ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 3:00 am
I definitely think this is false but you are welcome to try to convince me otherwise if you are willing to provide evidence and arguments to support this.
Many antisemitic narratives tie Jews to communism and then blame Jews for killing millions in the USSR but this is a fallacy. Some communist leaders were Jewish but the vast majority of Jews were not communists. Many Jews were in fact persecuted by the same regimes (e.g., Stalin purged Jewish communists, banned Jewish institutions, and persecuted Jewish populations).
No, it's not a fallacy. My argument is not that "all Jews are communists and every Jew is a murderer." My argument is, however, just as simple: international Jewry was responsible for the Bolshevik takeover in the past, international Jewry into present-day has covered it up,
and Jews universally (with virtually zero exceptions) cover-up the fact of international Jewry and its misdeeds.
ConfusedJew wrote:
This is not accurate. I am an independent thinking humanist, not a religious Jew, although racially I am a Jew. I don't believe in collective punishment for anything, I think that should be badly punished.
I don't know what holidays is about taking revenge on "perceived" enemies or anything that says G-d has made a promise that Jews will inherit or enslave or subordinate the entire planet. This is news to me. You are welcome to try to prove me wrong though.
ConfusedJew... you say you are "not a religious Jew" and then IN THE SAME REPLY, you censor the word "God" as "G-d" -- a Jewish
religious practice. Do you have to lie so constantly?
The phenomenon of Jews pretending to be "secular humanists" -- or, as they are called within Jewish networks: "universalists" (as opposed to "particularists") -- began post-Middle Ages only in the early-mid 1700s with Russian efforts to assimilate the previously-isolated Jewish communities. Once Jews realized they could effectively subvert the "goyim" (and Russia, in particular, at least at first) from these 'assimilated' positions, they were glad to break free from the Pale of Settlement, moving their activities inward to the Russian interior, establishing famous Jewish city-centers in places like Odesa, from which to further develop and expand their criminal enterprises and subversion.
Eventually, this same "universalist" trend caught wind among other Jews choosing to engage similarly in other European nations.
All of this is voluminously documented in Alexander Solzhenitsyn's "200 Years Together", available here:
https://archive.org/stream/200-years-to ... d_djvu.txt
As for the Jewish holidays, there is absolutely no secret nor question that Purim, Hannukah, and the Passover Seder (among other traditions/holidays) are explicitly about "remembering one's enemies", revenge and/or extremely violent themes. Anyone with Google, Wikipedia, and five minutes on their hands can easily confirm this. Call it "news", I call you a liar.
As for the point on subordination/enslaving the globe, there is a reason I cited my source. See my previous reply.
ConfusedJew wrote: Modern Jewish religious law has no practical halakhic category for identifying Amalek or Edom as actual ethnic groups in the world today.
Wrong, or misleading. It is commonly reported among rabbis that Amalek may "reveal himself" through his actions, his hatred of the Jewish people. Amalek is considered a tribe -- a blood tribe -- one which any common sense can suggest that Jews who promote and believe that Germans/Aryans (white people) killed "6 million Jews" would find this as a sufficient revelation of which specific tribe has "revealed itself" as Amalek. Jews are commanded to literally and physically kill the entire tribe, to physically wipe out even their memory, violently, including the children. Absolutely disgusting.
ConfusedJew wrote: No rabbinical court identifies nations or ethnicities as Amalek and calls for genocide. This is universally understood to be a symbolic inheritance. Jews worldwide, religious or secular, do not act collectively under a unified rabbinical command. Most Jews today are secular or non-orthodox and do not see Biblical tribal enemies as a real-world policy agenda
Jews are constantly in a delicate balance of advancing their agenda while also avoiding persecution and they are explicitly commanded to lie whenever it is deemed necessary in order to protect the Jewish people (and by extension, Jewish interests). There are specific commandments which attest to this, and examples of it carried out in practice by modern Jews.
ConfusedJew wrote: He might have said it but he aspired to do the same thing but much worse. Do you disagree with that? Just because somebody says something, doesn't mean that they actually believe in what they are saying, especially if it is self serving. I guess it is kind of like a lie.
