ADVERTISEMENT

Caitlin Johnstone Nails It With Indisputable Zionist Logic


No, and you shouldn’t either.

You and the other girls are being gamed.

It’s funny to me that you pretend to care but ignore Iran.

It’s really funny because you’re 180 on the proxy crap we pulled in the Ukraine.

But ignore Iran using Palestinians.

How?
 
  • Like
Reactions: okcpokefan12
Sigh. Another example of you people’s dumbfvckery. Did Joseph Smith actually found a Kingdom of Mormonia? You know, like the Kingdom of Israel? Hint: no
 
Sigh. Another example of you people’s dumbfvckery. Did Joseph Smith actually found a Kingdom of Mormonia? You know, like the Kingdom of Israel? Hint: no
I appreciate that you had the stones to read the article before commenting. The others were too cowardly because they thought it would be about Israel, when if fact it is about Zionist logic, and not about Israel at all. And, frankly, the logic in her proposal is pure Zionist logic. What's good for Zionists should be just as good for Mormons.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: okcpokefan12
I appreciate that you had the stones to read the article before commenting. The others were too cowardly because they thought it would be about Israel, when if fact it is about Zionist logic, and not about Israel at all. And, frankly, the logic in her proposal is pure Zionist logic. What's good for Zionists should be just as good for Mormons.

Everytime I read one of your diatribes I wonder what NZ poke is doing.

He got run by the lefties on the board for saying “Zionist” a couple of times.
 
People need a history lesson.

The part that Caitlyn seems to be missing is that Israel took the land, held it against those who pushed back, and did so long enough until they were recognized by international governing bodies much the way most of the countries in the world were formed. So if Smith had been willing to fight the US government for his parcel of New York in order to establish New Mormondy, then maybe the mormons would own NY. Much like the New Yorkers were willing to fight the Native Americans first, and then the British second in order to make claim to their newly acquired land. Israel isn't any different. They started settling prior to the first world war. And immediately their settlements were attacked by Arabs attempting to throw them out, but unfortunately for the Arabs, the Ottoman empire had just crumbled following WW1 and lacked the capability to unseat the Israeli settlers. Israelis continued to develop the region and following the holocaust of WW2, the UN decided to decree that the land they were already settled in would be apportioned to them officially. The arab states voted against that UN resolution, but it passed by some absurd margin. That didn't include the Gaza strip. That was annexed by Israel following the 6 day war as the Egyptian forces fled the region as fast as their tanks would carry them. That was in the '60s. When the peace was established there was no agreement to return Gaza to the Egyptians. As such, it became Israel's. Palenstinians call it the "contested lands" but in reality, it hasn't truly been contested for 60 years. I know it pains you as a pacifist to hear this Dan, but geopolitically, "might makes right". That's the true law of the land. Just ask South Vietnam, Yugoslavia, or even the Ottoman Empire.
 
People need a history lesson.

The part that Caitlyn seems to be missing is that Israel took the land, held it against those who pushed back, and did so long enough until they were recognized by international governing bodies much the way most of the countries in the world were formed. So if Smith had been willing to fight the US government for his parcel of New York in order to establish New Mormondy, then maybe the mormons would own NY. Much like the New Yorkers were willing to fight the Native Americans first, and then the British second in order to make claim to their newly acquired land. Israel isn't any different. They started settling prior to the first world war. And immediately their settlements were attacked by Arabs attempting to throw them out, but unfortunately for the Arabs, the Ottoman empire had just crumbled following WW1 and lacked the capability to unseat the Israeli settlers. Israelis continued to develop the region and following the holocaust of WW2, the UN decided to decree that the land they were already settled in would be apportioned to them officially. The arab states voted against that UN resolution, but it passed by some absurd margin. That didn't include the Gaza strip. That was annexed by Israel following the 6 day war as the Egyptian forces fled the region as fast as their tanks would carry them. That was in the '60s. When the peace was established there was no agreement to return Gaza to the Egyptians. As such, it became Israel's. Palenstinians call it the "contested lands" but in reality, it hasn't truly been contested for 60 years. I know it pains you as a pacifist to hear this Dan, but geopolitically, "might makes right". That's the true law of the land. Just ask South Vietnam, Yugoslavia, or even the Ottoman Empire.
Outstanding reply! Straight from the Zionist handbook.
 
Lol. Outstanding reply. Is your bag so empty that all you got is to call me a Zionist?
Are you a Zionist? There’s no shame if you are. I didn’t call you a Zionist personally, just pointed out what you wrote is something that could have come directly from the Zionist handbook. I would ask that you watch the video I posted from Piers Morgan’s show in which Dave Smith makes an impassioned plea for the transcendence of natural law from Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence, in which humans are considered to be born free from a mandate by God, and have the right, indeed the duty, to rebel against servitude. I find the argument very compelling. I wonder if you do, too.
 
I appreciate that you had the stones to read the article before commenting. The others were too cowardly because they thought it would be about Israel, when if fact it is about Zionist logic, and not about Israel at all. And, frankly, the logic in her proposal is pure Zionist logic. What's good for Zionists should be just as good for Mormons.
I’ve just demonstrated the illogic of Bunny-Boiler’s position above. LDS never had its own country like the Hebrews did. This is yet another stupid comparison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: okcpokefan12
Are you a Zionist? There’s no shame if you are. I didn’t call you a Zionist personally, just pointed out what you wrote is something that could have come directly from the Zionist handbook. I would ask that you watch the video I posted from Piers Morgan’s show in which Dave Smith makes an impassioned plea for the transcendence of natural law from Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence, in which humans are considered to be born free from a mandate by God, and have the right, indeed the duty, to rebel against servitude. I find the argument very compelling. I wonder if you do, too.
No actual rebuttal. Just a reference to some other video by some other person. I guess your bag really is that empty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: okcpokefan12
Original poster claims to be a 77 year old man, but he has the thought process of a liberal freshman co-ed wearing a hipster swastika rag to the encampment.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT