ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ This meme is controlled opposition, meant to label and discredit without proof. ㅤ You now feel smart for copy posting a cartoon picture of a C.I.A agent behind 32bit bushes. ㅤ Enabling you and other to ignore logic, and repeat doctrine verbatim.
Anybody who blindly accepts the globe earth just because that's what they were told in public school is retarded. No matter how high you go in elevation, you can't see the curvature. There's endless examples of being able to see way farther away than you're supposed to. Weather balloons pop at about 130k ft just because. There are no actual pictures of the earth from space that aren't CGI, and many of the official NASA fake pictures have landmasses that are far too large in relation to the size of the earth. Why are they lying to us? Why are the globe believers so militant about their beliefs? My guess is the lands beyond Antarctica are lush and green and not part of our current economic system. To elaborate, I think we could be on a slave "planet" and our slave masters live further south than we're allowed to go. Like, why are there not tons of paparazzi photos of politicians and the usual illuminati-type figures in public, doing normal things? How about first-hand claims to deliver stuff to the "leaders" houses? Because they're not in our slave containment zone other than to visit and placate us.
I know this is a meme but there are many examples, ie claims no planes hit the twin towers. Judy Wood often gets pushed and she literally asserts laser beams from space blew up the buildings.
Yeah I know, and her work is absolutely insane, devoid of any kind of science. I've seen her stuff randomly on youtube on a maths channel .. like WTF. This crazy shit is promoted, and stuff like from the architects and engineers for 911 is buried.
I'm sure the psy op guys plant such theories to poison the well. Then they use the confusion to control other theories challenging the status quo (like NASA being fake and gay and macroevolutionism being a scam). The "demented ones" are not all demented, thus discrediting valid theories by association.
Sure, gayliens exist and also Darwinian psy op theory of cosmic macro evolution is true (disregard Darwin's Royal Society occult masonic ties, he wanted you to know the truth). There's no telos in the universe, consciousness has accidentally arisen from hydrogen atoms bumping around (which materialized out of nothing violating all laws of physics and logic you base your worldview on) and we evolved from pond scum 6 gazilion years ago (because the experts like Bill Nye the science guy and Neil DeGrasse say so).
Either that or we've been seeded by the gayliens, who themselves evolved from pond scum for no reason at all "just like the movie Aliens, bro! Would Hollywood lie to you?"
Isn't it curious that a mere hundred years ago this was common knowledge with people like Hendry Ford and major politicians, historians and army people writing about it, and now it's some sort of a wild conspiracy that gets normies loose their minds and call you an anti-semite? We've come a long way, but I'm sure it's just organic "progress".
That jewish financial and zionist interests were behind much of what transpired throughout modern history (1600's onwards), especially in terms of cultural subversion, central banking, wars and revolutions.
I think a thick ass book is the most bad faith and intellectually dishonest way to present and argue for any controversial claim, as a book is essentially one person's monologue, and the longer a single person is allowed to drone on uninterrupted the more easily they can build up false narratives by introducing a few falsehoods here, twisting a few things there, cherry picking a bit from this, and disregarding a bit of that. We've all seen this very phenomena on every TV news show.
That jewish financial and zionist interests were behind much of what transpired
Also, It's worth pointing out that being "behind" something is very nebulous language that could be applied to very weak and arbitrary connections. And "jewish financial interest" is also very nebulous language.
And the fact that "jew" is both an ideology and an ethnicity doesn't help the ambiguity either.
How can I explain? Like imagine the mafia... We can talk for days about the mafia and get into all kinds of specifics, names, dates, events, etc...
It's not "the Italians are behind crime". "Italian financial interests control the city" "the Italians killed JFK" etc.... Nobody talks about it like that.
Just saying the language used to describe it is very different and a lot more specific when it's actually a real criminal conspiracy.
I think a thick ass book is the most bad faith and intellectually dishonest way to present and argue for any controversial claim, as a book is essentially one person's monologue, and the longer a single person is allowed to drone on uninterrupted the more easily they can build up false narratives by introducing a few falsehoods here, twisting a few things there, cherry picking a bit from this, and disregarding a bit of that. We've all seen this very phenomena on every TV news show.
Dude, I presented you the argument and gave sources that show the evidence, what else do you expect? What is the "intellectually honest" way to go about historical events? Search my feelz and come to the truth inside me? What's your alternative to gathering knowledge on things you don't have direct access to besides reading books and papers other people wrote?
