A Freemason in We Are Change NYC

[thirdeyewise]

Basically that   woman (really wanted to call her a name) is saying Israel can be criticised, but Judaism cannot be questioned, and that not accepting the (delusional, supremacist) tenets of Judaism is atomatically hateful.

This is the kind of trash that occupies key positions in academia, which has long been hopelessly corrupt and controlled.

Not only is it considered hateful but it may one day be against the law:
 
'Noahide Laws' Ostensibly Against Theft and Murder Rationalize Theft and Murder
http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2009/08/noahide-laws-ostensibly-against-theft.html


We have 3 Jews in the supreme court, 1 possible Hispanic crypto Jew and an Italian American who studies Talmud with the Nasi of the reconstituted Sanhedrin:

Scalia Studies Talmud with Lubavitch Rabbi
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/blog/fester/scalia-studies-talmud-lubavitch-rabbi

Could Scalia be of Jewish heritage, like the Italian mafioso Joseph "Joe bananas" Bonanno?:
http://theforbiddentruth.net/40784-post9.html

[thirdeyewise]

Came across this very interesting video pertaining to that pyramid sign....
[youtube:cw3aaq9s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05VeZjQ6l5w[/youtube]cw3aaq9s]

and an interesting article pertaining to the "A OK/666" sign....
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/a-ok-hand-sign-sign-of-the-occult-music-industry/

[jai_mann]

What I'm not hearing is the distinction the homeland holds and how that distinguishes Zionists.

And what distinction is that since the Jews in general ALL BENEFIT by having a place to run to after they commit crimes. A place that will not extradite them. What is this distinction? Does it some how negate this "get out of jail" card for criminals who flee there?

Stating "Zionism was not around during those times" neglects the importance Jerusalem has always held.  Though the term "Zionism" may not have been a reference of any pertinence to that day and age, it certainly holds relevance in the context we're confronting now.  The Zionist bent of securing sovereignty over Palestine motivated certain sects of Jews more than others for as long as we're allowed to recall time.  Zionists constantly remind us of how the locales surrounding Jerusalem have always been their true right and title.  But nowhere near all of Judaism believes in adulating Jerusalem to the suspension of human rights of non-Jews occupying the same area for as long if not longer.

Okay, so why don't these Jews who disagree with their fellow Jews change things? Or are they simply the false opposition to make people think there are "good jews"? The latter is the most likely since, to be a jew, means recognition of the Talmud.

Too many examples of practitioners of Jewish spawned belief systems that don't endorse murder as a means of securing a sentimental spot on the globe and do exercise their beliefs to the good of humanity exist to take seriously the one-dimensional assertion the belief system is at fault.  That assertion also carries with it mass delusion and dilution of the core Zionist fixation on Jerusalem.

One dimensional my ass. The belief system is what makes them the culture that they are. Islam is what makes a muslim a muslim, and christianity makes a christian. Behaviors stem from motives and those motives are associated with attitudes. All Jews are indoctrinated with the oral tradition as found in the Talmud. Name some of these practitioners rather than making a claim and leaving out the examples.

But honestly with the many sides to any debate always possible, I'm 100% ready for an overhaul of Occidental belief systems so rant on about Judaism all you want, but I still see it as a losers game neglecting key distinctions when it comes to dealing with crucial problems at hand.

You can slice salami all you want. When there is utility in discriminating between elements of a whole then I do so; other wise I'm wasting my productive time since the elements of the whole all function the same with respect to specific contexts. Answer me this: Will your non-zionists jews really stand up against and raise arms against zionist jews (I can't seem to recall the last armed conflict between zionist and non-zionist jews, maybe you can help me since you seem to know this stuff...)? Or will they side with the rest of the tribe as Jew vs. Goyim? That is all one needs to know when deciding if discriminating between jewish groups is necessary, or a waste.

Also, for your edification:

rant
   /rænt/ Show Spelled[rant] Show IPA
–verb (used without object)
1. to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement way; rave: The demagogue ranted for hours.
–verb (used with object)
2. to utter or declaim in a ranting manner.
–noun
3. ranting, extravagant, or violent declamation.
4. a ranting utterance.

You might want to make sure that your verbiage is congruent with the behaviors which you claim to describe, otherwise people might construe you as disingenuous...

[ahaze]

What I'm not hearing is the distinction the homeland holds and how that distinguishes Zionists.

And what distinction is that since the Jews in general ALL BENEFIT by having a place to run to after they commit crimes. A place that will not extradite them. What is this distinction? Does it some how negate this "get out of jail" card for criminals who flee there?

Riiight, like they welcomed Roman Polanski with open arms didn't they?  NOT!!!  Why burden the board with such ad hominem nonsense?  The main point I tried to speak to pertained to the Jewish fantasy of controlling Jerusalem harkening back to the Babylonian enslavement and many modern Jewish minds recognizing today's misconstrued ambitions surrounding that hope.  Ever consider Googling "anti-zionist Jew"? or how about visiting the "Israel versus Judaism" website (at _http://www.israelversusjudaism.org) and pondering their take on the Talmud instructing "not to take the land of Israel by force"?

Stating "Zionism was not around during those times" neglects the importance Jerusalem has always held. Though the term "Zionism" may not have been a reference of any pertinence to that day and age, it certainly holds relevance in the context we're confronting now. The Zionist bent of securing sovereignty over Palestine motivated certain sects of Jews more than others for as long as we're allowed to recall time. Zionists constantly remind us of how the locales surrounding Jerusalem have always been their true right and title. But nowhere near all of Judaism believes in adulating Jerusalem to the suspension of human rights of non-Jews occupying the same area for as long if not longer.

Okay, so why don't these Jews who disagree with their fellow Jews change things? Or are they simply the false opposition to make people think there are "good jews"? The latter is the most likely since, to be a jew, means recognition of the Talmud.

As noted above, a good number of Jews read the Talmud and comprehend  strict divine guidelines restricting their assertions of control over Jerusalem.  And as for why those Jews with better sense don't just change things, perhaps the sinister means employed by Zionist power mongers work in more insidious ways than readily evident, but pondering Yitzhak Rabin's assassination and the ramifications therein might help build awareness.  

Too many examples of practitioners of Jewish spawned belief systems that don't endorse murder as a means of securing a sentimental spot on the globe and do exercise their beliefs to the good of humanity exist to take seriously the one-dimensional assertion the belief system is at fault. That assertion also carries with it mass delusion and dilution of the core Zionist fixation on Jerusalem.

One dimensional my ass. The belief system is what makes them the culture that they are. Islam is what makes a muslim a muslim, and christianity makes a christian. Behaviors stem from motives and those motives are associated with attitudes. All Jews are indoctrinated with the oral tradition as found in the Talmud. Name some of these practitioners rather than making a claim and leaving out the examples.

That sounds like an uncomfortable ass to sit on.  I can actually make an argument for how the belief system is at fault, whereas your 'Islam a muslim muslim, christianity a christian christian, hari hari' seems to lack a certain something.  But rather than focusing on how belief systems compel people, I sense we're stuck on more primary distinctions between forests and trees.  Along with simple Google search-strings like "anti-Zionist Jew" or sites like 'Israel versus Judaism', there are plenty of references to Jews wise to Zionist claims on the "holy land", and whether or not they rise to the level of dissent we might hope to see  might depend on the level of comprehension demonstrated by outsiders, but regardless I don't see how gross over generalized condemnation of any ethnic categorization stands to defuse volatile circumstances infecting the globe or dethrone instigators orchestrating the problems.

Answer me this: Will your non-zionists jews really stand up against and raise arms against zionist jews (I can't seem to recall the last armed conflict between zionist and non-zionist jews, maybe you can help me since you seem to know this stuff...)?

Here I think you're really getting at the crux quandry.  Namely the problems military technology introduced with the emergence of the "gunpowder empires" in the 1600's and how Israel has come to assume the role of lead belligerent nation with its nuclear arsenal.  To me, all the surrounding religious contexts are nothing more than tools of mass control disguising the assertion of military technology by the lead gunpowder empires.  So no, I don't expect any anti-Zionists to directly confront or antagonize the nuclear-missile wielding psychopathic nation of Zionists.  But it seems that's just what the Gaza aid flotilla did, and the Palestinians have to do on a daily basis.  So despite my pacifist leanings and incredulity at 'happiness is a warm gun', I recognize the belligerents force the confrontation and its up to the greater portion of humanity to find a way to overcome.  But adhering to the ideological constructs germinated by the belligerents just seems to empower their agenda.

[jai_mann]

Riiight, like they welcomed Roman Polanski with open arms didn't they?  NOT!!!  Why burden the board with such ad hominem nonsense?  The main point I tried to speak to pertained to the Jewish fantasy of controlling Jerusalem harkening back to the Babylonian enslavement and many modern Jewish minds recognizing today's misconstrued ambitions surrounding that hope.  Ever consider Googling "anti-zionist Jew"? or how about visiting the "Israel versus Judaism" website (at _http://www.israelversusjudaism.org) and pondering their take on the Talmud instructing "not to take the land of Israel by force"?

Well clearly Israel didn't BAN him from entering that geographic region, in fact, they delayed doing any thing with him and let him slip back out of the country which removed any controversy and burden from them. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/sep/29/roman-polanski-hunted-underage-sex

After criticism about the timing of the arrest, the Los Angeles county district attorney's office issued a detailed chronology of its efforts bring Polanski to justice after his admission of sex with an underage girl.

It first attempted to have Polanski extradited from the UK in May 1978 after learning that he may have been in England. Similar moves were made in Canada in 1986, France in 1994, and Thailand in 2005. Polanski was also close to being arrested in Israel in July 2007, but a delay over paperwork requested by the Israelis meant he fled before the arrest could be made.

Where's the ad hominem buddy? I'm not remotely interested in wasting my time reading jewish contrived and twisted logic which is attempting to get non-jews to perceive a false divide amongst jews. That's a serious waste of my productive time.

As noted above, a good number of Jews read the Talmud and comprehend  strict divine guidelines restricting their assertions of control over Jerusalem.  And as for why those Jews with better sense don't just change things, perhaps the sinister means employed by Zionist power mongers work in more insidious ways than readily evident, but pondering Yitzhak Rabin's assassination and the ramifications therein might help build awareness.  

At this point I have to ask: Are you a jew? Your verbal behavior strikes me as 100% jewish. You're defending those who read the Talmud for one thing. I know what kind of filth is in that text which eliminates any hope of working WITH adherents to its contents. The fact that jews will kill each other in power struggles or over the MEANS to fulfill an END does not present non-jews with viable options for working with any of them, since they have the same goals in mind. And as you so aptly pointed out, "and pondering their take on the Talmud instructing "not to take the land of Israel by force"?", they merely differ in the approach employed.

That sounds like an uncomfortable ass to sit on.  I can actually make an argument for how the belief system is at fault, whereas your 'Islam a muslim muslim, christianity a christian christian, hari hari' seems to lack a certain something.  But rather than focusing on how belief systems compel people, I sense we're stuck on more primary distinctions between forests and trees.  Along with simple Google search-strings like "anti-Zionist Jew" or sites like 'Israel versus Judaism', there are plenty of references to Jews wise to Zionist claims on the "holy land", and whether or not they rise to the level of dissent we might hope to see  might depend on the level of comprehension demonstrated by outsiders, but regardless I don't see how gross over generalized condemnation of any ethnic categorization stands to defuse volatile circumstances infecting the globe or dethrone instigators orchestrating the problems.

"We" are not stuck on any thing. You might be stuck, attempting to convince a recalcitrant goy, that there is a reason to exert time and energy, parsing out the various jewish approaches to the SAME end, but that is all. Here you are hardily promoting this notion that Zionism is the problem. This is exactly what has been promoted in the alternative controlled media when push came to shove, as more and more people realized the jewish involvement in various massive crimes. And again, you falsely attempt to pigeon hole the logical approach of assessment based upon function.

I can turn a knob and open a door with my left hand, or my right hand. My left hand operates independently of my right hand, and vis versa. The digits on each hand are not identically configured, they are however mirror images. But ultimately, do any of these details regarding the hands MATTER? No, not at all in the context of their function opening the door. They both open the door and the aforementioned details matter not, as they perform the same function. You might be able to muddy the waters for some one else.

