Yes, absolutely, demonstrable by the patterns of shared and common initiatives among these organizations.

After acquiring so much power, Jews could have acted as a true "light among nations"... but how instead have they used that power?

bb.jpg (33.84 KiB) Viewed 21 times