reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I don't understand why left-leaning media, which some say is predominantly Jewish, labels people as white supremacists. According to my Jewish friends, this perspective exists. But why is there a perceived animosity towards white individuals? It seems to stem from what some call "woke" culture and virtue signaling.

It's a trick we Israelis often use. When Europeans criticize Israel, we bring up the Holocaust. Here in America, critics of Israel are labeled anti-Semitic. The ties between Israel and the American Jewish establishment are strong. They are a talented group of people and wield power in media and money. Their attitude is "Israel, my country, right or wrong". They aren't open to criticism. It's easy to dismiss those who criticize the Israeli government as anti-Semitic, evoking the Holocaust and Jewish suffering to justify our actions towards the Palestinians.

An Israeli Jew responds to the accusation of anti-Semitism when criticizing Israeli government policies. They explain that it's a common trick to silence dissent by invoking the Holocaust or labeling critics as anti-Semitic. The strong ties between Israel and the American Jewish establishment, along with their power in media and finances, contribute to this dynamic. The speaker emphasizes that this attitude of unquestioning support for Israel and the reluctance to accept criticism allows for the justification of actions against Palestinians.

Speaker 1 responds to accusations of antisemitism, stating that criticizing the Israeli government or supporting justice for the Palestinian people does not equate to antisemitism. They mention that a former president campaigned against the power of finance without being labeled antisemitic. The speaker questions the motives behind the questions being asked, suggesting that the goal is to silence them. They highlight past tragedies involving the Jewish community and argue against linking financial dominance to antisemitism. The speaker warns against limiting freedom of expression and compares the situation to the United States, where they claim a fraud is occurring regarding Israel within the Democratic Party and a growing opposition within the Jewish community due to the connection between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu.

An Israeli Jew responds to the accusation of anti-Semitism when criticizing Israeli government policies. They explain that it's a common trick to silence dissent by invoking the Holocaust or labeling critics as anti-Semitic. The strong ties between Israel and the American Jewish establishment, along with their power, money, and media influence, contribute to this dynamic. The speaker points out that this attitude of unquestioning support for Israel and the reluctance to accept criticism allows the Israeli government to justify their actions against Palestinians.

I don't get why left-leaning media, which I hear is mostly Jewish, labels people as white supremacists. Did you really say that? Yeah, I mean, my Jewish friends say it is. But why do they seem to dislike white guys? It's just woke culture, man. It's all about virtue signaling and that kind of stuff. I just don't understand it.

Israel has a right to exist and is a vital democracy. Amid rising anti-Semitism, some Jewish individuals may feel they can handle the situation alone, but I believe it's essential to oppose anti-Semitism regardless. It is wrong, unjust, and evil. Similarly, if my Catholic friends faced bigotry and felt they could manage it themselves, I would still stand against that bigotry because it is also wrong and unjust.

Speaker 0 argues that history gets deep when examining tiny hats and slavery, claiming this was left out of history books because “the history books” are owned by “tiny hats.” They state that those who owned slaves, were slave traders and auctioneers, also owned newspapers, and played a role in creating social division. They claim it becomes interesting to uncover the exploitation of slaves and the way people were treated, noting that those who defended slavery would be exposed as supporting it, and that slave dealing was “an extremely profitable business.” They connect these ideas back to the Rothschilds, saying this is a recurring topic they have discussed, and mention Malcolm X as another figure who talked about it, urging others to look into it. Speaker 1 contends that a Black person is not antisemitic when he says that the man exploiting him in his community is white, because it is a white man who owns all the stores. They question whether it is an accident that the whites who own these stores are Jewish, and assert that if it is an accident, then the statement that “the Jew on the corner is exploiting me” is not antisemitic but merely a description of the man exploiting him.

Elon Musk's support for Israel does not necessarily mean he is free from making anti-Semitic remarks. It is important to understand that one can support Israel and still hold prejudice against Jewish people. The fight for Palestinian freedom encompasses the liberation of all people, including Jewish individuals.

