|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 0:57:32 GMT
I think you may have missed one or two of the reasons that people consider Hitler to be a madman. Yeah I heard the stories. In the mainstream media and their films. That was before 911, Wall Street sending jobs to China, etc. Now one can look up actual Hitler speeches and see what he said, not what Hollywood claimed he said. They had the same problem we have today--Jews controlling government, finance, and media, believing in a Chosen People myth that says they must rule over the Goyim. When they kill, they claim they are the victim. This was from a 2011 article but it really gets to the gist of things for those not too stupid to figure it out: "Legendary U.S. General George S. Patton realized late in the war that the United States fought the wrong country. Patton felt the U.S. should have sided with Germany to destroy Jewish Bolshevik/Communist USSR. This information comes from Patton's diary entries, letters he wrote to his wife, and comments he made to military officers and staff. World War II was incredibly complex. However, in the final analysis, WWII was essentially a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism -vs- Jewish Internationalism/globalism. Adolf Hitler and his allies fought to preserve the concept of Nationalism, not just for Germans but for all peoples the world over. Nationalism really just means the sovereignty of an ethnic people and the right of such ethnic people/nationalists - within their own bordered country - to self-determination. What is meant by self-determination? Self-determination just means an ethnic people preserving their unique culture & heritage and pursuing their collective goals as a unique people. This applies to any ethnic peoples: Nigerians, Germans, Swedes, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Tibetans, etc. On the other side of WWII was Jewish (Bolshevik) Internationalism (today we simply call this 'globalism'). In the 1920's, 1930's, and of course during WWII, powerful Jewish Internationalists were fervently advancing the Jewish worldview of eventually eliminating all nations... except for a Jewish homeland... (what was later to be - after WWII - the nation of Israel in 1948). Today we see that nothing has changed; Jewish Internationalism/globalism still works toward gradually "merging" all peoples of the world (particularly in the Western World) into one globalist system with a global government, global laws, consistent global culture, global bank, global currency, etc. In short, Jewish globalism (i.e., the weakening and eventual elimination of all nations) is the exact opposite of Nationalism (i.e., a world composed of nations ... specifically, ethnically homogenous and bordered nations). The Allied powers of WWII (led by Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, et al) were tools of International Jewry and thus de facto fighting for the Jewish globalist worldview. After the (Jewish run) Allies won WWII in 1945, International Jewish forces were then free to exercise a Jewish 'Sphere of Influence' over the greater Western World (and as we see today, increasingly over the rest of the world)."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 1:01:48 GMT
I think you may have missed one or two of the reasons that people consider Hitler to be a madman. Yeah I heard the stories. In the mainstream media and their films. That was before 911, Wall Street sending jobs to China, etc. Now one can look up actual Hitler speeches and see what he said, not what Hollywood claimed he said. They had the same problem we have today--Jews controlling government, finance, and media, believing in a Chosen People myth that says they must rule over the Goyim. When they kill, they claim they are the victim. This was from a 2011 article but it really gets to the gist of things for those not too stupid to figure it out: "Legendary U.S. General George S. Patton realized late in the war that the United States fought the wrong country. Patton felt the U.S. should have sided with Germany to destroy Jewish Bolshevik/Communist USSR. This information comes from Patton's diary entries, letters he wrote to his wife, and comments he made to military officers and staff. World War II was incredibly complex. However, in the final analysis, WWII was essentially a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism -vs- Jewish Internationalism/globalism. Adolf Hitler and his allies fought to preserve the concept of Nationalism, not just for Germans but for all peoples the world over. Nationalism really just means the sovereignty of an ethnic people and the right of such ethnic people/nationalists - within their own bordered country - to self-determination. What is meant by self-determination? Self-determination just means an ethnic people preserving their unique culture & heritage and pursuing their collective goals as a unique people. This applies to any ethnic peoples: Nigerians, Germans, Swedes, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Tibetans, etc. On the other side of WWII was Jewish (Bolshevik) Internationalism (today we simply call this 'globalism'). In the 1920's, 1930's, and of course during WWII, powerful Jewish Internationalists were fervently advancing the Jewish worldview of eventually eliminating all nations... except for a Jewish homeland... (what was later to be - after WWII - the nation of Israel in 1948). Today we see that nothing has changed; Jewish Internationalism/globalism still works toward gradually "merging" all peoples of the world (particularly in the Western World) into one globalist system with a global government, global laws, consistent global culture, global bank, global currency, etc. In short, Jewish globalism (i.e., the weakening and eventual elimination of all nations) is the exact opposite of Nationalism (i.e., a world composed of nations ... specifically, ethnically homogenous and bordered nations). The Allied powers of WWII (led by Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, et al) were tools of International Jewry and thus de facto fighting for the Jewish globalist worldview. After the (Jewish run) Allies won WWII in 1945, International Jewish forces were then free to exercise a Jewish 'Sphere of Influence' over the greater Western World (and as we see today, increasingly over the rest of the world)." Yeah... you're still missing a thing or two.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 1:08:42 GMT
The funny thing is, it is ALL right there in the Bible for all to see. It is not even a hidden conspiracy.
