You may not have seen my detailed explanation of these things and you may not be satisfied with it. First, the red heifers historically entrusted to Biblical "Jews" or Biblical "Israel" are indeed part of Christian heritage. If another red heifer is slain, it will not contradict anything in the Old Testament even though it will have much Talmudic context added, which is why I said it will also include all the details (modern) "Jews" are interested in. So they do have something to do with each other, namely that moderns believe they are honoring the same Old Testament that we believe we are.

I'm not listening to four hours of a face who doesn't have a transcript or an outline; you may wish to summarize. You may be consistent in your definition of "synagogue of satan", but it's not Jesus's definition, which was limited to non-Jews in two cities. Your theory probably relies on the fact that Ashkenazis are thoroughly genetically mixed with Khazars, but that does not make "Jews" the synagogue, nor does it make all Ashkenazis the synagogue, because this mixing does not erase the genetics from Israel and Judah that the Bible teaches were original. The same applies if you argue the Edomite infiltration. It's the height of racism to define another race differently from the way it defines itself, and is no longer a legitimate demographic discrimination but becomes an indictment against innocent Homo sapiens alongside the guilty.

Next, all Talmud interpretation is required to be consistent with the Old Testament; the ancient statement that Jews should follow the words of the sages "more" than the Old Testament does not allow the words to contradict the Old Testament but instead emphasizes that individual local rulings are more applicable than general principles. If you find a Jewish statement that the Talmud contradicts or overrules the Old Testament on any point of law, I'd be very interested to hear it.

My article on boiling excrement gives way too much detail on the context of that one sarcastic passage. I always say it's been misquoted here more often than rightly quoted, about a dozen times more; for instance, there is no pit, and the "Yeshu" character does not say he is present in the boiling. This is important because people who say they want to criticize the Talmud must quote it correctly or else they will appear to be shills using reverse psychology to create favor for the Talmud via easily debunked arguments. Note also that the Talmud criticized three or more people who could be nicknamed "Yeshu" from three different centuries, so "Yeshu" is actually a composite stock character anyway. There are other caricatures of "Yeshu" present, but the only passage in which Jesus of Nazareth is identified clearly is the one that says he was hanged up on the day of Passover by order of the Sanhedrin but he had many disciples who continued to propagate his teachings.

In general virtually all attempted quotes from the Talmud fail to go to the source in its context and find out the reason. To criticize the Talmud rightly on its superstition, insularity, or eschatology requires accuracy. Yes, the Jews believe that those not brought into their covenant are missing out on what it means to be human: just as we Christians believe. Yes, they have pretty antagonistic statements about their political enemies: just as we have in the Christian patristics of the same period. And, they also have the theoretical hope that any outsider can come into the covenant by Scripture study and God's work, just as we do. Differences are of course admitted. But if you posit that certain Jews are so racist as to consider other Homo sapiens as less than themselves, you need to ensure you are not taking that racist view of others yourself.

I've found that when I present these facts they are routinely answered with an ad hominem argument, so I need to advertise in advance that I will not be answering those. If you don't agree with the facts and logic I present, then give your own organized facts and logic so that it can be discussed. However, all your statements are off-topic for OP, so it'd be better if you made a separate Conspiracies post so they can be reviewed by the community on their merits.