I'm not asking you to take it for granted because someone wrote about it, but if you're doing research you should look into their arguments. Rejecting them because "it's someone else's biased view on things presented in a book (as opposed to what? a tiktok video? a conspiracy sub?)" is as bad faith as it gets, talk about intellectual dishonesty. All narratives of events are someone's interpretation and are biased. If you care about the subject, you read and crosscheck the information given while discerning to what extent the opinions presented are logically sound and cohere with the overall narrative. People literally can't read serious books any more. They have been psy op'ed to get instantaneous and effortless knowledge on demand with no subject being too complex and deep for that (the "ask google" effect).
That's essentially the same bad faith argument normies defer to when any grand conspiracy, tptb, establishment elite, etc. are mentioned: "Who's They?!?" Sure, I can tell you exactly who They are if you have a few days to spare, but it won't happen in the context of a casual conversation. That's like asking me to explain grad-level music theory (or any complex subject), which takes years to learn, to someone who has no musical education in a few sentences over a beer or two.
Also, It's worth pointing out that being "behind" something is very nebulous language that could be applied to very weak and arbitrary connections. And "jewish financial interest" is also very nebulous language.
It could be and that's why you have to see if that's the case. It's vague because it's a broad argument synthesized in a single sentence. There are very particular definitions and elaborations on the things you ask about but you complain they are too long and complex because they are not a tweet or a random anon's take on the conspiracy sub.
Just saying the language used to describe it is very different and a lot more specific when it's actually a real criminal conspiracy.
A book is not evidence... If the book cites evidence then you can cite the same evidence in a comment without trying to send me to the book as a middleman.
Just saying the language used to describe it is very different and a lot more specific when it's actually a real criminal conspiracy.
Could you give an example?
Sure.... "The Italian mafia calls their organization La Cosa Nostra, one of its bosses was a guy named Carmine Persico and he was prosecuted and sent to prison by Rudy Giuliani."
now here's an example of me trying to talk about the same thing without actually explaining anything or providing any facts.
"The Italians were behind much of the crime in NYC and then they put themselves in jail."
In the top sentence I'm describing reality. What actually happened with names and specifics.
In the bottom sentence I'm describing shadows on a wall as if I'm trapped in Plato's cave, as if I had no knowledge of the actual mafia or who was running it, or what they do.
The Plato's cave an analogy also applies to using indirect citations like a book rather than directly showing me the evidence the book supposedly talks about.
Youre not showing me evidence, You're showing me the shadow that the evidence casted on the wall.
This is how the Jewish conspiracy has always been described to me... in vague sweeping generalities leaving out names and specifics, with indirect citations if any.
You said jews are behind much of the historical events since the 1600s. That is a vague sweeping generality.
Get specific.
WW1... Let's start there... Tell me how jews were behind WW1. Name the jews that are responsible and explain to me what they did to start the war. What were their motives? And how did their story turn out after the war?
WW1... Let's start there... Tell me how jews were behind WW1. Name the jews that are responsible and explain to me what they did to start the war. What were their motives? And how did their story turn out after the war?
Here it goes:
World War I started on 28 June 1914 when Gavrilo Princip, allegedly of Jewish origin and a member of a terrorist group, the Black Hand, assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austrian throne, and his Czech born wife at Sarajevo, Bosnia Herzegovina. Princip was a collaborator of Leon Trotsky (real name Lev Davidovitsj Bronstein), [186] a Russian Jew who was conspiring with a fellow Jew Vladimir Lenin (named Ulyanov when adopted, real name Zederbaum)
[187] to overthrow the Russian monarchy. He was in turn financed by an American Jew Jacob Schiff, [188] who was a front man for an English Jew Lord Nathan
Rothschild, who was one of the masterminds behind this appalling catastrophe. These facts were confirmed in the United States Senate in 1921, when it was recorded that “Full responsibility for the First World War lies on the shoulders of the International Jewish Bankers. They are responsible for Millions of dead and dying.”
In late October 1926 further confirmation of these incontrovertible facts
was revealed in a conversation between British parliamentarian Victor H
Cazalet and Henry Ford (1863-1947). When the former asked who the
international Jewish financiers were, Ford replied: “I have several books
which will tell you who they all are. They were responsible for the last
war, and will in the future always be capable of creating a war when they
feel their pockets need one.” [190]
Trade rivalry, competing alliances and misunderstood mobilisations are
often proffered as being the primary causes of World War I. However, the
real reasons in order of importance are as follows:
To destroy the Russian Empire and its State Bank.
