Upload
Login or register

cupotruth

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Age: 24
Date Signed Up:1/11/2012
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#4300
Highest Content Rank:#3633
Highest Comment Rank:#296
Content Thumbs: 1891 total,  2201 ,  310
Comment Thumbs: 27050 total,  29610 ,  2560
Content Level Progress: 40% (40/100)
Level 118 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 119 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 99% (990/1000)
Level 322 Comments: Covered In Thumbs → Level 323 Comments: Covered In Thumbs
Subscribers:0
Content Views:114961
Times Content Favorited:75 times
Total Comments Made:3943
FJ Points:20093
Favorite Tags: i (2)

latest user's comments

#116 - What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish? And what is t…  [+] (2 new replies) 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... 0
User avatar
#122 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later? "
e.g. media blackout on Occupy Wall Street.
The media says what it's owners want to say. If the audience wants to retort, they can't. How can they? All the mainstream media is in the hands of the same clique of rich powerful assholes. If the general public and citizens want to express themselves in other ways because the media is closed off to them, e.g. demonstrations. They get portrayed as riots by "extremists" and "racists" and every name in the book, or more likely get a media blackout.
When it comes to entertainment such as reality TV and trash culture. Yes, the media has no problem selling the public whatever garbage the public wants. if it dumbs them down, that's an added bonus. But when it comes to political issues, the public will be told what the assholes in power want them to hear whether the public likes it or not. Of course, they'll use every mass manipulation technique in the book (largely invented by Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays also Jews woohoo!) to have the public swallow the message as smoothly as possible.

"because they are jewish"
It is not BECAUSE they are Jewish that they are corrupt. Every race has a bunch of corrupt elite asshole at its top. Jews are no exception.

"beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish"
Then correlate what the media says, with the policies of government, the interests of also-Jewish-controlled arms manufacturers, banks, corporations, etc. If those align, then you can reasonably deduce that a large subset of those jews are working for their own and each other's interests at the expense of everyone else.

"corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish. "
It's both. If you're going to be a corrupt CEO or politician would you hire people underneath you or with you who are related to you or would you hire a total stranger? Would you hire your brother or cousin? Naturally not everybody they hire is not a stranger, but the bent towards hiring from the inner circle is there.
Hiring from within your own social circle means the other person can't betray you without paying a reputation cost in that social circle, in this case, the ultra-wealthy club of the Jewish community. Every nation or ethnicity has rich people at the top and they all form their own exclusive club and they're real sticklers about that club being exclusive. Once you get kicked out, it's damn near impossible to get back in. "You take care of us, we take care of you".
Do you believe religions cause discrimination against outgroups? Can you easily imagine muslims being hostile to non-muslims? Why is that so hard to believe when it comes to jews? My bet is that you're a christian or atheist who is not that religious and have a hard time putting yourself in the shoes of people who think solely and view people solely in terms of what religion they believe in and what ethinicity they belong to because you yourself do not think that way.

""but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway "
CEOs and ultra-wealthy jews are a tiny fraction of the Jewish population. The club of ultra-wealthy jews does not extend to all jews.

"What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish?"
I'm sorry, but I'm exhausted. if you are a seeker after the truth as your username implies then continue the rest of the research on your own.
User avatar
#123 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Look man Im gonna level with you this has been not that bad of an experience and I actually enjoyed what you said I thought this was a please argument. You were respectful and eager to explain and not once called me a cuck. I just have my reservations and it would take us hours more to explain it all away. If we were face to face and had more time maybe we could have reached a conclusion and even left tentative friends.

Thank you for your time, goodbye.
#108 - Ah yes "Africans" because there isn't any difference…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... 0
User avatar
#117 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Because Europe was an idyllic land of peace and peacefulness? Go back to European history and you'll hardly find a decade where there wasn't some nation or white ethnicity fighting another nation or white ethnicity. Whites and Europeans have been killing each for centuries, the recent peace after TWO fucking world wars is an aberration and largely because of the shared threat of the Soviet Union. That's how fucking thick Europeans' skulls are. It took them centuries of killing each other plus two world wars to finally have the bright idea of "Hey, what if we stopped killing each other".

The point being that whites were killing each other just as much as blacks were down in sub-Saharan Africa, but throughout that whole process they didn't engage in slavery of people of the same race as them as black did. Blacks sold orders of magnitude more blacks than whites sold whites, otherwise the Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slave trade would not have become "Black Slavery". Instead it would have been something more like 50% white, 50% black.

Do I have to spoon-feed you every minute detail in my argument?

And that's to say nothing about Black-on-white and/or Muslim-on-Christian slavery in North Africa which was likely far bigger than the trans-Atlantic slave trade ever was.
User avatar
#118 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I like proof of the last part and the reason that they took more prisoners and sold them was because there was a demand, the more demand the more supply, not a hard thing to see. It was a codependent market, Europeans were the demand and Africans were the supply and it was like that for quite some time.

My point was they didn't "sell their own kind" they sold their enemies and they didn't have a problem with it because those people were their enemies. The reason it continued was because europeans had a huge demand for it along with a huge supply that is why europeans selling europeans didn't last long.

Ignoring Russian serfdom which was huge but not as brutal as the slave trade as serfs had slightly more agency in what they did.
User avatar
#124 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
But if Europeans are just as unscrupulous as blacks why didn't they meet that demand by enslaving the whites a stone's throw away from them (and here's the important part) in numbers anywhere approaching the ones at which blacks enslaved other blacks?

Europe had no shortage of inter-white wars. And even if there weren't any, the lure of profit from slavery would have made white ethnicities wage war against another ethnicity under some lame pretext just so they get tons of slaves to sell.

What kept them from doing this AT RATES ANYWHERE NEAR THOSE done by blacks? Is it some sort of innate higher sense of morality? Is it nurture (as opposed to nature) morality inculcated by Christianity? Is it simply correlation with a higher average IQ for the white population? Who knows.
User avatar
#126 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I think that would come down for the same reason as muslims, a good portion of europe was the same religion and it was a foba to enslave Christians when you were one. Plus they all could defend themselves effectively. Easy to obtain African slaves was an easier and more plentiful source than white Europeans as that would require wars and the like to get in any large quantities and as much Europeans did fight they did not fight in large enough and in unified enough numbers to make pows an effective source of slaves for burgeoning empires like the kind that existed during the time of the Atlantic slave trade.
#107 - And what is their motivation? What have they done? Have they a…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... 0
User avatar
#112 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"And what is their motivation?"
You mean beyond disproportionate power and profit and control?

