BeyondFedUp
Hall of Famer
You have mentioned "White ethno state" twice now in as many posts. Why? I don't know of a single poster here on C.F. that has ever or is now advocating that at all, much less talking about it. Why are you??
Ben Shapiro
- Thread starter McCaffrey Dude
- Start date
NolanCromwell
Guru
- Joined
- May 2, 2015
- Messages
- 115
I agree with you, McCaffrey Dude. In light of all of our societal challenges, frequently noted here, I certainly don't consider Shapiro our greatest threat lol. I may not share all of his opinions but often he is fair with his analysis and criticisms.
PHillisFan
Master
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2013
- Messages
- 2,114
I think most people will agree that a white ethnostate in the US is a pipe dream. What can be done is discourage mass immigration and race mixing. The latter ends up becoming a personal choice as we can't control the impulses and disgusting habits of mudsharks. As far as Jews are concerned I don't care much for them except what I would like is for those with prominent roles in the media to quit their duality bs. They like to play both sides as the white person and the semite. You can't have it both ways. I personally don't like Shapiro. He champions conservatism because it's good for Israel. If the democrats were more in favor of Israel, I bet you he'd be supporting liberal policies. You better believe it. His number one priority has always been and will remain Israel.
MD, just so we're clear, I have no interest in labeling you. Dialogue, yes. Discussion, yes. Finger pointing, no.
I don't have an irrational hatred for Shapiro in particular or Jews in general. I do have a bit of wariness toward both, however, based on their track record.
If you like Ben Shapiro, fine. He does say some things that are hard to argue, and his is very intelligent. It's his dogmatic belief in race-blindness that dooms him to the unserious category. Anyone who overrides everyday observation and all existing data in service to the liberal egalitarian cult will never see the world as it is and will certainly not offer credible analysis or solutions. It is not a small matter, because it affects one's assessment of immigration, public education, taxation, "civil rights" law, and many other issues.
A guy who says some good things is better than a guy who says virtually no good things. So, Ben Shapiro > Cenk Uygur.
If you're looking to read some good writers who see clearly and make crucially important points, try Steve Sailer, Paul Gottfried, Paul Kersey, or better still, Samuel Francis. I personally enjoy reading Jim Goad, but I get why some people don't.
For short form video content, Red Elephants is fantastic. Ram Z Paul is, too. James Allsup is very good. Colin Flaherty has basically one issue, but no one is better at it. Red Ice TV/Radio produces excellent podcast and interview content. The Political Cesspool is a priceless radio broadcast of out of Memphis that is live for 3 hours every Saturday night, and also archived on the website for those who cannot listen live.
Ben Shapiro and the Myth of the Judeo-Christian West
by Vernon Thorpe
As the cathedral of Notre Dame burned in Holy Week, Ben Shapiro took time out to tell his vast social media audience that: “If we wish to uphold the beauty and profundity of the Notre Dame cathedral, that means re-familiarizing ourselves with the philosophy and religious principles that built it.” Shapiro went on to clarify that the cathedral was a “central monument to Western civilization, which was built on the Judeo-Christian heritage.”1 The term ‘Judeo-Christian’ is a favourite of Mr. Shapiro’s and appears with wearying frequency throughout his latest bestselling book The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great.