Hitler cared about the German people. The Slavic nations were not compatible with German people. Saying this, or even finding them inferior in certain ways, does not entail a will to enslave nor kill them off. But it is common-sense that as actual war approaches or begins, this changes the context significantly.
ConfusedJew wrote: You are right that the term “Master race” is more a popular English shorthand than a literal quote.
It's not "shorthand" -- it's a lie, ConfusedJew. The Allies lied, the Jews lied, and Germany was right. The world is waking up to this.
ConfusedJew wrote: The term is derived from German phrases like “Herrenvolk” and “Herrenrasse”, which did appear in Nazi rhetoric but not as an everyday official slogan. Hitler himself used related language repeatedly in Mein Kampf — speaking of the Aryan as the “culture-founder” and the “highest race” and other races as lesser.
He may or may not be correct about some of his specific claims in this regard. You will need to raise them case-by-case. But if he had ever said anything like, "Germans are the master-race and other races are inferior" --
anything like this -- then you would have already copy-pasted it here at some point. It'd be in every textbook. Instead, we see much more nuanced (and intelligent, reasonable) ideas from Adolf Hitler when his words are actually read and understood in-context.
ConfusedJew wrote:He does not use “Herrenvolk” constantly but he clearly believed that the Aryan is the racial elite, and Germans must guard racial purity.
Hitler simply spoke positively and cheered on his own race. This is typical behavior among people of every race
except white people today, who have been beaten down by Jewish-led propaganda and falsified historical narratives.
The survey below essentially just asked, "how favorable do you feel toward people of X race":

- favor.jpg (81.02 KiB) Viewed 152 times
Based on data from American National Election studies, see p. 121-124: https://electionstudies.org/wp-content/ ... e_post.pdf
Notice that the above shows clearly that white people are the least "racist" of any group, yet all of the Jewish-controlled media, academia, and other institutions insist otherwise.
ConfusedJew wrote:In Mein Kampf, Hitler discusses Slavs as inferior, but primarily as obstacles to German eastward expansion. He calls for acquiring Lebensraum (living space) in the East, specifically Russia, and for German colonization and settlement. He says bluntly that Germany must seize territory from Russia and treat it as a colonial domain.
Russia was NOT actually Russian-controlled at the time Hitler wrote Mein Kampf. Bolshevik Jews had already seized the nation and were slaughtering actual Russians en masse.
ConfusedJew wrote:Hitler made private remarks in the 1930s (e.g., Table Talk, Hitler’s Secret Conversations, Goebbels’ diaries) that show he clearly wanted Eastern Europe to be cleared and settled by Germans with Slavs as a subservient peasantry or displaced.
The Table Talks are NOT a reliable source of information:
The idea that the table talks contain Hitler’s words as they were actually spoken to his entourage in the various military HQs during the war must, as a result, be
considered to have been conclusively disproven. The table talks are
not that kind of sources, since they, contrary to what has been assumed by prior research,
were not the product of stenographic notes. Instead, they were (as in the case of the nightly monologues)
re-constructed entirely from memory, and sometimes partly from so-called supporting words. Heim’s proof pages show that they were
not only edited later on – text was added, taken out, or moved around – and sometimes finished long after the date on them. Nor was Hitler more honest in these statements; the evidence is that lies from Mein Kampf are repeated in the table talks even though many of those present must have known that what he said was not true.
Nilson, M. (2021). Hitler Redux: The Incredible History of Hitler’s So-Called Table Talks. p. 384
https://ia801207.us.archive.org/13/item ... org%29.pdf
If you're going to reference Goebbels' diary, please quote it, but you're still dealing with a very non-Russian, Jewish "Russia" which had even further increased their slaughter of actual Russian citizens by the 1930s.
ConfusedJew wrote:Hitler did make pragmatic moves with Poland when he signed the 1934 pact to stabilize the east, partly to break France’s anti-German bloc but he didn't abandon expansionism. He used it as a tactic to buy time and isolate the USSR. The pact did not negate his ideological commitment to Lebensraum which was explicitly about German colonies in the East, to be carved from Slavic lands.