As an Israeli Jew, I believe accusations of anti-Semitism are used as a tactic to deflect criticism of Israel. The strong ties between Israel and American Jewish groups lead to labeling critics as anti-Semitic. There is a reluctance to accept criticism, with a mindset of "Israel, right or wrong." Criticism of Israeli government actions is often dismissed as anti-Semitic, invoking the Holocaust and Jewish suffering to justify actions against Palestinians.

I declare for those who will watch or are watching this information: Mr. Pruchinov, Mr. Yatsenyuk, Mr. Tekhnebok, and those with them — I know openly and reliably that these are funded agents of the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States. In addition, Mr. Yatsenyuk is the first deputy head of the Freemason lodge in Ukraine, and its head, if anyone doesn’t know, is Mr. Pinchuk, the son-in-law of Mr. Kuchma. All the deceptions that were carried out and all the commands of Mr. Yanukovych were simply puppetry in the hands of Mr. Honchuk, the best and Kravchuk. They sold him as well. They gave him commands—don’t let Berkut in, then let Berkut in, then storm or not storm—and then, when people were finally allowed to take up arms, their vile betrayal. Primarily it’s the work of Mr. Kravchuk and Mr. Kuchma. Not many know that Mr. Kuchma, after the so-called victory in the Maidan revolution, was targeted thanks to Mr. Pinchuk. The Americans lifted the arrest on his accounts, and he lives freely. And after they sold Yanukovych, I’m not saying he’s good; I’m not his admirer. He was wrong in many ways. Although he remains the legitimate president, whether we want it or not, whether those stinkers-who-smell, or not. I’m tired of listening, of not listening. Anyone can insult a person. But first we must understand what prompted this. What was the motive? The main lawlessness was committed by Mr. Rinat Akhmetov, Mr. Kolomoyskyi, the head of the World Jewish Congress, Mr. Fer t ash, and others. All these oligarchs. At first, it looked like two clans fighting for a feeding trough, as in 2005. Now it’s simply a direct occupation of Ukraine by the United States through stand-ins. I’m not afraid of this; I have enough strength to defend myself. But my wife remains there. And not only my wife. There are many people who want to threaten Russia. Many want help from Russia to cleanse Holy Rus from the invasion of red-brown plague and American Zionists. I am not an anti-Semite, God forbid; I am an internationalist. I was raised in the spirit of Soviet internationalism. But let people not confuse. I have no hatred for simple Jews. They are not to blame. They also endure from their landlords, so to speak, Orthodox Jewish organizations, Hasidim, in particular, organizations like Chabad, which rule this black feast. So let no one accuse me of anti-Semitism. But, in the end, I can say, as they say in Odessa, who are Semites and who are anti-Semites. You know? No, tell me. Semites are those who drink until seven; anti-Semites are those who drink after seven. This is how they say in Odessa. I love Odessa humor, genuine old Odessa humor. But I hate what they do. Imagine a scene on the Maidan: representatives of the Greek-C Catholic Church stand; representatives of the so-called autocephalous, self-proclaimed church, who during the war walked around showing to the Germans, to those in the family at the front children, in the partisans and so on. Also the so-called False Patriarchate of Kyiv, which papal Rome did not recognize in its time, led by Mr. Mykhailo Denysenko, who still calls himself Filaret, and is anathemized for sacrilegious acts and many other offenses against the church. Now he tries to join a secret assembly with Right Sector, in particular with such fascist organization as Svoboda. This is their true name; the Social-National Party of Ukraine. So that all may know: Svoboda is simply because they realized they cannot appeal on their own to politics, so they will go under their true banner. Then there is a law draft, a deputy-Briton, I think; I’m not strong with names, but I know it is 100 percent the bill banning the Moscow Patriarchate. Prohibition of the Russian language in Ukraine, up to criminal prosecution. All this is the work of ultraright forces with the support of American fascists, so to speak. World imperialism. That’s it. Maybe I’m not a skilled speaker, but I’ve had enough. I’ll repeat: it sounds banal. Thank you very much.

The speaker addresses accusations that their song "Jumi Sue Me" is antisemitic, stating it is not because they are not a racist person and love all races, including Arabs, Jewish people, and Black people. The speaker explains that in the lyrics "Jew me, sue me, everybody do me, kick me, kike me, don't you black or white me," they are portraying themselves as the victim.

