Criticism of Jews as a Collective (Not Just as Individuals) is Ethical and Warranted

[Wahrheitssucher]

https://rumble.com/v70rpu4-anyone-who-g ... ians..html

[Callafangers]

https://rumble.com/v70rpu4-anyone-who-g ... ians..html

This conversation (Cenk Uygur speaking with Israeli agent Mosab Hassan Yousef on Piers Morgan's show) is worth capturing further as it shows admission of one of two things, when shown in full context. Either:

(A) Israel and its agents/networks are killing Western politicians
(B) Israel and its agents/networks are affecting Western politicians to an extent that can eliminate them from the political process

There is no third option which can be believed by a reasonable person.

Here is the video with less editing, showing exactly what was said (and how it was said):

[Nessie]

You guys do realise there are people who have found that they can make a living out of saying controversial things and making outrageous claims, don't you? Those social media commentators and influencers, are not fussed about evidence and proof.

[Callafangers]

You guys do realise there are people who have found that they can make a living out of saying controversial things and making outrageous claims, don't you? Those social media commentators and influencers, are not fussed about evidence and proof.

Maybe, but that requires an assumption. You can make that same assumption about anyone saying "controversial" things but it's basically a hand-wave and a fallacy.

What matters is who says it, for starters, and under what conditions it was said. Does this person have a certain position or specific knowledge, making it plausible that they can speak truthfully on matters within their scope? Were they paid under a condition of saying particular things versus not? And is any of this evidenced?

All of it at least begs the question of why exactly they said it. And none of this rules out that they could be telling the truth, which has to be weighted for its significance.

Statements are often taken at face value unless evidenced otherwise, e.g. direct threats under law (notice here that the significance of what was said is factored into the urgency and seriousness of how it is handled - the same should of course apply to potential subversion or treason).