Netanyahu Wonders Out Loud How He Can Make Holocaust Survivors Into Anti-Semites

[Gary Anderson]

Examples of Globalization Netanyahu Wonders Out Loud How He Can Make Holocaust Survivors Into Anti-Semites



Bibi Netanyahu wondered out loud to his advisers recently that the holocaust survivors are making too much trouble for Israel. He called a meeting of his top confidants to map out a course for blaming the survivors for their anti-Semitism since they are opposing Israeli policy in Gaza.

Bibi was overheard saying, and I paraphrase, that we atheistic Zionists didn't survive the Holocaust by staying and facing Hitler. No, it is because we got out while others were left behind. So these Holocaust survivors and their families mean nothing to us! We have to make them into anti-Semites!

Well, word got out and the average Israelis were offended by Netanyahu's comments. They understand that being anti Zionist cannot make these people anti Semitic. They are the essence of what it means to be Jewish. The Israeli policy of making anti Zionism into anti Semitism by encouraging the people to think they are exactly the same, is widely known.

Anyway, Bibi got mad and tweeted a finger at the world. And the world is reeling.

 

[deltex1]

Disclaimer: This article contains satire and humor, and while loaded with truth in my opinion, it is up to the reader to verify the claims of the article, which are made in jest and are not necessarily proven fact. Some claims are fiction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Don't have time for links to bullshit....there is enuf first person bullshit here already.

 

[Gary Anderson]

Disclaimer: This article contains satire and humor, and while loaded with truth in my opinion, it is up to the reader to verify the claims of the article, which are made in jest and are not necessarily proven fact. Some claims are fiction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Don't have time for links to bullshit....there is enuf first person bullshit here already.

That is what satire is, Einstein.

 

[Gary Anderson]

Amazing how the Zionists are avoiding this article, lol.

 

[Gary Anderson]

Still waiting for the Zionists to take this article on. Makes you all shy away? Then you need to stop being Zionists.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Still waiting for the Zionists to take this article on. Makes you all shy away? Then you need to stop being Zionists.

Insofar as we're talking about Zionism as a nationalist movement promoting the reconstitution of the biblical, pre-Diaspora Jewish homeland, a haven from the anti-Semitism and persecution historically experienced by Jews among the peoples of the rest of the world, I'm okay with that. But then I come from the perspective that God the Creator, you know, being God the Creator, has the uncontestable power and authority to apportion the Earth's territorial reaches and the resources thereof among the creatures of his domain as He sees fit.
______________________________

Also, you asked me about classical liberalism in another place and invited to share my ideology on one of your OPs. Think the Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism on which this nation was founded, the Lockean construct of natural law as extrapolated from the sociopolitical ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's ethical system of thought, coupled with the construct of laissez-faire, as opposed to the obnoxious Rousseauian construct of General Will.
______________________________

On another note: from your work, it doesn't appear that we agree on much, but your stuff is very funny, a pleasure to read.

 

[Gary Anderson]

Still waiting for the Zionists to take this article on. Makes you all shy away? Then you need to stop being Zionists.

Insofar as we're talking about Zionism as a nationalist movement promoting the reconstitution of the biblical, pre-Diaspora Jewish homeland, a haven from the anti-Semitism and persecution historically experienced by Jews among the peoples of the rest of the world, I'm okay with that. But then I come from the perspective that God the Creator, you know, being God the Creator, has the uncontestable power and authority to apportion the Earth's territorial reaches and the resources thereof among the creatures of his domain as He sees fit.
______________________________

Also, you asked me about classical liberalism in another place and invited to share my ideology on one of your OPs. Think the Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism on which this nation was founded, the Lockean construct of natural law as extrapolated from the sociopolitical ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's ethical system of thought, coupled with the construct of laissez-faire, as opposed to the obnoxious Rousseauian construct of General Will.
______________________________

On another note: from your work, it doesn't appear that we agree on much, but your stuff is very funny, a pleasure to read.

I appreciate the complement. Thanks. I would like to address your issues, for debate and clarification.