Again, Russia was NOT Russian by this time. Any effort by Hitler to seize lands controlled by bloodthirsty Jewish Bolsheviks is a
good, benevolent, positive thing, not an 'evil'.
ConfusedJew wrote:If you are going to make such claims, at least define what you mean by "the most ethnocentric and ideologically and politically consistent group in the history of human civilization". I could say the same thing about white European Holocaust deniers and skeptics but it wouldn't mean anything. Really terrible counterargument but you are welcome to try again.
For the record, American Jews,the largest Jewish population outside Israel, have rates of intermarriage are very high: ~60% among non-Orthodox Jews. This is not consistent with extreme ethnocentrism.
Regarding your claim about ideological consistency, that is clearly false too. Medieval Jews produced rival religious sects (Karaites vs. Rabbinic Judaism). In the 19th century, major Jewish thinkers led both socialist revolution and capitalist industry. Even the early Zionists fought bitterly among themselves: Labor Zionists, Revisionists, Religious Zionists, Communists, Bundists, non-Zionists. There is no single unified “Jewish ideology” spanning centuries — only overlapping religious, cultural, and sometimes nationalist threads.
But it is true that Jewish communities have historically preserved identity over thousands of years as have many minority groups. Jews today are internally divided, pluralistic, and politically diverse. There is no credible historical or sociological evidence of unique “planet-wide ideological and political consistency.”
[...]
I'm not sure what your point is. You said that Jews don't criticize other Jews or Jewish organizations or movements and that's clearly false.
Only with total disregard of proportionality and trends can your above drivel be taken seriously. You can keep the sub-90 IQ visitors we might have passing through here. For the others, I've already won.
ConfusedJew wrote:Again this is false and dogmatic. There are well-known Jewish dissidents, Jewish human rights organizations, Jewish anti-occupation groups, Jewish anti-lobby critics — and they are not fringe lunatics, but recognized public actors. They simply are not the majority voice inside organized communal politics.
There are so many more that I could add to the list but I won't even bother to try because you will likely just dogmatically reject them as you did before.
Firstly, you're now listing a range of categories -- "Jewish dissidents, Jewish human rights organizations, Jewish anti-occupation groups, Jewish anti-lobby critics" -- none of these are explicitly against the Jewish problem in itself, which is one of subversion of nations from within, of unpatriotic and disloyal Jews organizing specifically for Jewish interests from positions of power within host nations. By chopping it up to be about Zionism, Israel lobbies, etc., you attempt to distract from what I have actually pointed out:
despite all their power, Jews are not organizing forcefully (nor even lightly) against Jewish power networks and their patterns of behavior. Whether across national borders or across centuries, Jewish behavior remains essentially the same at its power centers, and its extended networks -- as tribal beneficiaries and co-ideologists -- invariably become passive enablers.
ConfusedJew wrote:These claims are so wrong that I'm not sure they are worth responding to but I will do it anyway to see if you will concede even an inch on something that is 99% wrong.
Metzizah b'peh is rejected by the vast majority of Jewish medical authorities. Jewish doctors, rabbis, and local governments have regulated or tried to ban it. Jewish community newspapers debate it. In reality, it's an isolated and controversial practice within a small subgroup of Jews. And the purpose has nothing to do with inflicting pain on infants so the argument that this is a widespread sadistic practice is 100% wrong. Please do respond to that because I want to see how you will rationalize making a completely false claim.
You're so
transparently disgusting, how can I even respond? The issue is that rabbis have for many generations been doing this and, yet, despite all of their media outlets, there were total crickets from the Jewish community, at least until recent years when non-Jews began to catch wind of it (a big 'chillul Hashem', so to speak; a very bad PR situation), mainly due to situations like this:

- metzizah.jpg (123.93 KiB) Viewed 152 times
How "rare" can this be to be causing multiple cases of herpes?
Even without the disgusting infant-fellatio, circumcision is a
painful event for a baby, yet Jews treat it as a
celebration. How is this not perfectly within the definition of "sadistic"?
sadistic
adjective
- Delighting in or feeling pleasure from the pain of others.
- Of behaviour which gives pleasure in the pain of others.
