Do you call out the entire ethnicity of Italians because of the Italian mafia, and their well documented involvement with Hollywood, political corruption, and general thug behavior, and societal degeneracy? .... ....
....
....
Narrow your focus, and avoid collateral damage against our patriotic American jewish allies please.
100% same with hispanics, blacks, asians, and whites. There's shitty people everywhere. Hispanics have thugs and illegal immigration, blacks have thugs and fatherless homes, asians have....there's something, and whites have supremacist nihilists, and degeneracy of what is morally good. But guess what, all those bad things are accross the board. We are going through a cultural problem, not a racial problem. Most people are too stupid to think.
"OK. Not ALL the [Unvaccinated]. That is axiomatic. But it is still [an Unvaccinated people's] problem and we better figure out how to handle it. Time is getting short."
See how this works? Either we fight against it, or we don't.
Picking the characteristic related to the problem is pretty important. Why stop at expanding the category from Zionists to Jews? Let's just include all humans as well. Then everyone can be our enemy.
If somebody is taking part in a relatively small satanic group trying to take over the world through sneaky devious means, then they need to be strung up. The answer is individual accountability and responsibility. I realize that some predictions can be made about an individual from general group characteristics. Black people are, by far, the least likely of any demo to give a tip. At least in places where I have worked. Yet I've gotten some great tips from some Blacks also. So I cannot judge each person on the basis of group membership.
Sounds like you're responding to something not facts on the ground. The original Zionist bought land from the Turkish land owners, and developed it, including disease-ridden swamps. Arabs moved in to get jobs, then claimed they always owned the land. Other areas were captured in defensive wars the Arabs initiated.
Goyim and gentile mean "the nations". As in other nations in the world. It does NOT mean cattle. That's a smear.
(Golem is a legend of a clay man made by a Rabbi to defend the community, but it's probably just a legend)
The Talmud is a long and involved work of Rabbinical commentary on the laws of the Torah in minute detail and abstraction that makes it a difficult area of study. Some anti-Semites focus in on a few problematic passages out of context and declare the whole work evil. Is that what you're planning to do?
The land was part of the Ottoman Empire, which dissolved after World War 1 and was part of Britain. There was never an independent nation or people of Arabs called "Palestinians."
If you have citation of the Talmud, let's hear it.
Sex with three year old girls -- I think I saw this particular slur addressed by a Talmudic scholar who took the time to rebut the popular, anti-Semitic slanders on the Torah.
Here's what it is discussing:
A woman who loses her virginity is ineligible for marriage.
The question was: If there was a girl who was three, and was molested by some creep, does that mean she was ineligible for marriage?
The Talmud's interpretation of this was that it did not count as sex, therefore the girl could still get married when she came of age.
Horrors. An abused child is allowed to get on with her life.
You see, this is the kind of out-of-context crap you Jew-haters come up with to slander the Talmud and the Jews.
I can't speak for other anons, but some verses from the Sanhedrin are quite strange, so I think that's what he's talking about.
is this just some weird way to tell stories? like morality plays? isn't Sanhedrin part of the Talmud?
and maybe I missed it, since I was raised Catholic-not proficient in the Bible-
but I don't remember talking about children and 'intercourse' in catechism class...
"The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do Rav and Shmuel disagree?
The Gemara answers: Rav holds that any halakha that applies to one who engages in intercourse actively applies to one who engages in intercourse passively,
and any halakha that does not apply to one who engages in intercourse actively does not apply to one who engages in intercourse passively.
Therefore, just as one who engages in intercourse actively is not liable if he is less than nine years old,
as the intercourse of such a child does not have the halakhic status of intercourse,
so too, if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively,
the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable.
22"
ושמואל
I'm often to extend the benefit of the doubt to a lot of people here, a lot more than usual. And I've said some pretty harsh things about leftist Jews. (Basically that they're idolators). But when I get hit like the other guy did, with "Synagogue of Satan" and stuff, well, that's what we have a block button for.