"What have they done?"
Clearly you have been under a rock and haven't been aware of the collusion between media and government. How are the arms manufacturers, also disproportionately Jewish, going to sell yet another war or military intervention or obscenely massive military spending to the public without the media selling their lies?

"Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them?"
Boardroom meetings are closed to the public. There's no conspiracy there. Speaking of secret meeting how about that meeting of banksters and Big Business way back in the day at Jekyll Island? Think tanks such as CFR and Trilateral Commission, who formulate policy fo rthe US government, meet out in the public, right?

"Do they exchange money to each other?"
No, there's no such thing as backroom wheeling and dealing and "I rub your back, you rub mine".

"Meet in the basements of synagogues?"
It's social networking but largely off-limits to out-groups (i.e. non-Jews). What next, you're going to tell me that the various ethnic gangs (the Italian mafia, the Cubans, the Russians, the Columbians...) are open to hiring people who do not belong to their ethnicity?

"those people are zionist zealots"
Like I said earlier, it's not just Zionism. It's Judeo-tribalism. You look after your own kind and you screw everyone else. It's not as narrow as Zionism (usually means the interests of the state of Israel) but not so broad as to encompass all Jews.

"may not actively practice their faith"
Jewish identity is threefold: ethnic, religious and cultural. And the Jews themselves consider the Jewish religion and identity as a contract or bond with God. You can say you're an atheist, but from their POV that doesn't not absolve you from your contact with God, which in non-metaphysical terms means your bond with the Jewish community.

"who happen to share opinions"
Having a vast majority of media owners and controllers have homogeneous opinions isn't desirable. And when so many media owners and controllers have largely the same opinions, they're not just their opinions anymore, they're molding and shaping the opinions of the entire country.

"Wow, what an amazing conspiracy. "
Yeah, because powerful people getting together to increase their power and screw everybody else is such an extraordinary and outlandish claim.

The Italian Mafia, for example, IS a conspiracy. A bunch of power-hungry unscrupulous men got together in secret meetings and decided to gain power, money and influence in unethical ways at the expense of the general public. No, that does not mean that all Italian people are in on it, but that doesn't mean it's not real and harmful.

But when you switch that over to Jews doing the same thing, suddenly your brain shuts down and suddenly it's a whacky conspiracy theory.

It's not like every single government in the history of mankind has been corrupt. And it's totally unimaginable that CEOs and top executives may have done something unscrupulous to get where they are. And it's totally unthinkable that people have a bias for their own race.

Jesus fucking Christ, how can you even survive being this fucking naive?
User avatar
#116 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish? And what is the communication between them and the media? Also "Jews themselves consider" what all of them? Also you make the point that a majority of the country shares an opinion that means that you think the media shapes what the people want rather than the people shaping what the media says, where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later?

The problem I have is not that there are rich people being pricks, that isn't shocking. The problem I have is that you take them, say it is because they are jewish when you haven't shown me something beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish which doesn't prove they all helped each other get there, if you can prove that they all helped each other get there solely because they are all jewish rather than it being advantageous in a business sense or not having a connection at all I will reconsider and then go back and say "but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway lumping them all together with a conspiracy that looks more like corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish.

They idea of rich people cheating to become more rich isn't unbelievable, the fact that you say it is because they are jewish and that they are all helping each other solely because they are all jewish is what I find extremely hard to believe.

Also I've seen the media pander to mass crowds more than CEO's or the government.
User avatar
#122 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later? "
e.g. media blackout on Occupy Wall Street.
The media says what it's owners want to say. If the audience wants to retort, they can't. How can they? All the mainstream media is in the hands of the same clique of rich powerful assholes. If the general public and citizens want to express themselves in other ways because the media is closed off to them, e.g. demonstrations. They get portrayed as riots by "extremists" and "racists" and every name in the book, or more likely get a media blackout.
When it comes to entertainment such as reality TV and trash culture. Yes, the media has no problem selling the public whatever garbage the public wants. if it dumbs them down, that's an added bonus. But when it comes to political issues, the public will be told what the assholes in power want them to hear whether the public likes it or not. Of course, they'll use every mass manipulation technique in the book (largely invented by Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays also Jews woohoo!) to have the public swallow the message as smoothly as possible.

"because they are jewish"
It is not BECAUSE they are Jewish that they are corrupt. Every race has a bunch of corrupt elite asshole at its top. Jews are no exception.

"beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish"
Then correlate what the media says, with the policies of government, the interests of also-Jewish-controlled arms manufacturers, banks, corporations, etc. If those align, then you can reasonably deduce that a large subset of those jews are working for their own and each other's interests at the expense of everyone else.

"corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish. "
It's both. If you're going to be a corrupt CEO or politician would you hire people underneath you or with you who are related to you or would you hire a total stranger? Would you hire your brother or cousin? Naturally not everybody they hire is not a stranger, but the bent towards hiring from the inner circle is there.
Hiring from within your own social circle means the other person can't betray you without paying a reputation cost in that social circle, in this case, the ultra-wealthy club of the Jewish community. Every nation or ethnicity has rich people at the top and they all form their own exclusive club and they're real sticklers about that club being exclusive. Once you get kicked out, it's damn near impossible to get back in. "You take care of us, we take care of you".
Do you believe religions cause discrimination against outgroups? Can you easily imagine muslims being hostile to non-muslims? Why is that so hard to believe when it comes to jews? My bet is that you're a christian or atheist who is not that religious and have a hard time putting yourself in the shoes of people who think solely and view people solely in terms of what religion they believe in and what ethinicity they belong to because you yourself do not think that way.

""but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway "
CEOs and ultra-wealthy jews are a tiny fraction of the Jewish population. The club of ultra-wealthy jews does not extend to all jews.

"What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish?"
I'm sorry, but I'm exhausted. if you are a seeker after the truth as your username implies then continue the rest of the research on your own.
User avatar
#123 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Look man Im gonna level with you this has been not that bad of an experience and I actually enjoyed what you said I thought this was a please argument. You were respectful and eager to explain and not once called me a cuck. I just have my reservations and it would take us hours more to explain it all away. If we were face to face and had more time maybe we could have reached a conclusion and even left tentative friends.

Thank you for your time, goodbye.
#104 - Oh yes let me believe random unsourced images on the internet,…  [+] (12 new replies) 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... 0
User avatar
#106 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Also, the vast number of Africans in Africa who were selling their own race to slave ships bound to the other side of the Atlantic, were they "owning" their families and wives as slaves as well?

The truth is that when travelers started putting up a fight to slavers and drove the price of capturing them up, if blacks weren't the exception and didn't jump on the opportunity to sell their own kind, Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slavery would have died right then and there.
User avatar
#108 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Ah yes "Africans" because there isn't any difference between some one from different tribes and there aren't any conflicts.