You assume that the Jewish homeland is biblical. I argue it was biblical then, but isn't now. The atheists who founded Israel did so for their ends of power and greed and globalization. Also, the USA is the best haven for anti Semitism.

God apportions as he sees fit, but judges the Empires that disobey His will. The Tower of Babel was a warning to mankind to acknowledge the sovereignty of nations. Now we have the Tower of Basel and an empire based on finance and the limiting of sovereignty, like the Romans but with money instead of brute force.

Classical liberalism, which supports separation of church and state, as do I and as all Christians should, has degenerated into Libertarianism and the worshiop of self.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Still waiting for the Zionists to take this article on. Makes you all shy away? Then you need to stop being Zionists.

Insofar as we're talking about Zionism as a nationalist movement promoting the reconstitution of the biblical, pre-Diaspora Jewish homeland, a haven from the anti-Semitism and persecution historically experienced by Jews among the peoples of the rest of the world, I'm okay with that. But then I come from the perspective that God the Creator, you know, being God the Creator, has the uncontestable power and authority to apportion the Earth's territorial reaches and the resources thereof among the creatures of his domain as He sees fit.
______________________________

Also, you asked me about classical liberalism in another place and invited to share my ideology on one of your OPs. Think the Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism on which this nation was founded, the Lockean construct of natural law as extrapolated from the sociopolitical ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's ethical system of thought, coupled with the construct of laissez-faire, as opposed to the obnoxious Rousseauian construct of General Will.
______________________________

On another note: from your work, it doesn't appear that we agree on much, but your stuff is very funny, a pleasure to read.

I appreciate the complement. Thanks. I would like to address your issues, for debate and clarification.

You assume that the Jewish homeland is biblical. I argue it was biblical then, but isn't now. The atheists who founded Israel did so for their ends of power and greed and globalization. Also, the USA is the best haven for anti Semitism.

Well, for the sake of debate and clarification, then, let's assume this is true. It remains that Israel's reconstitution in 1948 was foretold in scripture, that God would make it a reality in the end times. The scriptures hold that Palestine is the land set aside by God for the line of Abraham-Isaac-Israel, not for the Edomites, the descendants of Israel's brother Esau, and not for the descendants of Ishmael.

God apportions as he sees fit, but judges the Empires that disobey His will. The Tower of Babel was a warning to mankind to acknowledge the sovereignty of nations. Now we have the Tower of Basel and an empire based on finance and the limiting of sovereignty, like the Romans but with money instead of brute force.

I get that aspect of globalization coupled with the corporatism of the long march of Hegelian progressivism against individualism; notwithstanding, God's will is impervious to the designs of disobedience. I take it that "the Tower of Basel" is an allusion to the Rothschilds and the World Zionist Congress, yes?

Classical liberalism, which supports separation of church and state, as do I and as all Christians should, has degenerated into Libertarianism and the worshiop of self.

Well, certainly, classical liberalism asserts separation of church and state, though not the construct of benevolent despotism, i.e., the construct of Jacobinian/Marxist progressives; but classical liberalism remains classical liberalism, encompassing both contemporary American conservatism and libertarianism.

Excerpt from another post that should be helpful:

In his The Closing of the American Mind, Allan Bloom grasps the true nature of relativism: the epitome of black-and-white think, as it eschews the evaluations of reality's inescapable categorical distinctions.

Notwithstanding, even Bloom falls prey to Critical Theory's deconstructionist assault on individualism proper in his critique of Lockean sociopolitical theory.

The reason Bloom's critique is such a mess is due to his confused notion that the rugged individualism of classical liberalism is akin to something like the rational egoism of Rand's Objectivism, when in fact Lockean natural law does not emphasize the maximization of self-interest at all; rather, it emphasizes the peoples' duty to recognize the ultimate Source and Guarantor of human rights, the boundaries of the individual's inalienable rights relative to the inalienable rights of others and, thereby, avoid the tyrannical, mobocratic trappings of relativism's democratic collectivism. In other words, it emphasizes the tangible means by which the people may mark the proper limits of governmental power!