Deuteronomy 20:10-17 "When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. . . . This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them, the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded you."
Raiders is basically Jewish propaganda, like Inglorious Basterds. It is a Jewish violence wetdream. Because many goyim are not so bloodthirsty, they do not catch on to the joke at their expense. But once you wake up, there is no going back.
The scary part is the Ark of the Covenant is real. It is the A bomb. Developed by Jews. In 1989 Seymour Hersh published a book the Samson Option where Israel said if they ever felt threatened again, they would launch missiles to destroy Europe.
We's got big problems.
It's bad enough that they push no talents like Shia LaBouef, or they make Wonder Woman an israeli as if a western European would find her more attractive than someone from our own heritage-and they shoved non jews out from writing and directing,-but to think they may be looney enough with a persecution complex to blow up the world?
One hopes this is just a case of Jewish bravado. I doubt very much jews would commit mass suicide, Israel is the country that did a surprise attack on the USS Liberty, and uses proxy armies so I do not think they want to kill themselves--but you never know.
Voltaire(addressing Jews): "You seem to be the maddest of the lot. The Kaffirs, the Hottentots, the Negroes of Guinea are much more reasonable and more honest people than your ancestors, the Jews. You have surpassed all nations in impertinent fables, in bad conduct, and in barbarism. You deserved to be punished, for this is your destiny..[The Jewish nation] dares spread an irreconcilable hatred against all nations; it revolts against all its masters. Always superstitious, always avid of the well-being enjoyed by others, always barbarous, crawling in misfortune, and insolent in prosperity. Here are what were the Jews in the eyes of the Greeks and the Romans who could read their books....I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people [Jews] would not some day become deadly to the human race."
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 1:15:30 GMT
And if you are referring to the gas chambers let us not forget that in a few so-called free countries, questioning WW 2 can result in jail time. A refugee in Germany can rape a 10 year old and get out with a welfare check, but question the gas chambers and 5 years in jail. Ditto for some other countries.
You would think if something is true (strange that the Great Escape didnt talk about the concentration camps--or any war movie before the 70s)you would not need a law to support it.
Millions were said to be killed by the Bolsheviks-and you can question it all you want to.
Anyway I will leave it to Roald Dahl:
“There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews. I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason. I mean, if you and I were in a line moving towards what we knew were gas chambers, I’d rather have a go at taking one of the guards with me; but they [the Jews] were always submissive.”
2) “I am certainly anti-Israel, and I have become anti-Semitic.”
3) In book review written by Dahl in the periodical “Literary Review,” he referred to “those powerful American Jewish bankers” and accused the United States Government of being “utterly dominated by the great Jewish financial institutions over there.”
4) The Israeli military activity in Lebanon, he said, “was very much hushed up in the newspapers because they are primarily Jewish-owned … there aren’t any non-Jewish publishers anywhere.”
5) When further discussing the Lebanon War, he wrote: “makes one wonder in the end what sort of people these Israelis are. It is like the good old Hitler and Himmler times all over again.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 1:17:24 GMT
The funny thing is, it is ALL right there in the Bible for all to see. You speak as if the book were a trustworthy guide to... anything. In fairness, Ms Gadot is a stunningly beautiful woman. Far more so than the vast majority of women from "our own heritage", whatever that's supposed to be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 1:34:02 GMT
And if you are referring to the gas chambers Now you're getting it.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 1:36:56 GMT
You speak as if the book were a trustworthy guide to... anything. In fairness, Ms Gadot is a stunningly beautiful woman. Far more so than the vast majority of women from "our own heritage", whatever that's supposed to be. Religious Jews with money and power in government DO consider it a trustworthy guide--that is ze problem. But they prefer the Talmud which says non jews are animals and you can have sex with three year olds (I know I know, it blew me away when I read about it myself). As for Ms Gadot, sorry but she does not hold a candle to a lot of western actresses who looked far more the part. Wonder Woman is primarily aimed at Western audiences anyway--so it makes sense to find one from the population that is the target, not some small country in the Middle East. And BTW I have watched an Israeli movie or two, I like movies from all places--but if someone is telling me as a Westerner that I am supposed to be satisfied with someone else's culture masquerading as my own, I do have a problem with it. I liked Raiders as a kid, but as I got older I started to see issues with it. And then someone told me about the pedo stuff which I hadn't noticed. Indiana Jones is a pedophile. I remember when that was considered a bad thing. I expect in the near future he will become a transsexual.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 2:00:34 GMT
As for Ms Gadot, sorry but she does not hold a candle to a lot of western actresses who looked far more the part. Such as? If one assumes that most people have ethnicity as a factor in the appeal. Which, no. The weird thing about this argument is that she wasn't actually masquerading as your culture. She was masquerading as Themysciran culture. A culture which is radically different from yours - FAR more different than Israel's culture is - and which has literally been completely separate from yours for several thousand years or more. I think you have that backwards, actually. We're waaaaay more down on pedophilia today than we were in the early 80s. That's why the reference to Marion's age in Raiders (which is what I assume you're talking about) didn't even cause a ripple at the time, but no writer in his right mind would ever put such a thing in his movie today.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 2:17:09 GMT
Greeks are closer to Western Europeans than Jews (even though most Israelis are some kind of European, not sephardic). Most of Shakespeare requires a good knowledge of Greek literature because there are so many references (many more than Bible references I might add). You can read Shakespeare without knowing the Bible but you need Greek to understand all the references.
Ironically, Lebanon, the country that banned the movie, is closer to Greek heritage than Israel. A Lebanese playing the role would have been more accurate.
People in 1981 did not embrace pedophilia, they just didn't talk about it because it was assumed to be rare or the media didnt discuss it. Ditto for bestiality. It was a taboo subject--not anymore--the Guardian of London recently had an article about sex with dolphins.
No one I recall pointed out Indiana Jones was a pedophile. Not mentioned once because by underage it was assumed she was 16 or something like that. Her comment "I was a child" could have been exaggeration on her part. We had no way of knowing.
And did Woody Allen lose jobs because of his case? Nope.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 2:42:09 GMT
Greeks are closer to Western Europeans than Jews But again, Themyscira isn't Greece. It split off from greek culture a long, long time ago. It may have some superficial similarities, but it isn't Greek. ...which further destroys your own argument. I didn't suggest that they embraced it. Merely that they didn't really think of it in the terms we do today. The 80s were a time of ads like this : People didn't really register it as pro-pedo because they didn't see it the way we do. The exact people who liked that ad back then would probably see it today and be appalled. Actually what we do have are the notes of the original discussions about that scene between Kasdan, Lucas and Spielberg, and they are worse than what ended up on the screen. "Lawrence Kasdan: I like it if they already had a relationship at one point. Because then you don't have to build it. George Lucas: I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven. Kasdan: And he was forty-two. Lucas: He hasn't seen her in twelve years. Now she's twenty-two. It's a real strange relationship. Spielberg: She had better be older than twenty-two. Lucas: He's thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve. Lucas: It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time. Spielberg: And promiscuous. She came onto him. Lucas: Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it's an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she's sixteen or seventeen it's not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met. And she was madly in love with him and he... Spielberg: She has pictures of him." They wind up suggesting that she was 15 when Indy slept with her, but Lucas suggested she could be 12. Of course, we don't know the context of the conversation - Lucas could have been saying "He's thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve" in a "wait, that's ridiculous, we need to change that" sense - he does immediately say they should make her slightly young, before offering fifteen as the right age. And clearly, from that discussion this was not a "hey, make Indy a pedo because pedophilia is fantastic!" sense. They wanted it to be something "outrageous". Oh, and if she was 15 then it would be ephebophilia, not pedophilia. He wasn't convicted of anything, nor was any real solid evidence offered of wrongdoing, was it?
