Well, would you look at that, Joe, the previous debunk was in reply to your use of this same meme earlier this year!
Good answer fren.
I always want the truth. I ask people to agree with me on some method of deriving truth so that we can work on it together. Are you bound by the Bible and the magisterium? If so why do you demean and judge without evidence?
Misleading (as opposed to being innocently misinformed) is determined by evidence of ongoing illogic or contradiction.
Quality is also easily judged objectively.
These don't contradict being open-minded, as we are not to be open-minded to contradiction, or manipulation against transparency.
This is not about anything that needs "passing" but about analyzing the status quo. Do you think the sidebar rules should change, and if so how?
I asked you about how you find what is true and you couldn't even point me to your alleged magisterium. I presume that you are committed to whatever Jesus and His Spirit says. But for some reason your priest allows you a height of obscenity and vituperation that doesn't seem consistent with your confession. If you can speak honestly about your search for truth you might be able to speak honestly about my statements as well.
Who (sing/pl) would you like to moderate?
While we have anarchy, what changes would you like to how this place is run? Perhaps you're implying that we should stay anarchic, but then wouldn't that demonstrate that the admins are running things well to let us be?
Transform, bara'.
All will note the Party involvement helping the student "inspect" the pornography. Lots of what we call trans in the medical records too, other photos and records demonstrate.
Vlad Draculea was Eastern Orthodox and converted to Roman Catholicism under duress.
The symbols of satanism take many guises, don't get overfocused on a single guise. Rev. 2-3 warns us of seven plots of satan but people here fight what they think is only one of them, totally missing the comms. Maybe I'll write on that point.
Copying: Hi Pepe, just testing the waters again. "Unless they convert" is a gigantic exception and Romans 11 indicates that it will someday be used. There is no consistent exegesis that rejects that point.
Since the OT calls on all to convert, Jews never came to God except by conversion, whether or not Jesus's name had been revealed to them.
"Spontaneous" not found. Failed verification.
The party cleaned up after the students hours later as the link shows.
The party drew thousands to the public burning with an impassioned Himmler speech days later.
u/DresdenFirebomber is making more sense than you in this thread, which is a shock.
What do you think is making the majority of young people today cast off the chains of delusional israel-worship?
Coordinated university campaigning, same source. Didn't you see all the identical preprinted signs at the Palestine protests?
Your first clause is accurate and someday I'll finish my research on the Thule Society about that.
Your second clause mistakes OP for a Nazi when he is named after the enemies of the NatSocs and is exposing them (with some content I generated). Not a problem if you missed that context.
all reveals anyone within
What of creatio ex Deo?
How could a part within whole not also be whole?
If whole part, partially whole.
What if ones (uni) together (com) dulls ones sentience?
Suggestion can be ignored.
In reality...change (inception towards death) generates power (life).
want implies from one another,
only the chosen one shaping the suggestion is permitted to wield the power of both universe and multiverse.
Then read about the actual uneven enforcement of Article 175 against homosexuality. Add: When I first heard about it, my reaction was similar to yours for awhile too, until I analyzed the evidence.
See my 19th-century linked image.
It's a good-luck charm from his kabalist friends. They probably wrapped it around the rock seven times for extra potency.
I'll give you credit when you get one partly right. The quotation is rightly cited and the translation largely accurate. The first issue is that both your source and you take it as saying more than it says. It is not the language of the "protocols" or about taking "gentile lives" out of context, where there is no statement of provocation against the Jews but only an imagined preemptive destructive plan. Clearly what got Medrano's interest is that the letter merely builds on the words of the Spanish testimony and allows the Spanish to no more than what they say was done to them. If the Spanish report were true, then the advice would be tit for tat, and, if the Spanish report were false, then the judgment would fall against the Spanish if they exceeded it in response. This is hardly something damning assuming the original report is accurate. The idea that the revenge is somehow inappropriate due to its patience and its abuse of positions of trust in nominally different ways than the Spanish say official positions were abused against them doesn't fit its context.
The Spanish Inquisition began in 1478, and Ferdinand and Isabella expelled the Jews in 1492 with the Alhambra Decree. Myriads of Jews were expelled and thousands of those remaining were burned at the stake over the course of the Inquisition.
Unfortunately, the titles and names in the document fail verification. The names Chamorro and Yusuf (Ussuf) would be very common in their regions and are generic, as are the parallel titles of "prince" when neither kingdom recognized princes, and as is the title "satrap" which was not applied to Jews. The hermit of Salamanca, name given as Benito Selyagio, may not have an existence outside of contributions to Medrano's book. It is unclear why the royal archives of Toledo would contain both these letters when Jews could not openly be called Jews in Spain and certainly not princes.
So it looks like this is merely an imaginative characterization by Medrano of how Jews would react in Spain after Alhambra, without accuracy of detail about persons and titles.