Anyway, onto your question.
This verse you're going to -- what one people miss about the Talmud and this track you are citing as well is that these are conversations. It's famous Rabbis of old, discussing the application of the Torah's laws in absolute minutia. You see both sides are being recorded. Like "Rabbi Rav said this, but Rabbi Shmuel countered with this."
One of the most famous friendly rivalries was between Hillel and Shami, for instance. We don't often arrive at a "correct" answer, but it's debates on the question of applicable law -- even on cases that are not theoretically possible. Think of it like a brain exercise.
There's one anecdote about Rabbis discussing how an animal that is born on one man's property belongs to him, but if it's born on the other side, it belongs to the neighbor. So one asks: "What if a goat is born with two legs on one man's side of the property line, and the other two legs on his neighbor's?"
That's the kind of minutia I'm talking about. Not even possible in the real world, but they still inquire about it.
Onto these phrases -- as to the liability of these sexual sins -- nothing is off base. It's risqué subject matter. But keep in mind, the Torah does outlaw a wide range of sexual activities. A question might be -- if a boy is raped by a homosexual, is he liable? Maybe he is never liable below a certain age? But maybe there's an age where he would be a willing participant? And if he's a willing participant, is he liable? Should that be the age of Bar-Mitzvah, or not? What if he's not physically forced, but is coerced? Or bribed? If bribed, was he in poverty? Should his liability be reduced if it was his only method of getting food?
It may seem odd that a bunch of Rabbis are talking about this, but the Torah doesn't deal with risqué subjects by ignoring them. That's why a lot of people go nuts. "the Bible codifies slavery!" yes it does. Because slavery was a reality. If the Bible said "stop slavery altogether" that sounds fine in 2021. But in 3000 BC, people would say: "Not possible. We can't have functioning farms without at least some slaves." So they made a codification to lessen the burden.
There's even a rule for what to do with captive women. If you read the Iliad, you may recall that the initial fight that starts it all is when Achilles and Agamemnon are arguing about a captive girl. That is, some girls was captured in the skirmish. Agamamenon and Achilles both had one... a girl to keep in their tent, to rape when the move struck them. Agamemnon had to give his girl back to her father, since her father was a priest of Apollo -- and Apollo was sending plagues to the Greeks until they gave the girl back. Agamemnon then takes Achilles's girl as compensation. (She has no connections, unlike the other one). And Achilles, pissed off, boycotts the war.
What were they fighting over? Captured women who would be their rape slaves.
What does the Bible say about this subject?
It says this: You can do it. BUT you have to do it this way. The girl gets captured. You have to cut her hair. Then she wears baggy, unflattering clothes. You give her a month to mourn her family. Then you can take her home and MARRY her.
What changed? Well, she gets married in the end. But something else is happening. If you're a soldier, you captured this beautiful woman. You imagine doing the nasty with her. But first... she has to cut her hair. And wear ugly clothes. And sit in your tent for a month, crying about how she misses her family. And she's no longer as pretty as when you caught her. After all, you cut her hair and gave her ugly clothes. What might many a soldier do in this situation?
After a few days, you might just say: "Okay, okay, that's enough. Don't cry anymore. Go home. "
That gives her a better shot of that than if she was a captive of the Greeks.
It seems weird to us, but we're thinking of 21st century war, not what it was like in the ancient world. the Bible (and by extension, the Talmud) confronts these uncomfortable subjects, and works their way through them.
The first clue you've found yourself full of s*** is that you just moved the goalpost from muh Jews to muh Zionists.
Second full of s*** comment is that you believe the entire American public believes we should be sending aid to Israel or we're antisemitic, as if Q doesn't exist and America's policy for sending money hasn't been molded and shaped by a small number of psychopaths.
Well allow me to blow your mind.
I don't think we should send money to Israel and I can say that without throwing a Sieg heil.
Now comes the sweet irony. You're going to get bent out of shape I insinuated you're a Nazi while this entire time, you're the one making massive blanket stereotypical assumptions.
