To understand the current world affairs, you need to understand the mindset of Zionism and Jewish Supremacy. This debate between Candice Owens and Rabbi Barclay highlight the concept nicely. The debate speaks for itself, but nevertheless we should highlight and share key points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ9GQ-gexhQ
(1) Jews get to define antisemitism, not you, not anyone else. They freely admit this definition changes overtime, but they are in the sole position to define what is antisemitism and not antisemitism. This concedes debate and power to the Jew so that he has complete control over the dialogue. There is no rational or objective definition that lies outside Jewish control (e.g. a jury) but instead the Jewish community defines antisemitism.
(2) An attack on a Jew is held above all other things. There is no moral equivalent, the supposed "fact" that 1200 Jews died on OCT 7th trumps 30000 Palestinians dead, it trumps 100,000 Palestinian dead, it will even Trump 1,000,000 Palestinian children dead - one Jew life is worth the entire world of goyim. The Rabbi claims the Palestinians have gave up their humanity (dehumanizing is a step in genocide) because of the Oct 7th attack thus genocide is acceptable. This type of sociopathic behavior may be due to decades of inbreeding among Jews.
(3) Under no circumstances can you bring up the concept of Hitler or anything else the Jews don't like. The very mention of Hitler (in any context) is appalling to Jews and as such there is never a reason to mention it. The Jews control your speech (based on their definition of antisemitism) and thus they maintain power over you. Don't even think of admitting Hitler did anything right - NOTHING. There is literally nothing this man did that was right in the eyes of Jews (not even the fact that he was an animal rights proponent).
(4) Rabbi Barclay attacks "Passion of the Christ" because the devil manifest in the faces of children (who he claims were Jewish). So this is antisemitic. Now think about about many Jewish directors there exist in Hollywood and the modern villain and hero stereotype: White Villain, Black/Minority hero. Think of commercials: White Woman / Black Father, Black person in possession of knowledge / authority and White man acting stupid / foolish. What is Borat other than a Jew walking around making fun of white people? This is prevalent throughout (((Hollywood))) and a blatant obvious example of anti-whiteness; however, according to Jews there would be no moral equivalency. Jews are held to their own standards:
(5) Jews have their own standard. They are above you and above moral equivalency. Rabbi Barclay states that the definition of antisemitism is allowed to change (whereas other definitions are not) because Jews are unique. Jewish hatred, according to Barclay, is the unlike any other hatred - which, again, there is no moral equivalency when dealing with Jews. They hold themselves above all other groups.
Let me know what you found interesting in the comments below and dont forget to smash the like button and subscribe.
You are getting it. For anyone who wants to understand Jooz, watch this guy: https://www.bitchute.com/profile/T8sehO7hOuLl/
When you parrot ignorance you become ignorant, the entirety of your argument is based on a false premise. Antisemites are defined as anyone who attacks or ridicules "semites" Semite refers to a member of any of the Semitic languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa, including Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians (including the Amhara and the Tigrayans), and Aramaean tribes. The term was given in the 19th century to include any people who speak one of the Semitic languages. The Semitic languages are a family of languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa. What Israel is doing in Gaza is an antisemitic genocide because Palestinians are semites.
Noone uses the term that way. Its only used as anti jew.
You mean people who manipulate the meaning of words? I have no interest in what those people say
That's not the definition the Rabbi is giving. That is nowhere near the definition the ADL uses. Where do you get this definition? Are you Jewish? What gives you the right to define Antisemitism - that's reserved for Jews!
Does my best rabbi impression: Merely_a_condiut I'm going to stop you right there. Would you knowingly attack/hurt someone because of their race? Because what's what you're doing merely_a_conduit. merely_a_conduit, your comments are hurtful, very hurtful. 2000 years of antisemitism (to which we constantly changed the definition: from religious, to race, to Israel, to the bankers that own the world) have made Jewish hate ABOVE ALL OTHER HATE. There is no hate comparable to the hate Jews have received (even though we changed that definition over and over). October 7th is the WORST DAY IN HUMANITY, it's when 30,000 Palestinian VOLUNTARILY gave up their humanity - the children, they are no longer human. Holocaust, 2000 years. You compare these Palestinians to Israeli's, which I find hurtful and offensive. These Palestinian children are not human anymore, they gave the up on October 7th, they are not human beings.