Jesus Christ your own link talks constantly about the conflicts going on in Africa: slaverebellion.org/index.php?page=the-black-slave-owners

They didn't "sell their own kind" anymore than english "sold their own kind" when selling irish indentured servants. They sold enemies that resulted from massive regional conflicts, stuff you clearly should've known about as it was stated, once again, in your own evidence.
User avatar
#117 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Because Europe was an idyllic land of peace and peacefulness? Go back to European history and you'll hardly find a decade where there wasn't some nation or white ethnicity fighting another nation or white ethnicity. Whites and Europeans have been killing each for centuries, the recent peace after TWO fucking world wars is an aberration and largely because of the shared threat of the Soviet Union. That's how fucking thick Europeans' skulls are. It took them centuries of killing each other plus two world wars to finally have the bright idea of "Hey, what if we stopped killing each other".

The point being that whites were killing each other just as much as blacks were down in sub-Saharan Africa, but throughout that whole process they didn't engage in slavery of people of the same race as them as black did. Blacks sold orders of magnitude more blacks than whites sold whites, otherwise the Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slave trade would not have become "Black Slavery". Instead it would have been something more like 50% white, 50% black.

Do I have to spoon-feed you every minute detail in my argument?

And that's to say nothing about Black-on-white and/or Muslim-on-Christian slavery in North Africa which was likely far bigger than the trans-Atlantic slave trade ever was.
User avatar
#118 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I like proof of the last part and the reason that they took more prisoners and sold them was because there was a demand, the more demand the more supply, not a hard thing to see. It was a codependent market, Europeans were the demand and Africans were the supply and it was like that for quite some time.

My point was they didn't "sell their own kind" they sold their enemies and they didn't have a problem with it because those people were their enemies. The reason it continued was because europeans had a huge demand for it along with a huge supply that is why europeans selling europeans didn't last long.

Ignoring Russian serfdom which was huge but not as brutal as the slave trade as serfs had slightly more agency in what they did.
User avatar
#124 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
But if Europeans are just as unscrupulous as blacks why didn't they meet that demand by enslaving the whites a stone's throw away from them (and here's the important part) in numbers anywhere approaching the ones at which blacks enslaved other blacks?

Europe had no shortage of inter-white wars. And even if there weren't any, the lure of profit from slavery would have made white ethnicities wage war against another ethnicity under some lame pretext just so they get tons of slaves to sell.

What kept them from doing this AT RATES ANYWHERE NEAR THOSE done by blacks? Is it some sort of innate higher sense of morality? Is it nurture (as opposed to nature) morality inculcated by Christianity? Is it simply correlation with a higher average IQ for the white population? Who knows.
User avatar
#126 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I think that would come down for the same reason as muslims, a good portion of europe was the same religion and it was a foba to enslave Christians when you were one. Plus they all could defend themselves effectively. Easy to obtain African slaves was an easier and more plentiful source than white Europeans as that would require wars and the like to get in any large quantities and as much Europeans did fight they did not fight in large enough and in unified enough numbers to make pows an effective source of slaves for burgeoning empires like the kind that existed during the time of the Atlantic slave trade.
User avatar
#105 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
You're supposed to check for the names on the list. Go ahead and do your due diligence and you'll find the graph to be more accurate than you would like to believe.
User avatar
#107 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
And what is their motivation? What have they done? Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them? Do they exchange money to each other? Meet in the basements of synagogues? Or did you just get told that they were jewish and were expected to fill in the rest with what ever prejudice you can think of.

If you can convince me that every single one of those people are zionist zealots in secret that have constructed a conspiracy together then I will be impressed because to me it looks like a bunch of random people who may or may not actively practice their faith who happen to share opinions that are popular throughout the country but don't align with your opinions. Wow, what an amazing conspiracy.
User avatar
#112 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"And what is their motivation?"
You mean beyond disproportionate power and profit and control?

"What have they done?"
Clearly you have been under a rock and haven't been aware of the collusion between media and government. How are the arms manufacturers, also disproportionately Jewish, going to sell yet another war or military intervention or obscenely massive military spending to the public without the media selling their lies?

"Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them?"
Boardroom meetings are closed to the public. There's no conspiracy there. Speaking of secret meeting how about that meeting of banksters and Big Business way back in the day at Jekyll Island? Think tanks such as CFR and Trilateral Commission, who formulate policy fo rthe US government, meet out in the public, right?

"Do they exchange money to each other?"
No, there's no such thing as backroom wheeling and dealing and "I rub your back, you rub mine".

"Meet in the basements of synagogues?"
It's social networking but largely off-limits to out-groups (i.e. non-Jews). What next, you're going to tell me that the various ethnic gangs (the Italian mafia, the Cubans, the Russians, the Columbians...) are open to hiring people who do not belong to their ethnicity?

"those people are zionist zealots"
Like I said earlier, it's not just Zionism. It's Judeo-tribalism. You look after your own kind and you screw everyone else. It's not as narrow as Zionism (usually means the interests of the state of Israel) but not so broad as to encompass all Jews.

"may not actively practice their faith"
Jewish identity is threefold: ethnic, religious and cultural. And the Jews themselves consider the Jewish religion and identity as a contract or bond with God. You can say you're an atheist, but from their POV that doesn't not absolve you from your contact with God, which in non-metaphysical terms means your bond with the Jewish community.

"who happen to share opinions"
Having a vast majority of media owners and controllers have homogeneous opinions isn't desirable. And when so many media owners and controllers have largely the same opinions, they're not just their opinions anymore, they're molding and shaping the opinions of the entire country.

"Wow, what an amazing conspiracy. "
Yeah, because powerful people getting together to increase their power and screw everybody else is such an extraordinary and outlandish claim.

The Italian Mafia, for example, IS a conspiracy. A bunch of power-hungry unscrupulous men got together in secret meetings and decided to gain power, money and influence in unethical ways at the expense of the general public. No, that does not mean that all Italian people are in on it, but that doesn't mean it's not real and harmful.

But when you switch that over to Jews doing the same thing, suddenly your brain shuts down and suddenly it's a whacky conspiracy theory.

It's not like every single government in the history of mankind has been corrupt. And it's totally unimaginable that CEOs and top executives may have done something unscrupulous to get where they are. And it's totally unthinkable that people have a bias for their own race.

Jesus fucking Christ, how can you even survive being this fucking naive?
User avatar
#116 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish? And what is the communication between them and the media? Also "Jews themselves consider" what all of them? Also you make the point that a majority of the country shares an opinion that means that you think the media shapes what the people want rather than the people shaping what the media says, where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later?

The problem I have is not that there are rich people being pricks, that isn't shocking. The problem I have is that you take them, say it is because they are jewish when you haven't shown me something beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish which doesn't prove they all helped each other get there, if you can prove that they all helped each other get there solely because they are all jewish rather than it being advantageous in a business sense or not having a connection at all I will reconsider and then go back and say "but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway lumping them all together with a conspiracy that looks more like corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish.

They idea of rich people cheating to become more rich isn't unbelievable, the fact that you say it is because they are jewish and that they are all helping each other solely because they are all jewish is what I find extremely hard to believe.

Also I've seen the media pander to mass crowds more than CEO's or the government.
User avatar
#122 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later? "
e.g. media blackout on Occupy Wall Street.
The media says what it's owners want to say. If the audience wants to retort, they can't. How can they? All the mainstream media is in the hands of the same clique of rich powerful assholes. If the general public and citizens want to express themselves in other ways because the media is closed off to them, e.g. demonstrations. They get portrayed as riots by "extremists" and "racists" and every name in the book, or more likely get a media blackout.
When it comes to entertainment such as reality TV and trash culture. Yes, the media has no problem selling the public whatever garbage the public wants. if it dumbs them down, that's an added bonus. But when it comes to political issues, the public will be told what the assholes in power want them to hear whether the public likes it or not. Of course, they'll use every mass manipulation technique in the book (largely invented by Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays also Jews woohoo!) to have the public swallow the message as smoothly as possible.

"because they are jewish"
It is not BECAUSE they are Jewish that they are corrupt. Every race has a bunch of corrupt elite asshole at its top. Jews are no exception.

"beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish"
Then correlate what the media says, with the policies of government, the interests of also-Jewish-controlled arms manufacturers, banks, corporations, etc. If those align, then you can reasonably deduce that a large subset of those jews are working for their own and each other's interests at the expense of everyone else.

"corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish. "
It's both. If you're going to be a corrupt CEO or politician would you hire people underneath you or with you who are related to you or would you hire a total stranger? Would you hire your brother or cousin? Naturally not everybody they hire is not a stranger, but the bent towards hiring from the inner circle is there.
Hiring from within your own social circle means the other person can't betray you without paying a reputation cost in that social circle, in this case, the ultra-wealthy club of the Jewish community. Every nation or ethnicity has rich people at the top and they all form their own exclusive club and they're real sticklers about that club being exclusive. Once you get kicked out, it's damn near impossible to get back in. "You take care of us, we take care of you".
Do you believe religions cause discrimination against outgroups? Can you easily imagine muslims being hostile to non-muslims? Why is that so hard to believe when it comes to jews? My bet is that you're a christian or atheist who is not that religious and have a hard time putting yourself in the shoes of people who think solely and view people solely in terms of what religion they believe in and what ethinicity they belong to because you yourself do not think that way.

""but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway "
CEOs and ultra-wealthy jews are a tiny fraction of the Jewish population. The club of ultra-wealthy jews does not extend to all jews.

"What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish?"
I'm sorry, but I'm exhausted. if you are a seeker after the truth as your username implies then continue the rest of the research on your own.
User avatar
#123 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Look man Im gonna level with you this has been not that bad of an experience and I actually enjoyed what you said I thought this was a please argument. You were respectful and eager to explain and not once called me a cuck. I just have my reservations and it would take us hours more to explain it all away. If we were face to face and had more time maybe we could have reached a conclusion and even left tentative friends.

Thank you for your time, goodbye.
#102 - You have just pointed out that the free white population was b…  [+] (14 new replies) 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... +1
#103 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"You have just pointed out that"
Oh for the love of God! Let's say 99% of the population is white and 1% is black. Among that white population, for every 1000 white people, there may be, let's say, 20 slave owners. Among the black population, for every 1000 black people there is, let's say, 150 slave owners. The RATE (i.e. percentage or permillage) of slave ownership among the black population is a lot higher than the RATE of slave owners among the white population, but that can still lead to a bigger total ABSOLUTE NUMBER of slave owners that are white compared to those who are black because the white population is so much bigger than the black population.

Plus Africans weren't "eager"
Yes, they were. And a lot smaller percentage of them had enough moral reservations against slavery, as compared to other races, to limit selling members of their own race to slavers. All races (white, chinese, arabs, mullatos, sub-Saharan Africans, native mesoamericans...) are tempted with profit to capture and sell their own kind as slaves. But the blacks did it at far higher rates and crashed the price of black slaves compared to slaves of other races.

"are you serious with the whole "jewish run media" thing? Come on, what is your proof?"
Not just news companies, but all media companies. Their CEOs, chairmen, presidents, shareholders, etc. are not only disproportionately Jewish but also majority Jewish. And keep in mind that Jews in the US are only about 2% the US population, but they represent high double digits (very often very close to 100%) of control over almost all major media companies.
i.imgur.com/ENMHMIj.jpg
i.stack.imgur.com/PPhcg.jpg

User avatar
#104 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Oh yes let me believe random unsourced images on the internet, that is definitely smart.

Plus I explained, using your own source, that blacks that owned slaves owned significantly less slaves than whites and it consisted of a lot family members and was required of the blacks to maintain their freedom in the state that they live.

You cited Charlestown as one of the places where a high amount blacks owned slaves which would make sense as Virginia is one of the states to enact this policy.

So yes a lot of blacks owned slaves but the majority of the percentage owned 1-9, an extremely small number and most of these slaves were related to the owner and counted as slaves so that the owner could maintain their free status. Some blacks did make a lot of money and own a lot of slaves and those people were assholes and the whites that owned slaves were assholes but you seem to only be focusing on the blacks and the other side on the whites. All of this using your own evidence by the way.

This goes back to my original point that you're both fools progressing towards nothing because all you do is complain about how "blacks owned slaves and were bad" and vice versa for the other idiots. My efforts here are to show both races were deeply at fault but you seem to be focusing on Jews and Blacks.

Fuck it this isn't going anywhere, go ahead and think the media is run by jews and that blacks owned a proportionately larger amount of slaves for no reason beyond profit. I clearly can't change your mind if you are more convinced by some random picture from " theforbiddentruth.net ".
User avatar
#106 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Also, the vast number of Africans in Africa who were selling their own race to slave ships bound to the other side of the Atlantic, were they "owning" their families and wives as slaves as well?

The truth is that when travelers started putting up a fight to slavers and drove the price of capturing them up, if blacks weren't the exception and didn't jump on the opportunity to sell their own kind, Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slavery would have died right then and there.
User avatar
#108 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Ah yes "Africans" because there isn't any difference between some one from different tribes and there aren't any conflicts.