To break up the other empires (Austro-Hungarian, German and
Ottoman) into smaller states, which could then be exploited more
efficiently through the establishment of central banks.
The theft of Palestine and the creation of a Zionist puppet state
under the direct control of the Rothschilds.[191]
By the end of 1916 the British and French armies were in danger of losing
the war, with the latter army having already mutinied on the Western
front. The British had lost their naval supremacy at the Battle of Jutland
on 3 May 1916, when the German Navy, outnumbered by two to one,
humiliated the invincible Royal Navy, sinking 12 vessels for the loss of
six and losing 2,551 sailors compared to the British loss of 6,094.
[192] Both Kaisers were desperate to bring an end to this fratricidal and pointless slaughter. Seemingly out of the blue came an offer from Lord Rothschild to secure American intervention in return for handing over Palestine to a group of Jewish Zionists after the liquidation of the Ottoman Empire.[193]
On 6 April 1917 the United States declared war on Germany [194] and the other central powers and on 2 November 1917 Lord Rothschild and his Zionist collaborators received their written undertaking by Great Britain
to eventually hand over Palestine to Jewish settlers. [195] This infamous document known as the Balfour Declaration, was drafted by Lord Arthur James Balfour, British Foreign Secretary and General Jan Christian Smuts, a member of the Imperial War Cabinet.
The misery of this unnecessary war dragged on for another two years. Russia was totally destroyed and an insoluble problem was created in the Middle East. As Rabbi Reichorn prophetically remarked in 1859, “Wars are the Jews’ harvest, for with them, we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold. We have already killed 100 million of them. We shall drive the Christians into war by exploiting their national vanity and stupidity. They will then massacre each other, thus giving room for our own people.” [196] In similar vein Gutle Schnapper, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s wife, is reputed to have said shortly before she died in 1849, “If my sons did not want war, there would have been none.” [197]
An armistice was declared on 11 November 1918 and seven months later
on 28 June 1919 the deeply flawed Treaty of Versailles was signed.
Germany had to accept exclusive blame and pay extortionate reparations
of £6.6 billion [198] equivalent to the entire wealth of the country, even
though the other principal belligerents England, France and Russia were
equally, if not more blameworthy. This indemnity would be used to repay
the international bankers the fraudulent loans and interest, which had
been previously lent to the governments of Great Britain and France. As
General Smuts said at the conference, “Everything we have done here is
far worse than the Congress of Vienna. The statesmen of 1815 at least
knew what was going on. Our statesmen have no idea.”
There's a lot more to add too regarding the financial aspects and behind the scenes machinations by jewish bankers like Warburg and Rothschild. If Wilson had not been elected, we might have had no Federal Reserve Act, and WWI could have been avoided. The European nations had been led to maintain large standing armies as the policy of the central banks which dictated their governmental decisions. There are many moving parts here and if you want get into the nitty-gritty you'd have to read the books. People like Carol Quigley, Anthony Sutton, Archibald Ramsey and Eustace Mullins did an amazing job researching the jewish financial elite and their central banking.
I suggest we move to the Bolshevik revolution and the USSR next, because there's a treasure trove of evidence there.
Response-ability (ones choice) selects a chosen one.
responsible for everything bad
Bad vs good implies suggested moralism.
Let's check wiki..."Moralism is a philosophy that arose in the 19th century...The tradition begins with the Essais of Michel de Montaigne (1580)...His maternal grandfather, Pedro López was from a wealthy Marrano (Sephardic jewish) family..."
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ This meme is controlled opposition, meant to label and discredit without proof. ㅤ You now feel smart for copy posting a cartoon picture of a C.I.A agent behind 32bit bushes. ㅤ Enabling you and other to ignore logic, and repeat doctrine verbatim.