The ultimate point of the Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism is that human nature is utterly corrupt and can only be effectively checked by the imperatives of liberty, not by the corruptible machinations of the state.

Bloom not only conflates classical individualism with rational egoism, ultimately, he confounds the distinction between the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition and the "liberalism" of the Hegelian dialectic, i.e., the post-modern progressivism of the political left, alternately expressed as fascism or Marxism since the turn of the Twentieth Century.

But in spite of Bloom's failure in this regard, his work is worth reading, as he rightly identifies the essence of relativism, the extent of the problem in higher education and proposes a number of worthwhile solutions. —M. D. Rawlings​

 

[Gary Anderson]

Still waiting for the Zionists to take this article on. Makes you all shy away? Then you need to stop being Zionists.

Insofar as we're talking about Zionism as a nationalist movement promoting the reconstitution of the biblical, pre-Diaspora Jewish homeland, a haven from the anti-Semitism and persecution historically experienced by Jews among the peoples of the rest of the world, I'm okay with that. But then I come from the perspective that God the Creator, you know, being God the Creator, has the uncontestable power and authority to apportion the Earth's territorial reaches and the resources thereof among the creatures of his domain as He sees fit.
______________________________

Also, you asked me about classical liberalism in another place and invited to share my ideology on one of your OPs. Think the Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism on which this nation was founded, the Lockean construct of natural law as extrapolated from the sociopolitical ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's ethical system of thought, coupled with the construct of laissez-faire, as opposed to the obnoxious Rousseauian construct of General Will.
______________________________

On another note: from your work, it doesn't appear that we agree on much, but your stuff is very funny, a pleasure to read.

I appreciate the complement. Thanks. I would like to address your issues, for debate and clarification.

You assume that the Jewish homeland is biblical. I argue it was biblical then, but isn't now. The atheists who founded Israel did so for their ends of power and greed and globalization. Also, the USA is the best haven for anti Semitism.

Well, for the sake of debate and clarification, then, let's assume this is true. It remains that Israel's reconstitution in 1947 was foretold in scripture, that God would make it a reality in the end times. The scriptures hold that Palestine is the land set aside by God for the line of Abraham-Isaac-Israel, not for the Edomites, the descendants of Israel's brother Esau, and not for the descendants of Ishmael.

God apportions as he sees fit, but judges the Empires that disobey His will. The Tower of Babel was a warning to mankind to acknowledge the sovereignty of nations. Now we have the Tower of Basel and an empire based on finance and the limiting of sovereignty, like the Romans but with money instead of brute force.

I get that aspect of globalization coupled with the corporatism of the long march of Hegelian progressivism against individualism; notwithstanding, God's will is impervious to the designs of disobedience. I take it that "the Tower of Basel" is an allusion to the Rothschilds and the World Zionist Congress, yes?

Classical liberalism, which supports separation of church and state, as do I and as all Christians should, has degenerated into Libertarianism and the worshiop of self.

Well, certainly, classical liberalism asserts separation of church and state, though not the construct of benevolent despotism, i.e., the construct of Jacobinian/Marxist progressives; but classical liberalism remains classical liberalism, encompassing both contemporary American conservatism and libertarianism.

Excerpt from another post that should be helpful:

In his The Closing of the American Mind, Allan Bloom grasps the true nature of relativism: the epitome of black-and-white think, as it eschews the evaluations of reality's inescapable categorical distinctions.

Notwithstanding, even Bloom falls prey to Critical Theory's deconstructionist assault on individualism proper in his critique of Lockean sociopolitical theory.

The reason Bloom's critique is such a mess is due to his confused notion that the rugged individualism of classical liberalism is akin to something like the rational egoism of Rand's Objectivism, when in fact Lockean natural law does not emphasize the maximization of self-interest at all; rather, it emphasizes the peoples' duty to recognize the ultimate Source and Guarantor of human rights, the boundaries of the individual's inalienable rights relative to the inalienable rights of others and, thereby, avoid the tyrannical, mobocratic trappings of relativism's democratic collectivism. In other words, it emphasizes the tangible means by which the people may mark the proper limits of governmental power!