That's Google's definition, it's common knowledge if you actually looked into it instead of parroting the definition of an Israeli propaganda outlet. You should buy a little Hat you would do well in Hollywood 🤣
I'm not parroting anything; I'm critiquing the rabbi's remarks. You need to work on reading comprehension.
Here is Google's definition of antisemitism:
noun: antisemitism hostility to or prejudice against Jewish people. "he is a leader in the fight against anti-Semitism"
Google's definition is no way anywhere close to what you claimed it to be.
I didn't say it was the definition of antisemitism, I said Semites is defined by Google "Semite refers to a member of any of the Semitic languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa, including Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians (including the Amhara and the Tigrayans), and Aramaean tribes. The term was given in the 19th century to include any people who speak one of the Semitic languages. The Semitic languages are a family of languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa."
Anti noun A person who is opposed to something, such as a group, policy, proposal, or practice.
You are projecting your lack of comprehension onto Internet strangers, your mother would be proud.
Your voice of reason will be drowned out here by the hatred that consumes this place.
Reason implies agreeing vs disagreeing about what others are suggesting...that ain't voice; that's perpetual noise, hence always a conflict.
VOICE, noun (Latin vox; voco) - "to drive out sound; and voice is that which is driven out"...only nature drives sound, and each one within is being driven out.
Only while drowning (inception towards death) can there be stayin' alive, and only within consumption (loss) can being (growth) prolong.
Voice of reason? Maybe you should try to use a voice of reason with Rabbi Barclay like Candace did. How did that turn out for Candace? Oy Vey! Voice of Reason:
https://www.newsweek.com/candace-owens-not-silenced-daily-wire-exit-1882371
It's a fight against an ocean of ignorance but it's not in vain because there's people like yourself in the world who can see the truth.
If a gentile chooses to stand under (understand) a jewish suggestion, then a jew was chosen to be supreme.
...implies ignoring to resist (life) current (inception towards death).
One needs to resist the wanted temptation to stand under another...otherwise one cannot sustain self.
Aka reasoning over suggested information; while ignoring the implication of perceivable inspiration.
Gentiles consenting to suggested -isms permits a jew to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the suggested at will.
a) A jew suggests definition and time to tempt gentiles to ignore being solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) aka constantly changing. Holding onto suggested definitions; while contemplating affixed states (past; present; future) tempts one to ignore being moved.
b) A jew suggests words to tempt gentiles to ignore perceivable sound, hence suggested "definition" tempting one to ignore perceivable "DEAF PHONETICIAN" aka being deaf to perceivable phonics (sound).
Another example: suggested "insane person" tempts one to ignore perceivable....being in sanus (within sound) and per sonos (by sound).
Suggesting words (information) over sound (inspiration) implies spell-craft.
a) Sole (all perceivable) generates positions (ones perception) by separating itself from whole into partial.
b) Whole/sole/soul aka "one for all and all for one" aka "there can be only one" aka "alone - ALL(in)ONE"
c) Consenting to suggested definition implies ONES CHOICE establishing CHOSEN ONES position over self by submitting of self to another.
d) Suggested pluralism (they) tempts perceiving singular (one) to ignore self for others.
a) Rational implies reasoning over suggested definitions. A jew suggests to tempt gentiles to reason against one another over suggested; which permits a jew control over both sides of every conflict of reason.
Nature operates on implication (if/then)...not on reason (want vs not want; true vs false; yes vs no; agree vs disagree; believe vs denial; good vs bad etc.)
Being implies choice within balance, hence if balance; then choice...reasoning against other choices implies imbalance.
b) Objective implies as perceived by self; consenting to anything suggested by another tempts one to subject self.
c) Being (life) implies in (inception) and out (death) of sides (inception/death balance aka momentum of motion for matter within).
d) jews suggest sides to tempt gentiles off-center and into circumference, which permits jews to erect self at center, while cutting off circumference. This implies circumcision.
Being implies center (perception) within circumference (perceivable)...