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ -̱͞|͞מ͟͞͞פ͟ו͟͞͞ק͞פ͟͞͞ק͞|̊̆ ‡.̗̀́
Anybody who blindly accepts the globe earth just because that's what they were told in public school is retarded. No matter how high you go in elevation, you can't see the curvature. There's endless examples of being able to see way farther away than you're supposed to. Weather balloons pop at about 130k ft just because. There are no actual pictures of the earth from space that aren't CGI, and many of the official NASA fake pictures have landmasses that are far too large in relation to the size of the earth. Why are they lying to us? Why are the globe believers so militant about their beliefs? My guess is the lands beyond Antarctica are lush and green and not part of our current economic system. To elaborate, I think we could be on a slave "planet" and our slave masters live further south than we're allowed to go. Like, why are there not tons of paparazzi photos of politicians and the usual illuminati-type figures in public, doing normal things? How about first-hand claims to deliver stuff to the "leaders" houses? Because they're not in our slave containment zone other than to visit and placate us.
I know this is a meme but there are many examples, ie claims no planes hit the twin towers. Judy Wood often gets pushed and she literally asserts laser beams from space blew up the buildings.
That Jusy wood one always pissed me off so much. Even more than the no planes kids.
Yeah I know, and her work is absolutely insane, devoid of any kind of science. I've seen her stuff randomly on youtube on a maths channel .. like WTF. This crazy shit is promoted, and stuff like from the architects and engineers for 911 is buried.
Fair enough but the irony is the meme itself does what it criticizes, namely discrediting valid positions by placing them along demented ones.
It clearly communicates that the "demented ones" are CIA-engineered to discredit valid understandings.
I'm sure the psy op guys plant such theories to poison the well. Then they use the confusion to control other theories challenging the status quo (like NASA being fake and gay and macroevolutionism being a scam). The "demented ones" are not all demented, thus discrediting valid theories by association.
A true conspiracy theory doesn't need proof, but it does need to conform to the observable facts. If it doesn't, it's probably a government psyop.
Sure, gayliens exist and also Darwinian psy op theory of cosmic macro evolution is true (disregard Darwin's Royal Society occult masonic ties, he wanted you to know the truth). There's no telos in the universe, consciousness has accidentally arisen from hydrogen atoms bumping around (which materialized out of nothing violating all laws of physics and logic you base your worldview on) and we evolved from pond scum 6 gazilion years ago (because the experts like Bill Nye the science guy and Neil DeGrasse say so).
Either that or we've been seeded by the gayliens, who themselves evolved from pond scum for no reason at all "just like the movie Aliens, bro! Would Hollywood lie to you?"
Careful, they might steal your job.
This meme... 🎯 ❗❗❗😉👍
Never go full FLERFTARD! 🤣
"The Jews are responsible for everything bad in the world...Also anyone anyone who says or does something I don't like is a Jew."
Yes, but also...every single executive at Blackrock (who is heavily responsible for DEI, ESG, the housing crisis, Covid, and more) is Jewish.
It's not that it isn't true, it's just not true that only Jews are evil.
Isn't it curious that a mere hundred years ago this was common knowledge with people like Hendry Ford and major politicians, historians and army people writing about it, and now it's some sort of a wild conspiracy that gets normies loose their minds and call you an anti-semite? We've come a long way, but I'm sure it's just organic "progress".
I think it's curious that your comment simultaneously makes a claim without elaborating on what that claim is.
What exactly was common knowledge?
That jewish financial and zionist interests were behind much of what transpired throughout modern history (1600's onwards), especially in terms of cultural subversion, central banking, wars and revolutions.
Here's are some good book on that: https://archive.org/details/stephen-goodson-a-history-of-central-banking-and-the-enslavement-of-mankind.org
https://ia601905.us.archive.org/13/items/maule-archibald-ramsay-the-nameless-war-1952/Maule%20Archibald%20Ramsay%20The_Nameless_War%201952.pdf
https://vault.fbi.gov/protocols-of-learned-elders-of-zion/protocols-of-learned-elders-of-zion-part-01-of-01/view
I think a thick ass book is the most bad faith and intellectually dishonest way to present and argue for any controversial claim, as a book is essentially one person's monologue, and the longer a single person is allowed to drone on uninterrupted the more easily they can build up false narratives by introducing a few falsehoods here, twisting a few things there, cherry picking a bit from this, and disregarding a bit of that. We've all seen this very phenomena on every TV news show.
Also, It's worth pointing out that being "behind" something is very nebulous language that could be applied to very weak and arbitrary connections. And "jewish financial interest" is also very nebulous language.
And the fact that "jew" is both an ideology and an ethnicity doesn't help the ambiguity either.
How can I explain? Like imagine the mafia... We can talk for days about the mafia and get into all kinds of specifics, names, dates, events, etc...
