I have one simple question for the publishers of Montreal Counter-Info:
"Do you know who wrote the hit piece?
I’m not asking you to reveal their identities. They have a right to their privacy. I’m simply asking if you can confidently assert that they are not spooks. I think this is a fair question, don’t you?
Or do you think that COINTELPRO tactics are just another crazy conspiracy theory?
I'm not here to pick your nit, but that's three. Now I'm going back to read the rest of your post. ;-)
I definitely miss having an editor. I used to write for the Earth First! Journal and Slingshot and really liked someone else making the final cut, because finishing the job is the hardest part for me.
This year, I made it my business to just write a lot and not to worry about whether or not it's good. My motto has been FUCK QUALITY.
My reasoning is this - if I express something once, I can always re-express it better in the future.
And if people don't like it, they don't have to read it.
It's not like I'm getting paid to care whether people like my writing or not.
That's kind of what I was getting at. What I meant was that nobody's perfect, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who does pytos and clumsy wording. Perfect writing can be left to AI bots.
The answer to your question "why..." is, very likely, because it pays well. Or it pays enough. I'm reminded of the first Ghostbusters film. The secretary asks the applicant if he believes a long list of things such as the Loch Ness monster and the theory of Atlantis. The applicant asserts that he'll believe whatever they want as long as there's a pay cheque in it. Funny moment in the film, which came out well before the 1987 stock market crash inspired Alan Greenspan to begin with "the Fed put." Serious issue tho
I'm not aware of any of the people you name. I have no idea if they sold their souls for a pot of message. But it may be the simplest explanation. Many people are more avaricious than they are good.
If you want to understand the Antifa phenomenon, you absolutely must study Alexander Reid Ross. He is key to understanding the descent of the Left into pro-NATO aggro-delusionism.
I keep bringing him up because this stuff has been swept under the rug, but this stuff is super, super important.
It is important in the sense of "how was a previously committed anti-war collective perverted to become an establishment shill extravaganza." I note that my own brief and singular experience talking to Barack Obama at Columbia in the late Spring of 1983 is arguably related. Barry, as he called himself, was tasked to profile and denigrate the anti-war groups at Columbia.
In Autumn of 1982 we organised a successful demonstration on campus. Thousands of students and guests on campus all lay down at the same time. Our "die in" simulated what campus might look like if NYC were nuked. We received national and international coverage. The war machine was very angry. They sent Barry to find dirt on us.
He wrote it up in a long tirade published by Sundial magazine. It makes no mention of me. A buddy of mine asked me to take over his job at a midtown bank. He liked his boss but found the cheque processing work boring. So I went and got hired. Good pay for the time and a subway ride away.
So Barry went out of his way to find me on campus during stop week before final exams in Spring 1983. He tried to ingratiate himself by pretending to like my iconic hat with political buttons. He showed me a red white and blue forager cap and a handful of lapel pins, mostly from defence contractors. Then he quizzed me about my involvement in Students Against Militarism and Young Americans for Freedom.
I explained about my job and studies. He asked if I would be involved in Students Against Militarism during the next school year. I said that I would not. He asked me why not. I said that the job paid well and I was a poor scholarship student. I also said that I had attended one Spring 1983 meeting of the group and met the graduate student who was chosen to be chairman of the group in the next school year. I said, "He's a Maoist. I can't have anything to do with that."
Barry asked, "What's wrong with Maoism?"
I looked at him for a while. The whole scene became disgusting to me. All my concerns about why this stranger had hailed me from across campus, knew my name, had all these questions, came up again. I am sure my expression became cold. I looked him in the eye and said, "You know, all the dead people."
That was the end of the conversation. I walked on to the Furnald grocery. He went wherever. I never heard of him again until he ran for the Senate. I met nobody who had any classes with him. This is the entirety of my conversation with Barry. Further more deponent sayeth nought.
The banksters have used the people of "the west" in general as a crowbar against the global south, the same way they have used the Jewish people in general as a crowbar against the people of "the west" in general. Now they are using the alphabet people (LGB etc.) as a crowbar against us all.
Since moving to Mexico, my attitude towards anti-semitism has change because the taboo that exists in Canada simply doesn't exist here.
You can't go to a bookstore or book fair without seeing titles like Mein Kampf, Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Henry Ford's book about globalist Jews, etc...
(No, I haven't read any of these books.)
People see WWII very differently here, because they weren't part of it and didn't take a side. Honestly, I kinda think Mexicans were hoping that Germany would win, because the U.S. is the traditional enemy of Mexico.
How many times has the U.S. invaded Mexico? I don't know. A lot. More than you think.
