Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 883
    MEMBERS
  • 51910
    MESSAGES
  • 0
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Niqab, burka and veils   The U.K and Europe

Started 2/20/20 by Di (amina046); 4141 views.
bml00

From: bml00

3/5/20

You asked you got the answer HASSIDIC JEWS WHICH THE IDIOT CLAIMS GO BACK 2000 YEARS - you don't understand or grasp then sad for you .

Hassidic Judaism is about 300 years old and was strictly Eastern European - there were no Hassidic Jews in Jerusalem or Babylon

lets add in his absolute nonsense about the Arch of Titus

Don't defend him you will get even more tarnished

BM

  • Edited March 5, 2020 11:04 am  by  bml00
RGoss99

From: RGoss99

3/5/20

What you don´t get is that I am not defending Berry, only choosing not to judge him based on your unsupported opinión. Yes I asked for an answerfrom, but you just posted me without giving it. Why is that. you claim he posted "Wabsolute nonsnese about the arch" so a logical solution would be to quote what he posted and your evidence that it is nonsnese. But you can´t seem to play by the rules. Is that evidence that his "nonsense" is not "absolute"? Asking these questions is not defending anybody, just defending standards for determining truth in a valid discussion. Since you claim truth but can´t defend it, sort of suggests that if there is a liar involved here it is yourself..

bml00

From: bml00

3/5/20

This is from the numb nuts favorite Jews - the True Torah Jews , Berry the twat who has as much understanding of Judaism claims the Jews are not allowed to return to Israel - below his very most favourite people the TTJ prove him wrong

The TTJ agree that movement to Israel is allowed they say not on mass - but that would be a discussion amongst Rabbi's to decide what a Mass means in terms of a religious debate

https://www.truetorahjews.org/qanda/cyrus

n view of the Three Oaths, which prohibit an unauthorized mass return to the Land of Israel, the long-awaited return MUST be sanctioned by prophecy or another unquestionably supernatural event, otherwise how will we know it is the right time and not a violation of the Oaths?

Note that I said a mass return is forbidden. But for individual Jews to live in the Land of Israel is certainly permitted, and in this your rabbi is correct. There is an opinion in the Talmud (Rav Yehuda) who holds it is forbidden, but the halacha is not ruled in accordance with him

bml00

From: bml00

3/5/20

A cunt is a cunt unless it is a cauliflower I am guessing you have problems with both

Grow up - if you don't see his obsession with all things Jewish , the Myriad of people who have seen through his lies and his OWN ADMISSION to being a liar then heaven help you.

Judge you are not

BM

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

3/5/20

bml00 said:

Note that I said a mass return is forbidden. But for individual Jews to live in the Land of Israel is certainly permitted, and in this your rabbi is correct. There is an opinion in the Talmud (Rav Yehuda) who holds it is forbidden, but the halacha is not ruled in accordance with him

You Israel has held a gun to their head.

Their "JewsNotZionist" web-site has disappeared and with it statements such as this:

Zionism was supported by the German SS and Gestapo.[3. Francis R. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985), pp. 54-55.; Karl A. Schleunes, The Twisted Road to Auschwitz (Urbana: Univ. of Illinois, 1970, 1990) pp. 178-181][4. Jacob Boas, "A Nazi Travels to Palestine," History Today (London), January, 1980, pp. 33-38.][5. Facsimile reprint of front page of Das Schwarze Korp, May 15, 1935, in: Janusz Piekalkiewicz, Israels Langer Arm (Frankfurt: Goverts, 1975), pp. 66-67.][6. Das Schwarze Korps, Sept. 26, 1935.  Quoted in: F. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985), pp. 56-57]

Hitler himself personally supported Zionism.[7. F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), pp. 141-144; On Hitler's critical view of Zionism in Mein Kampf, see. Esp. Vol. 1, Chap. 11.  Quoted in:  Robert Wistrich, Hitler's Apocalypse (London: 1985), p. 155.; ][8. W. Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavra-Transfer (1972).  Entire text in:  David Yisraeli, The Palestine Problem in German Politics 1889-1945 (Israel: 1974), pp. 132-136.]

During the 1930’s, in cooperation with the German authorities, Zionist groups organized a network of some 40 camps throughout Germany where prospective settlers were trained for their new lives in Palestine.

