Judaism is Racism!

[Hektor]

Interesting post I made on the Jewish religion and Amalek

Re: Jair Bolsonaro: We can forgive, but we cannot forget / Yad Vashem: no forgiveness
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12413#p92043

Racist jews often use the term "Amalek" which literally is a call to genocide.

To summarize on this here is what the President of Israel said:

What Amalek did to us inscribed in our memory, the memory of an ancient people. We will always oppose those who deny the truth or those who wish to expunge our memory – not individuals or groups, not party leaders or prime ministers. We will never forgive and never forget

https://twitter.com/PresidentRuvi/statu ... 1375546368

Seems fellow tweeters don't get the message.

And this seems common in Israel, unlike in Europe whose people they like to accuse of ""Racism:

[christianbethel]

Damn. That's a lot of references. I also hear that there is much controversy about the treatment of non-Jews in the Talmud. It says statements such as "it's okay to steal from non-Jews", "If a Jew is tempted to do evil, he should go to a city where he is unknown and do it there", and the like. Are these statements actually in the Talmud, or are they mere fabrication?

[Lamprecht]

---

How To Kill Goyim And Influence People -- Torat Ha'melech

Leading fundamentalist rabbis gathered in Israel to defend the publication of a book, Torat Ha'Melech, that attempted to provide halakhic justification for the killing of non-Jews, including innocent children and families. The gathering exposed not only the ferocious racism of a swath of Israel's pro-settlement rabbinate, but the powerlessness of the government to stop them. Produced by Max Blumenthal, Joseph Dana and Alternet.


Mirror: https://www.bitchute.com/video/JIaDARj5jjJa/

[Lamprecht]

Despite being a racial supremacist that considered all non-Jews sub-human created only to serve the Jews, roughly 50,000 people attended Rabbi Schneerson's grave in NYC on the 25th anniversary of his funeral.


https://archive.fo/787cV | http://web.archive.org/web/201907060058 ... nce-death/

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (April 18, 1902 - June 12, 1994) also known as The Lubavitcher Rebbe, or simply as The Rebbe, was an American Orthodox Jewish rabbi born in Russia, and the last rebbe of the Lubavitcher Hasidic dynasty. As the hereditary leader of the Chabad movement, he has been called "The Most Influential Rabbi" in modern history. Many of his adherents also believe that he is the Messiah and will rise from the dead. This is known as "Chabad Messianism" and those who believe it are called Meshichists or messianists.
Rabbi Schneerson is the only Jewish person in America with his own holiday, known as the national Education Day U.S.A. or Education and Sharing Day.

Throughout his career, Rabbi Schneerson preached the hatred of all non-Jews. Here are some quotes, mostly translated from his book "Gatherings of Conversations published in the Holy Land in 1965" but please note: During the subsequent three decades of his life until his death, Rabbi Schneerson remained consistent; he did not change any of the opinions. What Rabbi Schneerson taught either was or immediately became official, Lubovitch, Hassidic belief.

"The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: 'Let us differentiate.' Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of 'let us differentiate' between totally different species. This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world."

Schneerson explained that the passage in Chapter 49 of Hatanya [the basic book of Chabad]:

"And you have chosen us" [the Jews] means specifically that the Jewish body was chosen [by God], because a choice is thus made between outwardly similar things. The Jewish body "looks as if it were in substance similar to bodies of non-Jews,' but the meaning ... is that the bodies only seem to be similar in material substance, outward look and superficial quality. The difference of the inner quality, however, is so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species. This is the reason why the Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews] ... 'their bodies are in vain.' ... An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness."

Schneerson explains the difference between Jews and non-Jews:

"As has been explained, an embryo is called a human being, because it has both body and soul. Thus, the difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish embryo can be understood. There is also a difference in bodies. The body of a Jewish embryo is on a higher level than is the body of a non-Jew. This is expressed in the phrase 'let us differentiate' about the body of a non-Jew, which is a totally different kind. The same difference exists in regard to the soul: the soul of a Jewish embryo is different than the soul of a non-Jewish embryo. We therefore ask: Why should a non-Jew be punished if he kills even a non-Jewish embryo while a Jew should not be punished even if he kills a Jewish embryo? The answer can be understood by [considering] the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews." 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth' [Genesis 1:1] means that [the heavens and the earth] were created for the sake of the Jews, who are called the 'beginning.' This means everything, all developments, all discoveries, the creation, including the 'heavens and the earth - are vanity compared to the Jews. The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim."

Schneerson explaining why non-Jews were created:

"Following from what has already been said, it can be understood why a non-Jew should be punished by death if he kills an embryo and why a Jew should not be punished by death. The difference between the embryo and a [baby that was] born is that the embryo is not a self-contained reality but rather is subsidiary; either it is subsidiary to its mother or to the reality created after birth when the [divine] purpose of its creation is then fulfilled. In its present state the purpose is still absent. A non-Jew's entire reality is only vanity. It is written, 'And the strangers shall stand and feed your flocks' [Isaiah 61:5]. The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews. Because of this a non-Jew should be punished with death if he kills an embryo, while a Jew, whose existence is most important, should not be punished with death because of something subsidiary. We should not destroy an important thing for the sake of something subsidiary. It is true that there is a prohibition against [hurting] an embryo, because it is something that will be born in the future and in a hidden form already exists. The death penalty should be implicated only when visible matters are affected; as previously noted, the embryo is merely of subsidiary importance."

Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel (1999) - by Jewish professors Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky
PDF: http://web.archive.org/web/202005022041 ... israel.pdf

[christianbethel]

OK, I just had to be sure that you weren't just spewing antisemitic nonsense. I have a feeling that these sources are legitimate, so I will defer to you on this issue.

[christianbethel]

Yeah, this'll do. Thanks! Now there needs to be a thread titled '(Authentic) National Socialism Is Anti-Racism!'.

[Hektor]

Yeah, this'll do. Thanks! Now there needs to be a thread titled '(Authentic) National Socialism Is Anti-Racism!'.

Just bear in mind that terms like "Racism" are semantic fraud. Those using them are either morons or malicious.

Simply try to have people define what "racism" is and what it isn't and you may see what I mean.

[christianbethel]

Can you give me an example?

[Butterfangers]

Can you give me an example?

I won't speak for Hektor but my concern with the word "racism" is that it is most often used in a defamatory way against a majority group that is being targeted (namely whites). If that group does not allow subversion, wants to focus its efforts and attention in life to people most similar to itself, it is labeled "racist" but the same standard does not apply to any minority group. Whites cannot say "white lives matter" or even "it is okay to be white" without a media campaign which follows these statements to label the proponents as "racists". Jews are perfectly fine with racism in their own ranks; they refer to the distinction between the more or less "racist" among them with the terms "particularist" versus "universalist"; the former being those who are focused solely on the Jewish community, the latter being those who are more out and about in the "diaspora". In truth, the vast majority of all Jews put Jewish interests above all others, and this sort of behavior is tolerated among all minorities, but if whites do this even in the slightest, anywhere in the world, it is "racist".

There is obviously a great deal of racial tension where I live (in the US) but I would attribute most of it to the deliberate effort of Jewish organizations in sowing narratives which promote this tension, as the resulting chaos is precisely where Jews thrive and benefit. The less united the nation is, the easier it is to get away with basically anything. So they promote the empowerment of every other group (minorities), even dedicating themselves to fabricating or inventing new minorities (e.g. "LGBTQ+") only to the extent they may be used against the majority group in political campaigns. This isn't just bad for whites. The racial tension over the decades hasn't been good for anyone. I would go as far as to say that "integration" perhaps was not at all the best way forward post-"Civil Rights" era. Jews sought to forcibly integrate all groups together rather than simply promote quality of life within the segregated black communities. They didn't seek to upgrade the black drinking fountains, black schools, etc.; they made sure that blacks were using the white ones. Rather than attach themselves to black nationalists who wanted separation (although still perhaps reparation), they wrote speeches for MLK, organized meetings and rallies, funding, etc. that were better-aligned with the destructive vision they had for white communities.

The only way the "integration" and "individualism" game were ever going to work is if EVERYONE played along. But the key proponents of this worldview, Jews, never had any intention of playing these games. They sought only to impose a culture where all whites adopted these values, just enough to destroy themselves by allowing openly all forms of infiltration and subversion. The result is a society completely dominated by Jewish interests, with [often-sadistic] opportunists from every other racial group looking to claim a piece of the pie as white societies disintegrate and fall apart.

Any white resisting this is called "racist".

[Hektor]

Yeah, this'll do. Thanks! Now there needs to be a thread titled '(Authentic) National Socialism Is Anti-Racism!'.

Just bear in mind that terms like "Racism" are semantic fraud. Those using them are either morons or malicious.

Simply try to have people define what "racism" is and what it isn't and you may see what I mean.

Example for what?
1. If a term can have several even contradicting meanings, using it is a means of deception.
2. If you still use a term and you know this, then you are malicious.
3. If you don't know it and still use it, you are a moron.