Also, there is just cultural factors. There is a strong streak of mysticism in the German character, which is something they have in common with Mexicans. This is less evident in the post-WWII era, but if you look at the Volkisch movement, or the wandervogel, or the utopian community of Ascona, which involved Jung, Otto Gross, Bakunin, Hermann Hesse and many others, I think you'll conclude that Germans have a strong predilection for animism, shamanism, pantheism, mysticism, and the occult. It's worth noting that the Germanic tribes were converted to Christianity by the sword, and that they were the first to rebel against the authority of the Roman Church in a major, major way.
When I first learned that many people in South America have Nazi sympathies, and that it Neo-nazi skinheads are often part of the same punk scenes as anarchists, it made absolutely zero sense to my brain. We're talking about Latinos here. Didn't they know that the Nazis were white supremacists who wanted to take over the world?
Here's the thing, though - it really depends what you're comparing Nazism to.
From the perspective of Latin America, white supremacists have in the process of taking over the world for the past 500 years. Were the Nazis any worse than the Conquistadors? If you think they were, I recommend reading Stolen Continents by Ronald Wright, because you need a history lesson. The Third Reich lasted for 12 years. When did the Conquista end?
I know that the Nazis were racist as fuck, but were they racist against the indigenous people of North or South America? I'm not asking rhetorically. This is a real question, because I haven't studied this question in detail, but my perception is that they weren't, possibly due to the fact that Germans have always had a fetish for indigenous culture.
If you know anything about the ancient Germanic Bear Dance ceremony, it seems pretty similar to the Sun Dance. I suspect that Germans love indigenous cultures because they recognize something in them that they lost when Caesar conquered the Celts.
(I highly recommend a episode of Hardcore History called The Celtic Holocaust by Dan Carlin to people curious about this history.)
I also think that Latin Americans in general like Germans better than other Europeans because Germans haven't fucked them over.
Think about it. What did Germans ever do to Latin America? I'm sure you could come up with some things if you thought about it long enough, but compared to the crimes of England, France, and Spain, they're nothing. Also, there are more Germans in Latin America than you might think, and they don't seem to be disliked.
From what I've observed, Mexicans also seem to like Italians better, possibly for the same reason.
So when thinking about WWII, this is worth considering. Reasonable people don't tend to assume that one person is all right and the other is all wrong when it comes to conflict.
It's normal to assume that it takes two to tango, and I think that is the Mexican attitude to WWII. No one's making excuses for the Holocaust, or anything like that, but the Jews aren't assumed to be blameless scapegoats who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, which is what people believe in Canada.
If you had to pick a side in a conflict, though, chances are that you're going to side with the ones you like better, right?
Latin Americans like Germans and Italians better than the English, French, Jews, and Russians. Also, they're part Spanish.
To any Latin Americans reading this - please correct me if I'm wrong. Obviously, these are broad strokes. Latin America is huge, and I've only been to Mexico, Guatemala, Panama, Costa Rica, and Cuba...
I think I know what I'm talking about, but I could be wrong, and I stand to be corrected if I am.
If you never read the Protocols you should. It reads like a history book about the 20th century. Mein Kampf should also be read. If you don't, you leave it up to others to form your opinion of the author. ;-)
Another fantastic read on this subject is Douglas L. Reed's "The Controversy of Zion". He was a correspondent for The Times in London, and resigned in disgust in 1939. He tried to warn the British people about what was happening in Gemany, but the editors trashcanned his writing. The book changed my perception of Communism and of Joseph McCarthy. Now I see him as a good guy. Had he lived another decade he would have said "I TOLD YOU SO, MOTHERFUCKERS!" The Khazar owned media and Hollywood has done a good job smearing him. Which reminds me of a quote:
"You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism created the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrator."
- Alexandr Solzhenitsyn -
He was, of course talking about the Khazar banking mafia.
Lots of Gemans went to Latin America after WW II. The Khazar banking mafia wanted to crush Germany. They blame two world wars on Germany, and split the country in two in 1961.
As for NATO, in the late fifties the General Secretary stated in no uncertain terms the organization's three objectives.
1. Keep the US in.
2. Keep Russia out.
3. Keep Germany down
I have called Nordstream a trifecta in that regard?
Yes, if Latin Americans should have a hate object Spain should top the list. Imagine what these countries would be if they still had all that gold.
If Mexicans should have a hate object the US is the perfect choice. It stole Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and California from them. That's a lot of real-estate. Top that off with all the wars you mentioned.
Oof, I really don't like that wink, and hope that it doesn't mean that you think that I'm a Nazi sympathizer because I'm anti-Zionist.
Maybe that's not what you meant, though. You seem like you're beyond Pepsi-Coke, Republican-Democrat, double-bind false dichotomy politics, but I'll say it anyway: Fuck the Nazis.
You know how many schizophrenics, anarchists, and "undesirables" the Nazis murdered?
Personally, I blame the Third Reich on the Prussian model of "education", which was developed as part a long-term military strategy by the Prussian aristocracy after Prussia was defeated by Napoleon.
Obviously, the Nazi obsession with Aryan atomic ubermensch tells you something. They were insane. The fact that some of the grievances they had were legit doesn't change that. They were brainwashed to be highly nationalistic patriots, and after WWI they entered into a mass psychosis caused by the cognitive dissonance created by the incompatibility of their beliefs with their material reality. This is my pet theory, but we should be able to agree on one thing - the Third Reich was a direct result of a mass psychosis.
As for reading books like Mein Kampf and Protocols of Zion, I think that the serious student should read primary sources, and those are primary sources, even if the latter is a forgery, as Zionists claim.
Tough to know how to respond to your comment because you seem to know a lot of things that I don't, but your anti-Zionism bias seems to be much stronger than mine, and it makes me a little uncomfortable.
Joe McCarthy a good guy? Seems highly unlikely but I'll hear you out if you'd like to go into greater detail.
After finding out that I am 1/64th Ashkenazi Jew, I read a book called The Thirteenth Tribe, so I know about Khazaria, but I don't know about the "Khazarian banking mafia". What are you basing this on, and why do you think they control Hollywood?
That's quite the Solzhenitsyn quote. Thanks for sharing. If you care to put that in context, I'm all ears.
Breeeeeath........ No I don't think so. I myself am an anti Zionist. I am also an anti socialist. Even of the National kind. ;-) I also hate to listen to, or read comments from people who are stuck in the false left/right paradigm. If I were to describe myself politically with one word it would be anarchist. Why should you have power over me, or vise versa? Why should anyone?
If you get hold of a copy of Douglas L. Reed's book, you can start reading from Napoleon and on. When you get to the October Revolution (which actually happened in November because of the calendar difference. Nit picking again), that's where it really gets interesting. How the author has been able to find out the details of how the Romanovs were butchered is unknown to me, but they wrote on the walls with their blood, and he describes it in gory detail. Khazars did it.
Of course Zionists (and everyone with any sympathy for Israel) say the Protocols are a forgery.That's why in 1919 the DoS assembled a committee to find out whether or not it is. The committee's report was presented in 1920, and promptly got a TOP SECRET stamp on it. Then it was purposely misfiled because people who knew about it were unable to find it. At some point a zealous clerk must have found it and put it where it belonged because it was released on a FOIA request in 2001. I have not seen the report nor the FOIA request, but I trust the source I got the info from. As for the contents of the report it doesn't take a lot of imagination to conclude what the result was considering the classifying and subsequent misfiling of it. Another fact that supports its authenticity is, as I have mentioned before, that it reads like a history book of the 20th century.
Who has been runing the US after 11/22/1963? Khazars, that's who.
"Israel controls the United States, and the Americans know it."
- Ariel Sharon -
This is exactly what Joseph McCarthy was trying to stop. He knew that "colonel" Edward Mandel House was the hand inside the sock puppet we know as Woodrow Wilson. The Khazars in Germany went to London when Germany was winning WW I, and asked them if they wanted to defeat Germany. They contacted E.M.House, and the US entered the war.
I can't recall his name right now, but there was another guy (A banker. Khazar, of course.) in between Edward M. House and Heinz Kissofdeath (as I call him).
Either way, there is no doubt, or rather glaringly obvious, that the Khazars have total control over both the district of criminals, London, Brussels and so on, and so forth. There is even a Khazar in charge of the Russian central bank last I checked. Of the seventeen original oligarchs in Russia under Yeltsin, 16 of them were Khazars.
It is well established that the international media is under Jewish control. Rothschild owns Reuters which in turn bought up AP. The names of most of the movie makers in Hollywood is a dead give away as to who owns and controls them. Put the Solzhenitsyn quote, and the fact that we are reminded ad nauseam of the Holocaust® into that context.
The one world government is their ambition. They want to rule the planet from Oded Yinon's Greater Israel which spans from river (Nile) to river (Euphrates).
Edit: Finally there is a book by Paul Findley (R-IL). In this book he shows how they continue to control the entire political system in the US from the federal, state, county and down to the municipal level.
Well... I suspect there is some truth to what you say, and in a few years maybe I'll be better qualified to judge.
