Poisoning the well with retarded conspiracy theories
(files.catbox.moe)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (47)
sorted by:
I addressed that already. I posted a couple of paragraphs, but you decided to reduce it all to the first statement, taking it out of the context of the whole and ignoring the rest and thus strawmaning the argument as if the whole argument is build around the speculation that Gavrilo Princep is jewish.
As for Trotsky, it is definitely significant that he was jewish considering 90% of the bolsheviks were jewish and were financed by jewish banks in the West.
So we have a jewish ideolog (Karl Marx), jewish revolutionary leaders (Lenin, Trotsky, Kerensky and Zhinoviev) and jewish financiers (Wall str's Jacob Schiff, of Kuhn Loeb and Co., Chase Manhattan Bank of the Fed, J.P. Morgan). Then we have the Protocols of Zion which is a blueprint for the revolution and the subsequent regime. How is the bolshevik revolution not a jewish conspiracy to seize control of Russia (and other European countries, where the communist revolutions and short-lived regimes failed miserably)? Moreover, this was not their first rodeo in bringing about a communist NWO and previously both the English and the French Revolutions where planned, organized and executed by jews (and their useful pawns).
No. The mafia does not hold a nationalistic agenda - as I said they are a criminal secret society originating from Italy. The mafia was a conspiracy of Italian criminals to rule over New York criminal world and influence the government. Calling it an Italian conspiracy would suggest the Italian government and elites supported their efforts in the US, which they did not. Subtlety of language is key for context.
You're supposed to open with your strongest arguments, and Gavrilo Princep and Leon Trotsky being jewish was your opening argument for why WW1 was a jewish conspiracy.
Now making you actually back that up is somehow a strawman? You shouldn't have said it if you didn't wanna justify it's relevancy.
So far I've spent 3 days trying to get you to define what makes a "jewish conspiracy" and you haven't. So forgive me I'm skeptical as to what makes a bank a "jewish bank".
Then why bring up serbian nationalism and communism as jewish conspiracies when neither of those hold a nationalistic agenda for jews?
And as I said before, Zionism is not a conspiracy. Neither was Serbian nationalism or communism for that matter.
So what exactly is the standard for being a "jewish conspiracy" and how does Serbian nationalism and communism fit that standard?
And yet the membership of the mafia is 100% Italian and you just told me that doesn't count as an "Italian conspiracy"....
Don't tell me how I'm supposed to debate, dude. I pasted a chapter of a book about WWI and it logically starts with the assassination of Franz Joseph.
A bank run by jews maybe?
It's not about the quantity but of category. I pointed that out in my reply about the mafia but you glossed over it.
Your sophistry is off the charts, I'm done with this. Just read the fucking books (or don't, I don't care). You don't need me and I feel I'm getting trolled, no one can be this bad faith uwnillingly.
Well that explains why what I read contained absolutely no relevant answers to my question... Because it wasn't written in response to my question at all, and instead you just lazily grabbed some random ass text tangentially related to the topic, written by someone who agrees with you, and who's main argument was to imply guilt by association.
So let's just be clear here.... If you can not even take the time to write your own responses then you are in no position to chide me for not fully responding to each and every point written in them.
That is actually incredibly dishonest and bad faith.
Ok.... I think I get it now.
If white people run a bank, it's just a bank. But when jews run a bank it's a "jewish bank".
Kind of like how when Italians have a criminal organization with 100% Italian members, it's just a conspiracy.
Yet when bolsheviks have 90% jewish membership (citation needed) it becomes a "jewish conspiracy".
So I guess the rule is that jews seem to imprint their race onto anything they are involved with and those things become jewish as a result.
And that is the basis of claiming jews are behind 400 years of historical events, wars, conspiracies, and political changes. Some jews were involved at some point and imprinted their race onto all of those events.
It's literally just based on double standards not applied to any other race.
Ok you baited me for one last response
"White people" is not an ethnic, religious or cultural group - it's a race. Most jews are white people. Not only that, jews are a very small part of the population (0.2%) compared to the category "white people".
The jewish banks are more precisely banks, owned by jewish banking families because jews, especially rich and powerful ones, keep it in the family (or marry other jewish families with similar stature). Jews are grossly overrepresented in banking and financial institutions and there are historical reasons behind that.
Now read this carefully: The reason why jews are named and "white people" are not is because jews are and always were seen as foreigners in every country they lived, because they refused to assimilate and isolated themselves. They were banished from more than 200 countries because they didn't assimilate and practiced talmudic judaism, usury and were involved in subversion and conspiracies (even when they were not, they were viewed with suspicion and were the usual scapegoats) which was not well received in Christian countries. It was common for jews to be treated as second class citizens because judaism is anti-christian and the West used to be Christian before they secularized it through their communist freemasonic revolutions.
I have to give you basic history lessons because you fail to understand the obvious - why jews are perceived as "others" in our European (and Western) culture. At least you sound like a young guy so there's time to learn. I was stupid when I was in my 20's too.
Even if we put the history aside - because they are a small minority and a peculiar community, it makes perfect sense to name them like that. It would have been the same if a lot of amish guys owned banks. Such peculiarities are easily noticed. This is basic psychology and language. I'm amazed I have to explain this to you and I don't mean to be rude but you sound like a sperg (either that or you're young).