Jesus Christ your own link talks constantly about the conflicts going on in Africa: slaverebellion.org/index.php?page=the-black-slave-owners

They didn't "sell their own kind" anymore than english "sold their own kind" when selling irish indentured servants. They sold enemies that resulted from massive regional conflicts, stuff you clearly should've known about as it was stated, once again, in your own evidence.
User avatar
#117 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Because Europe was an idyllic land of peace and peacefulness? Go back to European history and you'll hardly find a decade where there wasn't some nation or white ethnicity fighting another nation or white ethnicity. Whites and Europeans have been killing each for centuries, the recent peace after TWO fucking world wars is an aberration and largely because of the shared threat of the Soviet Union. That's how fucking thick Europeans' skulls are. It took them centuries of killing each other plus two world wars to finally have the bright idea of "Hey, what if we stopped killing each other".

The point being that whites were killing each other just as much as blacks were down in sub-Saharan Africa, but throughout that whole process they didn't engage in slavery of people of the same race as them as black did. Blacks sold orders of magnitude more blacks than whites sold whites, otherwise the Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slave trade would not have become "Black Slavery". Instead it would have been something more like 50% white, 50% black.

Do I have to spoon-feed you every minute detail in my argument?

And that's to say nothing about Black-on-white and/or Muslim-on-Christian slavery in North Africa which was likely far bigger than the trans-Atlantic slave trade ever was.
User avatar
#118 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I like proof of the last part and the reason that they took more prisoners and sold them was because there was a demand, the more demand the more supply, not a hard thing to see. It was a codependent market, Europeans were the demand and Africans were the supply and it was like that for quite some time.

My point was they didn't "sell their own kind" they sold their enemies and they didn't have a problem with it because those people were their enemies. The reason it continued was because europeans had a huge demand for it along with a huge supply that is why europeans selling europeans didn't last long.

Ignoring Russian serfdom which was huge but not as brutal as the slave trade as serfs had slightly more agency in what they did.
User avatar
#124 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
But if Europeans are just as unscrupulous as blacks why didn't they meet that demand by enslaving the whites a stone's throw away from them (and here's the important part) in numbers anywhere approaching the ones at which blacks enslaved other blacks?

Europe had no shortage of inter-white wars. And even if there weren't any, the lure of profit from slavery would have made white ethnicities wage war against another ethnicity under some lame pretext just so they get tons of slaves to sell.

What kept them from doing this AT RATES ANYWHERE NEAR THOSE done by blacks? Is it some sort of innate higher sense of morality? Is it nurture (as opposed to nature) morality inculcated by Christianity? Is it simply correlation with a higher average IQ for the white population? Who knows.
User avatar
#126 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I think that would come down for the same reason as muslims, a good portion of europe was the same religion and it was a foba to enslave Christians when you were one. Plus they all could defend themselves effectively. Easy to obtain African slaves was an easier and more plentiful source than white Europeans as that would require wars and the like to get in any large quantities and as much Europeans did fight they did not fight in large enough and in unified enough numbers to make pows an effective source of slaves for burgeoning empires like the kind that existed during the time of the Atlantic slave trade.
User avatar
#105 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
You're supposed to check for the names on the list. Go ahead and do your due diligence and you'll find the graph to be more accurate than you would like to believe.
User avatar
#107 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
And what is their motivation? What have they done? Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them? Do they exchange money to each other? Meet in the basements of synagogues? Or did you just get told that they were jewish and were expected to fill in the rest with what ever prejudice you can think of.

If you can convince me that every single one of those people are zionist zealots in secret that have constructed a conspiracy together then I will be impressed because to me it looks like a bunch of random people who may or may not actively practice their faith who happen to share opinions that are popular throughout the country but don't align with your opinions. Wow, what an amazing conspiracy.
User avatar
#112 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"And what is their motivation?"
You mean beyond disproportionate power and profit and control?

"What have they done?"
Clearly you have been under a rock and haven't been aware of the collusion between media and government. How are the arms manufacturers, also disproportionately Jewish, going to sell yet another war or military intervention or obscenely massive military spending to the public without the media selling their lies?

"Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them?"
Boardroom meetings are closed to the public. There's no conspiracy there. Speaking of secret meeting how about that meeting of banksters and Big Business way back in the day at Jekyll Island? Think tanks such as CFR and Trilateral Commission, who formulate policy fo rthe US government, meet out in the public, right?

"Do they exchange money to each other?"
No, there's no such thing as backroom wheeling and dealing and "I rub your back, you rub mine".

"Meet in the basements of synagogues?"
It's social networking but largely off-limits to out-groups (i.e. non-Jews). What next, you're going to tell me that the various ethnic gangs (the Italian mafia, the Cubans, the Russians, the Columbians...) are open to hiring people who do not belong to their ethnicity?

"those people are zionist zealots"
Like I said earlier, it's not just Zionism. It's Judeo-tribalism. You look after your own kind and you screw everyone else. It's not as narrow as Zionism (usually means the interests of the state of Israel) but not so broad as to encompass all Jews.

"may not actively practice their faith"
Jewish identity is threefold: ethnic, religious and cultural. And the Jews themselves consider the Jewish religion and identity as a contract or bond with God. You can say you're an atheist, but from their POV that doesn't not absolve you from your contact with God, which in non-metaphysical terms means your bond with the Jewish community.

"who happen to share opinions"
Having a vast majority of media owners and controllers have homogeneous opinions isn't desirable. And when so many media owners and controllers have largely the same opinions, they're not just their opinions anymore, they're molding and shaping the opinions of the entire country.

"Wow, what an amazing conspiracy. "
Yeah, because powerful people getting together to increase their power and screw everybody else is such an extraordinary and outlandish claim.

The Italian Mafia, for example, IS a conspiracy. A bunch of power-hungry unscrupulous men got together in secret meetings and decided to gain power, money and influence in unethical ways at the expense of the general public. No, that does not mean that all Italian people are in on it, but that doesn't mean it's not real and harmful.

But when you switch that over to Jews doing the same thing, suddenly your brain shuts down and suddenly it's a whacky conspiracy theory.

It's not like every single government in the history of mankind has been corrupt. And it's totally unimaginable that CEOs and top executives may have done something unscrupulous to get where they are. And it's totally unthinkable that people have a bias for their own race.

Jesus fucking Christ, how can you even survive being this fucking naive?
User avatar
#116 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish? And what is the communication between them and the media? Also "Jews themselves consider" what all of them? Also you make the point that a majority of the country shares an opinion that means that you think the media shapes what the people want rather than the people shaping what the media says, where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later?