It took an Israeli paper, Ha’aretz to point out the obvious yet unmentionable:
“There certainly seems to be a degree of wilful blindness, if not crass manipulation, in Shapiro setting up 12th-14th century France, when Notre Dame was being built, as embodying “Judeo-Christian religious principles,” when during that period France’s Jews were expelled (twice), their holy texts subject to public book burnings and their property confiscated by the crown (several times). Look at the actual tangible built evidence of the cathedral itself, whose west front is adorned with twin statues: proud Ecclesia (the Church) and Synagoga (with head bowed, blindfolded with a snake, her crown at her feet and the tablets of the law falling from her hands), representing Christianity’s triumph over Judaism.”2
The Times of Israel paper recorded elsewhere that a prominent and influential rabbi, Shlomo Aviner, considered one of the leaders of the religious Zionist movement, had suggested that the burning of Notre Dame could be divine retribution on Catholics. The piece reported:
““The first great Talmud burning happened in Paris, right there at the Notre Dame Cathedral square,” Aviner wrote. “It was the result of the Paris trial in which Jewish sages were forced to debate Christian sages, and the result was the burning of the Talmud. Volumes of Talmud were brought in 20 carts and burned there, 1,200 Talmud volumes. So [the fire demonstrates] ‘there is justice and there is a Judge,’” he wrote, the quote a reference in Jewish religious literature to divine justice.”3
Mass-burnings of the Talmud took place close to the cathedral in 1242 following the debates Rabbi Aviner mentions. The French-born rabbi further elaborated that Christianity
“is our number one enemy throughout history. [They] tried to convert us by arguments and by force, carried out an inquisition against us, burned the Talmud, expulsions, pogroms. Western anti-Semitism draws from Christianity’s hatred of the ‘murderers of God.’ It also had a role in the Holocaust.”
The disputations had arisen after another French Jew, Nicholas Donin, had converted to Catholicism and gone to see Pope Gregory XI in 1238 to warn him of the blasphemies contained in the Talmud and the danger the text posed to a Catholic culture. Among the charges Donin levelled against the Talmud was that it crudely blasphemed Christ and denigrated His mother (Notre Dame) and that it was the basis of a new anti-Christian rabbinic religion which was not the Judaism of the Old Testament, but rather a way of wrenching away the message of those books from their true fulfilment in the New. In so doing, the Talmud deliberately kept Jews from the light of Christ.
This content of the Talmud was a revelation to most people in Christian Europe at the time. Subsequent scholarship, most recently by Professor Peter Schaefer of Princeton University4 has largely substantiated what Donin had to say about the animus and blasphemies contained in the Talmud (primarily but not exclusively the Babylonian Talmud), with the Gospel of St John a particular target of ire. Schaefer and others highlight the extent to which these authoritative texts deliberately slander the holiest elements of the Christian sacred narrative.
More generally, Israel Yuval of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has done much to establish the conclusion that “The polemic with Christianity that gradually came to dominate the Land of Israel was not conducted openly, but in a convoluted and allusive manner. The Talmuds and midrashim do not explicitly state the name of the rival with whom they are struggling, but the shadow of Christianity nevertheless looms in these rabbinic texts.”5 Long before these debates, St. Jerome was well aware of earlier Jewish interpretations of the Old Testament, which he set out to refute with Christian interpretations, producing an authoritative Latin version of the Bible for the purpose of confuting anti-Christian Jewish accounts.
None of this is even alluded to by Mr Shapiro, who goes on to quote the Talmud approvingly and who in the acknowledgements thanks (alongside John Podhoretz and David French, the man Bill Kristol endorsed for President), his “Talmudic study partner Rabbi Moshe Samuels” (Director of Israel Engagement at Congregation B’nai Jeshurun in New York who “recently served as the Director of Tikkun Olam in Tel Aviv-Jaffa a service-learning Masa program, spearheading the field of Jewish peoplehood and leadership training”).
It’s worth spending some time on this issue, because anyone who talks about ‘Judeo-Christian’ values, let alone makes the term central to his thesis about the decline of the West, needs to be asked some questions. This is not to deny that the term is sometimes used benignly to signify a willingness to work together with those of another Abrahamic faith on genuinely positive social goals. However, use of the term is suggestive of a political agenda which is in some areas far removed from what a well-informed defender of Christendom will see as worthy of support. As Mr Shapiro is continually hailed as an important ‘conservative thinker’, it is worth asking what his version of conservatism omits and what lies behind the terminology he promotes.