The ultimate point of the Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism is that human nature is utterly corrupt and can only be effectively checked by the imperatives of liberty, not by the corruptible machinations of the state.

Bloom not only conflates classical individualism with rational egoism, ultimately, he confounds the distinction between the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition and the "liberalism" of the Hegelian dialectic, i.e., the post-modern progressivism of the political left, alternately expressed as fascism or Marxism since the turn of the Twentieth Century.

But in spite of Bloom's failure in this regard, his work is worth reading, as it rightly identifies the essence of relativism, the extent of the problem in higher education and asserts a number of worthwhile solutions. —M. D. Rawlings​

1. Yes, Basel is a symbol of our world financial system.
2. Christ made the fig tree wither in his ministry. That was Israel I don't believe the fig tree spoken of in Matthew 24 is Israel. The fig tree that is Israel was destined to be destroyed, being rolled away at 70 AD.
3. I don't have confidence in the godless libertarianism that speaks of an invisible hand of market forces always making the community prosper. With deregulation of the banks, that theory was busted up. But I would even cross Locke if he believed you have a right to refuse service in your place of business based on race. If a person is hungry, that is against God, that volunteerism. You ought to feed the person, regardless of race. Schiff says you don't have to and he is a putz.
4. Man's nature is corrupt, so that is why there is government, to force compliance with law. Any teaching that says this is not needed should view a basketball game without referees. It won't work, and it is utopian.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

1. Yes, Basel is a symbol of our world financial system.
2. Christ made the fig tree wither in his ministry. That was Israel I don't believe the fig tree spoken of in Matthew 24 is Israel. The fig tree that is Israel was destined to be destroyed, being rolled away at 70 AD.
3. I don't have confidence in the godless libertarianism that speaks of an invisible hand of market forces always making the community prosper. With deregulation of the banks, that theory was busted up. But I would even cross Locke if he believed you have a right to refuse service in your place of business based on race. If a person is hungry, that is against God, that volunteerism. You ought to feed the person, regardless of race. Schiff says you don't have to and he is a putz.
4. Man's nature is corrupt, so that is why there is government, to force compliance with law. Any teaching that says this is not needed should view a basketball game without referees. It won't work, and it is utopian.

2. Indeed, the utter destruction of Israel and the scattering of its people were foretold in the Bible, but not just by Christ. The Great Diaspora and the eventual reconstitution of Israel is prophesized many times in the Bible, in both the New and the Old Testament. And Revelation makes it abundantly clear that the tribulation period of the Anti-Christ will not occur until after the reconstitution of Israel after a prolonged period exile.

3. Well, once again, godless libertarianism is not classical liberalism, and the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition harks back to the Augustinian natural law of biblical extraction, which, of course, utterly eschews the notion of discrimination on the basis of nature's benign morphological traits/features. Racism is stupid. As for public accommodation: the political left has conflated the imperatives of nature with the impositions of its obnoxious collectivist agenda, asserting a growing number of protected classes of people, sheer ideological contrivances predicated on normative relativism, at the expense of the absolute, inalienable rights of humanity.

4. Wrong. Idolatrous governments exist to impose artificial constraints on the naturally occurring incentives and sanctions, respectively, asserted by unfettered liberty against the banalities of human nature. It's nature and nature's God, not the state, that enforce compliance or else. . . . See my signature. Governments constrained by the imperatives of natural law, i.e., the inalienable rights of the people, serve to promote the liberty and welfare of the people. Ultimately, the people are responsible for enforcing the rule of law, defending their natural rights and prohibiting the government from exceeding the proper limits of its jurisdiction over their lives.

 

[Gary Anderson]

1. Yes, Basel is a symbol of our world financial system.
2. Christ made the fig tree wither in his ministry. That was Israel I don't believe the fig tree spoken of in Matthew 24 is Israel. The fig tree that is Israel was destined to be destroyed, being rolled away at 70 AD.
3. I don't have confidence in the godless libertarianism that speaks of an invisible hand of market forces always making the community prosper. With deregulation of the banks, that theory was busted up. But I would even cross Locke if he believed you have a right to refuse service in your place of business based on race. If a person is hungry, that is against God, that volunteerism. You ought to feed the person, regardless of race. Schiff says you don't have to and he is a putz.
4. Man's nature is corrupt, so that is why there is government, to force compliance with law. Any teaching that says this is not needed should view a basketball game without referees. It won't work, and it is utopian.

2. Indeed, the utter destruction of Israel and the scattering of its people were foretold in the Bible, but not just by Christ. The Great Diaspora and the eventual reconstitution of Israel is prophesized many times in the Bible, in both the New and the Old Testament. And Revelation makes it abundantly clear that the tribulation period of the Anti-Christ will not occur until after the reconstitution of Israel after a prolonged period exile.

3. Well, once again, godless libertarianism is not classical liberalism, and the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition harks back to the Augustinian natural law of biblical extraction, which, of course, utterly eschews the notion of discrimination on the basis of nature's benign morphological traits/features. Racism is stupid. As for public accommodation: the political left has conflated the imperatives of nature with the impositions of its obnoxious collectivist agenda, asserting a growing number of protected classes of people, sheer ideological contrivances predicated on normative relativism, at the expense of the absolute, inalienable rights of humanity.

4. Wrong. Idolatrous governments exist to impose artificial constraints on the naturally occurring incentives and sanctions, respectively, asserted by unfettered liberty against the banalities of human nature. It's nature and nature's God, not the state, that enforce compliance or else. . . . See my signature. Governments constrained by the imperatives of natural law, i.e., the inalienable rights of the people, serve to promote the liberty and welfare of the people. Ultimately, the people are responsible for enforcing the rule of law, defending their natural rights and prohibiting the government from exceeding the proper limits of its jurisdiction over their lives.

2. The eventual reconstitution of Israel in some form is prophesied in the bible, but specifically, the Messiah was to do it. That is why most Jews at the time Zionism was established knew it was wrong and opposed it. And the tribulation already happened, circa 70 AD. I am sorry that such an educated individual as you would be sucked in by Christian Zionism and Dispensationalism: New Covenant Theology Dispensationalism Messianic Judaism Yinon Zionism and: New Covenant Theology Christ and His Ministry the Fulfillment of Daniel 70 Weeks

3. You have a lot of work ahead of you in the effort to educate Libertarians of this age who are godless and angry.

4. There are only two things in this world that constrain evil. Punishment is one, and grace is the other. Law has little power because the conscience of the natural man wants to be broken by the sin nature in that man.

 

[Indeependent]

Amazing how the Zionists are avoiding this article, lol.

Wow, are you an idiot.
Perhaps simply an ignoramus.
Hitler came for the assimilated Jews first.
The shtetl Jews weren't going anywhere because they didn't have the money and they believed God wouldn't allow such a horror to occur.
The physicians, accountants, lawyers, teachers and other professionals were the hardest hit by Hitler.

Of course I realize you don't actually know any Jewish Jews in real life.
Just the Stormfront Jews.

 

[Gary Anderson]

Amazing how the Zionists are avoiding this article, lol.

Wow, are you an idiot.
Perhaps simply an ignoramus.
Hitler came for the assimilated Jews first.
The shtetl Jews weren't going anywhere because they didn't have the money and they believed God wouldn't allow such a horror to occur.
The physicians, accountants, lawyers, teachers and other professionals were the hardest hit by Hitler.

Of course I realize you don't actually know any Jewish Jews in real life.
Just the Stormfront Jews.

Well, my natural father was Jewish and I am adopted. I know plenty of Jews in real life. The Zionists have adopted Nazi tactics and if the Jews are ever thrown under the bus here in the US it will be because Americans find out that the Zionists were involved in 9/11 and Sandy Hook Hoax and the other false flags and if they all learn about Yinon Zionism and the Lavon Affair and the media not reporting squat.

Otherwise, Jews have nothing to worry about.

 

[Gary Anderson]

And that is why Jews must take a stand against Zionism so people know where American Jews stand.