THE JOOS

Guys, honest question

THE JOOS

How is Zionism different from white nationalism?

thats the answer @Abel

Zionism is racist

I'm pro Israel, I think it's a great country

Though it's done shady shit

im not against isreal

But Zionism seems awfully similar to white nationalism, except with Jews instead of Whites

I'm "anti-Israel" but pro Jew.

i have no beef with them but .... the joos

Jews are whites.,

Jews are like elves

i honestly dont care too much about the joos

i think the bigger problem is soros and the obamss

Indians are like dwarves

Any billionaire that funds politics is a problem. Why focus on only one guy?

Zionists want a homeland for Jews. It doesn't necessarily mean that other people can't live there too.

Bannon is cool

dude i fucking swear to go if i was american indian i would so fucking abuse my privelage

Oh, I don't mean fake indian

I mean actual indian

Like what? live in the poorest communities in America? Die young?

Damn red skins culturally appropriating identities smh

Wait is that racist

I'm sorry to any red people here

dude fuck off american indians have casinos and sheet

they rich niggah

So? You seriously think the average tribal member gets that money?

Are you implying that Musk was saying the Jews own the press rather than 'powerful people' as was being discussed?

fuck no

I'd love to be American and black

"They rich" meaning the corrupt leadership, while the rest suffer in extreme third world poverty?

They have so much privilege

Literal privilege

@Schedrevka wtf do you think im the mainstream media i would never assume that oh wait ...............

@Abel Imagine how much priv you would have if your were a gay trans black native american female

Hell yeah

Only benefit I have is next to free healthcare.

It was pretty funny how many verified Twitter users with Jewish names dog-piled Musk after his 'Who owns the media?' tweet.

das wat im talking about being poor and under representive is the new Kool Kids Klub KKK

What club do racist scientists join

he was responding to someone saying "powerful people" are opposed to the free press
he meant powerful people owns the media

@Abel dude scientist arent lefties

Potassium Potassium Potassium

I'm sorry I'll go kill myself now

I don't get it

Potassium is represented by K

On the periodic table

oh

LOLOLOL

Potassium KKK

Hitler

1488

Conspiracy

I wonder, with net neutrality gone, won't ISPs fuck with the Infowars website in America?

He's basically done for, isn't he?

He's on alt-tech sites.

Well any website that directly challenges them will be wiped

https://youtu.be/G-4u5L4um0c

A classic

I swear, Americans are becoming what India used to be

And we are becoming America

Especially with the shit California is doing

🤔

Do you guys think states like Texas may split from America in the coming decades?

We don't street shit

Why would Texas rebel against GOP hegemony?

All the low-key rebellion is happening in blue states.

If all the states split up they’d probably get even less recognition

For some reason I recalled an old video

Of the greatest hero of our time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU4Glcq69GM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oohb1CAAcOE

The US wouldn't allow TX to secede. The US has too much to lose economically.

Every methods to protect twitter from 24/7 snooping... yeah but from who? Twitter or United States?

So Twitter thinks it is okay for them to snoop on us, but it isn't okay United States can?

It can't not allow it to recede though. Isn't it legal for an America state to do a referendum and leave?

I find that hypocritical, I hope both understand neither has the right.

But apparently it is okay for twitter.

It takes an act of Congress for a state to leave.

Actually Texas does have the right to break away from United States, but it would be ill advised to door so when Mexico right next do wants Texas really badly.

They even stated before that they want their former land back, even though it was bought and paid for by United States.

Texas has the right to split into 5 different states if it wants, but no, while it's something of a gray area most experts agree it does not have the right to secede, and that in practice it would absolutely not be granted the privilege

It has the right actually.

To be part of the union, they kept the right to leave United States.

It was on the first and founding agreement of being part of United States.

It hasn't change since then.

Technically they do have the right to secede.

Texas tried to secede during the Civil War. It was not granted that right.

No... they joined the confederates.

That was a war against the confederates, not against texas itself.

They did both.

I used to think Texas was crazy for that shit.