“Judeo-Christian”
The term Judeo-Christian has an interesting and varied history. A very early user of the term was Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860) who in his lectures on New Testament theology was concerned to understand how Christianity emerged from the religion of the Old Testament and retained certain features of that ‘particularist’ religion of the ‘chosen people’.6
For this Protestant German idealist and advocate of higher biblical criticism, the term Judeo-Christianity was a theological term used to distinguish between competing schools of thought following Christ’s founding of the Church. Baur accepted supercessionism, though his further aim was to relegate Catholicism, tainted in his view by Judaism, in favour of a ‘Pauline Christianity’, which he saw as Protestant and uncontaminated by the ‘Judeo-Christianity’ of Catholicism.
This Hegelian approach to religious questions was to have an influence on major political questions through Baur’s students at the Tubingen school. In Baur’s hands, the term had a negative meaning and, while it took seriously the Jewish/Hebraic roots of Christianity (especially in terms of a firm monotheism among faithful Hebrews), it in no way endorsed the idea that Judaism had not been superseded by Christianity. Baur’s view sounds odd today, for while Catholicism recognises its continuity with the religion of the Old Testament and the sacrifices of the Temple which would ultimately be fulfilled in Christ’s sacrifice and the Mass which re-presents that event, it has also historically regarded the post-Christ and post-Temple religion of Judaism, as formulated through the Talmud and rabbinic schools, as an enemy of Christianity and a locus of attraction for heretical ‘protesting’ sects.
Baur’s concerns were primarily theological, but at about the same time in France, the term Judeo-Christian took on a political meaning. Joel Sebban has emphasised the way in which the term arose following the French Revolution and Jewish emancipation in 1791. As part of this tradition, the term was taken up much later by Jacques Maritain who sought to build up a liberal Catholic understanding of Judeo-Christianity; this went together with some decidedly heterodox and indeed incoherent ideas of the relationship between Church and State,7 as well as assigning Judaism a role in salvation history impossible to square with a traditional Catholic understanding.8 It was no coincidence that Maritain ecstatically praised the U.S. Constitution when it came to Church and State relations. His political project was aptly summed up by Aurel Kolnai, a Jewish convert to Catholicism, who wrote of him,
“[Maritain] aims at a compromise, not between the Christian religious position and this or that extra-religious, worldly though naturally justifiable point of view, [but] between the Christian religious position proper, which he espouses whole-heartedly and is eager to make valid, and another position “religious” in nature: that of “temporal” Christendom, Christianity made into the quasi-religion of progressive democracy, Christianity inverted and secularized into the humanistic self-worship of the “person” and of the body politic…What he really has in mind is not an agreement, adjusted to what is attainable according to time and place, between Christ and Caesar, but a synthesis suffused with all the religious afflatus of the soul, between Christ and the idol of modernity: between Christ and His modern caricature; between the true Christ of faith and the substitute Christ of humanism; between Christ and Anti-Christ.”9
The seeds of this political trajectory lay, however, much earlier, in the Reformation’s critical interest in the Hebrew Bible and its political implications, which continued through to the Enlightenment. As one scholar puts it,
“In the 16th century, primarily in Protestant milieu, the academic interest in other religions, both Christian and non-Christian, is facilitated by the political campaigns for tolerance and separation between Church and State as well as the search for a prisca theologica (an ur-religion). Evidence of this lineage are two students of John Selden (1584–1654), who wrote many renowned writings on the Hebrew Republic, James Harrington and Thomas Hobbes, both of whom also sought to draw political lessons from the Hebrew scriptures.” 10
As Sebban demonstrates, the concept of Judeo-Christianity certainly goes beyond the boundaries of theology: a fact which all of the authors who locate its origins in the period between the 17th and 18th century appreciate.
[…]
This is just an excerpt from Culture Wars Magazine, not the full article. To continue reading, purchase the July/August, 2019 edition of Culture Wars Magazine.
https://culturewars.com/news/ben-shapiro-and-the-myth-of-the-judeo-christian-west
http://www.americanfreedomunion.com/ben-shapiro-and-the-myth-of-the-judeo-christian-west/
by Vernon Thorpe
As the cathedral of Notre Dame burned in Holy Week, Ben Shapiro took time out to tell his vast social media audience that: “If we wish to uphold the beauty and profundity of the Notre Dame cathedral, that means re-familiarizing ourselves with the philosophy and religious principles that built it.” Shapiro went on to clarify that the cathedral was a “central monument to Western civilization, which was built on the Judeo-Christian heritage.”1 The term ‘Judeo-Christian’ is a favourite of Mr. Shapiro’s and appears with wearying frequency throughout his latest bestselling book The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great.
It took an Israeli paper, Ha’aretz to point out the obvious yet unmentionable:
“There certainly seems to be a degree of wilful blindness, if not crass manipulation, in Shapiro setting up 12th-14th century France, when Notre Dame was being built, as embodying “Judeo-Christian religious principles,” when during that period France’s Jews were expelled (twice), their holy texts subject to public book burnings and their property confiscated by the crown (several times). Look at the actual tangible built evidence of the cathedral itself, whose west front is adorned with twin statues: proud Ecclesia (the Church) and Synagoga (with head bowed, blindfolded with a snake, her crown at her feet and the tablets of the law falling from her hands), representing Christianity’s triumph over Judaism.”2
The Times of Israel paper recorded elsewhere that a prominent and influential rabbi, Shlomo Aviner, considered one of the leaders of the religious Zionist movement, had suggested that the burning of Notre Dame could be divine retribution on Catholics. The piece reported:
““The first great Talmud burning happened in Paris, right there at the Notre Dame Cathedral square,” Aviner wrote. “It was the result of the Paris trial in which Jewish sages were forced to debate Christian sages, and the result was the burning of the Talmud. Volumes of Talmud were brought in 20 carts and burned there, 1,200 Talmud volumes. So [the fire demonstrates] ‘there is justice and there is a Judge,’” he wrote, the quote a reference in Jewish religious literature to divine justice.”3
Mass-burnings of the Talmud took place close to the cathedral in 1242 following the debates Rabbi Aviner mentions. The French-born rabbi further elaborated that Christianity
“is our number one enemy throughout history. [They] tried to convert us by arguments and by force, carried out an inquisition against us, burned the Talmud, expulsions, pogroms. Western anti-Semitism draws from Christianity’s hatred of the ‘murderers of God.’ It also had a role in the Holocaust.”
The disputations had arisen after another French Jew, Nicholas Donin, had converted to Catholicism and gone to see Pope Gregory XI in 1238 to warn him of the blasphemies contained in the Talmud and the danger the text posed to a Catholic culture. Among the charges Donin levelled against the Talmud was that it crudely blasphemed Christ and denigrated His mother (Notre Dame) and that it was the basis of a new anti-Christian rabbinic religion which was not the Judaism of the Old Testament, but rather a way of wrenching away the message of those books from their true fulfilment in the New. In so doing, the Talmud deliberately kept Jews from the light of Christ.
This content of the Talmud was a revelation to most people in Christian Europe at the time. Subsequent scholarship, most recently by Professor Peter Schaefer of Princeton University4 has largely substantiated what Donin had to say about the animus and blasphemies contained in the Talmud (primarily but not exclusively the Babylonian Talmud), with the Gospel of St John a particular target of ire. Schaefer and others highlight the extent to which these authoritative texts deliberately slander the holiest elements of the Christian sacred narrative.
More generally, Israel Yuval of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has done much to establish the conclusion that “The polemic with Christianity that gradually came to dominate the Land of Israel was not conducted openly, but in a convoluted and allusive manner. The Talmuds and midrashim do not explicitly state the name of the rival with whom they are struggling, but the shadow of Christianity nevertheless looms in these rabbinic texts.”5 Long before these debates, St. Jerome was well aware of earlier Jewish interpretations of the Old Testament, which he set out to refute with Christian interpretations, producing an authoritative Latin version of the Bible for the purpose of confuting anti-Christian Jewish accounts.
None of this is even alluded to by Mr Shapiro, who goes on to quote the Talmud approvingly and who in the acknowledgements thanks (alongside John Podhoretz and David French, the man Bill Kristol endorsed for President), his “Talmudic study partner Rabbi Moshe Samuels” (Director of Israel Engagement at Congregation B’nai Jeshurun in New York who “recently served as the Director of Tikkun Olam in Tel Aviv-Jaffa a service-learning Masa program, spearheading the field of Jewish peoplehood and leadership training”).
It’s worth spending some time on this issue, because anyone who talks about ‘Judeo-Christian’ values, let alone makes the term central to his thesis about the decline of the West, needs to be asked some questions. This is not to deny that the term is sometimes used benignly to signify a willingness to work together with those of another Abrahamic faith on genuinely positive social goals. However, use of the term is suggestive of a political agenda which is in some areas far removed from what a well-informed defender of Christendom will see as worthy of support. As Mr Shapiro is continually hailed as an important ‘conservative thinker’, it is worth asking what his version of conservatism omits and what lies behind the terminology he promotes.
“Judeo-Christian”
The term Judeo-Christian has an interesting and varied history. A very early user of the term was Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860) who in his lectures on New Testament theology was concerned to understand how Christianity emerged from the religion of the Old Testament and retained certain features of that ‘particularist’ religion of the ‘chosen people’.6
For this Protestant German idealist and advocate of higher biblical criticism, the term Judeo-Christianity was a theological term used to distinguish between competing schools of thought following Christ’s founding of the Church. Baur accepted supercessionism, though his further aim was to relegate Catholicism, tainted in his view by Judaism, in favour of a ‘Pauline Christianity’, which he saw as Protestant and uncontaminated by the ‘Judeo-Christianity’ of Catholicism.
This Hegelian approach to religious questions was to have an influence on major political questions through Baur’s students at the Tubingen school. In Baur’s hands, the term had a negative meaning and, while it took seriously the Jewish/Hebraic roots of Christianity (especially in terms of a firm monotheism among faithful Hebrews), it in no way endorsed the idea that Judaism had not been superseded by Christianity. Baur’s view sounds odd today, for while Catholicism recognises its continuity with the religion of the Old Testament and the sacrifices of the Temple which would ultimately be fulfilled in Christ’s sacrifice and the Mass which re-presents that event, it has also historically regarded the post-Christ and post-Temple religion of Judaism, as formulated through the Talmud and rabbinic schools, as an enemy of Christianity and a locus of attraction for heretical ‘protesting’ sects.
Baur’s concerns were primarily theological, but at about the same time in France, the term Judeo-Christian took on a political meaning. Joel Sebban has emphasised the way in which the term arose following the French Revolution and Jewish emancipation in 1791. As part of this tradition, the term was taken up much later by Jacques Maritain who sought to build up a liberal Catholic understanding of Judeo-Christianity; this went together with some decidedly heterodox and indeed incoherent ideas of the relationship between Church and State,7 as well as assigning Judaism a role in salvation history impossible to square with a traditional Catholic understanding.8 It was no coincidence that Maritain ecstatically praised the U.S. Constitution when it came to Church and State relations. His political project was aptly summed up by Aurel Kolnai, a Jewish convert to Catholicism, who wrote of him,
“[Maritain] aims at a compromise, not between the Christian religious position and this or that extra-religious, worldly though naturally justifiable point of view, [but] between the Christian religious position proper, which he espouses whole-heartedly and is eager to make valid, and another position “religious” in nature: that of “temporal” Christendom, Christianity made into the quasi-religion of progressive democracy, Christianity inverted and secularized into the humanistic self-worship of the “person” and of the body politic…What he really has in mind is not an agreement, adjusted to what is attainable according to time and place, between Christ and Caesar, but a synthesis suffused with all the religious afflatus of the soul, between Christ and the idol of modernity: between Christ and His modern caricature; between the true Christ of faith and the substitute Christ of humanism; between Christ and Anti-Christ.”9
The seeds of this political trajectory lay, however, much earlier, in the Reformation’s critical interest in the Hebrew Bible and its political implications, which continued through to the Enlightenment. As one scholar puts it,
“In the 16th century, primarily in Protestant milieu, the academic interest in other religions, both Christian and non-Christian, is facilitated by the political campaigns for tolerance and separation between Church and State as well as the search for a prisca theologica (an ur-religion). Evidence of this lineage are two students of John Selden (1584–1654), who wrote many renowned writings on the Hebrew Republic, James Harrington and Thomas Hobbes, both of whom also sought to draw political lessons from the Hebrew scriptures.” 10
As Sebban demonstrates, the concept of Judeo-Christianity certainly goes beyond the boundaries of theology: a fact which all of the authors who locate its origins in the period between the 17th and 18th century appreciate.
[…]
This is just an excerpt from Culture Wars Magazine, not the full article. To continue reading, purchase the July/August, 2019 edition of Culture Wars Magazine.
https://culturewars.com/news/ben-shapiro-and-the-myth-of-the-judeo-christian-west
http://www.americanfreedomunion.com/ben-shapiro-and-the-myth-of-the-judeo-christian-west/
BeyondFedUp
Hall of Famer
Thanks for posting this Don.
Two parts that stand distinct in my opinion are:
The more I research history and even recent history that even occured in my lifetime, it's clear that we as European Christians (and I would be considered Protestant) have had the same enemies for literally centuries. I condemn the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of power in the Middle Ages and basically all of their murder and persecutions and spiritual manipulations through the ages. I also condemn the Christ-rejecting Jews and Judaism that has the blasphemous Talmud as their superseding authority that allows and encourages all acts of evil against the rest of humanity. Truly satan has had his tools and fools at work.
Two parts that stand distinct in my opinion are:
The more I research history and even recent history that even occured in my lifetime, it's clear that we as European Christians (and I would be considered Protestant) have had the same enemies for literally centuries. I condemn the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of power in the Middle Ages and basically all of their murder and persecutions and spiritual manipulations through the ages. I also condemn the Christ-rejecting Jews and Judaism that has the blasphemous Talmud as their superseding authority that allows and encourages all acts of evil against the rest of humanity. Truly satan has had his tools and fools at work.
McCaffrey Dude
Mentor
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 561
What does religious dogma have to do with what is going on in our country? To some, maybe a lot to most, probably not so much.
Shapiro is clearly not Alt-Right. He is pro-American though. We need to worry about our country which he mostly does. If he supports Israel so be it. How much of that support for Israel affects his stance on abortion, or equal pay or affirmative action? None.
People here are nitpicking at small things that they don't like about the guy when he clearly for me is the best thing going for our country. I compare this nitpicking to the same as lobby groups and nobody likes them. You may not like everything about him but he is the best thing we have going at the moment and by we I mean Americans.
Shapiro is clearly not Alt-Right. He is pro-American though. We need to worry about our country which he mostly does. If he supports Israel so be it. How much of that support for Israel affects his stance on abortion, or equal pay or affirmative action? None.
People here are nitpicking at small things that they don't like about the guy when he clearly for me is the best thing going for our country. I compare this nitpicking to the same as lobby groups and nobody likes them. You may not like everything about him but he is the best thing we have going at the moment and by we I mean Americans.
BeyondFedUp
Hall of Famer
The quotes I put in bold from your comments need to be seriously reconsidered by you. Think on them for a while and in the meantime try and chill your adoration for someone who could give a crap less about Whites in this nation, as he has stated publicly. I could go into detail, but I will not at this time. I shouldn't have to. As I said, think about what you are stating above and think long-term.