As late as 1942 Zionists operated at least one of these officially authorized "Kibbutz" training camps[9. Y. Arad, et al., eds., Documents On the Holocaust (1981), p. 155. (The training kibbutz was at Neuendorf, and may have functioned even after March 1942.)] over which flew the blue and white banner which would one day be adopted as the national flag of "Israel".[10. Lucy Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945 (New York: Bantam, pb., 1976), pp 253-254; Max Nussbaum, "Zionism Under Hitler," Congress Weekly (New York: American Jewish Congress), Sept. 11, 1942.; F. Nicosia, The Third Reich (1985), pp 58-60, 217.; Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement (1984), p. 175.]

Part of what they say concerning the camps used to be exceeded by Yad Vashem - one of the "agricultural training camps" was still operating in the summer of 1943, by Zionists, at least some of whom were able to reach Israel after the war.

In the Hachshara agricultural training camp Jews trained under Gestapo supervision until mid-1943. The album includes photographs of the camp from August 1939 until Spring 1942. Guenter Israel Marcusa appears in many of the photographs. His journal, starting from 06/10/1942, correspondence between him and Dr. Kurt Israel Marcusa about his guardianship over Guenter, and the latter's life story are housed in the Yad Vashem Archives. https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/gross-breesen-germany-a-group-photograph-in-the-hachshara-camp-february-1941/gAFpHTNtdseNPQ

But that's been taken down too.

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

3/5/20

RGoss99 said:

Why is that. you claim he posted "Wabsolute nonsnese about the arch" so a logical solution would be to quote what he posted and your evidence that it is nonsnese.

What I've said about the arch is that the good quality pictures are all of a replica, not the original as is severely deteriorated after 2000 years outside. BM has found a better real one but its still not very good.

Were the Menorah and the trumpets taken from the temple? Who is to say? Its claimed that 10% of the Roman Empire was Jewish - would or could the Romans have created and paraded a replica? Or a different original on loan from another temple?

What we do know is that Judaism in Palestine went through a period of great scholarship (likely with wealth - 120 known tannaim working) producing the Jerusalem Talmud over 5 generations in Tiberias and Cesaria clean through both revolts, completed 200 or 210 CE.

So it makes no sense to claim that the Romans were set on destroying Judaism and depopulating the country the way they did to mine. More likely, this was a Civil War between a section of the population that was funded by, and collaborated with, Rome and a section which was nationalist and considered itself the one true faith.

The other thing to note is that BM is laughably ill-informed about the faith he doesn't claim to practise.

In reply toRe: msg 174
bml00

From: bml00

3/5/20

So the TTJ read the Talmud something Berry has never done and can’t and they decide the old lies of Berry about the 3 Oaths are horse shit 

Took numbnuts ages to find the truth

Bm

bml00

From: bml00

3/5/20

If you have a shred of credibility you see the revisionist horse shit about the The Arch of Titus

Apparently Titus , the Romans , the Legions are all liars But numbnuts is not

Enjoy it

BM

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

3/5/20

There are parallel examples throughout the classical world. Yes, Rome destroid the power of the Phoenicians of Carthage, but it made very little change in the actual population and culture. Parallel myths here and in Mexico.

There is no way, no matter how better equipped and armed Cortez´s 800 could overthrow the Aztec Empire. First because it was not that old and established, and secondly because it was held togather by conquest of superior cultures who resented being bossed by barbarians. But in the bogus "Brown" studies courses they teach about "Malinche", the prostitute who sold her people out to Montezuma, ignoring the common practice of holding the children of captured foreign chiefs hostage. When it came to the fall of Montezuma, Malinche´s father was on Cortez´s side, his daughter was a hostage, who had the advantage of speaking Najuatl, her tribal language, and Spanish making her a natural translater (BTW her family ended up in Spain as Spanish nobility Morqués de Moctezuma, who currently lives at Vemtira Rpdrogiez. 9, Madrid 28008. .