For 5000 years, Jewish people faced persecution, mainly from white European Christians. Palestinians didn't contribute to atrocities like Auschwitz or turning away Jewish refugees. The real enemy is white Christian Europeans, not Palestinians. The question remains: why are 2 million Palestinians in an open-air prison?

Those who have mistreated artists in the music industry are individuals, not a specific group like Jews. It's important to distinguish between the two.

Today, I want to remind everyone that hiding behind a supposed desire to defend the Palestinians and taking to the streets to protest is nothing more than anti-Semitism. Let's call it what it truly is. That's all I have to say.

Antisemitism is a threat to everyone's safety. We must acknowledge that Palestinian people are not disposable; they are human beings who deserve freedom and dignity. Speaking up to save lives should not be controversial. The cries of Palestinian and Israeli children are equally important. It is perplexing why the cries of Palestinians seem different to some. We must remember our shared humanity.

The discussion centers on political criticism and backlash tied to Israel. One participant says Americans can be criticized heavily about their own government—citing being “brutal” on presidents from Barack Obama to Joe Biden and also being critical of Donald Trump “where he deserves it too”—but claims a different standard applies when criticism involves Israel. They describe a “hard no” response from a faction of the conservative movement, where critics are labeled “grifter[s]” and attacked by “bots nonstop online,” alongside an “apparatus” that “immediately turns on you.” They ask who is effectively trying to “veto” or block efforts by figures such as Tom Massie, podcasters, and people raising issues on social media. The other participant argues that the groups involved “entirely support Israel,” and points to Israel-related funding and campaigns, saying they have to set aside “seven hundred and fifty million dollars in a propaganda campaign” and references hiring Brad Parscale. They say Brad Parscale runs Salem Media and “had to register as a foreign agent for a foreign government.” They also claim that during the Trump reelection effort, “millions of dollars had disappeared from the campaign,” and that Parscale was “in charge of it,” implying it is “kind of shocking” and “odd” that he would be responsible for missing money and later overseeing other efforts. They add that it was “so significant” that he “had no choice,” and note that Parscale is “upfront about being a paid—at least… about being” something related to the arrangement being discussed. The conversation then returns to criticizing Israel’s government and foreign policy. One participant says it is “fine to be critical of Israel,” arguing that having “an issue with Israel’s foreign policy” or claiming Israel “getting us into a war” should not automatically make someone an “anti-Semite” or “a bad person.” The transcript ends mid-sentence with “I question the.”

Speaker 3 said he has been told that criticizing AIPAC makes him anti-Semitic. Speaker 1 called that “ridiculous.” Speaker 3 said it feels good to have concern for one’s country and asked whether AIPAC represents a “cutting in line of prioritization” away from the American people—meaning that although Americans vote and are citizens, a separate group gets higher priority. Speaker 0 responded that the point of a PAC is to represent a group, but said there is a “huge problem” with allowing a group that does not represent American interests to influence people who are supposed to represent Americans. Speaker 0 said he has previously stated that he thinks only “like 20 representatives between Senate and the House” fully do the work of the American people without the interests of some group pulling their sway. Speaker 1 said that “over since 1948” the amount amounts to “$319 billion adjusted to inflation” and argued that there are multiple things the money could have been spent on at home instead of military strikes for Israel. Speaker 1 said the money could have been better allocated toward supporting an economy that would help the current generation afford homes. Speaker 3 asked what else would improve views if Israel’s government presented a “five-year plan to decouple from us aid,” including moving toward self-reliance, and noted that Israel is a rich country that has balanced its budget and money in a sovereign wealth fund. He asked whether people would think more highly of Israel if it stopped relying on U.S. aid and if the issue were talked about less. Speaker 2 agreed that people should be less focused on labeling, saying that the word “racism” is used when there is disagreement and that “we just have to call them a name.” Speaker 2 said he does not think people are anti-Semitic, arguing that people “just can’t agree with them” and can’t “prove them wrong,” so they “throw a word out” like “anti-Semitic” because they think the U.S. should stop sending money there. Speaker 3 said, “thank you” and noted that some people he tells “must get more aggressive.”