Examples for what Racism can mean:
1. Believing that there are racial differences between people and population groups (rather obviously the case, although there is lots of denial of this).
2. Having a preference of your own racial/ethnic group.
2. Hating other ethnic/racial groups.
4. Wanting to oppress other racial groups (e.g. "White Supremacy")
5. Wanting to separate from other racial groups.

Now if you separate from other groups, you can not oppress them. Separatists don't want to rule a large political entity, they want to secceed from it.

You can love your group and hate others of course... But the one doesn't follow from the other. You can love your group and and be loving to others or simply indifferent. Most folks are like this with regards to their family. Imagine a dad loving his kids, taking care of them, being accused of being hateful... The hate could be demonstrated of course by showing footage where he beats up people that want to harm his kids, right?

So it is a fraud. It's an example of loaded language, too. How was the loading done:
* Linking negative events to "Racism".
* Having academics write about "Racism" in a negative way.
* Producing movies were White folks were mean to non-White folks for no reason at all. Claim that the movie is 'based on true events'.

Reality tends to be a bit more complicated, though.

I recall a 1950 academic booklet that was about (racial) prejudice. It didn't use the term "Racism" ones. In literature a book by a certain Magnus Hirschfeld was the first book to have the word "Racism" in the title.

I can link you to that kind of literature. It shows that the whole "racism" thing only started mid 20th century. Previously it wasn't really an issue. People accepted that there are difference between humans... And of course that their own nation was associated with a certain race, they also belonged to. Some where more explicit about this than others. Germany being an example, but so was the US., South Africa, Australia, etc. More homogenous weren't so explicit about it. For Swedes it was self-evident that there fellow Swedes were Whites.. Same applies to virtually all European countries... There nationality issues were more linked to language and religion. Pretty much everyone accepted that culture was a function of race or heredity. Gustave le Bon is perhaps the most explicit writer on this with his "psychology of races". It's a very insightful book.

Of course to a woke audience... All those old White folks were racist and they were to blame for all problems in the world.

That those 'old, white folks' made it possible for billions of people to live on this planet, they won't mention of course. In fact, they have a problem with that, too ("climate change").

[christianbethel]

@Hektor @Butterfangers So, in other words, you guys are 'White' Nationalists. I suppose that comes with the territory on a forum questioning the 'Holocaust'.

[jarno]

@Hektor @Butterfangers So, in other words, you guys are 'White' Nationalists. I suppose that comes with the territory on a forum questioning the 'Holocaust'.

There is absolutely no inherit relationship between white nationalism and Holocaust revisionism. The latter is by nature scientific and non-political. Also, I've noticed that the leading figures in revisionism have a strong sense for injustice as well as a distaste for lies. Whatever overlap occurs is random and coincidental. In fact, in my casual research I've noticed that most leading figures of white nationalism are not Holocaust revisionists, and that revisionists have repeatedly received hostility from them.

[Butterfangers]

@Hektor @Butterfangers So, in other words, you guys are 'White' Nationalists. I suppose that comes with the territory on a forum questioning the 'Holocaust'.

There is a natural, honest, organic progression (at least in my experience) when one starts to learn about Jewish control of historical narratives, that one realizes Jews have had the ability to control more narratives than just the "Holocaust". That power is immense. It's a power that enables whichever group that yields it to control entire nations, or even more than that. The Jews were known in Nazi Germany (and are known today) as "internationalists". Internationalists that hold such power are undoubtedly even more dangerous, as they not only control individual nations but can formulate or fabricate conflicts between nations, thus working toward control over the entire planet. Furthermore, Jews are not just a religious group; race is as important to them as it is to anyone (note that if your mother is Jewish, you are Jewish [by blood], in Judaism). The entire Jewish ideology, furthermore, is based on crushing one's [racial] enemies, a concept which is a central theme in most Jewish holidays. Many Jews consider Germans (or whites, generally) to be "Amalek"; which is a race of people they are commanded to literally kill and wipe out of existence. Accordingly, many Jews and their organizations have implemented societies and structures which have led to death, destruction, and abysmal birth rates in white societies.

White nationalism is, thus, a natural, ethical response to these conditions. When dealing with a people who target you (1) based on race, and (2) as internationalists, the natural response is to unite by race and by nation.