Now, seeing how LIBTAAAAHHHHHDS behave, I totally totally get it.

Texas. I am so sorry.

I understand now.

Maybe if Sam Houston had stayed in power then we would potentially have the right to secede, but the precedent has been set.

Future US Congresses could revise the Texas statehood law to remove the 5-state plan anyway.

I honestly didn't like the idea of Texas leaving United States, but I do understand and respect their right too. I have members of my family in Texas.

Precedent doesn't super-secede the agreement between Texas and United States.

Be like United States can't be a nation because it became a normal thing that illegal immigrants are flooding into our borders, that we must break up our borders to follow precedent.

It does. The Supreme Court ruled that states don't have that option in Texas vs White.

Only precedent matters when it comes to a law ruled on by supreme court.

A LAW

Constitution Law to be exact.

Right now free movement between US states is about as problematic for the US as Schengen for the EU.

Hey guys

I don’t like shots

You can argue that Texas by law has the right to secede, but we already tried doing that by the books and the US said no.

Shots... um so what. Just means your immunity would be poor against future infections.

What was the country which made a 3foot fence in their borders and reduced illegal immigration by 95%?

That is your choice.

Shots like

Cinnamon alcohol

Maybe if something changed that made the US not want to own Texas, but that isn't a likely scenario

FIREBALLLLL

it’s actually a generic brand

Man my phone is so nice for spelling things

You were told by Democrats who consistently disregard the constitution of our nation, why do you think they would care for the Texas law that allows them to secede.

Hungary stopped illegal migration by building a wall, more or less.

Democrat congress.

Nah, it was a fence

Just a fence

It was a physical barrier.

Think about the emotional barriers

I found that to be a poor ruling by the Democrats congress and Democrat leaning Supreme court.

That infringed upon Texas right.

I remember Tim bringing it up on a live stream months ago

Why not create a dome that we put all immigrants into

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8d-apDo98Q

Then we turn it into a human hamster ball

I like how he just pulls out his old and worn constitution.

XD

I actually really like Kavanaugh from what I've seen

He's a nice guy

I actually like him because he is a constitutionalist.

Aren't most conservatives constitutionalists?

Most are.

Reason I am a Atheist, independent constitutionalist... I get along great with them.

As long as they don't attack me for being a Atheist.

I don't call myself an atheist anymore because most atheists aren't atheist

They're anti theist

And I don't like that

Constitutionalism is meaningless to me when it revolves entirely around the whims of federal judges.

Atheist was a term for pegans back then, but non-believers were then lumped in it.

I like Hitchens and Dawkins and I agree with them a lot

So I am like eh.. whatever, I will embrace the name.

But they're wrong when they claim religion can only do harm

Every human and type of ideology can cause harm.

An Atheist is someone like Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson

To what degree the harm is caused depends on the person who follows that ideology.

Or Jonathan Haidt

It depends on the people who are a part of that ideology or religion.

An anti theist is Matt Dilahunty

I don't believe in God/gods so I call myself atheist because it is descriptive of that. Doesn't really bother me if there are assholes or idiots who use the same title.

That is why people seem to misunderstand us Atheists.

They try to think of us as a collective.

When we are individuals.

Think of it this way, imagine the KKK call themselves feminists

And you call yourself a feminist

When you say you're a feminist, you're automatically lumped in with the KKK

And the person you're talking to, goes immediately on the offensive

I tell people I am a Atheist, they automatically think I am a Liberal left.

I am like woah woah, I am a independent.

I think a lot of younger and some older atheists are super edgy because they feel betrayed by the upbringing, and the ones who got over it or never felt that way just don't feel the need to bring it up much.

I don't give a crap for the left, hell I don't want to be associated with them.

I just want them to call themselves anti thesists and not pollute the term atheist

Because I want to be an atheist. I want to study and analyse religions

I believe it can do a ton of good

To me... religion is just a primitive way of understanding the world. Best way to describe it... a lot of unknowns were associated to deities.

That's how I see it as well for the most part.