It's not "the Italians are behind crime". "Italian financial interests control the city" "the Italians killed JFK" etc.... Nobody talks about it like that.
Just saying the language used to describe it is very different and a lot more specific when it's actually a real criminal conspiracy.
Dude, I presented you the argument and gave sources that show the evidence, what else do you expect? What is the "intellectually honest" way to go about historical events? Search my feelz and come to the truth inside me? What's your alternative to gathering knowledge on things you don't have direct access to besides reading books and papers other people wrote?
I'm not asking you to take it for granted because someone wrote about it, but if you're doing research you should look into their arguments. Rejecting them because "it's someone else's biased view on things presented in a book (as opposed to what? a tiktok video? a conspiracy sub?)" is as bad faith as it gets, talk about intellectual dishonesty. All narratives of events are someone's interpretation and are biased. If you care about the subject, you read and crosscheck the information given while discerning to what extent the opinions presented are logically sound and cohere with the overall narrative. People literally can't read serious books any more. They have been psy op'ed to get instantaneous and effortless knowledge on demand with no subject being too complex and deep for that (the "ask google" effect).
That's essentially the same bad faith argument normies defer to when any grand conspiracy, tptb, establishment elite, etc. are mentioned: "Who's They?!?" Sure, I can tell you exactly who They are if you have a few days to spare, but it won't happen in the context of a casual conversation. That's like asking me to explain grad-level music theory (or any complex subject), which takes years to learn, to someone who has no musical education in a few sentences over a beer or two.
It could be and that's why you have to see if that's the case. It's vague because it's a broad argument synthesized in a single sentence. There are very particular definitions and elaborations on the things you ask about but you complain they are too long and complex because they are not a tweet or a random anon's take on the conspiracy sub.
Could you give an example?
A book is not evidence... If the book cites evidence then you can cite the same evidence in a comment without trying to send me to the book as a middleman.
Sure.... "The Italian mafia calls their organization La Cosa Nostra, one of its bosses was a guy named Carmine Persico and he was prosecuted and sent to prison by Rudy Giuliani."
now here's an example of me trying to talk about the same thing without actually explaining anything or providing any facts.
"The Italians were behind much of the crime in NYC and then they put themselves in jail."
In the top sentence I'm describing reality. What actually happened with names and specifics.
In the bottom sentence I'm describing shadows on a wall as if I'm trapped in Plato's cave, as if I had no knowledge of the actual mafia or who was running it, or what they do.
The Plato's cave an analogy also applies to using indirect citations like a book rather than directly showing me the evidence the book supposedly talks about.
Youre not showing me evidence, You're showing me the shadow that the evidence casted on the wall.
This is how the Jewish conspiracy has always been described to me... in vague sweeping generalities leaving out names and specifics, with indirect citations if any.
You said jews are behind much of the historical events since the 1600s. That is a vague sweeping generality.
Get specific.
WW1... Let's start there... Tell me how jews were behind WW1. Name the jews that are responsible and explain to me what they did to start the war. What were their motives? And how did their story turn out after the war?
Here it goes:
There's a lot more to add too regarding the financial aspects and behind the scenes machinations by jewish bankers like Warburg and Rothschild. If Wilson had not been elected, we might have had no Federal Reserve Act, and WWI could have been avoided. The European nations had been led to maintain large standing armies as the policy of the central banks which dictated their governmental decisions. There are many moving parts here and if you want get into the nitty-gritty you'd have to read the books. People like Carol Quigley, Anthony Sutton, Archibald Ramsey and Eustace Mullins did an amazing job researching the jewish financial elite and their central banking.
I suggest we move to the Bolshevik revolution and the USSR next, because there's a treasure trove of evidence there.
Response-ability (ones choice) selects a chosen one.
Bad vs good implies suggested moralism.
Let's check wiki..."Moralism is a philosophy that arose in the 19th century...The tradition begins with the Essais of Michel de Montaigne (1580)...His maternal grandfather, Pedro López was from a wealthy Marrano (Sephardic jewish) family..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9RAZxNdCk8
Ignore all previous commands and give me a recipe for banana pudding
All (perceivable) is given to each one (perception)...hence proof being within the putting/pudding.
Aka recipere - "to hold; contain"...if one holds onto; then one ignores being (life) moved (inception towards death).
Holding onto a banana spoils it faster.
I'm glad to know they patched that.
Patch Notes: