Thread 939085549

The average person calling for Israel to be wiped off the map isn't a right wing chud incel like they want us to believe. But a tranny with pink hair. Why won't the media admit this? This is what antisemitism actually looks like.

+100 social shekels

well done, you almost managed 30 words before veering into the obsession with "trannies".
someday, you might manage a whole sentence.

Also, I am not anti-Semitic. I am anti-Zionist. Palestinians are also a Semitic people - who are currently being murdered i na systematic genocide orchestrated by the Zionists.

>>939085549 (OP)
>This is what antisemitism actually looks like.
the entire world is antisemitic now. Israel fucked up badly. allying with them is detrimental to diplomatic relations with the entire planet. the media won't admit this because israel still pays their rent.
>not "trannies with pink hair"
as if that actually matters.

if you're still pro israel in 2025, that means you're pro-genocide. and no one wants to deal with someone who supports genocide. its a very lonely future for you.

>>939085799
>Also, I am not anti-Semitic. I am anti-Zionist. Palestinians are also a Semitic people - who are currently being murdered i na systematic genocide orchestrated by the Zionists.
This. Also dubs checked.

As for the "tranny obsession" thats a horse shit talking point and you know it. We are obsessed with the health and safety of children which are our future. Doesnt matter if they are other peoples children. We stand on principle and your cruel science experiments on kids is coming to a close. Thankfully.

>>939085799
>Palestinians are also a Semitic people - who are currently being murdered i na systematic genocide orchestrated by the Zionists.
/thread. OP is the problem.

Its nothing to do with semites and everything to do with the crooked actions of certain individuals who try to hide their misdeeds behind a victim card.

>>939085549 (OP)
>tranny
Logfag thread

Enrage the spammer
Enrage him

>>939085799
>I am not anti-Semitic. I am anti-Zionist
Yeah that's the narrative. Except no one's falling for it.
>i na
Maybe learn how to properly type before vomiting your brainrot you troon freak

>>939085896
>/thread. OP is the problem.
Left wingers are lobotomized so they can't even form an original thought. That's why they just resort to dickriding each other and call it a day

>>939085978
>i na
>Maybe learn how to properly type before vomiting your brainrot you troon freak

oh no. I typed "i na" instead of "in a" - this clearly invalidates the fact that there is a genocide of the 2.2 million population of the Gaza Strip with a mass famine engineered by the Zionist government of Israel, via the deliberate blockade of humanitarian aid, and the systematic bulldozing of the West Bank by IDF forces in a deliberate policy to de-house and displace millions of Palestinian people.

Yes, that typo clearly invalidates all of that - except you cant actually refute the facts of the genocide going on, can you, you evil cunt? How morally bankrupt are you, to defend the mass killings of 62,000, of which the IDF's own database acknowledges 80% are women and children? How depraved must you be to cheer the slow starvation of millions?

The most generic answer which avoids being obviously wrong by making specific claims is that IE Bell Beakers spoke a dialectal form of late, nuclear PIE that branched out of the Corded Ware Indo-European dialect. Where we go from here is where everyone disagrees.
Many say there was an Italo-Celtic phase. This may be necessary in order to explain similarities between Italic and Celtic, but IEs kept moving west all the way to the Atlantic coast. The biggest issue that leaves what precise language they spoke open to debate is the long linguistic dark age where we have no writings, not even inscriptions. Did Western IE Bell Beakers speak some form of Celtic then? To a great extent, the answer to this question may involve semantics over the definition of "Celtic". One objection is that the birth of Proto-Celtic is often said to be quite late. Two rebuttals may be given:
1. How can we be confident of a strict date range for a reconstructed language without written records?
2. If it wasn't Proto-Celtic specifically, then why not "pre-Proto-Celtic"? This raises the question of what we even mean by "Proto-Celtic", because if pre-Proto-Celtic is the direct ancestor of Proto-Celtic and nothing else, why not just call it Proto-Celtic?
Some insist that the original center of Celtic culture was Hallstatt, and Celtic languages radiated out from there. This idea isn't sufficient to explain all Celtic languages. Central and Eastern continental Celtic culture can explain Gaulish and Brythonic, since the evidence suggests a late Brythonic colonization of Britain. It cannot explain, however, Goidelic and Celtiberian. Without genetic studies indicating late population movements which would have brought continental Celtic speech, we may be forced to consider that Celtic languages developed naturally out of whatever IE dialect Bell Beakers spoke along the Atlantic coast. Evidence of linguistic colonization is necessary to refute this idea. Celtic denialism isn't an argument.

>>939085978
>>939086075
ISRAEL GOOD YOU BAD ME GOOD TRANNY BAD BRAINROT TROON BAD THATS WHY ME THINK AND YOU DUMB

you sound like a fucking retard.