The Jewish Question (JQ) thread

pitbullowner

Kingfisher
I just had a random idea
.


What if Q was the way to get boomers used to the idea that jews were bad.

I mean asking a couple of questions here and there and you could easily find that out.

But we just call them globalists, or elites or whatever faggoty Alex Jones name we're using for them.
 
Last edited:

Ironside

Robin
I just had a random idea
.


What if Q was the way to get boomers used to the idea that jews were bad.

I mean asking a couple of questions here and there and you could easily find that out.

But we just call them globalists, or elites or whatever faggoty Alex Jones name we're using for them.
Q came up because Pizzagate broke and the elites realized that suppressing it would lead to 'normies' digging into it themselves, so they came up a story of how there's a super secret infiltration of undercover patriots that are 'getting to the bottom of it' and organizing secret underground raids and other ludicrous shit, and the boomers predictably went back to eating McDonalds and watching TV with a sense of moral superiority that they were 'fighting the man' (keep in mind their formative years were spent 'fighting the man' by sitting around smoking pot and watching TV).
 
By rational I meant dealing with the points on their merits rather than responding with the fact that someone is Jewish, and with wild guesswork about my motivations.

Given the article I mentioned is a detailed response to McDonald's books can you explain how McDonald's books are themselves a response to the article? Can you or others actually explain on what points Cofnas is wrong?
I'll concede that Cofnas' article spends a lot of effort on appearances and looking neutral and academic. The first and best part of the article is an unexpectedly fair and factual restatement of MacDonald's views, and the article as a whole refrains from the customary hysterical name-calling.

That's unfortunately about all the good there is to say about it. The rest is all the usual nonsense and propaganda.

The main fallacy underlying it is the identification of Jewish identity and interests with Zionism. This is completely wrong, of course, as there is a wide diversity of opinion among Jews about where the Jewish interests lie and how they should be defended, and Zionism is only one possible position among many.

This fallacy leads Cofnas to make the most ridiculous claims, such as that "there is no evidence" that the "Frankfurt school" boys and others were representatives of Jewish power or interests. Cofnas is obviously blind to the Frankfurt school's preoccupation with "anti-Semitism" and "the authoritarian personality".

Even today, one might argue that Zionism is not the mainstream, default form of Jewish identity, that Zionism itself is only a subproduct of the Holocaust religion which is the real number one amongst Jews ; in any case, the Holocaust religion has far more penetrated into the Gentile mind and dominates it far more than Zionism.

can you explain how McDonald's books are themselves a response to the article?
They are response in that they show that what Cofnas actually "answers" a very small part of MacDonald's arguments, and is therefore guilty of what he accuses MacDonald of, cherry picking of sources.

I'll illustrate this with just one example : Freud. Cofnas answers nothing to the evidence MacDonald (and others) have offered that Freud viewed himself as Hannibal against Rome, as a Jew against the Christian world ; in fact he does not even mention it.

Instead of that, Cofnas counters with an anectode about how Freud allegedly refused to condemn an Arab attack on the nascent Israeli state - this is just passive resistance, not even a vocal condemnation of Zionism ; but appearantly this counts as "anti-Jewish activism" to Cofnas. This tells us more about Cofnas than about reality and history : I presume that he is a devout Zionist who cannot conceive that Jewish interests can lie anywhere outside Zionism.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Also, he's very wrong about leftie Jews like Chomsky not being zionists, Chomsky is arguably the greatest gatekeeper for Israel, because he is very trusted and revered by the left. He will criticize Israel all day long, but actively hide their role in 9/11, the JFK, and about the nature and control of the Federal Reserve.


One of the main difference between leftist globalist Tikun Olam Jews like Chomsky and Soros and right wing zionists is that the formers have a different concept of Jewish supremacy that's not specifically anchored in Israel, but international, whereas the Likudnik zionists want to dominate the world from and through Israel.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
This is a very relevant passage from a new Unz article by Gilad Atzmon about the Jewish socialist party, the Bund, which dominated the political scene in Poland and western Russia in the early 1900s. That party, a kind fo precursor to Antifas, had a motto and anthem that advocated the killing of the Tsar:


"In his book Memories, the first Israeli PM and pragmatic early Zionist, David Ben Gurion writes about his early years in Płońsk, Poland.