Sincerely,
BeyondFedUp
Old Scratch
Mentor
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2012
- Messages
- 1,055
He makes hypocritical arguments for Israel and the US, like most Jews. I'm pretty sure I had a post on here about his hypocrisy but wasn't able to find it. He's a two-faced Jew. He doesn't say anything controversial and probably pays to be astro-turfed on any vaguely conservative leaning website, hence all the "Ben Shapiro OWNS/DESTROYS/ANNIHILATES SJW leftist!" which is an easy target to appear logical and smart against. Just compare what he tweeted about Roseanne being fired to how he reacts when leftists are fired from productions like James Gunn. With Roseanne he takes the "they're a private company, can do what they want," with James Gunn and other lefts he starts going on about "free speech" and how they should have the right to say whatever they want, even creepy pedophile comments when they're making children's movies.
We could have the same discussion over and over, providing evidence of little Benji's perfidy but 6 months later you'd come back singing his praises again saying what a great conservative mind he is and all the evidence thrown in the memory bin because no one wants to bother dredging it all out again. He's pushed by all the usual suspects to be the face of conservatism and channel the conversation into safe avenues.
TomIron361
Mentor
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 691
Well said Sir.
The Hock
Master
I agree T.I. Three Six One.
The last sentence in particular says it all.
The last sentence in particular says it all.
Retired army here.
McCaffrey Dude
Mentor
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 561
I am a vet. I work mostly on cats and dogs. 
On a serious note: I love Shapiro. Since I have not seen one iota of anything on Trump lately I am assuming most people here are fed up with him or they know he probably will be impeached. I really hope Ben runs in 2020 instead of 2024. I have seen a lot of criticism on him just because he is another " Heeb ". So was Jesus. Well if he was even real.
On a serious note: I love Shapiro. Since I have not seen one iota of anything on Trump lately I am assuming most people here are fed up with him or they know he probably will be impeached. I really hope Ben runs in 2020 instead of 2024. I have seen a lot of criticism on him just because he is another " Heeb ". So was Jesus. Well if he was even real.
I am a vet. I work mostly on cats and dogs.
Would you please point out the replies in this thread that attacked Shapiro simply because he is a "Heeb."
McCaffrey Dude
Mentor
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 561
I believe Beyond Fed up, Carolina Speed, Deus Vult, Old Scratch and one more made comments that he is the " typical Jew " though Heeb was never used. I have watched enough of him to rationalize that he is not just espousing conservative ideology because it benefits Israel. I could be wrong but only Shapiro knows Shapiro. Maybe I believe in Occam's Razor too much but I until I see something otherwise I am going to stick by this guy.
So you can't cite a single specific reply to back up your claim in a thread that now has 41 total posts.
McCaffrey Dude
Mentor
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 561
Old Scratch: " He is a two faced Jew ". Maybe he is but where is the proof? I may be wrong about the guy but he seems pretty genuine to me. As I recall on May 15th , 1948 the Arabs attacked the Jews after the Palestinian British Mandate was rescinded and though I am not in favor of the way Israel pushes settlements onto Arab lands they do have the rite to defend themselves. I just don't see Shapiro harping to much on this subject. Most of what he talks about is indigenous to American politics.
Quote Old Scratch's entire post so it can be put in context, as your claim is that "I have seen a lot of criticism on him just because he is another Heeb." So let's see "a lot" of posts that criticize Shapiro only because he's Jewish and for no other reason.
Carolina Speed
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,849
Hold on there Dude! I never said anything derogatory about Shapiro. In fact if you look at the second post of this thread. I said I liked Shapiro as well. I mentioned leaving the judgement of the Jews as well as ourselves to God. Also, unlike some here I believe Jesus was part Jewish, part Gentile.
BTW, there's no doubt Jesus was real. There's more proof of the Bible and his, Jesus, existence than any piece of literature and person in history!
DWF Upside
Mentor
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2014
- Messages
- 670
Stay strong Don, there are a few real people on here. The frustrating part has to be that the traffic of lurkers is something like 99% genuine people, whereas the posters are maybe 2/3 non ADL/ACLU/CIA/FBI/Random Commie/yeshiva class project.