Well said. I hope more people listen to you and truly understand what you're saying. Cause as a white guy I'm getting really sick of being shit on. Things can't stay the way they are.
Yeah, I get that its a scam but there is a certain point were its not about anger its about practicalities. When I'm being denied access to jobs or medical care or I'm paying taxes but I'm cut off from gov services because I'm white... that's money out of my pocket. That's theft. That's a whole list of things it would take me too long to list. At some point that becomes basic survival requires me to grab my fucking rifle and fix it or die trying.
Don't worry I quickly moved past being angry at black people. I know exactly who the enemy is. As I said... things can't stay the way they are. The camels back is already broken. The fact it hasn't fallen down yet is a miracle.
Truth. The People have bought into the lies for too long. We are all one people, under God. Everyone on this planet wants one simple thing, to be allowed to live their best life in the best way they can, unfettered by tyranny.
Wow. I wasn't expecting that. My pre-conceived idea of his character is so wrong. I really thought he would be that liberal/ socialist kid of lefty parents.
Pleasantly surprised and grateful for the reminder that what I think I know is often distorted by pre judging someone.
John Lennon was more a pacifist than a liberal revolutionary. He also noted that he regretted penning the song “imagine.” Imagine is such an obvious liberal utopia song that was easily adopted by pro-communists. As you know, utopia is a complete pipe dream that could never manifest on this planet because of humanity’s flaws.
Paul died in the late 60s replaced with a fake Paul so the world wouldn’t freak out or find out how he was taken out. Don’t take my word for it do a dig on it. Pretty interesting stuff.
I have. Paul and Faul look like exactly the same person. I used to be a skeptic to all conspiracies. Then came Timber Sycamore/ISIS, then pizzagate, then Obama coining phrase "Fake News" to coverup for pizzagate. This caused me to doubleback on all other stuff like 9/11, Kennedy, moon landing, and even WW2! With my foundation fully rocked, I STILL try and be careful not to slide off the edge into believing any old conspiracy that exists. Flat Earth is SO stupid that I'd rather believe that it's existence is a conspiracy to make other true conspiracies look bad.
In an interview he said he took a step back and looked at his friends, family, and environment and it woke him up to the absolute insanity of it all. The same people calling for love and understanding are the same people screeching for division and are the most hateful.
It makes sense I guess. If your goal is something completely unobtainable, you're going to start hating everyone that gets in the way of that goal eventually, because everyone will always get in the way no matter what.
He has some excellent points. The only one I would disagree with is that "it seems clear from news events and statistics that race relations in this country are particularly terrible". I don't believe that at all. I think it is the left strategy to divide and conquer. They survive by pitting us against each other and forming different victim classes.
I live in lib city aka, nyc. But, the libs are stoking the fires here daily. example: Giuliani's kid has said that the current mayor wilhelm ordered the police not to protect the jews who were attacked by a pro-palestinian mob. BLM painted in front of Trump tower. Mayor wilhelm's daughter arrested in protests and released and his wife pushing defund police. It's all contrived. All made up. Q said they want to divide us.
Check out his album "South of Reality" from 2019. Really good, unlike the majority of "music" that is coming out today.
First time I heard it I was "shocked that a random noname Indie band could be this good" before finding out who it really was.
Either way, in his interviews you can clearly hear he's a liberal (environment?). But he speaks and thinks like a scientist (unlike most of the career academics in academia).
If liberals were like him we would have no issues, and merely different flavors of society in different locations (which would help conduct experiments on what works best).
If liberals were like him we would have no issues, and merely different flavors of society in different locations (which would help conduct experiments on what works best).
That's the way it was, good honest debate about acceptable amounts of 'investing' in social safety nets / infrastructure / protective measures / defense / etc using arguable levels of taxpayer money.
That was before the so-called managerial state really took over, i.e. managing society down to the minute details even in family, relationships, identity, associations, etc. The dividing wall has not been based on what we traditionally know as "liberal" and "conservative", not for a while.
