Callafangers wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 9:03 pm
1. Jews not responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths:
✔ - Callafangers counters by clarifying his argument that international Jewry was behind the Bolshevik takeover and its cover-up, implicating collective Jewish responsibility or silence.
It is factually inaccurate to claim “the Jews” as a collective were behind the Bolshevik revolution. While some prominent Bolsheviks (like Trotsky) were Jewish by birth, the movement was not a “Jewish project” — its leadership was diverse, and Lenin himself (the main leader) was not Jewish. This is an anti semitic conspiracy theory. Not really worth responding to this but it's fine. The entirety of the Soviet Union was not even responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths, this is just nonsense.
2. Jewish holidays not about revenge or global domination:
✔ - Callafangers directly refutes this by citing Purim, Hanukkah, and Passover Seder as celebrating revenge or violence, providing specific examples and sources like ChatGPT excerpts.
Purim does commemorate the biblical story of Jews defending themselves and executing Haman’s followers — it’s about survival against an attempted genocide, not unprovoked aggression.
Hanukkah celebrates a revolt against Greek imperial rule and rededication of the Temple — again, survival and religious freedom.
Passover marks the Exodus; it references the killing of Egyptian firstborns, but its modern Seder is not a celebration of revenge but freedom from slavery.
Again this is stupid and was not worth responding to until you cleaned it up.
3. Amalek/Edom not identified as real groups today:
✔ - Callafangers disputes this, stating Amalek can be identified by actions (e.g., hatred of Jews) according to rabbinical sources, and that Jews are commanded to physically eradicate such a tribe.
Historically, Amalek is a biblical enemy. Most rabbinic authorities today treat this as symbolic. There is no real group identified as “Amalek” in modern policy or Jewish law in practice. Calls to physically eradicate people are not mainstream or actualized in modern Judaism.
4. Hitler’s criticism of British in India as propaganda:
✔ - Callafangers challenges this by asserting Hitler’s statements are proven, while ConfusedJew’s assumed motive is unproven.
I didn't deny that Hitler said that. He just sought to do the same exact thing that the British did but worse. It is not unproven because Hitler's actions were very clearly at odds with his criticisms of other people. This too was not worth responding to.
5. Hitler’s views on Slavs and imperial conquest:
✔ - Callafangers counters that such notions arose only during wartime desperation, not pre-1939, citing Hitler’s earlier pragmatic moves like the 1934 Non-Aggression Pact.
Another totally false claim that didn't address my argument and is not worthy of a response. In Mein Kampf (1925–1926), Hitler clearly outlined that Germany needed Lebensraum (“living space”) in Eastern Europe. He wrote that Germany should expand into Russia and subjugate its Slavic population to secure land and food for Germans.
He called Slavs racially inferior and described Bolshevism as a Jewish-Slavic threat that must be destroyed.
This idea was foundational to Nazi ideology — not a late wartime improvisation.
The 1934 pact did not signal respect for Polish sovereignty. Hitler violated the pact when Germany invaded Poland in 1939 to start WWII. In 1938–1939, Hitler demanded Polish consent for the return of Danzig (Free City of Gdańsk) and a corridor link — claims he framed as “minor border adjustments.” A clear act of aggression.
Hitler argue that Germany’s request to reintegrate Danzig (a heavily German city) and allow a road/rail corridor through Polish territory were fair, but Poland’s refusal forced Germany’s hand. Hitler’s September 1, 1939 Reichstag speech said Germany could no longer tolerate Polish aggression and border provocations (these incidents were staged by German operatives — e.g., the Gleiwitz Incident, a fake attack on a German radio station made to look like Polish sabotage).
On the night of August 31, 1939, the SS staged an attack on the German radio station at Gleiwitz near the Polish border.
German operatives, dressed in Polish uniforms, “attacked” the station and broadcast a short anti-German message in Polish.
The SS left behind the bodies of prisoners dressed as Polish saboteurs (these victims were executed beforehand — called canned goods by the Germans). This fake raid was part of a larger secret operation called Operation Himmler, a series of staged border provocations to create “evidence” of Polish attacks.