And -- call me crazy -- but doesn't sucking the baby's dick add a further disturbing element, here?
ConfusedJew wrote:Animal sacrifice ended 2000 years ago with the destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE).Some traditional Jews use kapparot (swinging a chicken before Yom Kippur) but many rabbis discourage this and encourage giving money instead. Jewish animal welfare groups actively campaign against chicken kapparot. You are cherry picking a controversial practice within a small minority of Jews and ascribe collective guilt for something that you don't like. That's the definition of extreme racism.
No, ConfusedJew, it is you who is cherry-picking from my list of Jewish behaviors for those which are still indisputably Jewish but which you seek technical 'gotchas' about how some (not all) of them have fallen into relative obscurity. The only reason Jews are not doing sacrifices today, according to Judaism, is that they do not have a Temple. Losing their Temple is the only reason they ever stopped. Yet many of them still kill
and torture chickens annually. Far more of them are killing/torturing chickens than have ever protested the torturing of chickens.
ConfusedJew wrote:Purim is a holiday that celebrates the story of survival of genocide from the Book of Esther. The modern practice is to wear costumes, give charity, and get drunk. There's no violence to speak of. I'm not sure how this advances your argument at all. You are welcome to address this if you would like.
Purim is a celebration of the deaths of Haman's ten sons, you relentless liar. Why do you lie so much? Again, any person with five minutes on their hands and willing to see through Jewish 'hasbara' tactics can plainly verify this indisputable fact. Purim is all about revenge. A quick ChatGPT question:
During the Orthodox celebration of Purim, the reading of the Megillah (Book of Esther) in synagogues includes the graphic recounting of Haman’s execution and the killing of his ten sons (Esther 7:10, 9:7-10), as well as the reported slaughter of 75,000 enemies (Esther 9:16), with festive noise-making at Haman’s name that could be interpreted as reveling in vengeance and violence against historical adversaries.
LOL, ConfusedJew. LOL, indeed.
ConfusedJew wrote:Hannukah commemorates the liberation of the Jews from religious persecution of the Hellenists and the Seleucid Empire. The modern holiday celebrates by lighting candles, playing games, and eating fried food. No revenge or violent acts are involved.
Just incredible. You lie like a rug:
In Orthodox observance of Hanukkah, the commemoration of the Maccabean Revolt emphasizes the violent overthrow of Greek Seleucid oppressors, with prayers and songs (like "Al Hanissim") that highlight military victory, which could be interpreted as glorifying aggressive retribution and the suffering of enemies.
ConfusedJew wrote:Eruvin is about Sabbath boundaries, travel, and local laws, it has nothing about world conquest. Antisemitic tracts quote Talmud lines out of context or with forged translations. Real Talmud study shows vast legal arguments on ritual practice, not political domination.
You lie not as second nature but as your first nature. You never stop:
ConfusedJew wrote:There is a fringe religious Jewish group that uses messianic or biblical rhetoric to justify violence. Israeli courts, soldiers, politicians, and large parts of Jewish society oppose or prosecute extremist acts. Again this is collective punishment for the actions of a tiny minority that the vast majority of Jews oppose. Do you want to be punished for everything that every white nationalist does?
I don't see how any of this advances your argument that Judaism is a sadistic cult. You seem brainwashed to me to be honest.
I think you've received enough of a spanking for one day.
ConfusedJew wrote:OK but I don't believe that you provided a shred of evidence advancing your argument, let alone a conclusive argument. Beyond tiny isolated groups or practices, which you have largely misinterpreted, your arguments were almost entirely false and even when they were true, they were greatly exaggerated.
No one will ever know what you actually "think" because you are simply lying constantly. Any truth you tell is only ever out of convenience or circumstance, never out of any core principles in that regard. Your core principles are the 'yearning' you have for Moshiach so that you can finally conquer the goyim and inherit the Earth. You are a sadistic liar, pure and simple. This is not true of every single Jew but, for those who are not lying or doing sadistic acts, they still defend or stay silent about those who do, with near-zero exceptions.
Show me the heavily-funded, widely-supported organization titled "Jews Against Jewish Power" (past or present) and I'll be glad to take your position more seriously.