Here I think you're really getting at the crux quandry.  Namely the problems military technology introduced with the emergence of the "gunpowder empires" in the 1600's and how Israel has come to assume the role of lead belligerent nation with its nuclear arsenal.  To me, all the surrounding religious contexts are nothing more than tools of mass control disguising the assertion of military technology by the lead gunpowder empires.  So no, I don't expect any anti-Zionists to directly confront or antagonize the nuclear-missile wielding psychopathic nation of Zionists.  But it seems that's just what the Gaza aid flotilla did, and the Palestinians have to do on a daily basis.  So despite my pacifist leanings and incredulity at 'happiness is a warm gun', I recognize the belligerents force the confrontation and its up to the greater portion of humanity to find a way to overcome.  But adhering to the ideological constructs germinated by the belligerents just seems to empower their agenda.

You're about as dishonest an arguer as I've ever come across. You've responded to something I didn't mention. I mentioned:

Answer me this: Will your non-zionists jews really stand up against and raise arms against zionist jews (I can't seem to recall the last armed conflict between zionist and non-zionist jews, maybe you can help me since you seem to know this stuff...)? Or will they side with the rest of the tribe as Jew vs. Goyim? That is all one needs to know when deciding if discriminating between jewish groups is necessary, or a waste.

Nice try jew.    

[ahaze]

Well clearly Israel didn't BAN him [Polanski] from entering that geographic region, in fact, they delayed doing any thing with him and let him slip back out of the country which removed any controversy and burden from them.

Whether Polanski was just trying to pay a short visit or enter Israel for a more extended stay, the rebuff he received would seem to demonstrate that not all Jewish criminals have a safe haven to flee to.

Where's the ad hominem buddy? I'm not remotely interested in wasting my time reading jewish contrived and twisted logic which is attempting to get non-jews to perceive a false divide amongst jews.

Perhaps I gave the prejudice evident in the statement too much credit in categorizing the argument "ad hominem" and it actually deserves more credit as a "counterargument", but it still reads brain dead to me:

And what distinction is that since the Jews in general ALL BENEFIT by having a place to run to after they commit crimes.

And WTF ever about your "twisted logic" attempting to portray the entire J-tribe in fully disclosed collusion with one another.

You're defending those who read the Talmud for one thing. I know what kind of filth is in that text which eliminates any hope of working WITH adherents to its contents.

I merely pointed out a website demonstrating Jews who oppose Israel.  That you jump to spinning it as if an all out defense of people adhering to the the Torah and all its questionable Talmudic interpretation helps me understand your game, but I tend to go further and regard the Bible and Koran as poison to the Abrahamic bone.

"We" are not stuck on any thing. You might be stuck, attempting to convince a recalcitrant goy, that there is a reason to exert time and energy, parsing out the various jewish approaches to the SAME end, but that is all. Here you are hardily promoting this notion that Zionism is the problem. This is exactly what has been promoted in the alternative controlled media when push came to shove, as more and more people realized the jewish involvement in various massive crimes. And again, you falsely attempt to pigeon hole the logical approach of assessment based upon function.

Actually, the only thing I was stuck on was the potential of a constructive dialog.  As far as I understand TIU's tagline "anti zionist think tank", Zionism is indeed the problem, which correlates with my geopolitical observations.  Assertions that 'the forest of Judaism is the problem' reads like the type of cover story used by those instituting pogroms at the expense of oblivious Jews.

And yeah, right "funny shit" all that name calling, reading like the supercilious condescension we could expect from actual J-tribers  masterfully muddying waters.

[jai_mann]

You're completely transparent. Be happy I'm not an admin. I hate dishonest people and I wouldn't tolerate such blatant dishonesty in responses and selective non-responses. Go ahead and shit in the pool, I won't be swimming any longer.  :mrgreen:

[thirdeyewise]

Same hidden hand sign, guess who?..........


http://www.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=685&tbs=isch:1&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&gs_rfai=&q=young%20nietzsche