These are very basic historical facts that you are getting wrong. Your egregious inaccuracies have to continue or I'm just going to stop.
6. “Master race” as shorthand for Nazi rhetoric:
✔ - Callafangers calls it a lie, not shorthand, and argues Hitler’s views on Aryans were nuanced, not blanket superiority claims.
The exact phrase “master race” (Herrenvolk in German) does appear in Nazi writings and propaganda but less often in Hitler’s own direct public speeches. The concept was absolutely real in Nazi racial ideology: Germans (Nordic/Aryan type) were considered biologically superior to Slavs, Jews, Roma, and other groups. Hitler often used terms like “higher race” (höhere Rasse), “Aryan,” “racial elite,” and “bearers of culture” — implying a hierarchy with Germans at the top.
Callafangers is correct that Hitler’s race views were layered, not cartoonish. But calling the “master race” concept a lie is inaccurate: it’s a fair summary of the Nazi belief in the racial supremacy of the Germanic/Aryan people.
I'm not going to tolerate these inaccuracies any longer because they reflect serious ignorance on your part.
7. Jews not uniquely ethnocentric or consistent:
✔ - Callafangers dismisses this as lacking proportionality, maintaining Jews show consistent tribal behavior despite apparent diversity.
Again, actually respond to what I said. This totally disregarded my argument. Ethnocentrism is not unique to Jews. It is present in any ethnic group. Many religious-ethnic groups have especially strong in-group loyalty — e.g., the Amish, Pashtun tribes, Yazidis, Armenian diaspora, Overseas Chinese, and others. You did not address that at all.
8. Jews do criticize other Jews:
✔ - Callafangers refutes this by noting these examples are either persecuted (Finkelstein) or not directly against Jewish power networks, thus insignificant in scope.
Another dismissive response. Your argumentation style is abysmal. The idea that there is no significant Jewish self-critique is false: history and contemporary politics show robust, ongoing internal disputes — often highly public.
9. Judaism not a sadistic cult:
✔ - Callafangers directly responds with examples like Metzizah b’peh and kapparot, and treatment of Palestinians, arguing these show sadism, supported by evidence of harm.
I already explained why these are merely cherry picked examples. You also misrepresented the arguments. I personally think the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli government is worth serious criticism. The Israeli government does not represent all Jews or even all Israelis for the matter. Given that there was a longstanding blood feud where Palestinians waged pogroms against the Jews from the very beginning followed by many terrorist and suicide bombing attacks, I don't think oversimplifying that behavior as sadistic really makes sense. You personally appear to possess quite severe sadism. Do you not consider yourself a sadist? You are very hypocritical.
10. Specific rituals not widespread or sadistic:
✔ - Callafangers counters that circumcision involves a celebration amid infants' pain, and other rituals like Metzizah b’peh were historically accepted and recently faced increased scrutiny.
Not even worth addressing. Circumcision is not about celebrating pain. Just a very stupid comment.
11. Jewish holidays lack violent intent today:
✔ - Callafangers refutes this by highlighting violent historical underpinnings (e.g., Purim’s celebration of Haman’s sons’ deaths) with sourced quotes.
Another stupid comment. Celebrating survival from genocide is inherently violent. I'm just not willing to pursue this with you.
12. Eruvin not about world conquest:
✔ - Callafangers directly quotes a Chabad source linking Eruvin 43b to global subservience under the Messiah.
Eruvin 43b is not about world conquest. It is a prophecy that some fundamentalist Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe because it is the Torah. I don't personally believe that but it is not about dominating or oppressing other groups. Any religious with an eschatological belief is going to have some pretty bizarre beliefs.
What are your religious beliefs? Do you think other people should be persecuted for their religion because you don't agree with them? Very barbaric thinking.
I notice that ConfusedJew has not bothered to quote or respond to any of my arguments,
he's just claimed I didn't make them at all.
This seems like a tactic which hopes to ensure that any casual readers of this thread who are only skimming through pages might miss my last response, and ensuring he doesn't draw further attention to it.
Very clever, ConfusedJew. Very Jewish
... but very clever.
Most of these were severely off point and inaccurate. If you do that again, don't expect me to even respond.