The problem I have is not that there are rich people being pricks, that isn't shocking. The problem I have is that you take them, say it is because they are jewish when you haven't shown me something beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish which doesn't prove they all helped each other get there, if you can prove that they all helped each other get there solely because they are all jewish rather than it being advantageous in a business sense or not having a connection at all I will reconsider and then go back and say "but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway lumping them all together with a conspiracy that looks more like corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish.

They idea of rich people cheating to become more rich isn't unbelievable, the fact that you say it is because they are jewish and that they are all helping each other solely because they are all jewish is what I find extremely hard to believe.

Also I've seen the media pander to mass crowds more than CEO's or the government.
User avatar
#122 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later? "
e.g. media blackout on Occupy Wall Street.
The media says what it's owners want to say. If the audience wants to retort, they can't. How can they? All the mainstream media is in the hands of the same clique of rich powerful assholes. If the general public and citizens want to express themselves in other ways because the media is closed off to them, e.g. demonstrations. They get portrayed as riots by "extremists" and "racists" and every name in the book, or more likely get a media blackout.
When it comes to entertainment such as reality TV and trash culture. Yes, the media has no problem selling the public whatever garbage the public wants. if it dumbs them down, that's an added bonus. But when it comes to political issues, the public will be told what the assholes in power want them to hear whether the public likes it or not. Of course, they'll use every mass manipulation technique in the book (largely invented by Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays also Jews woohoo!) to have the public swallow the message as smoothly as possible.

"because they are jewish"
It is not BECAUSE they are Jewish that they are corrupt. Every race has a bunch of corrupt elite asshole at its top. Jews are no exception.

"beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish"
Then correlate what the media says, with the policies of government, the interests of also-Jewish-controlled arms manufacturers, banks, corporations, etc. If those align, then you can reasonably deduce that a large subset of those jews are working for their own and each other's interests at the expense of everyone else.

"corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish. "
It's both. If you're going to be a corrupt CEO or politician would you hire people underneath you or with you who are related to you or would you hire a total stranger? Would you hire your brother or cousin? Naturally not everybody they hire is not a stranger, but the bent towards hiring from the inner circle is there.
Hiring from within your own social circle means the other person can't betray you without paying a reputation cost in that social circle, in this case, the ultra-wealthy club of the Jewish community. Every nation or ethnicity has rich people at the top and they all form their own exclusive club and they're real sticklers about that club being exclusive. Once you get kicked out, it's damn near impossible to get back in. "You take care of us, we take care of you".
Do you believe religions cause discrimination against outgroups? Can you easily imagine muslims being hostile to non-muslims? Why is that so hard to believe when it comes to jews? My bet is that you're a christian or atheist who is not that religious and have a hard time putting yourself in the shoes of people who think solely and view people solely in terms of what religion they believe in and what ethinicity they belong to because you yourself do not think that way.

""but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway "
CEOs and ultra-wealthy jews are a tiny fraction of the Jewish population. The club of ultra-wealthy jews does not extend to all jews.

"What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish?"
I'm sorry, but I'm exhausted. if you are a seeker after the truth as your username implies then continue the rest of the research on your own.
User avatar
#123 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Look man Im gonna level with you this has been not that bad of an experience and I actually enjoyed what you said I thought this was a please argument. You were respectful and eager to explain and not once called me a cuck. I just have my reservations and it would take us hours more to explain it all away. If we were face to face and had more time maybe we could have reached a conclusion and even left tentative friends.

Thank you for your time, goodbye.
#98 - All in all I think your argument is idiotic because the proble… 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... +1
#96 - Comment deleted  [+] (16 new replies) 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... 0
User avatar
#100 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
My original contention was:
"back in the day when slavery was legal and blacks were just as allowed to own slaves and many cities had more black slave owners than white"
I proved the first part and for the second part, I wasn't able to point out specific cities where black slave owners outnumbered white. This is probably due to the white population being far bigger than the black population. But black had far greater slave ownership RATES than whites. Now, if you want to say they owned slave out of the goodness of their hearts, you may, and I may call BS as well.

The point I really wanted to make that it wasn't black-and-white (pardon the pun) and straight up white vs black, with whites as the oppressors and blacks as the victims. If all I accomplished is disproving that Jewish-media-manufactured narrative, then I have done enough.

A couple of things to note, is that originally the Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slave trade wasn't exclusively black slavery. It was slavery of every ethnicitiy. When potential victims of slaver ships started putting up a fight, the cost of capturing slaves went up. It wasn't until this was coupled with the readiness and eagerness Africans demonstrated in enslaving other blacks and selling them to slaver that the Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slavery transformed into "black slavery".

The second thing to note is that, whites in America, were among the first nations to abolish slavery in an age where it was almost universally practiced and accepted. Not to say anything of the countless whites who fought and died in the civil war for abolition (granted, among other reasons).
User avatar
#102 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
You have just pointed out that the free white population was bigger than the free black population and then said that more free blacks owned slaves than free whites! No shit! If there are less free blacks and legislation in place that you are required to own a slave to be free then of course a greater percentage of a smaller population will own slaves!

Plus I didn't say the all owned slaves out of the goodness of their hearts, Woodson someone you cited as supporting your argument did. "Benevolent Negroes", was his first hand words not mine.

Plus Africans weren't "eager" to sell people like they loved to enslave others and treat people like shit, they were eager for profit much like all kinds of people, black and white, all over the world.

Plus the Republic of Venice abolished slavery in 960, Iceland in 1117, 1200 it's practically gone in Japan save POWs, 1335 Sweden and Finland do as well. It does not belittle the point that we were good to do it but it shows not to sing our praises either, England did just before us and it was the way things were going for a long time. We were right and good to fight for it but sitting around saying how good we were to do it is wasting time that could be put towards currently achieving something.

And are you serious with the whole "jewish run media" thing? Come on, what is your proof? That someone who is Jewish disagrees with you and works on a new station? Does that mean that there is some secret society? No, It means there are uniformed people out there saying bullshit, some of them are jewish some of them are catholic all of them are assholes and blaming their religion just takes responsibility away from them and rests it on a group of people where a majority of them haven't done anything wrong.
#103 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"You have just pointed out that"
Oh for the love of God! Let's say 99% of the population is white and 1% is black. Among that white population, for every 1000 white people, there may be, let's say, 20 slave owners. Among the black population, for every 1000 black people there is, let's say, 150 slave owners. The RATE (i.e. percentage or permillage) of slave ownership among the black population is a lot higher than the RATE of slave owners among the white population, but that can still lead to a bigger total ABSOLUTE NUMBER of slave owners that are white compared to those who are black because the white population is so much bigger than the black population.

