You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
Just because one party commits an act that's considered immoral doesn't excuse the other party to do the same. Either both acts are immoral or both are moral. You can't have it both ways.
there is nothing immoral about refusing to be replaced. The jews were already the immoral aggressors. Saying that we know what you are doing and we aren't going to allow it is not immoral but a justified act of resistance.
Who fired the opening shot, the non-jew or the jew? It's likely lost to history. I personally am of the opinion that they were made that way by the Babylonian captivity. It's where their Talmud comes from.
You shouldn't resent them for their survival strategy. I'm not saying you shouldn't fight against being replaced. Just don't pretend like you're better than them for wanting to destroy them like they do us. Like it or not, you fall on the side of it all being fair-play.
Either the "Jews" (they may not even be Jewish, they could be trolls) are trolling or the White Supremacists reacted to threats of genocide.
You cannot equate trolling to genocide. People trying to piss off White Supremacists for laughs is not the same.
The timeline is important and I am quite positive the reason no one actually answered my question is because it's obvious the "jews" are just reacting and are trolling. And now the White Supremacists are writing a new narrative without being honest about it being a reaction. Which, to me, is despicable and the WS lose this argument quite easily.
I love trolling snowflakes, as well. It's fun watching them get triggered and throw tantrums.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] i_yam_wat_i_yam 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
This is a tu quoque fallacy.
Just because one party commits an act that's considered immoral doesn't excuse the other party to do the same. Either both acts are immoral or both are moral. You can't have it both ways.
[–] ravensedgesom 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
there is nothing immoral about refusing to be replaced. The jews were already the immoral aggressors. Saying that we know what you are doing and we aren't going to allow it is not immoral but a justified act of resistance.
[–] i_yam_wat_i_yam ago
Who fired the opening shot, the non-jew or the jew? It's likely lost to history. I personally am of the opinion that they were made that way by the Babylonian captivity. It's where their Talmud comes from.
You shouldn't resent them for their survival strategy. I'm not saying you shouldn't fight against being replaced. Just don't pretend like you're better than them for wanting to destroy them like they do us. Like it or not, you fall on the side of it all being fair-play.
[–] dadudemon1 ago
That's incorrect.
Either the "Jews" (they may not even be Jewish, they could be trolls) are trolling or the White Supremacists reacted to threats of genocide.
You cannot equate trolling to genocide. People trying to piss off White Supremacists for laughs is not the same.
The timeline is important and I am quite positive the reason no one actually answered my question is because it's obvious the "jews" are just reacting and are trolling. And now the White Supremacists are writing a new narrative without being honest about it being a reaction. Which, to me, is despicable and the WS lose this argument quite easily.
I love trolling snowflakes, as well. It's fun watching them get triggered and throw tantrums.