|
|
barkingbaphomet
Junior Member
all backlit and creepysmoking
@barkingbaphomet
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 1,006
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Jun 4, 2017 2:56:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 2:59:44 GMT
But again, Themyscira isn't Greece. It split off from greek culture a long, long time ago. It may have some superficial similarities, but it isn't Greek. Actually what we do have are the notes of the original discussions about that scene between Kasdan, Lucas and Spielberg, and they are worse than what ended up on the screen. No my argument isn't destroyed--you just want to play word games since you are out of your league. But I can stay in the playpen for you a little while longer. The visual depictions of WW tend to be European of an Anglo-Saxon type, not Russian Jewish. Greek, Themyscira, Minoan, whatever. We don't even know how accurate that alleged story meeting is--do they mention Secret of the Incas? They should-better yet, you watch a bit of it and see where Indiana Jones came from (without the pedophile angle).
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Jun 4, 2017 5:08:20 GMT
Believe it or not George isn't at home
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 10:08:51 GMT
But again, Themyscira isn't Greece. It split off from greek culture a long, long time ago. It may have some superficial similarities, but it isn't Greek. Actually what we do have are the notes of the original discussions about that scene between Kasdan, Lucas and Spielberg, and they are worse than what ended up on the screen. No my argument isn't destroyed--you just want to play word games since you are out of your league. But I can stay in the playpen for you a little while longer. The visual depictions of WW tend to be European of an Anglo-Saxon type, not Russian Jewish. Greek, Themyscira, Minoan, whatever. Yeah, your argument is destroyed. You're claiming that an Israeli actress is inappropriate to play a European character. Only most Israelis are European, and the character is not. So much for your argument.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 15:42:04 GMT
Yeah, your argument is destroyed. You're claiming that an Israeli actress is inappropriate to play a European character. Only most Israelis are European, and the character is not. So much for your argument. I mean Anglo-Saxon Europe--not Russian Asiatic Europe. She doesn't even have blue eyes like all the comics versions of the character. That is the European I am speaking of. Nope-she was picked for tribal nepotism reasons--and maybe to flaunt Israel is ruler of the world. But you are free to imagine whatever argument resolution you want. Reality will have its own conclusion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 15:47:17 GMT
Yeah, your argument is destroyed. You're claiming that an Israeli actress is inappropriate to play a European character. Only most Israelis are European, and the character is not. So much for your argument. I mean Anglo-Saxon Europe--not Russian Asiatic Europe. She doesn't even have blue eyes like all the comics versions of the character. That is the European I am speaking of. Nope-she was picked for tribal nepotism reasons--and maybe to flaunt Israel is ruler of the world. But you are free to imagine whatever argument resolution you want. Reality will have its own conclusion. So now you're reduced to complaining that you don't like her eye colour? Kind of pathetic. Good for her, I say. Dark eyes are more attractive anyway. And she was obviously picked because she was the best person for the role.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 4, 2017 16:00:35 GMT
So now you're reduced to complaining that you don't like her eye colour? Kind of pathetic. Good for her, I say. Dark eyes are more attractive anyway. And she was obviously picked because she was the best person for the role. Every time you lose an argument you change the subject. I originally said that previous versions of Diana were based on a western European (as in Anglo-Saxon) appearance and you kept changing the subject--fussing about word choices. Ok so finally we arrive at the details. She does not look like a typical anglo-saxon. Just because she may have European ancestry does not mean she came from Western Europe. Pretty simple. But for some reason you just like to argue. Everyone needs a hobby I guess. You keep at it and maybe you can score a point that has some relevance.
|
|
|
Post by sjg on Jun 5, 2017 13:15:04 GMT
7/10
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Jun 6, 2017 14:22:38 GMT
Pretty flawless I would say. I don't really have more to add, it's tremendous. On Spielberg's resume, I guess I'd still have E.T. his hallmark (wouldn't make my top 200), Schindler's List his masterpiece, & Jaws his greatest. We can rate the sequels another day. What did you rate this?
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Jun 7, 2017 3:24:52 GMT
Pretty flawless I would say. I don't really have more to add, it's tremendous. On Spielberg's resume, I guess I'd still have E.T. his hallmark (wouldn't make my top 200), Schindler's List his masterpiece, & Jaws his greatest. We can rate the sequels another day. What did you rate this?10
|
|