Plus Africans weren't "eager"
Yes, they were. And a lot smaller percentage of them had enough moral reservations against slavery, as compared to other races, to limit selling members of their own race to slavers. All races (white, chinese, arabs, mullatos, sub-Saharan Africans, native mesoamericans...) are tempted with profit to capture and sell their own kind as slaves. But the blacks did it at far higher rates and crashed the price of black slaves compared to slaves of other races.

"are you serious with the whole "jewish run media" thing? Come on, what is your proof?"
Not just news companies, but all media companies. Their CEOs, chairmen, presidents, shareholders, etc. are not only disproportionately Jewish but also majority Jewish. And keep in mind that Jews in the US are only about 2% the US population, but they represent high double digits (very often very close to 100%) of control over almost all major media companies.
i.imgur.com/ENMHMIj.jpg
i.stack.imgur.com/PPhcg.jpg

User avatar
#104 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Oh yes let me believe random unsourced images on the internet, that is definitely smart.

Plus I explained, using your own source, that blacks that owned slaves owned significantly less slaves than whites and it consisted of a lot family members and was required of the blacks to maintain their freedom in the state that they live.

You cited Charlestown as one of the places where a high amount blacks owned slaves which would make sense as Virginia is one of the states to enact this policy.

So yes a lot of blacks owned slaves but the majority of the percentage owned 1-9, an extremely small number and most of these slaves were related to the owner and counted as slaves so that the owner could maintain their free status. Some blacks did make a lot of money and own a lot of slaves and those people were assholes and the whites that owned slaves were assholes but you seem to only be focusing on the blacks and the other side on the whites. All of this using your own evidence by the way.

This goes back to my original point that you're both fools progressing towards nothing because all you do is complain about how "blacks owned slaves and were bad" and vice versa for the other idiots. My efforts here are to show both races were deeply at fault but you seem to be focusing on Jews and Blacks.

Fuck it this isn't going anywhere, go ahead and think the media is run by jews and that blacks owned a proportionately larger amount of slaves for no reason beyond profit. I clearly can't change your mind if you are more convinced by some random picture from " theforbiddentruth.net ".
User avatar
#106 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Also, the vast number of Africans in Africa who were selling their own race to slave ships bound to the other side of the Atlantic, were they "owning" their families and wives as slaves as well?

The truth is that when travelers started putting up a fight to slavers and drove the price of capturing them up, if blacks weren't the exception and didn't jump on the opportunity to sell their own kind, Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slavery would have died right then and there.
User avatar
#108 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Ah yes "Africans" because there isn't any difference between some one from different tribes and there aren't any conflicts.

Jesus Christ your own link talks constantly about the conflicts going on in Africa: slaverebellion.org/index.php?page=the-black-slave-owners

They didn't "sell their own kind" anymore than english "sold their own kind" when selling irish indentured servants. They sold enemies that resulted from massive regional conflicts, stuff you clearly should've known about as it was stated, once again, in your own evidence.
User avatar
#117 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
Because Europe was an idyllic land of peace and peacefulness? Go back to European history and you'll hardly find a decade where there wasn't some nation or white ethnicity fighting another nation or white ethnicity. Whites and Europeans have been killing each for centuries, the recent peace after TWO fucking world wars is an aberration and largely because of the shared threat of the Soviet Union. That's how fucking thick Europeans' skulls are. It took them centuries of killing each other plus two world wars to finally have the bright idea of "Hey, what if we stopped killing each other".

The point being that whites were killing each other just as much as blacks were down in sub-Saharan Africa, but throughout that whole process they didn't engage in slavery of people of the same race as them as black did. Blacks sold orders of magnitude more blacks than whites sold whites, otherwise the Caribbean and trans-Atlantic slave trade would not have become "Black Slavery". Instead it would have been something more like 50% white, 50% black.

Do I have to spoon-feed you every minute detail in my argument?

And that's to say nothing about Black-on-white and/or Muslim-on-Christian slavery in North Africa which was likely far bigger than the trans-Atlantic slave trade ever was.
User avatar
#118 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I like proof of the last part and the reason that they took more prisoners and sold them was because there was a demand, the more demand the more supply, not a hard thing to see. It was a codependent market, Europeans were the demand and Africans were the supply and it was like that for quite some time.

My point was they didn't "sell their own kind" they sold their enemies and they didn't have a problem with it because those people were their enemies. The reason it continued was because europeans had a huge demand for it along with a huge supply that is why europeans selling europeans didn't last long.

Ignoring Russian serfdom which was huge but not as brutal as the slave trade as serfs had slightly more agency in what they did.
User avatar
#124 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
But if Europeans are just as unscrupulous as blacks why didn't they meet that demand by enslaving the whites a stone's throw away from them (and here's the important part) in numbers anywhere approaching the ones at which blacks enslaved other blacks?

Europe had no shortage of inter-white wars. And even if there weren't any, the lure of profit from slavery would have made white ethnicities wage war against another ethnicity under some lame pretext just so they get tons of slaves to sell.

What kept them from doing this AT RATES ANYWHERE NEAR THOSE done by blacks? Is it some sort of innate higher sense of morality? Is it nurture (as opposed to nature) morality inculcated by Christianity? Is it simply correlation with a higher average IQ for the white population? Who knows.
User avatar
#126 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
I think that would come down for the same reason as muslims, a good portion of europe was the same religion and it was a foba to enslave Christians when you were one. Plus they all could defend themselves effectively. Easy to obtain African slaves was an easier and more plentiful source than white Europeans as that would require wars and the like to get in any large quantities and as much Europeans did fight they did not fight in large enough and in unified enough numbers to make pows an effective source of slaves for burgeoning empires like the kind that existed during the time of the Atlantic slave trade.
User avatar
#105 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
You're supposed to check for the names on the list. Go ahead and do your due diligence and you'll find the graph to be more accurate than you would like to believe.
User avatar
#107 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
And what is their motivation? What have they done? Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them? Do they exchange money to each other? Meet in the basements of synagogues? Or did you just get told that they were jewish and were expected to fill in the rest with what ever prejudice you can think of.

If you can convince me that every single one of those people are zionist zealots in secret that have constructed a conspiracy together then I will be impressed because to me it looks like a bunch of random people who may or may not actively practice their faith who happen to share opinions that are popular throughout the country but don't align with your opinions. Wow, what an amazing conspiracy.
User avatar
#112 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"And what is their motivation?"
You mean beyond disproportionate power and profit and control?

"What have they done?"
Clearly you have been under a rock and haven't been aware of the collusion between media and government. How are the arms manufacturers, also disproportionately Jewish, going to sell yet another war or military intervention or obscenely massive military spending to the public without the media selling their lies?

"Have they all met in secrets? Has there been emails between them?"
Boardroom meetings are closed to the public. There's no conspiracy there. Speaking of secret meeting how about that meeting of banksters and Big Business way back in the day at Jekyll Island? Think tanks such as CFR and Trilateral Commission, who formulate policy fo rthe US government, meet out in the public, right?

"Do they exchange money to each other?"
No, there's no such thing as backroom wheeling and dealing and "I rub your back, you rub mine".

"Meet in the basements of synagogues?"
It's social networking but largely off-limits to out-groups (i.e. non-Jews). What next, you're going to tell me that the various ethnic gangs (the Italian mafia, the Cubans, the Russians, the Columbians...) are open to hiring people who do not belong to their ethnicity?

"those people are zionist zealots"
Like I said earlier, it's not just Zionism. It's Judeo-tribalism. You look after your own kind and you screw everyone else. It's not as narrow as Zionism (usually means the interests of the state of Israel) but not so broad as to encompass all Jews.

"may not actively practice their faith"
Jewish identity is threefold: ethnic, religious and cultural. And the Jews themselves consider the Jewish religion and identity as a contract or bond with God. You can say you're an atheist, but from their POV that doesn't not absolve you from your contact with God, which in non-metaphysical terms means your bond with the Jewish community.

"who happen to share opinions"
Having a vast majority of media owners and controllers have homogeneous opinions isn't desirable. And when so many media owners and controllers have largely the same opinions, they're not just their opinions anymore, they're molding and shaping the opinions of the entire country.

"Wow, what an amazing conspiracy. "
Yeah, because powerful people getting together to increase their power and screw everybody else is such an extraordinary and outlandish claim.

The Italian Mafia, for example, IS a conspiracy. A bunch of power-hungry unscrupulous men got together in secret meetings and decided to gain power, money and influence in unethical ways at the expense of the general public. No, that does not mean that all Italian people are in on it, but that doesn't mean it's not real and harmful.

But when you switch that over to Jews doing the same thing, suddenly your brain shuts down and suddenly it's a whacky conspiracy theory.

It's not like every single government in the history of mankind has been corrupt. And it's totally unimaginable that CEOs and top executives may have done something unscrupulous to get where they are. And it's totally unthinkable that people have a bias for their own race.

Jesus fucking Christ, how can you even survive being this fucking naive?
User avatar
#116 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish? And what is the communication between them and the media? Also "Jews themselves consider" what all of them? Also you make the point that a majority of the country shares an opinion that means that you think the media shapes what the people want rather than the people shaping what the media says, where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later?

The problem I have is not that there are rich people being pricks, that isn't shocking. The problem I have is that you take them, say it is because they are jewish when you haven't shown me something beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish which doesn't prove they all helped each other get there, if you can prove that they all helped each other get there solely because they are all jewish rather than it being advantageous in a business sense or not having a connection at all I will reconsider and then go back and say "but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway lumping them all together with a conspiracy that looks more like corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish.

They idea of rich people cheating to become more rich isn't unbelievable, the fact that you say it is because they are jewish and that they are all helping each other solely because they are all jewish is what I find extremely hard to believe.

Also I've seen the media pander to mass crowds more than CEO's or the government.
User avatar
#122 - elenalkarnur (09/27/2015) [-]
"where is the proof that it is the first rather than the later? "
e.g. media blackout on Occupy Wall Street.
The media says what it's owners want to say. If the audience wants to retort, they can't. How can they? All the mainstream media is in the hands of the same clique of rich powerful assholes. If the general public and citizens want to express themselves in other ways because the media is closed off to them, e.g. demonstrations. They get portrayed as riots by "extremists" and "racists" and every name in the book, or more likely get a media blackout.
When it comes to entertainment such as reality TV and trash culture. Yes, the media has no problem selling the public whatever garbage the public wants. if it dumbs them down, that's an added bonus. But when it comes to political issues, the public will be told what the assholes in power want them to hear whether the public likes it or not. Of course, they'll use every mass manipulation technique in the book (largely invented by Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays also Jews woohoo!) to have the public swallow the message as smoothly as possible.

"because they are jewish"
It is not BECAUSE they are Jewish that they are corrupt. Every race has a bunch of corrupt elite asshole at its top. Jews are no exception.

"beyond the fact that a lot of them are jewish"
Then correlate what the media says, with the policies of government, the interests of also-Jewish-controlled arms manufacturers, banks, corporations, etc. If those align, then you can reasonably deduce that a large subset of those jews are working for their own and each other's interests at the expense of everyone else.

"corporate greed rather than a bunch off people sticking together solely because they are jewish. "
It's both. If you're going to be a corrupt CEO or politician would you hire people underneath you or with you who are related to you or would you hire a total stranger? Would you hire your brother or cousin? Naturally not everybody they hire is not a stranger, but the bent towards hiring from the inner circle is there.
Hiring from within your own social circle means the other person can't betray you without paying a reputation cost in that social circle, in this case, the ultra-wealthy club of the Jewish community. Every nation or ethnicity has rich people at the top and they all form their own exclusive club and they're real sticklers about that club being exclusive. Once you get kicked out, it's damn near impossible to get back in. "You take care of us, we take care of you".
Do you believe religions cause discrimination against outgroups? Can you easily imagine muslims being hostile to non-muslims? Why is that so hard to believe when it comes to jews? My bet is that you're a christian or atheist who is not that religious and have a hard time putting yourself in the shoes of people who think solely and view people solely in terms of what religion they believe in and what ethinicity they belong to because you yourself do not think that way.

""but it doesn't apply to all jewish people" then shit on jewish people anyway "
CEOs and ultra-wealthy jews are a tiny fraction of the Jewish population. The club of ultra-wealthy jews does not extend to all jews.

"What arms dealers are disproportionately jewish?"
I'm sorry, but I'm exhausted. if you are a seeker after the truth as your username implies then continue the rest of the research on your own.
User avatar
#123 - cupotruth (09/27/2015) [-]
Look man Im gonna level with you this has been not that bad of an experience and I actually enjoyed what you said I thought this was a please argument. You were respectful and eager to explain and not once called me a cuck. I just have my reservations and it would take us hours more to explain it all away. If we were face to face and had more time maybe we could have reached a conclusion and even left tentative friends.

Thank you for your time, goodbye.
#95 - You do know the majority of your links use Woodson's "Fre… 09/27/2015 on 2015 funnyjunk in one easy... +1
#136 - I'm gonna hunt you down and stick a broom up your ass for toyi… 09/26/2015 on Long but worth it +1
#80 - Ah yes, the country that executes gay people for being gay. … 09/24/2015 on oh well... 0