>>8623021 (PB)
You're jewish right? Only way you think that the current format makes sense, as far as I can tell.
Who has the infographic of how Israel is going to be China's conduit to the west? How Israel and China will have closer ties?
Hey. This reminds me of two quotes. Tell me, which is your favorite?
Quote 1:
>The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid. If all this didn't help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again. But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn't help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day. The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn't remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.
>Sometimes I stood there thunderstruck. I didn't know what to be more amazed at: the agility of their tongues or their virtuosity at lying. Gradually I began to hate them.
Quote 2:
>I am well aware of the tactics of you, my Zionist brethren, use to quiet anyone who attempts to expose any of your subversive acts.
If the person is a Gentile, you cry, "You're anti-semitic" which is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide your actions.
>But, if a Jew is the person doing the exposing, you resort to other tactics.
First, you ignore the charges, hoping the information will not be given widespread distribution.
If the information starts reaching too many people, you ridicule the information and the persons giving the information.
If that doesn't work, your next step is character assassination. If the author or speaker hasn't been involved in sufficient scandal you are adept at fabricating scandal against the person or persons.
If none of these are effective, you are known to resort to physical attacks.
But, NEVER do you try to prove the information wrong
BONUS QUOTE:
>An anti-Semite used to be a person who disliked Jews. Now it is a person who Jews dislike.
Which is your favorite? And do remember that I'm talking about the quotes, not who they're quoting. Try to stick on topic.
You've ignored the point, continuing to use muh joo instead.
The real question is what are you sliding this morning, rabbi?
We didn't talk last bread, you stupid faggot.
And so far you've just said "I don't like muh joo" but haven't addressed a single point raised.
Gradually…
Be careful of fake headlines…
But for the keks!