QTDDTOT: Questions that don’t deserve their own thread
This is the thread for one-liner questions about /pol/-related topics. “What does /pol/ think of [x],” “is [x] redpilled,” and associated questions belong here. Threads created based on a single, simple question will be deleted. If your thread is deleted, come here and ask again. REMINDER TO SEARCH THE CATALOG FIRST.
OP - https://8ch.net/pol/res/12021208.html
view the rest of the comments →
17046911? ago
I'm not buying the idea that Hitler "supported Lehi and Zionism" to be honest. The idea that he had anything to do with Israel is downright stupid once you realize that Lehi started to support "National Bolshevism" along with Stalin's support. Here's some contrast to the false accusation. Avraham Stern, the founder of Lehi, once said "no difference existed between Hitler and Chamberlain, between Dachau or Buchenwald and sealing the gates of Eretz Israel." Keep this in mind every time someone tells you otherwise. He even called the Brits as "enemies of the Jewish people" while the National Socialists of the Third Reich were "Jew haters", who were obviously also enemies. The Zionist kikes never considered Hitler as an ally, they just thought of him as a great asset against The Eternal Anglo since at that time they were the occupiers of Palestine. (((They))) wanted Palestine for themselves, and (((they))) thought that ye ol' divide and conquer was going to work on him. That never came to light however, as within the course of Hitler's life, he went on to support Palestine instead, along with other Muslims from Bosnia to Turkey. Here's a webm and some pics for reference, these have been posted many times by me and others before in /pol/, but it will always give you some insight on Hitler's view of the world. As I was saying, when support from him was out of reach, this resulted into Lehi resorting to support Stalin and his kike regime instead, like I mentioned before. It does make sense why the Alt-Kike would support "National Bolshevism". It fits their subversive tactics very well.
17049063? ago
Its disinformation
17054171? ago
According to Michael Collins Piper, he found a confirmation of The Protocols in some jewish publication, but his files disappeared after his death.
17058459? ago
The protocols don't have to be real, because the Talmud IS.
17058462? ago
That's not the point; the fact that his research shows that they are legitimate, is.
>>12858606
You won't fool anyone.
17058463? ago
They're clearly plagiarized from an 1856 French work. I've written a book with this shit in mind. You're far better off not using the Protocols themselves as your "evidence" for any given point, because they themselves aren't verifiable. What IS verifiable is what Ford said Do you have a link to the source for that quote? Because I've only found a quote that is worded completely differently. It's important to match not just the spirit, but the letter of a person's quote., what the Talmud says, and what jews themselves have admitted to saying.
Take another example, the "blood libel." It's universally heralded as… libel. A hoax, a lie, just antisemitic claptrap. They say that the stories are entirely fabricated and that the jews were either accused of what others did or were just scapegoated and the crimes didn't happen. And without modern medical autopsies or any form of forensic evidence, these individual cases can be brushed under the rug.
But when you look at what's being said and how it's being said, you start to ask questions. Such as, "Why did medieval nations who never had contact with one another–who were enemies, even–report stories about jews with identical events happening between them?" And while most jews themselves actively reject the "blood libel," it only takes a handful who admit it to throw the whole damn thing into question. Like a jewish doctor who wrote an entire fucking book on the subject and admits it.
https://www.scribd.com/document/330147501/Blood-Passover OR BERNARD LAZARE HIMSELF.
~ ✡Bernard Lazare✡; L’Antisémitisme, son histoire et ses causes, pp. 354-6; 1894
17265157? ago
The fact is, KIKES plagiarized Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu and then jews, specifically the ADL, claim it was "fabricated against them". Theodore Herzl plagiarized that piece at the First Zionist Congress held at Basle in 1897. That is AFTER the year 1856. The knowledge of the Protocols spread throughout Germany because Germans were told the truth that
JEWS LIE
Thus kikes could not effectively claim that plagairism equals fabrication against them, because it does not.
They say this about everything. Continue on blaming the hooknosed faggots for what they actually did.
17266218? ago
Of course. The source of the Protocols is irrelevant. The providence of its contents is all that matters.
>>12899328
There's no source for that. "A transcript of a conversation that someone overheard" isn't acceptable as a source.
17264047? ago
which?
17264049? ago
Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu. Not in full, but in part.
17059484? ago
No and I don't use the Protocols, I hold the same view as is Ford's comment.
17057250? ago
17058461? ago
I swear to G-d he obviously doesn't belong here. In fact, he only comes here hoping that anyone will believe him. He just circlejerks on his own arguments. To him, it's not the Jews, it's the CIA/FBI/insert Alphabet agency here, and everyone is an agent is an agent including his own family. Even though every single one of these said Alphabet agencies are Jewish to the core, he never acknowledges this. What a complete retard.