Radical conspiracism as a tool of the ruling groups. History as the foundation of ethics.

submitted by HibikiBlackCaudillo from self.conspiracy

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

i think zionists used kind of a boiled frog strategy to get jews to move to israel. Many probably didn't really want to live in a desert surrpounded by muslims, not when they were doing well financially and were comfortable in europe. So increasing the antisemiticism helped encourage them to move to israel. This is why they had the transfer agreement with nazi germany. Hitler and Himmler were obviously jewish too. Why would they want most jews living in a centralized place, israel? It could be that the rothschilds didn't want to have to compete with other jewish bankers for supremeacy, and wanted them to be easier controlled. Besides Israel many moved to USA as well.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

It may be possible Hitler was a renegade they used, promised him peace and power at different points, forcing him into worse and worse positions he personally wasn't equipped to handle.

I do think it's weird that prior to WW2, no Israel, post WW2, Israel.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

it started with the balfour declartion, that was in 1917 but jews were slow in moving there, I think they wanted to speed that up so yeah the boiled frogs. Seems weird to say rothschilds would want to make things hard on jews but yeah they have no loyalty.

I think Hitler mioght have known invading russia was a bad idea, he had known about history or why name it operation barbarossa? Barbarossa was the holy roman emperor and he led the third crusade and it failed and he died. Barbarossa was pro jew and he was trying to free the holy land so the jews could have it back as Israel. That naming might have been Hitler showing he didn't really want to do it. But he wasn't fully in power and the zionists wanted to make Russia inhospitable to jews so they would move to Israel. That failed but years later they had Stalin make antisemitic policies so the jews of russia would move.

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Seems weird to say rothschilds would want to make things hard on jews

Not all Jews are rich and/or Zionists. Jews are just another breed of sheeple to be manipulated and exploited, and the Us vs Them situation can be exploited endlessly for this special group of tribal pawns.

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

boiled frog strategy

Not an appropriate use of that term.

There was nothing slow or subtle about it.

The ruling class / Zionists intentionally created a hostile environment in Europe and Russia 100 years ago so they could utilize the prophecy excuse for the "chosen people" tribes to "return" to their "promised" land that they once co-inhabited for a blip in history, while other Semitics never left.

It could be that the rothschilds didn't want to have to compete with other jewish bankers for supremeacy, and wanted them to be easier controlled.

An interesting theory that sounds like pure speculation without evidence.

Everyone already knows and understands the hierarchy of things, especially those higher up in the global mafias. Getting rid of smaller Jewish banksters who already serve you doesn't make sense.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

bad take

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

How so?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

it's an appropriate use of the term for obvious reasons

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I explained why it wasn't appropriate, and it's not obvious as I obviously asked for elaboration.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

nah it's obvious you just said buzzwords you heard elsewhere

go read what boiling frogs means it's not literally frogs in a pot it's a metaphor bro

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

nah it's obvious you just said buzzwords you heard elsewhere

Bullshit. I speak with intention and aim for clarity. I defy you to try to prove I just use buzzwords.

go read what boiling frogs means it's not literally frogs in a pot it's a metaphor bro

Bullshit. I was a fan of Boiling Frogs Post long before it became NewsBud and followed them for a while until their pay-for-access model kicked in, then I quit entirely when Sybil Edmonds lost her credibility in a minor feud with James Corbett over some obviously petty bullshit.

https://www.wikispooks.com/wiki/Boiling_Frogs_Post

https://www.newsbud.com

" The boiling frog is a fable describing a frog being slowly boiled alive. The premise is that if a frog is put suddenly into boiling water, it will jump out, but if the frog is put in tepid water which is then brought to a boil slowly, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability or unwillingness of people to react to or be aware of sinister threats that arise gradually rather than suddenly. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

I knew what the metaphorical term meant then as now. And simply denying it doesn't make you correct. And you have not explained how it was a "bad take" or "it's an appropriate use of the term for obvious reasons".

I think you're irritating and full of bullshit.