×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules Donate
10
7 comments block


[ - ] yesiknow 4 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 18:40:54 ago (+4/-0)

The Guggenheim name is shit, runny stinking shit. Their foundation was responsible for creating the initial staff of the American historical Society, the "source" for historians that deleted everything for their war against Gentiles and adulterated what they left in. When they were accused of being corrupt, they said they wouldn't answer any accusations of corruptions

[ - ] Shotinthedark 3 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 18:47:04 ago (+3/-0)

1 there's no actual proof the family owned it.
2 the kike sold it, doesn't matter the circumstances. If I needed money badly and I sold my truck for far less that the value my great grand kids couldn't sue. Too bad so sad greedy kike

[ - ] Crackinjokes 2 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 21:00:20 ago (+2/-0)

Of course it's ridiculous that they should be able to get a painting back that their ancestor sold. It wasn't even seized it was sold.

But if this travesty of unfairness does happen which these days seems to be so likely all the descendants should be forced to pretend they didn't escape from Germany and go into the so-called ovens and be burnt up because if the ancestor wasn't able to benefit from the sale of the painting and they're going to get the painting back then they shouldn't get any of the benefits of the sale of the painting.

[ - ] PearofAnguishJuniorManager 2 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 20:42:00 ago (+2/-0)

If the Nazis had confiscated the painting, then the jew might have a chance. But that didn’t happen.

[ - ] Thyhorrorcosmic103 2 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 18:20:01 ago (+2/-0)

No mention of the Haavara agreement?

[ - ] carnold03 0 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 23:24:24 ago (+0/-0)

If I was the museum director, I'd respond by hiring an artist to reproduce the Picasso painting in dispute. Ship it to the surviving relatives followed by a box of sea salt and a letter saying, "On behalf of the Guggenheim Museum, cry some more," and move on with my money laundering museum operation.

The media furor the family makes will be more than enough to ensure the reproduced painting and its painter gain some media prominence. It'll also enable some price can be applied to the painting, so there's sufficient cover for when the inner ring gives them hush money.

[ - ] Crackinjokes -1 points 2.3 yearsJan 23, 2023 20:54:29 ago (+0/-1)

Hitler took a lot of these paintings from the Jews because they had gotten them themselves in immoral ways by exploiting debt and doing other things. That's why the Nazis took them from the Jews because the Jews ended up with all the wealth and culture of the whole country. And they wouldn't let anybody else have anything. For example they wouldn't sell houses to non-jews. The non-jews had to rent. It's one of the reasons the Nazis came to power.

So Hitler and the Nazis were righting a wrong when they took the ill-gotten gains from the Jews and repossessed them. So it's just ultimately ironic that now Jews are going to claim that the stuff was wrongly taken from them when they're the ones who wrongly took it in the very beginning.