Of Popes and Jews
Dennis Mangan asks, Is the Pope Catholic?, and notes:
Some conservatives and Catholics seem to believe that non-Catholics shouldn't criticize the Pope and his opinions.
I made several comments there before realizing it was more appropriate to recast them, and some further comments, into a post here.
The trick is to frame your critique in moral terms, taking for granted that the sensibilities and interests of your group trump all others. It also helps if the media is in your pocket and takes your side.Revised Catholic prayer troubles some rabbis, Sun Journal, Feb 2008.
Pope under fire for Yad Vashem speech, Jerusalem Post, May 2009.
US Jewish leaders denounce Catholic sermon, The Guardian, Apr 2010.
Jews Worried By Vatican Gesture To Traditionalists, Huffington Post, Sep 2011.
Anti-Semite is among papal candidates, MiamiHerald.com, Feb 2013.
Why the new pope matters to Jews, Fox News, March 2013.
Jews will be even less of a priority for the next Pope, Haaretz Daily Newspaper, March 2013.
You should never be put off from criticizing another group just because you don't belong. But remember you can always join a more universalist group to pursue your more particularist agenda from within.
The role of Jewish converts to Catholicism in changing traditional Catholic teachings on Jews, The Occidental Observer.
I have spoken before about the important distinction between universalism versus particularism (Morals, Morality and Moralizing and Universalism and Particularism).
One particularly popular jewish trope is that the jews have no pope. Like most jewish tropes about jews, this is a distortion of reality. The relationship between jews and popes is fascinating, and telling, specifically because the pope supposedly isn't a jew, because of the pretense that jewishness is entirely about religion (ideology) not peoplehood (biology), and because the usual jewish rhetoric about mutual respect and tolerance is, in practice, entirely one-sided.
First of all, the fact that the Catholic pope isn't a jew does not keep jews, big or small, from criticizing him, or other religious leaders for that matter. The underlying presumption is that even non-jews can and should be doing more to serve the best interests of jews. Second, there is organized jewry, a vast collective network that is in many ways more powerful, and more likely to use that power to promote particularist ends, than organized Christianity is. More broadly, there are thousands of jews who act, with and without the consent of organized jewry, as if they were superpopes, in the sense that they advocate more tirelessly and vociferously for the best interests of their group than any recent pope does for his.
Consider, for example, Alan Dershowitz, the author of the letter to the editor in the Miami Herald linked above. Dershowitz is usually described as a lawyer or professor and claims he isn't particularly religious. Yet his passion and efforts in favor of his own people (as a people, not as a religion) is so strong that, like thousands of other jews, he feels morally capable, entitled even, to publicly pass judgment on Christians and their leaders. In the minds of jews like Dershowitz, no Christian or pope comes before, or even equates, to them or their group.
New pope, Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina, has Jewish connections, JTA Jewish & Israel News.A good pope, from the shamelessly particularist point of view of jews, should have "a personal connection to the Jewish people".
Note that JTA, aiming at a jewish audience, didn't pretend it was about a spiritual connection to the jewish faith.
This is just one jewish answer to the question, implicit in this case, "Will this new pope be good for the jews?" Right now many other jews are undoubtedly asking and answering this same question more or less explicitly. Two jews, three opinions about what the pope could do to better "connect with the jewish people".
Society of Jesus, Wikipedia:Although in the first 30 years of the existence of the Society of Jesus there were many Jesuit conversos (Catholic-convert Jews),[50] an anti-converso faction led to the Decree de genere (1593) which proclaimed that either Jewish or Muslim ancestry, no matter how distant, was an insurmountable impediment for admission to the Society of Jesus.[51] The 16th-century Decree de genere remained in exclusive force until the 20th century, when it was repealed in 1946.[52]
The Jesuits, Jew or Not Jew:
The Jesuits, a Catholic order that was established in 1534, emphasized education, and tried to draw the brightest academics. (You know what that means: Jews!) They welcomed conversos with open arms, and, as a result, many prominent early Jesuits had Jewish heritage. The list includes Juan Alfonso de Polanco, the secretary and ghostwriter of the order's founder, as well as the second Superior General, Diego Lainez.
"Conversion" didn't used to fool Christians into thinking that jews stopped being jews. It still doesn't fool the editors at Jew or Not Jew.
I think it's safe to say that the influence of crypto-jews/conversos/marranos, whether on Jesuits or Christianity as a whole, has been greater than most contemporary Christians are aware of. The Occidental Observer article linked above makes a good case that the relatively recent shift in popular perception of morality, specifically in favor of jews, is both evidence of and a product of jewish influence.
The image source is GreenKeit hits the Vatican?, Jewlicious THE Jewish Blog. Paranoia disguised as mockery, or vice versa, this is yet another perfectly typical example of jewish attitudes regarding popes and Christians. HaShem is a reminder how distinct the jewish and Catholic conceptions of god are.
Labels: anti-christian, dennis mangan, jewish influence
posted by Tanstaafl at 3/14/2013 01:33:00 PM
35 Comments:
Jews have been trying to 'judaize' christianity since the beginning, just read John Chrysoton and Martin Luther.
Vatican II was made by crypto-jews inside the Church:
http://forward.com/articles/159955/converts-who-changed-the-church/?p=all#ixzz22tvGsMUu
This is from jewish newspaper!
It seems to us that Judaism operates both as Religion and Race in its own religio-racial (racial-religious?) interests. Its prmary technique is that of hypocrisy and deception, and the oft-used strategy of Divide-and-Conquer.
When their opponents try uniting as a race, the Judaists divide their opponents under the pretext of uniting them in religion.
Church as well as Islam have been their useful tools. Entering these religious organizations as converts and then manipulating their ideology (from within) seems a common practice. And then unsuspecting religious followers become the fighters for Judaists. Also, since these fighters come from the "other" they can easily be sacrificed as also hailed as martyrs to perpetrate their legacy.
So when the Church conducts inquisitions, the Arab-Moors are their saviors, and when Islam threatens them, the White-Church are their saviors.
Similarly, when their opponents try uniting as a religion, the Judaists divide their opponents under the garb of uniting them as "races".
Thus as a racial-religious team the Judaists divide others both as races and religions. Theology and Atheism (Marxism) remain useful tools in this game.
I assume that the pope, just like any others in powerful positions, in western civilization is anti-white. I will think differently only if he comes straight out and opposes the genocide of white children. Everything else, "the poor" gay marriage, etc. is a side show.
<a href="http://www.adl.org/press-center/press-releases/interfaith/adl-congratulates-new-pope-francis.html>ADL Congratulates New Pope Francis</a>
Note this:
<i>He has celebrated various Jewish holidays with the Argentinian Jewish community, including Chanukah where he lit a candle on the menorah, attended a Buenos Aires synagogue for Slichot, a pre-Rosh Hashana service, the Jewish New Year, as well as a commemoration of Kristallnacht, the wave of violent Nazi attacks against Jews before World War II.
In 2010, during a commemoration of the 1994 bombing, Cardinal Bergoglio called it “a house of solidarity” and added “God bless them and help them accomplish their work,” which showed his dedication and support in standing up against extremism.</i>
It is heresy for any Catholic to worship at any non-Catholic religious service.
Pope Francis is not the first, Benedict XVI and John Paul II also worshipped at Jewish services (as well as many other religious services like Buddhist and Hindu).
It is also a great heresy to support and urge on any non-Catholic religion, as Pope Francis did by stating "“God bless them and help them accomplish their work,”
From a Catholic perspective these acts alone demonstrate that Pope Francis is a heretic and is not Pope. Of course, most Catholics would reject this fact, but then, they are heretics as well. As were the preceding two Popes.
Just a Catholic perspective, I don't expect anyone here to share it.
The Catholic church has gradually abandoned its European traditions and returned to its Biblical/jewish roots, i.e. it has become yet another jewish supremacist organization.
The Catholic church has gradually abandoned its European traditions...
I would say it, the leaders - not the Church - abandoned the Faith in one fell swoop with Vatican II.
returned to its Biblical/jewish roots,...
Christianity is not rooted in Judaism. The people we call Jews rejected Christ and thus hold a special place amongst all the non-Catholic religions in that they specifically, and categorically, rejected and continue to reject, Christ. By definition they are anti-Christ.
it has become yet another jewish supremacist organization.
The leaders and many churches are manifestations of Jewish supremacy. The Church is not, and never will be. Christ said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it", that is against the Church.
The "gates of hell" is defined as heresy. So, whilst the Church is represented today by heretics, as she was in the past at certain times, they shall not prevail.
If the following premises are made:
1. The Bible = Old Testament + The Gospels + The rest of the material.
2. The Old Testament can be seen as (more or less) derived from Jewish Bible.
3. Teachings of Jesus of Nazarene (only the Gospels, including the "deleted" ones) can be seen as the message of Christ.
4. Jews can be assumed as those who view the two testaments as opposites and therefore rejected Jesus (and his message) to be anti-Jewish-Bible.
5. The rest of the Bible (or Bibles if there are many versions) can be seen as an attempt to tie the two testaments together and provide a theology.
Then, as a somewhat approximate conclusion, it must be convenient to visualize Jews (Judaism=Jewish Teachings) and Jesus the Christ (and Christianity as the teachings of the Christ) as two ends and various Church denominations lying somewhere in between.
If this is so, then getting closer to Christ (and His teachings) must be a better way to be a "true Christian".
Further, in such a view, if "blessing non-Catholics" is a heresy (say Catholic-heresy = something that is seen as heresy by the Catholic-Church), then even Catholic Church will be a true-Christian-heresy (something seen as heresy by someone who treats the message of the Christ as the highest (and only) authority).
More over, in such a view, even the removal of some of the Gospels (by the Church from the Bible) can be seen as an attempt to force the teachings of Christ in conformity with the Jewsih-Bible (hence a sort of Jewish conspiracy).
In such a scenario, it might be fruitful to try and collect all the gospels (including the rejected and trying to rediscover the lost gospels) and then understand these gospels in themselves. That might make one a truer Christian as it were.
Are there people who have investigated in such a manner? What are their findings?
Thanks
The new Pope's "credentials"
http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com.br/2013/03/pope-francis-of-holocaust.html
http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com.br/2013/03/pope-francis-sent-his-priests-to-chabad.html
http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com.br/2013/03/pope-francis-baptizes-bankers-rabbis.html
Pope Francis, friend of Jews, Muslims and all non-Catholics, in that order:
The Shoa Pope
Friend of Islam
Leader of World non_catholic churches
As the first article concludes:
Some 40 percent of the world’s Catholics live in Latin America, which is said to be rapidly losing adherents.
Gee, why would that be? Maybe it has something to do with Pope Francis doing anything for anyone - except the Catholic Church and those who remain faithful?
Can whites be much concerned about whether other whites are Catholic or not, or religious or not, when we don't have a home anywhere on the planet?
I think it's important to remember that it was the Catholic Church (pre-vatican II of course)that organised the defense of Europe against the muslim invaders. The protestants didn't want to know.
It was the protestants that emancipated the jews. The jews had been banned from Catholic England for 400 years.It was Oliver Cromewell financed by Amsterdam jews who let them in after the civil war.
The majority of Catholic or Orthodox regions have been forced to expel the jews at one stage. Has a protestant region ever expelled them?
Liberal atheistic societies are already jewish societies.
So I think the spiritual beliefs of a society are important because I think they provide the glue to take on the most cohesive ethno-religios group that exists.
I really recommend William Cobbett's "The History Of the Protestant Reformation in England and Ireland'. Cobbett was a Protestant but his judgement of the effects of the Protestant Reformation in England is scathing and unlike the one you read about in most history books.
He has a wonderful sarcastic,witty style of writing which is very modern.
I am 55 years old and was fortunate enough to be baptized and bought up on the tail end of the traditional Tridentine /Latin church. My parents stopped going to church in the late 1960’s because of the radical changes that were introduced in the wake of the infamous Vatican II Council.
To cut a long story short as part of my spiritual journey ,in my early twenties I came to reject Christ and Christianity altogether and ended up formally converting to Orthodox Judaism through the orthodox Beth Din(Jewish court) in Sydney Australia. I wore the black Hasidic clothing, grew the peyot(side curls) and the whole package.
As an “insider” I saw first hand the virulent anti-Gentile and anti-Christian mindset that dominates Judaism. I witnessed Jews spitting on the floor of a synagogue in 20th century Australia during the Shacharith service(morning prayers) when the words –“and they(the Christians) pray to a god that cannot save”; I witnessed month after month calendars from an orthodox group based in Israel, Yad L’Chaim, posted up on the walls of Sydney synagogues bragging of their burnings of the New Testament; I studied with rabbis Talmudic and Hassidic texts teaching of the sub-human character of the goyim. And the list goes on.
In time, thank God, I rejected and left Judaism, sadder(mainly with my own self, for being so stupid and naïve) , cynical and somewhat wiser concerning foreign cultures.
It is because of my first hand experiences that I not only have no time for Judasim, Zionism and the state of Israel, but needless to say I have no time whatsoever for Multiculturalism. Judaism(and Zionism) is an ideology that is foreign, as well as being hostile, to western Christian civilization, no less than Islam is. This is why I also came to a parting of the ways in recent years with the Counter-Jihad movement, which in Australia, as elsewhere in the world, is dominated by goy Zionists.
Jews are the original and archetypical non-assimilating peoples, in other words ‘multiculturalism’ originated with the Jews, little wonder they have played such an important role in promoting M.C. in Western countries.
The pro-Jewish position that has been adopted by much of the Church today began with the Protestant sects that took on Dispensationalism and Christian Zionsm in the mid 19th century. The Roman Catholic Church, while not accepting the specific doctrine of Christian Zionism, became more pro-Jewish in the wake of Vatican II, a move that was no doubt aided by the guilt trip forced upon the Western nations because of World War II, or at least a certain biased “historical” interpretation of that conflict.
Just as a follow up to my first comment.Regarding the second comment made by ‘Anonymous’ – “The Bible says "God will bless those who bless Israel", and most Christians take that to heart.”
No doubt the Bible verse that Anonymous is referring to is the one favored by the heretical, non-Bible believing, judaized Christian Zionists , Genesis 12:3. This is the verse that a seeming million blog sites are referencing when you see the Israeli flag with the caption –“I stand with Israel – Gen. 12:3”
Both the Old Testament and the New interpret this verse as referring not to the physical descendents of Abraham, in other words the Israelites or Jews, but to the spiritual descendents of Abraham through the promised Messiah, that is – the Christians.
The Christian Right, dominated as it is by dispensationalism and its, bastard spawn- Christian Zionism, is no less heretical and false as the Christian Left.
A large part of the confusion for many people, and I fell into this trap many years ago due to the influence of the so-called Hebrew Roots Movement, is that because the Old Testament figures, such as Moses, David, Solomon, and all the prophets, as well as Jesus and the apostles were “Jewish” then Christianity has Jewish roots that we should all acknowledge and respect, or more precisely fall down genuflect before.
This of course is nonsense, while all the good guys of the Old Testament were racial “Jews”, or more precisely Hebrews, there religion was Messianic Judaism- in that they were all preaching about and looking forward to the Messiah.
Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament! While it has its roots in the distorted interpretation of the Pharisees, it is largely as post Christian religion based on the Talmudic interpretation of the O.T. This just part of the reason why there can be no such thing as a “Judeo-Christian” tradition or culture, term that makes me at once violent sick and enraged. It is a total mystery to me why the Christian Zionists and the Counter-Jihad movement cannot see that Judaism is just as false and destructive religion as Islam and any pagan religion. It is a “mystery” that can only be explained by spiritual blindess, induced by accepting heretical teaching.
So, sad to say, it is not just Western secular,liberal society that needs to undergo a severe and unflinching reformation, or purge, if we are even to begin to turn things around, much of the Church, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, need to be disciplined and purged as well. In fact from a traditional Christian perspective the reformation of society must begin with the Church.
To finish, I just want to briefly touch on the issue of race, specifically of course my own white race. I find it particularly galling and enraging that “bible believing” Christian Zionists are so ready to quote(even if it is to misinterpret) Genesis 12:3 as referring to blessings bestowed on the “Jews”, but are entirely and blissfully ignorant of the blessings bestowed upon the white, and I stress white, gentiles of the world, in Genesis 9:25-27, blessings that were pronounced generations before the advent of Abraham and the blessings of Genesis 12:3. In fact the blessings of Genesis 12:3 are a affirmation and consolidation of the blessings of Japeth in Gen. 9:25 -27.
Japeth, one of the sons of Noah, is the ancestor of the white European peoples of the earth. One of Japeth descendents was Yavan (Javan) the ‘father’ of the Greek peoples, among others(Genesis 10:2-5). Even the Rabbinic writings admits this
It is no coincidence that so many of the letters of Saint Paul were addressed to Greek churches. It is no coincidence, but part and parcel of Divine providence, that Christianity was taken to heart so much among the white European peoples of the earth and was then spread right around the entire world by the same peoples.
So don’t tell me race does not matter.
I apologise for the length of this comment as well as for it being so “theological”, however that is the essence of the featured article.
At the risk of going against the advice given in Mathew 7:6, the following excerpt from an article by Marcelo Gonzalez of Panorama Catolico Internacional sheds some light on the new Pope:
"Of all the unthinkable candidates, Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Pope Francis) is perhaps the worst. Not because he openly professes doctrines against the faith and morals, but because, judging from his work as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, faith and morals seem to have been irrelevant to him. A sworn enemy of the traditional mass, he has only allowed imitations of it in the hands of declared enemies of the ancient liturgy. He has persecuted every single priest who made an effort to wear a cassock, preach with firmness, or that was simply interested in Summorum Pontificum (the document that authorises priests to use the old Latin rite at will).
"Famous for his inconsistency (at times for the unintelligibility of his addresses and homilies), accustomed to the use of coarse, demagogical and ambiguous expressions, it cannot be said that his magisterium is heterodox, but rather nonexistent for how confusing it is.
"He has not missed any occasion for holding acts in which he lent his cathedral to Protestants, Muslims, Jews and even to partisan groups in the name of an impossible and unnecessary inter-religious dialogue. He is famous for his meetings with Protestants in the Luna Park arena where ... he was 'blessed' by Protestant ministers in a common act of worship in which he, in practice, accepted the validity of the 'powers' of the television pastors.
"This election is incomprehensible: he is not a polyglot, he has no curial experience, he does not shine for his sanctity, he is loose in doctrine and liturgy, he has not fought against abortion and only very weakly against homosexual 'marriage', he has no manners to honour the pontifical throne. He has never fought for anything else than to remain in positions of power. It really cannot be what Benedict wanted for the church. And he does not seem to have any of the conditions required to continue his work.
"May God help His church. One can never dismiss, as humanly hard as it may seem, the possibility of a conversion ... nonetheless, the future terrifies us."
A song to listen to with Cam's post:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zm4ge8iOcoY
Here's the link to Cam's post, which he has sent me:
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-horror-buenos-aires-journalist.html
Note, though: the Catholic Church has been under siege since John XXIII. Contrary to Marcelo Gonzalez the Catholic Church (the one true faith) has been long forgone.
Pat Hannagan, 'Marcelo Gonzalez' is a pen name of mine.
I moonlight (between orgy ladden drunken benders) as one of the foremost authorities on South American Traditionalist Catholicism. Indeed I, or should a say Marcelo, has been labeled 'the great White hope of traditionalist minded Southern Hemisphere Catholics'. Perhaps not the catchiest nickname for our brevity minded northern friends, but i digress (BID).
May you dine in hell with your Judeo-Protestant comrades for your criticism!
What ironbark jack said...
I agree that Judaism is not genetic.
I was raised Catholic. The head of my family is very successful and well known. I grew up in extreme privilege. It has taken me nearly 30 years of adulthood to wash the psychological remnant of feeling "chosen" because of the success of my family. That somehow I was special because someone in my family was special. It fucks you up. It's a poison pill, almost impossible to let go of. This poison pill warps your entire worldview. It turns you into an "other," in spite of yourself. It obviously doesn't happen to everyone, but it can happen.
It was an extremely painful and long process to shake it. I can see why many Jews who "convert" don't make it. But it's not because it's genetic. It's because the poison pill of being "chosen," by the world or by God, is basically a form of brain damage. Most of the time there will always be something back in there that you will never shake, no matter how hard you try.
I'm no Jew, but in essence, I've had the same spiritual problem. And it's not genetic. It's just bloody impossible to shake. Especially if it's working for you.
Most of the time there will always be something back in there that you will never shake, no matter how hard you try.
Wouldn't you then call this part genetic? Is an atheist jew not a jew?
In fact the mere phenomenon of pseudo-'converts', marranos in catholicism or donmeh in islam, should give credence to the notion that is there is something in jewishness beyond religion/culture.
It's not a matter of absolute determinism, but it is common sense that a population which has been practicing thorough inbreeding for centuries must have a biological binding component among its members.
A buddhist Navajo is still a Navajo, is he not?
Besides, modern research shows that even political ideologies are at least partly genetic, probably through certain psychological proclivities and other behavioral traits.
So, in a way, it's not really a matter of either/or (culture vs genetics); it's actually both, the two factors interplaying and reinforcing each other. The culture selects for particular traits (eg. iq, ethnocentrism etc) by excluding outliers and heretics from the community. And the genetics sustain and expand the culture of otherness and hostility to outgroups.
Do this for centuries and millenia and it's pretty obvious that you end up with a population where you can't really disentangle its culture from its genetic background.
Which, I presume, is the case with our beloved chosenites.
Once an alcoholic always an alcoholic? Sure. But it's not true in all cases, and in a properly functioning white society, the cultural and legal presumptions should always lie with the desired outcome, lest the dead weight, even if frequently occurring, infect the dialogue and drag it down.
People have their problems. When we call them insurmountable we make them ours when they are not, and then have difficulty discussing them out of guilt. There are things we like and things we do not like. The less moral culpability we attach to ourselves with regard to negative behaviors that are not our own, the easier they are to deal with.
Belief and behavior should always be considered a choice, even if there are genetic influences. Otherwise we end up about exactly where we are -- trapped, immobile, and seemingly unable to free ourselves. When we say other people don't have a choice, we take the choice away from ourselves as well.
It shouldn't be tolerated. Yet what is the strongest argument yet that it must be tolerated?
The argument is going from "it must be tolerated because of historical persecution" to "it must be tolerated because they can't help it, it's genetic, it's the way God made them."
I don't know about you but the first argument is a whole lot easier to navigate around than the second. And therefore furthering the second is incredibly dangerous. That's just what we need -- let's go from easily disputed historical lies to science that few would bother to understand, let alone refute.
The genetic argument is like the global warming hoax. Who the hell knows if it's true but in the wrong hands it will be the end of us.
"TooJewCru" says blah blah blah it will be the end of "us".
The concern here is what must be done to prevent the end of Whites. It's telling that to you separation means "the end". Likewise your disingenuous argument in terms of "us" when your obvious concern is for the jews.
Knowing that they were 'raised up' tells us all we need to know.