More hand waving and trite bullshit about how we’re all the same.
15% of the population commit 50% of the crimes. Among this population almost 75% of homes are single parent homes. That is a huge problem. It does affect a particular population of a particular skin color. The solution is that the men in that population make the hard decisions to turn away from crime, drugs, alcohol, sleeping around and instead take responsibility, protect their family, and raise their kids properly. Nobody can do this for them, but the problems they face and cause could all be fixed in a generation if enough black men showed leadership and did this. It’s not a poverty issue. Many groups of people came to America poor and because they took responsibility for their actions their children became doctors and lawyers. Black culture has a very bad cultural problem and the anti-racist movement exacerbates the issue by allowing them even less accountability.
Then they call the based men among them: Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Larry Elder and others Uncle Toms. We are all the same, in the sense of all being created in God's image. Some are, however, more damaged from the fall than others. One thing that has been pointed out on Gab is that freed black men were responsible for much of the slave trade from Africa to America.
We should stop engaging them in conversations about “slavery” and “equality” which are irrelevant distractions. Their problems can corrected in a single generation if they took responsibility for their actions.
Agree. It's that small percentage that just can't seem to control themselves or are deluded to think they should lead with everything trickling up to them.
Not into celebrities and he doesn't have the fame of his father but he is one by association. A star I would follow if he kept this line of thinking going forward.
The good news is that when the funding stops, the racism will stop. The bad news is that it has grown from a fledgling cottage industry to a major Fortune 500 cabal. Stoppable, but harder.
That site is fucking cancer... to save the mind, here's the tweet:
When I was young ppl used to say racist shit about Asians around me all the time and then be like ‘Oh sorry! But you’re not reeeally Asian so…’ and I think they sincerely thought that would make me feel better. I’m not exactly sure why I brought that up but I think…
Yeah, you didn't know this? No one has actually died since JFK's assassination in 1963. He was the last human to die. Since then, people just disappear, even the old folks. They're all being held in secret camps in Antarctica (i.e., the edge of the flat Earth).
Look. Until people understand that Racism, Sexism, Gender issues are a HUSSLE!
Things will never change.
These things are PRODUCED and are not organic in nature.
Yes.. a young child might ask their parents. Why does this person look different then me.
That is supposed to be a simple response and then move on.
What shocks me. Is that people cannot see that this is a hustle!
It’s so fucking obvious right now! BLM is a fake movement:
Used to bring down America for more government control.
They want us fighting each other. So in the background.
They can grab more control:
In reality.
THEY ARE SMALL IN NUMBERS! They are just loud in voice.
The reason why they are loud. Is because the media gives them a voice:
I have repeated this before:
I am a black guy:
Racism is a SCAM!!
It saddens me that people can’t see this shit:
“Jews are not the problem...”. Full Stop
If young Sean does not know WHO was behind the development of Cultural Marxism and Critical Race Theory then he is still a “nowhere man”.
Jews is different from zionist.
All zionists are jews, but not all jews are zionists.
OK. Not ALL the Jews. That is axiomatic. But it is still a Jewish problem and we better figure out how to handle it. Time is getting short.
And it’s not just “Zionists”.
Do you call out the entire ethnicity of Italians because of the Italian mafia, and their well documented involvement with Hollywood, political corruption, and general thug behavior, and societal degeneracy? .... ....
....
....
Narrow your focus, and avoid collateral damage against our patriotic American jewish allies please.
100% same with hispanics, blacks, asians, and whites. There's shitty people everywhere. Hispanics have thugs and illegal immigration, blacks have thugs and fatherless homes, asians have....there's something, and whites have supremacist nihilists, and degeneracy of what is morally good. But guess what, all those bad things are accross the board. We are going through a cultural problem, not a racial problem. Most people are too stupid to think.
"OK. Not ALL the [Unvaccinated]. That is axiomatic. But it is still [an Unvaccinated people's] problem and we better figure out how to handle it. Time is getting short."
See how this works? Either we fight against it, or we don't.
Picking the characteristic related to the problem is pretty important. Why stop at expanding the category from Zionists to Jews? Let's just include all humans as well. Then everyone can be our enemy.
If somebody is taking part in a relatively small satanic group trying to take over the world through sneaky devious means, then they need to be strung up. The answer is individual accountability and responsibility. I realize that some predictions can be made about an individual from general group characteristics. Black people are, by far, the least likely of any demo to give a tip. At least in places where I have worked. Yet I've gotten some great tips from some Blacks also. So I cannot judge each person on the basis of group membership.
Amen! Completely agree.
You should search and learn about legal name fraud and how it really works.
Nothing wrong with Jews supporting their ancestral homeland.
If there's another connotation to zionist, tell me.
Sounds like you're responding to something not facts on the ground. The original Zionist bought land from the Turkish land owners, and developed it, including disease-ridden swamps. Arabs moved in to get jobs, then claimed they always owned the land. Other areas were captured in defensive wars the Arabs initiated.
Goyim and gentile mean "the nations". As in other nations in the world. It does NOT mean cattle. That's a smear.
(Golem is a legend of a clay man made by a Rabbi to defend the community, but it's probably just a legend)
Horse shit.
The land was part of the Ottoman Empire, which dissolved after World War 1 and was part of Britain. There was never an independent nation or people of Arabs called "Palestinians."
If you have citation of the Talmud, let's hear it.
Sex with three year old girls -- I think I saw this particular slur addressed by a Talmudic scholar who took the time to rebut the popular, anti-Semitic slanders on the Torah.
Here's what it is discussing:
A woman who loses her virginity is ineligible for marriage.
The question was: If there was a girl who was three, and was molested by some creep, does that mean she was ineligible for marriage?
The Talmud's interpretation of this was that it did not count as sex, therefore the girl could still get married when she came of age.
Horrors. An abused child is allowed to get on with her life.
You see, this is the kind of out-of-context crap you Jew-haters come up with to slander the Talmud and the Jews.
I can't speak for other anons, but some verses from the Sanhedrin are quite strange, so I think that's what he's talking about.
is this just some weird way to tell stories? like morality plays? isn't Sanhedrin part of the Talmud?
and maybe I missed it, since I was raised Catholic-not proficient in the Bible- but I don't remember talking about children and 'intercourse' in catechism class...
really is a creepy verse:(
https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.54b.21-22?lang=bi
"The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do Rav and Shmuel disagree?
The Gemara answers: Rav holds that any halakha that applies to one who engages in intercourse actively applies to one who engages in intercourse passively,
and any halakha that does not apply to one who engages in intercourse actively does not apply to one who engages in intercourse passively.
Therefore, just as one who engages in intercourse actively is not liable if he is less than nine years old,
as the intercourse of such a child does not have the halakhic status of intercourse,
so too, if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively,
the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable. 22" ושמואל
I'm often to extend the benefit of the doubt to a lot of people here, a lot more than usual. And I've said some pretty harsh things about leftist Jews. (Basically that they're idolators). But when I get hit like the other guy did, with "Synagogue of Satan" and stuff, well, that's what we have a block button for.
Anyway, onto your question.
This verse you're going to -- what one people miss about the Talmud and this track you are citing as well is that these are conversations. It's famous Rabbis of old, discussing the application of the Torah's laws in absolute minutia. You see both sides are being recorded. Like "Rabbi Rav said this, but Rabbi Shmuel countered with this."
One of the most famous friendly rivalries was between Hillel and Shami, for instance. We don't often arrive at a "correct" answer, but it's debates on the question of applicable law -- even on cases that are not theoretically possible. Think of it like a brain exercise.
There's one anecdote about Rabbis discussing how an animal that is born on one man's property belongs to him, but if it's born on the other side, it belongs to the neighbor. So one asks: "What if a goat is born with two legs on one man's side of the property line, and the other two legs on his neighbor's?"