I strongly encourage you to watch the 12-part series, "Europa The Last Battle" which will answer any questions you might have in this regard. It is well-worth your time: https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/euro ... ary-2019:6

All of this said, as jarno mentions above, white nationalism is not necessarily tied to Revisionism (see question 16, here: https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/Holoc ... ticism.pdf ). They are two entirely different things but, if nothing else, white nationalists are going to be more comfortable asking "tough questions" about race and/or Jews, etc., thus these conclusions about the Holocaust are more "accessible" (i.e. less cognitive dissonance) to them.

[hermod]

@Hektor @Butterfangers So, in other words, you guys are 'White' Nationalists. I suppose that comes with the territory on a forum questioning the 'Holocaust'.

Aren't race and nation more natural communities than a common belief in the myths cherished by members of the Christian cult?

[Hektor]

@Hektor @Butterfangers So, in other words, you guys are 'White' Nationalists. I suppose that comes with the territory on a forum questioning the 'Holocaust'.

I'm White and think ethno-based nation states were the best policy for development of societies. That's the conclusion I came to independent of whether the Holocaust is true or not.

@Hektor @Butterfangers So, in other words, you guys are 'White' Nationalists. I suppose that comes with the territory on a forum questioning the 'Holocaust'.

Aren't race and nation more natural communities than a common belief in the myths cherished by members of the Christian cult?

Actually, the bible is quite positive on the issue of nation and race. It is also positive on the issue of heredity. That makes woke Christians a bit of an ahistorical oddity.

But it gets more juicy. The Holocaust is actually a form of 'replacement theolog'. You can not be a Christian and a Holocaust believer at the same time.

"If Auschwitz is something other than a horror of history, if it goes beyond the 'banality of evil', then Christianity totters on its foundations. Christ is the Son of God, who went to the end of the humanly endurable, where he endured the cruelest suffering... If Auschwitz is true, then there is a human suffering which simply cannot be compared with that of Christ... In this case, Christ is false, and salvation will not come from Him... If the pain of Auschwitz is much more extreme than that of the Apocalypse, much more horrifying than that described by John in the Apocalypse (since the Apocalypse can be described as, and even resembles, a huge, Hollywood-style spectacular, while Auschwitz is inexpressable and undescribable), then the Book of the Apocalypse is false, and the Gospels are false, too. Auschwitz is the refutation of Christ."

One could hardly provide a more drastic demonstration that, for increasingly greater numbers of Jews, the Holocaust has become a genuine religion. Perhaps two Jews out of three Jews believe in God, but 99.9% of them believe in the gas chambers. If this murky religion were restricted to Jews, that would be their own affair; basically, it would be their problem, not ours; yet ominously, increasingly shameless attempts have been made in recent years to force this Jewish Holocaust religion upon non-Jews by criminal law.

If "Auschwitz" is true, salvation will not come from Christ, says Lanzmann -- so where is it going to come from, then? Quite obviously from the Jews, who have now been transsubstantiated into a sort of collective Messiah because of Auschwitz! The arch-enemy of the new collective Messiah is therefore the "National Socialist regime of the gas chambers and the Holocaust" -- the incorporation of Absolute Evil.
https://www.vho.org/GB/Books/hoh/chap1.html

Tat sums it about up. And one may add the term NAZI supposedly short for NAtionalsoZIalist. But there may have been a more sinister reason for popularizing the term. The hebrew word Nazir/נָשִׂיא means prince, but it is also a reference to Christ. And by that it also links up to Nazarene. So the term NAZI is actually a codeword for Christians. And after all Germany was a Christian country, majority Lutheran with some Reformed and a large minority of Catholics concentrated in the South. The NSDAP was 'concessionally diverse' itself - Catholics, Protestants, and confessionless people who signed off as 'gottglaeubig' (theist). The NSDAP also wanted the Protestant churches to be unified and had a concordat with the Roman Catholic Church... The Catholics still have. They also never apologized for their support for Nation Socialism. The Protestants did do the "Stuttgarter Schulerklaerung", were essentially bullied into this by Willem Adolph Visser 't Hooft (World Council of Churches).

The left says "NAZI', because they want to avoid to use the term "National SOCIALIST", since the term "SOCIALIST" was kind of 'sacred' for them. As secular and agnostic the society pretends to be. It seems more religious than ever to be. The Holocaust having replace Christianity and Hitler having replaced Jesus and the Devil at the same time. While people did "good" because "Jesus said so" in the olden days. They now appose "bad that Hitler would have supported". That's why the are against "Racism", "Homophobia", "Nationalism", "Militarism" etc. and support "Multiculturalism", "Sexual Tolerance", etc. It's all about the image they created about Hitler. He's the last moral authority "Everybody" would accept nowadays... at least in Western Countries.