“For many of us, anti-Semitic feeling had little to do with our (Zionist) dedication. I personally never suffered anti-Semitic persecution. Płońsk was remarkably free of it… There were three main communities: Russians, Jews and Poles. … The number of Jews and Poles in the city were roughly equal, about five thousand each. The Jews, however, formed a compact, centralized group occupying the innermost districts whilst the Poles were more scattered, living in outlying areas and shading off into the peasantry. Consequently, when a gang of Jewish boys met a Polish gang the latter would almost inevitably represent a single suburb and thus be poorer in fighting potential than the Jews who even if their numbers were initially fewer could quickly call on reinforcements from the entire quarter. Far from being afraid of them (the goyim), they were rather afraid of us (the Jews). In general, however, relations were amicable, though distant.” (Memoirs: David Ben-Gurion (1970), p. 36)
Ben Gurion is very explicit when describing the balance of power between Jews and Poles in his town in the early days of the 20th century. “Far from being afraid of them, they were rather afraid of us (the Jews).”

Jews were indeed very powerful in Poland in the first years of the 20th century. The Jewish socialist party, the Bund, was a leading political force in the 1905 Revolution particularly in the Polish areas of the Russian empire. In the early stages of that Revolution, the Bund’s military wing was the strongest revolutionary force in Western Russia.

The Vow, the Bund’s anthem didn’t leave much room for imagination, it declared war and practically sentenced to death those who didn’t fit with their political agenda:

“We swear our stalwart hate persists,
Of those who rob and kill the poor:
The Tsar, the masters, capitalists.
Our vengeance will be swift and sure.

So swear together to live or die!”

“To wage the holy war we vow,
Until right triumphs over wrong.
No Midas, master, noble now –
The humble equal to the strong.
So swear together to live or die!”


The Bund was extremely confident of its power. In the autumn of 1933 it issued a call to the Polish public to boycott goods from Germany in protest of Hitler and the NSDAP. In December 1938 and January 1939, in the last Polish municipal elections before the start of WWII, the Bund received the largest segment of the Jewish vote. In 89 towns, one-third elected Bund majorities. In Warsaw, the Bund won 61.7% of the votes cast for Jewish parties, taking 17 of the 20 municipal council seats won by Jewish parties. In Łódź the Bund won 57.4% (11 of 17 seats won by Jewish parties).

We now know that this sense of victorious Jewish empowerment ended shortly after these elections. The East European and Polish Jewish communities suffered greatly during WWII. The Bund was completely wiped out during the war. For one reason or another and, as problematic as it may be for some, at least in the early stages of the war, some Poles, Ukrainians and other East European nationalists saw the Nazis as their ‘liberators.’ They apparently weren’t blind to the reality that was depicted by Ben Gurion.

This sense of Jewish political and social empowerment that is portrayed in Ben Gurion’s Memories and in the story of the Bund created a problematic pattern, as it clearly led to some tragic consequences."

 

tomtud

Pelican

911

Peacock
Gold Member

Article from 1954 discussing the Jewish marxists using the blacks as pawns to create social unrest at the time. for example, segregation of schools being made illegal. More so, the Radek directive from 1921 to create racial strife. Anyhow is it full of truths, semi truths or garbage it is an interesting read.
Not much garbage in that article actually, it is written by Eustace Mullins, a leading American intellectual who produces solid research.

Interesting excerpt from that article:


1595983263631.png
 
Not much garbage in that article actually, it is written by Eustace Mullins, a leading American intellectual who produces solid research.

Interesting excerpt from that article:


View attachment 24222
Have you read the book White Power by George Lincoln Rockwell?

There is a chapter titled The Black Plague that goes into a lot of detail with regard to our situation with blacks in the US.
 

pitbullowner

Kingfisher
Top