That's the kind of minutia I'm talking about. Not even possible in the real world, but they still inquire about it.
Onto these phrases -- as to the liability of these sexual sins -- nothing is off base. It's risqué subject matter. But keep in mind, the Torah does outlaw a wide range of sexual activities. A question might be -- if a boy is raped by a homosexual, is he liable? Maybe he is never liable below a certain age? But maybe there's an age where he would be a willing participant? And if he's a willing participant, is he liable? Should that be the age of Bar-Mitzvah, or not? What if he's not physically forced, but is coerced? Or bribed? If bribed, was he in poverty? Should his liability be reduced if it was his only method of getting food?
It may seem odd that a bunch of Rabbis are talking about this, but the Torah doesn't deal with risqué subjects by ignoring them. That's why a lot of people go nuts. "the Bible codifies slavery!" yes it does. Because slavery was a reality. If the Bible said "stop slavery altogether" that sounds fine in 2021. But in 3000 BC, people would say: "Not possible. We can't have functioning farms without at least some slaves." So they made a codification to lessen the burden.
There's even a rule for what to do with captive women. If you read the Iliad, you may recall that the initial fight that starts it all is when Achilles and Agamemnon are arguing about a captive girl. That is, some girls was captured in the skirmish. Agamamenon and Achilles both had one... a girl to keep in their tent, to rape when the move struck them. Agamemnon had to give his girl back to her father, since her father was a priest of Apollo -- and Apollo was sending plagues to the Greeks until they gave the girl back. Agamemnon then takes Achilles's girl as compensation. (She has no connections, unlike the other one). And Achilles, pissed off, boycotts the war.
What were they fighting over? Captured women who would be their rape slaves.
What does the Bible say about this subject?
It says this: You can do it. BUT you have to do it this way. The girl gets captured. You have to cut her hair. Then she wears baggy, unflattering clothes. You give her a month to mourn her family. Then you can take her home and MARRY her.
What changed? Well, she gets married in the end. But something else is happening. If you're a soldier, you captured this beautiful woman. You imagine doing the nasty with her. But first... she has to cut her hair. And wear ugly clothes. And sit in your tent for a month, crying about how she misses her family. And she's no longer as pretty as when you caught her. After all, you cut her hair and gave her ugly clothes. What might many a soldier do in this situation?
After a few days, you might just say: "Okay, okay, that's enough. Don't cry anymore. Go home. "
That gives her a better shot of that than if she was a captive of the Greeks.
It seems weird to us, but we're thinking of 21st century war, not what it was like in the ancient world. the Bible (and by extension, the Talmud) confronts these uncomfortable subjects, and works their way through them.
You should read more carefully.
Blaming "the Jews" is like blaming all Whites for Clinton/Bush and all Blacks for Obama.
Who was behind it?
I can tell you who wasn't behind it.
Every living Jew in existence today wasn't behind it.
That seems to be what you're insisting, and if not then you have poor communication skills.
Oh please.
The first clue you've found yourself full of s*** is that you just moved the goalpost from muh Jews to muh Zionists.
Second full of s*** comment is that you believe the entire American public believes we should be sending aid to Israel or we're antisemitic, as if Q doesn't exist and America's policy for sending money hasn't been molded and shaped by a small number of psychopaths.
Well allow me to blow your mind.
I don't think we should send money to Israel and I can say that without throwing a Sieg heil.
Now comes the sweet irony. You're going to get bent out of shape I insinuated you're a Nazi while this entire time, you're the one making massive blanket stereotypical assumptions.
Your arguments are as relevant as Voat.
I’m sure he knows, but he was trying to wake up some normies without being political.
Well said. I hope more people listen to you and truly understand what you're saying. Cause as a white guy I'm getting really sick of being shit on. Things can't stay the way they are.
Your response doesn't need to be anger. That's what they want.