And that's what I disagree with.

The more we learn about the world around us, the more we kill off these so called deities.

Think about it.

More than that, though

I think philosophy is at odds with nature.

Let's take the Abrahamic story

Why is god such a hypocrite?

The fact that we can have a civil discussion and not rip each other's throats out

And why have these stories stayed the same for thousands of years?

That's not natural, but I'd consider it as good.

Atleast that element of it

Religion is also a way of creating social codes and cohesion. A way of controlling people, and I don't mean that in a bad way, it was one that I think probably did a lot of good for our ancestors. Same way modern laws are a way of controlling people.

There is a small grain of truth to most religious stories, but those who written them down took a lot of creative liberties to them.

i think religion has a variety of good and bad aspects

The entire point of Religion is to put a person beholden to a consistent higher power.

I don't think religious stories were ever intended to be a way of understanding the world as we think of it

Because being beholden to your fellow man and your own legacy beyond your own life is a MUCH HARDER thing to ask.

I think they were designed to impart values that were easily impressed upon people through stories than complicated philosophy

Some were. Like Zeus throwing lightning bolts. "well how else could you explain that? No human could ever understand where those come from so it MUST be Zeus"

and yeah the fear of going to hell is a good way to get people to effectively police themselves, which is kind of important in a world with very primitive investigatory methods

Well, yes. But that explanation branches off of 'being beholden to a higher power'.

Especially during the times when most civilizations used word of mouth

I love the example of Hinduism. People mistake it for a pagan religion like the Greek and Roman religions

It's anything but that

I believe it can be said that Christianity makes for good policy, but bad politics.

I doubt it was ever meant as political advice

Mmm... I'd argue with you on that.

Like Islam was, for instance

The story of Jesus Christ was wrought with politics.

Commandments are just laws that come from a different place

The politics of the time.

@Schedrevka Are they laws, or morals?

The adoption of Catholicism was a political move.

They're literally what you're commanded to do. Hence the name.

The King James Bible came about from a political schism.

And then there's stuff like leviticus which is not only the rules but also the punishments, but there's some argument for that not being 'Christian'. Jesus was kind of inconsistent about whether he was there to replace the old laws or not

If you look at the Bible purely as a record of the life of Jesus, you're missing a lot of the background.

Or maybe the Bible is just inconsistent about what he said

Or, maybe, it was the root Church that interpreted it incorrectly.

i imagine the bible has been reinterpreted and rewritten enough that there isn't an intact original sentence in the whole thing

Catholicism got a bad read from the start.

Then there's the whole issue with the church deciding at different times what is and isn't canon.

I work on occasion with a Biblical Scholar.

Specifically, this person is a 'Messianic Jew'

That is to say, he follows Jewish tradition as Jesus himself did.

Y'all know that the Hebrew Aleph means head?

Ever wonder why this language lacks that dimension? The legend of symbols?

Y'know, the part of the map that tells you what each drawing means.

You mean Greek letters?

Naw those were basic af at first, all their meaning grew from numerical order implication

Excuse me, Latin alphabet.

That one incorporated some kind of coding, some precursor of cockney rhyming slang.

but still, numbers mainly.

That's what I'm saying, the Western one's flat out blank

This was not a bolt from an Ikea end table

Easy

it was not misplaced and shrugged about

Mormons weren’t right

Ancient Jews didn’t sail to America

My cat's breath smells like cat food?

> people not understanding that they're supposed to be in talk room 4

What's wrong with kids these days

>people even going into a vc

^

even the initials spell masturbation to me lmao

What are you going on about?

V to me is hand, C to me is subjective

A ladder, B tension, I got em all worked out.

It makes English a whole lot funnier.

Listen cuck

If I want to play bass in VC I can

Why is “b” tension?

Bow and arrow visually, the power behind it is tension

lure and repulsion in balance

I think I see what you mean

This one would be the Divine Intellect interpretation, and this would be one of three parts of Anglo-noetic initial theory.

or I'm nuts. Either way. lol