It's a pretty known fact that the Jews are God's chosen people, that the Jewish homeland is Israel, that the Jews believe in the Old Testament, and that the Old Testament is about Jews. However, almost none of these facts are true. "Nowhere in the Bible does it call the Jews God's chosen people." "The Jews don't really believe in the Old Testament, and only maybe 5% of the people in the Old Testament can even be considered Jewish." "the expression anti Semite literally means against Shem or his descendants. However, being anti Jewish isn't the same as being anti Semitic." "Shem is the son of Noah, the guy who built the ark when Mesopotamia flooded." "Except Abraham has never been a Jew nor will he ever be a Jew."

I am a seventh-generation Palestinian and I remember a time when we had a great relationship with our Jewish neighbors. We would babysit each other's children and celebrate holidays together. The issue here is not religion, but rather the occupation and the violence that comes with it. Palestinians don't hate Jews, they hate the occupation. It doesn't matter if it's Jews, French, or English, the hate is directed towards the occupiers. This has nothing to do with antisemitism, it's about the occupation. We need to understand that the problem lies in the occupation, not the religion.

I used to ask people to silence those who spoke against Israel by labeling them as antisemitic. It's wrong, but that's what we did. It's shameful as a Jew to admit this.

I was once asked why evangelical Christians are so supportive of Jewish people and Israel. The answer is simple: you can be Jewish and have nothing to do with Christians, but I can't be Christian and not have everything to do with the Jewish people. My faith, scriptures, and everything I believe is built on that foundation. We are people of the book. If you read in Genesis that God blesses those who bless Israel and curses those who curse Israel, it becomes very clear.

There is a misconception that the entire Palestinian nation is responsible for the atrocities committed. This is not true. It is puzzling to see the world's concern for the Palestinian people, when it should be directed towards those who have committed terrible acts.

I identify as Jewish and have personally faced antisemitism as a member of a minority group. Judaism is an ethno-religion, meaning that even though I am an atheist, I still consider myself Jewish due to my ethnicity. Contrary to popular belief, Jews are not considered white. This may disappoint some who enjoy engaging in discussions about oppression. While the Nazis did not consider us white enough, we are often included in discussions about race, where white people are typically portrayed as the villains.

The discussion presents a series of provocative claims linking prominent social issues to Jewish influence, framed around the idea that “tiny hats” (a pejorative reference to Jews) control many institutions and events. The key points raised include: - A claim that MLK and the tiny hats are connected to the Rothschilds who “run a lot of things,” and that schools are owned by the tiny hats, with this ownership connected to a suppressed narrative about slavery. The argument suggests people are missing a wider story involving tiny hats. - An assertion about who took out Native Americans, attributed to the tiny hats, with a prompt that people have not been taught this. - A claim about Christopher Columbus, asking “who? tiny hat person,” and stating he brought over 300,000 other tiny hats, implying a hidden expansion of Jewish influence. - The idea that public questioning of the narrative is being challenged by the government, which is trying to prevent people from questioning anything. - A deeper claim about who created division among people, attributing to those who own newspapers and radio—the tiny hats—ownership of media that can obscure the truth. - An assertion that the tiny hats orchestrated the Tulsa race riots of 1921. - A claim about who brought in Planned Parenthood and the LGBT movement (described as “forty seven whatever it may be, tiny hats”), suggesting deliberate influence. - The suggestion to question everything taught in school, ending with a video from Malcolm X to let individuals decide for themselves. Speaker 1 discusses antisemitism and analysis of Jewish influence, addressing a question about being anti-Semitic. The speaker argues that Jews defend themselves by accusing others of antisemitism when objective analysis of their role is made. The speaker contends that a Negro is not antisemitic when pointing out that white people own all the stores in his community. The speaker asserts that it is not an accident that “these whites who own these stores are Jewish,” and that labeling “the Jew on the corner” as exploiting him is not antisemitic but a description of the exploiter. The speaker also contrasts Arabs and Jews as both semitic, noting that if one were truly anti-Semitic, they would be anti-Arab and anti everything else, and suggests that the issue is framed as antisemitic rather than an objective analysis of economic exploitation by white store owners who are Jewish.