Your response needs to be "Hey. ITS A SCAM".
If someone continues to argue with them. Keep repeating. It's a SCAM!
We need people calling this out in mass numbers.
Yeah, I get that its a scam but there is a certain point were its not about anger its about practicalities. When I'm being denied access to jobs or medical care or I'm paying taxes but I'm cut off from gov services because I'm white... that's money out of my pocket. That's theft. That's a whole list of things it would take me too long to list. At some point that becomes basic survival requires me to grab my fucking rifle and fix it or die trying.
Don't worry I quickly moved past being angry at black people. I know exactly who the enemy is. As I said... things can't stay the way they are. The camels back is already broken. The fact it hasn't fallen down yet is a miracle.
I would give this a million upvotes, if I could.
Racism, sexism, etc etc is all a lie. Anyone who hates anyone has anger. The end. But we made up words for anger to divide people.
Truth. The People have bought into the lies for too long. We are all one people, under God. Everyone on this planet wants one simple thing, to be allowed to live their best life in the best way they can, unfettered by tyranny.
Wow. I wasn't expecting that. My pre-conceived idea of his character is so wrong. I really thought he would be that liberal/ socialist kid of lefty parents. Pleasantly surprised and grateful for the reminder that what I think I know is often distorted by pre judging someone.
Nothing like having your dad whacked as a redpill.
John Lennon was more a pacifist than a liberal revolutionary. He also noted that he regretted penning the song “imagine.” Imagine is such an obvious liberal utopia song that was easily adopted by pro-communists. As you know, utopia is a complete pipe dream that could never manifest on this planet because of humanity’s flaws.
"Double Fantasy" era John Lennon strikes me as very modern red-pilled. He was family focused, anti-war, targeted by the DS, etc..
Seeing Paul's recent MK-Ultra music videos starts to tell me a different path that these two took.
Forgiving that one communist manifesto (with a beautiful melody) of a song John wrote, I see John as a tragic hero.
All 4 of the Beatles were Freemasons, no?
The cabal granted them success and they were used to influence the world.
Paul died in the late 60s replaced with a fake Paul so the world wouldn’t freak out or find out how he was taken out. Don’t take my word for it do a dig on it. Pretty interesting stuff.
I have. Paul and Faul look like exactly the same person. I used to be a skeptic to all conspiracies. Then came Timber Sycamore/ISIS, then pizzagate, then Obama coining phrase "Fake News" to coverup for pizzagate. This caused me to doubleback on all other stuff like 9/11, Kennedy, moon landing, and even WW2! With my foundation fully rocked, I STILL try and be careful not to slide off the edge into believing any old conspiracy that exists. Flat Earth is SO stupid that I'd rather believe that it's existence is a conspiracy to make other true conspiracies look bad.
Biiiiiiillllllll
Illiiiiieeeeee
Shears!
In an interview he said he took a step back and looked at his friends, family, and environment and it woke him up to the absolute insanity of it all. The same people calling for love and understanding are the same people screeching for division and are the most hateful.
It makes sense I guess. If your goal is something completely unobtainable, you're going to start hating everyone that gets in the way of that goal eventually, because everyone will always get in the way no matter what.
Check what he recorded with Les Claypool, it’s really good.
South of Reality (2019) in particular.
I have both LPs and the EP, besides the Monolith’s inteo, I am a huge fan. have discovered Primus back in 1990…
but Primus sucks
He nailed it
Still hilarious watching that black musician have no idea how to handle Yoko fucking up their show tho.
He has some excellent points. The only one I would disagree with is that "it seems clear from news events and statistics that race relations in this country are particularly terrible". I don't believe that at all. I think it is the left strategy to divide and conquer. They survive by pitting us against each other and forming different victim classes.
Actually he’s right: the keyword here is « seems ».
Good point.
Depends where you live.
I live in lib city aka, nyc. But, the libs are stoking the fires here daily. example: Giuliani's kid has said that the current mayor wilhelm ordered the police not to protect the jews who were attacked by a pro-palestinian mob. BLM painted in front of Trump tower. Mayor wilhelm's daughter arrested in protests and released and his wife pushing defund police. It's all contrived. All made up. Q said they want to divide us.
I thought it an excellent post, hope more people read it...
Get rid of Soros, Sharpton, Jackson and a few other race-baiters and it all goes away.
Check out his album "South of Reality" from 2019. Really good, unlike the majority of "music" that is coming out today.
First time I heard it I was "shocked that a random noname Indie band could be this good" before finding out who it really was.
Either way, in his interviews you can clearly hear he's a liberal (environment?). But he speaks and thinks like a scientist (unlike most of the career academics in academia).
If liberals were like him we would have no issues, and merely different flavors of society in different locations (which would help conduct experiments on what works best).
That's the way it was, good honest debate about acceptable amounts of 'investing' in social safety nets / infrastructure / protective measures / defense / etc using arguable levels of taxpayer money.
That was before the so-called managerial state really took over, i.e. managing society down to the minute details even in family, relationships, identity, associations, etc. The dividing wall has not been based on what we traditionally know as "liberal" and "conservative", not for a while.
More hand waving and trite bullshit about how we’re all the same.
15% of the population commit 50% of the crimes. Among this population almost 75% of homes are single parent homes. That is a huge problem. It does affect a particular population of a particular skin color. The solution is that the men in that population make the hard decisions to turn away from crime, drugs, alcohol, sleeping around and instead take responsibility, protect their family, and raise their kids properly. Nobody can do this for them, but the problems they face and cause could all be fixed in a generation if enough black men showed leadership and did this. It’s not a poverty issue. Many groups of people came to America poor and because they took responsibility for their actions their children became doctors and lawyers. Black culture has a very bad cultural problem and the anti-racist movement exacerbates the issue by allowing them even less accountability.
Then they call the based men among them: Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Larry Elder and others Uncle Toms. We are all the same, in the sense of all being created in God's image. Some are, however, more damaged from the fall than others. One thing that has been pointed out on Gab is that freed black men were responsible for much of the slave trade from Africa to America.
We should stop engaging them in conversations about “slavery” and “equality” which are irrelevant distractions. Their problems can corrected in a single generation if they took responsibility for their actions.
I get the ecosystem analogy.
It's really good too, because on a functional (mathematical modeling) level that is precisely what is happening.
Lennon Claypool delirium
Agree. It's that small percentage that just can't seem to control themselves or are deluded to think they should lead with everything trickling up to them.
Not into celebrities and he doesn't have the fame of his father but he is one by association. A star I would follow if he kept this line of thinking going forward.
Everybody needs to read this a couple of times and really think about what he said. Then pass it on to others.
Rarely in my life have I read more profound and truthful words.
That was brilliant.
Identity politics is nothing more then divide and conquer strategies invented to weaponize morons to attack their fellow human being.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/bWRY5IxHaOne/ - THE TABOO THAT COULD BREAK AMERICA, PART I
The good news is that when the funding stops, the racism will stop. The bad news is that it has grown from a fledgling cottage industry to a major Fortune 500 cabal. Stoppable, but harder.
One has to go entirely out of their way to be racist. It isn't racist to point out our differences in looks or culture. It's all fake.
Pure gold.
That site is fucking cancer... to save the mind, here's the tweet:
When I was young ppl used to say racist shit about Asians around me all the time and then be like ‘Oh sorry! But you’re not reeeally Asian so…’ and I think they sincerely thought that would make me feel better. I’m not exactly sure why I brought that up but I think…
— Sean Ono Lennon (@seanonolennon) May 23, 2021
ezra suggests lennon is alive
Yeah, you didn't know this? No one has actually died since JFK's assassination in 1963. He was the last human to die. Since then, people just disappear, even the old folks. They're all being held in secret camps in Antarctica (i.e., the edge of the flat Earth).
/s