However, the plot thickens. This passage is in fact quoted by the Protocols as if inspiring the later work. It gives further details that the letters appeared in Revue des etudes juives in 1889 (editor Isidore Loeb), that the first was dated 1489-01-13, and that it was written by the rabbi of Arles ("Chemor" or Chamorro) to the Grand Sanhedrin. This flatly contradicts Medrano's setting that it was composed in Spain (not in Provence, France) after 1492 (not before); and it is well-known that there has been no grand Sanhedrin anywhere between 358 and 2004.
However, what's not said is that H. Graetz of the Review gave a full treatment of the context of exactly these two letters on pp. 106-114 (probably the third of four such numbered annual releases), titled "But Reel de la Correspondance" etc. The third paragraph there begins, "Aujourd'hui, personne ne doute plus de l'inauthenticite de ces deux lettres." ("Today, no one doubts the inauthenticity of these two letters.")
Without trying to transcribe and translate the whole article, it's clear that he has enough data to call into question whether these people existed at all given the difference of reported cities and the fictional titles. If you think the case needs more work than that in all honesty, you're free to it.
Here is the actual text transcribed from La Silva Curiosa pp. 173-175, Volume X of El Refranero General Espanol by Jose Sbarbi, Madrid, 1878; translation quibbles are too minor to argue about.
Esta carta siguiente, fue hallada por el Ermitano de Salamanca en los Archibos de Toledo, buscando las antiguedades de los Reinos de Espana; y pues ella es sentida y notable, quiero escribirtela aqui.
Carta de los judios de Espana a los de Constantinopla.
Judios honrados, salud y gracia. Sepades que el rey de Espana, por pregon publico, nos hace volver cristianos; y nos quitan las haciendas y las vidas, y nos destruyen nuestras sinagogas y nos hacen otras vejaciones, las cuales nos tienen confusos e inciertos de lo que hemos de hacer. Por la ley de Moisen os rogamos y suplicamos tengais por bien de hacer ayuntamiento, y enviarnos con toda brevedad la deliberacion que en ello hubiereis hecho.
CHAMORRO,
príncipe de los judios de Espana.
Respuesta de los judíos de Constantinopla a los Judios de Espana.
Amados hermanos en Moisen: Vuestra carta recibimos, en la cual nos significais los trabajos e infortunios que padeceis, de cuyo sentimiento nos ha cabido tanta parte como a vosotros. El parecer de los grandes satrapas y rabi, es el siguiente:
A lo que decis que el rey de Espana os hace volver cristianos, que lo hagais, pues no podeis hacer otro. A lo que decis que os mandan quitar vuestras haciendas, haced vuestros hijos mercaderes, para que poco a poco les quiten las suyas. A lo que decis que os quitan las vidas, haced vuestros hijos medicos y boticarios, para que les quiten las suyas. A lo que decis que os destruyen vuestras sinagogas, haced vuestros hijos clerigos y teologos, para que les destruyan sus templos. Y a lo que decis que os hacen otras vejaciones, procurad que vuestros hijos sean abogados, procuradores, notarios y consejeros, y que siempre entiendan en negocios de republica, para que sujetandolos ganeis tierra, y os podais vengar de ellos; y no salgais de esta orden que os damos, porque por experiencia vereis que de abatidos vendreis a ser tenidos en algo.
USSUF,
principe de los judios de Constantinopla.
Thanks dude. I'm a volunteer, though, not everyone here is; Swamp Rangers is proud of our volunteers. Plus I volunteered to do some time travel today and that affects my schedule too.
I get paid twice as much for this comment, because twice nothing is nothing!
For now enjoy this one.
While I'm working on Finkelstein that's another myth I'm working on. There was no official count of 109 by anyone, there was only basically some tweet that had repeated entries in it.
Hitler knew that Rohm and his teen squads were gay in 1924. It was an open secret shared by many of the gay DAP and the tavernkeepers who hosted them and their sleepovers. You of all people should know the history. Aren't you thankful I don't post memes about it for you to clean up?
Except that this is dooming because they cannot occupy the Christian home that is already occupied by the Holy Spirit. Nothing about what we Jesus freaks do will ever make sense to you unless you understand that we live under a superior occupation. But given that detail we are free in our assemblies and we are free in our traffic with the likes of you.
protestors out of context
Low-effort, dude.
Funny how you believe the liberal media when they're on Hitler's side but not when they're on Israel's side. Almost as if you're using them as a human shield that you don't care about. Plus a boycott, described as a trade "war", didn't cause WWII, and two of the pro-Hitler headlines describe his threat of destruction.
They expressed interest. Just being considerate.
What do you propose for standards of objective proof other than "Joe says so"? Should I start raking you over the coals for the time you thought "sacrificing a kid" (chevre or goat in the source) meant human sacrifice, and doubled down on it? Or should we just agree that the truth is out there and we can infer the most reasonable explanation from the data?