There is no way Jaume I could conquer the Baleares without help. He had Good timing because this during a civil war in North Africa,, so a lot of Muslims fought on his side in the conquest, and in the "repartament" (our versión of the Doomsday Book) the Muslims on the Christian side also shared in the redistribution of the land. The families are still here, as are the names of their estates, the clues being "Al-" as in Algaida and Alaró, "Beni-" from Arabic (ibn) as in Benicomprat, Benimelis, Benisalem, and others that show up on coats of arms as in our county seat Manacor (shield is a hand and heart, but the actual name has nothing to do with the Latin alluded to on the shield, but something entirely different in Arabic.

So when one hears of great conquests, ethnic clearing, is relatively rare, it is notables who are hauled off as hostages, prisoners, or killed. The peasants are generally ignored in classical histories, but kept around because the conquerors need somebody to keep the local economy going. Eventually they inbred with the conquerors, who usually did not bring their wives along, and thus the two cultures modified each other producing a unique different culture. Same with the Normon Conquest, the Saxons did not cause the Britons to disappear, and the Normans did not cause the Saxons to disappear. In Scotland the language of history and government was the germanic Scots, and Latin,  but the Two invasions of Celts from Wales and Ireland did not make the Picts disappear, nor did the Germans and Vikings eclypse the Celtits disappear As here on Mallorca the earlier languages and cultures show in family and place names. So in Scotland we have "Eccles from Greek for church along with Kirk from German, along with Dun for fortress from Celtic, and Burgh from German, and "Car..." from Latin, Ness for nose, firth for fijord, dee for goddess, and both aber (welsh) and inver (gaelic) for delta.

As an aside, you can see why I have Little patience with people who are so fixated on "correct" spelling and grammer that they freeze and have a brain fart when they discover an "error". Or say such ridiculous things as "Mac" is Scottish and "Mc" is Irish, and know nothing about M´, Mag´, Mhic, N´, Nic,´ and Nhic´things Scots just take for granted. Here is a rather strange concidence, where the head guy lives in a White house, so in Morocco you have Casa Blanca, but the palace of the Catholic bishop of Wigtownshire is Tigh Ban which means the same thing as that of the Episcopal bishop, Candida Casa. (The illusion here is that a "candidate" wears white because he should be spotless.  

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

3/5/20

RGoss99 said:

Yes, Rome destroid the power of the Phoenicians of Carthage, but it made very little change in the actual population and culture.  

How do we know that the Tunisians are the Carthiginians? That Rome didn't completely change the population?

Because there is something you've missed - the Romans are pretty unique in the world for the mass use of slaves, and in an exceptionally brutal fashion requiring constant replenishment. They literally depopulated places and totally wiped out civilisations. Dacia in Romania? The Druids in Anglesey and the Boudicca in Norwich. The Greeks vanished. I suggest that's the reason that the British Isles fell into the Dark Ages and parts were repopulated from elsewhere.

RGoss99 said:

There is no way, no matter how better equipped and armed Cortez´s 800 could overthrow the Aztec Empire. First because it was not that old and established, and secondly because it was held togather by conquest of superior cultures who resented being bossed by barbarians.

I don't understand that either. Cortez could overthrow an Empire by simply destroying everything. Scorched earth works pretty well.

RGoss99 said:

when one hears of great conquests, ethnic clearing, is relatively rare 

Yes, it is rare. Only the Romans and the Americans, really. Not sure that Genghis Khan was as thorough.

RGoss99 said:

Same with the Normon Conquest, the Saxons did not cause the Britons to disappear, and the Normans did not cause the Saxons to disappear.  

The Saxons probably did not murder the Britons - but the latter had been reduced to quite a low level first by the Romans.

RGoss99 said:

In Scotland the language of history and government was the germanic Scots, and Latin,  but the Two invasions of Celts from Wales and Ireland did not make the Picts disappear, nor did the Germans and Vikings eclypse the Celtits disappear  

I don't think there's any evidence for the Picts. The Celts came up the coast from Spain after the last ice age. They didn't populate the wooded East very much, not in England and not in Scotland. Those areas only really became populated with the arrival of the Neolithic culture and farming (c. 4000 BCE, or 6,000 years ago). However, although the culture arrived, not many people brought it here.

RGoss99 said:

As an aside, you can see why I have Little patience with people who are so fixated on "correct" spelling and grammer that they freeze and have a brain fart when they discover an "error". 

Idiots. And trolls. Seriously. What the fukk did they come to cyber-space for?

TOP