People do and are free to have different opinions. But everything about this doesn't feel right. There should be an agreed upon way to show a topic or post as (((Suspect))). This would be helpful for lurkers who might be passing through. It does no good to argue this as another poster will just be created or activated from the available list of shills. The (((Suspect))) label would be much more effective at fighting infiltration.
People do and are free to have different opinions. But everything about this doesn't feel right. There should be an agreed upon way to show a topic or post as (((Suspect))). This would be helpful for lurkers who might be passing through. It does no good to argue this as another poster will just be created or activated from the available list of shills. The (((Suspect))) label would be much more effective at fighting infiltration.
BeyondFedUp
Hall of Famer
Since you listed me first in the list I'll post my own previous post in this thread (see above). Let's see if I didn't implicate "Conservatives" in my criticism, and never once did I say what you have said. Never once did I say I didn't like him because he is a "Heeb". In fact, I mentioned Jewish Dennis Prager, who I do like and listen to, as someone who makes more sound and logical arguments against Leftism, without the repulsive nasally voice. And unlike you, I didn't pm you and make juvenile and rude statements about your mother as you did with me.
And if you are a vet, and have a University degree, and there was a library on campus or in the city, and it carried the historical, secular works of people such as Josephus, Tacitus, Sutonius and others, and you don't know that Jesus Christ actually existed then you are pathetic.
Last edited:
McCaffrey Dude
Mentor
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 561
I am not a vet. It was pretty obvious with my second sentence about working on cats and dogs. I apologize to Carolina Speed as I misquoted him. " Shapiro is given a platform because he is a Jew" is not malicious but maybe he was given his position because he tackles issues with intelligence and conviction whether you agree with him or not. I never said Jesus did not exist I said " if ". I am just not big on religion.
I can find Shapiro off putting as well because of his voice and his usually characteristic rapid speech cadence but I don't find him obnoxious and I would deem that as a personal attack on him which is your rite to do so.
As for your mother I said probably. My attempt at humor is the only way to deal with people and some of their obtuse opinions. Old Scratch as I quoted earlier called him a two faced Jew. What does religion/ethnicity have to do with being two-faced? It is an attack. Maybe he is once again. I don't have the proof to argue for or against it. I genuinely think the guy could turn this country on its head. It can't be any worse than our current occupant in the White House though I don't totally hate the guy.
I can find Shapiro off putting as well because of his voice and his usually characteristic rapid speech cadence but I don't find him obnoxious and I would deem that as a personal attack on him which is your rite to do so.
As for your mother I said probably. My attempt at humor is the only way to deal with people and some of their obtuse opinions. Old Scratch as I quoted earlier called him a two faced Jew. What does religion/ethnicity have to do with being two-faced? It is an attack. Maybe he is once again. I don't have the proof to argue for or against it. I genuinely think the guy could turn this country on its head. It can't be any worse than our current occupant in the White House though I don't totally hate the guy.
knightedsoldier5000
Mentor
Can't stand his nasally whiny voice. What has the little turd ever accomplished in his own life to make him qualified to be on tv and radio doling out political proclamations? I guess if you're part of the tribe you get to be on tv and radio.
BeyondFedUp
Hall of Famer
It's not a guarantee but it makes you about a trillion times more likely, no matter the pathetic or zero "talent level" (i.e. Tony Kornheiser) so weigh the odds you would have against them to get a gig. It may not be an all kosher affair, but it's an all controlled kosher affair. If someone can convince me of a more destructive entity than the J-ish mass media in all western countries I'd like to know. A close second is also their intentional destruction of all of academia from top to bottom.
109 is not enough if you get my meaning.
McCaffrey Dude
Mentor
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 561
I like his ideas and how he presents them. I don't like Donald Trump's hair but I am not juvenile enough to use that partially against him.