"Just ignore the jews" and "you don't know anything about the jews" are classic, characteristically jewish arguments. Bonus points for arguing both at the same time.
The genetic argument is like the global warming hoax.
Actually, it's not. Judaism isn't just another universalistic religion like christianity or islam. It is built specifically around its own 'chosen' people with whose racial purity it is obsessed. It is anti-universalistic by definition.
This isn't much of an argument; it's a fact.
If your tribe really wants to be part of 'us', what you should do is abolish judaism (it doesn't matter if you become christians or not) and outbreed yourselves completely into the large white pool.
But, strangely, something tells me that not only will you never do this. Even the supposedly benevolent 'converts' like you won't ever be able to bring themselves to think of it, let alone propose it. Because, you see, after that you won't be 'chosen' anymore.
'I agree that Judaism is not genetic.'
I agree that TooJewCru should be marched into a cattle train.
Hiiissss....
I love the smell of Zyklon B in the morning.
Smells like defeated jew blogger.
You want to think
Jews like telling others what to think, e.g. jewishness has nothing to do with biology. They're exquisitely sensitive on this point, and when arguing such points they tend to project their your own polarized thinking - it has to be 0%, otherwise it might as well be 100%.
In the podcast Pat mentioned above I discussed exactly the points about jewish identity that this jew brings up. I'm not surprised that A) he didn't listen, and B) that it doesn't keep him from telling me what I think.
I think TooJewCru, the coyly self-described non-jew jew who is willing to lie about the nature of jewish identity, supports the case for excluding jews genetically.
I think non-jews who think like jews is a separate problem.
But he and others call themselves Jew, whilst proclaiming themselves as Christians. You can be one or the other, not both.
Baloney. They can and do specifically because "jew" has an essential biological component that doesn't suddenly disappear when they "convert" to Christianity.
Ironically it is only now, in the age of science and genetics, that this absurd pretense that "jew" is 100% mental state has become so prevalent. As I pointed out in the original post, even back when religion was dominant common sense regarding the biological reality of jewishness can be found.
Today however jews feel they can't afford anything but 0% biology - at least in debates like this. In semitically-correct discussions of crypto-jews the biological component is downplayed but cannot be completely ignored. They don't even try to hide it when they talk among themselves.
Funny how Jews don't see it that way.
"Lord Phillips, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Kerr held that the school had directly discriminated on grounds of race. Lord Clarke wrote,
"I do not accept they were not considering M’s ethnic origins or making a decision on ethnic grounds....As I see it, once it is accepted...that the reason M is not a member of the Jewish religion is that his forbears in the matrilineal line were not Orthodox Jews and that, in that sense his less favourable treatment is determined by his descent, it follows that he is discriminated against on ethnic grounds....The question is, in my opinion...whether it is discrimination on ethnic grounds to discriminate against all those who are not descended from Jewish women."[1]
All those not descended from Jewish women are not Jewish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%28E%29_v_Governing_Body_of_JFS
Funny how Jews don't see it that way.
That's the whole point. They should be free to define jewishness on racial grounds thereby excluding not sufficiently 'pure' members from their group.
Yet we shouldn't be free to ...accept their own standards on jewishness, thereby excluding them from non-jewish groups. [And we shouldn't notice the double standard either.]
This must be another form of exterminationist antisemitism: taking jews at their own word.
So, let's get this straight - atheist liberal societies are Jewish, Protestant societies are Jewish, Jewish societies are Jewish, the Catholic church is Jewish, boy, you people really want to blame Jews for everything, don't you, lol.
Pat Hanagan, why do you make a distinction between 'Jews' and 'Whites'? Most Jews I've seen are white. Are you a bit of a racist?
Pat is currently undergoing treatment for substance abuse at "The Sanctuary", Byron Bay, but has asked that I forward on his reply, on his behalf.
Pat says "Yes".
He also said, "Why can't these mashuganas spell my name right?"
Pat then drifted off into silent musings.
Post a Comment
<< Home