With all due respect, if you're actually trying to convince me of something, I would suggest narrowing your focus down to one or two things, because you're kind of all over the place.
Could you give me a link for that Ariel Sharon quote please? That's quite a zinger if real.
There are a few red flags in what you say:
"How the author has been able to find out the details of how the Romanovs were butchered is unknown to me, but they wrote on the walls with their blood, and he describes it in gory detail. Khazars did it."
This makes me think of the "babies on bayonets" WWI propaganda trope, so George Bush Sr.'s riff on that theme (about how Saddam's soldiers were ripping babies from incubators in Kuwait).
If you don't know where the author got the information, then why do you believe it?
On the subject of the media, I myself have said that Zionists own the media, which might be a bit of an overstatement, especially now that Elon Musk owns Twitter.
It seems to me that the power of the Zionists might be declining, as suggested by all the powerful Jews (Weinstein, Epstein, Shermans) who have been taken out in recent years.
Thompson-Reuters Trusted News Initiative was at the top of the Facebook fact-checking Ministry of Truth, wasn't it?
The Thompson family, which owns the Globe and Mail, is the richest family in Canada and appears to have massive influence in international media.
They aren't Jewish. Then again, neither is Rupert Murdoch but he might as well be.
"On the subject of the media, I myself have said that Zionists own the media, which might be a bit of an overstatement, especially now that Elon Musk owns Twitter."
Elon Musk is just as Jewish as Ariel Sharon, and contrary to what he said last year, the bird is not free. Speaking of Sharon:
Have you ever considered the possibility that the people you describe as rich or powerful Jews might not be Jews at all? Ever heard them described as name-stealers? Check out the history of the Radanites, from Babylon. Very interesting. Could be the original founders of the "Synagogue of Satan", mentioned in the bible as "saying they are Jews but are not".
I have absolutely considered that. After finding out that I am 1/64th Ashkenazi Jew, I read the Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler and concluded that a majority of world Jewry are not descended from Semites, but Eurasians.
That doesn't mean they're not real Jews, though. If they practice the religious, they're Jews.
People who don't believe in God and identify as Jewish?
I have one simple question for the publishers of Montreal Counter-Info:
"Do you know who wrote the hit piece?
I’m not asking you to reveal their identities. They have a right to their privacy. I’m simply asking if you can confidently assert that they are not spooks. I think this is a fair question, don’t you?
Or do you think that COINTELPRO tactics are just another crazy conspiracy theory?
I'm not here to pick your nit, but that's three. Now I'm going back to read the rest of your post. ;-)
You got me! One day I'm going to have an editor, and the world will never be the same.
I'm not looking forward to that. :-)
I definitely miss having an editor. I used to write for the Earth First! Journal and Slingshot and really liked someone else making the final cut, because finishing the job is the hardest part for me.
This year, I made it my business to just write a lot and not to worry about whether or not it's good. My motto has been FUCK QUALITY.
My reasoning is this - if I express something once, I can always re-express it better in the future.
And if people don't like it, they don't have to read it.
It's not like I'm getting paid to care whether people like my writing or not.
"My motto has been FUCK QUALITY."
That's kind of what I was getting at. What I meant was that nobody's perfect, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who does pytos and clumsy wording. Perfect writing can be left to AI bots.
WHAT you say is the most important.
Thanks! I'm anal-expulsive.
The answer to your question "why..." is, very likely, because it pays well. Or it pays enough. I'm reminded of the first Ghostbusters film. The secretary asks the applicant if he believes a long list of things such as the Loch Ness monster and the theory of Atlantis. The applicant asserts that he'll believe whatever they want as long as there's a pay cheque in it. Funny moment in the film, which came out well before the 1987 stock market crash inspired Alan Greenspan to begin with "the Fed put." Serious issue tho
I'm not aware of any of the people you name. I have no idea if they sold their souls for a pot of message. But it may be the simplest explanation. Many people are more avaricious than they are good.
If you want to understand the Antifa phenomenon, you absolutely must study Alexander Reid Ross. He is key to understanding the descent of the Left into pro-NATO aggro-delusionism.
I keep bringing him up because this stuff has been swept under the rug, but this stuff is super, super important.
It is important in the sense of "how was a previously committed anti-war collective perverted to become an establishment shill extravaganza." I note that my own brief and singular experience talking to Barack Obama at Columbia in the late Spring of 1983 is arguably related. Barry, as he called himself, was tasked to profile and denigrate the anti-war groups at Columbia.
In Autumn of 1982 we organised a successful demonstration on campus. Thousands of students and guests on campus all lay down at the same time. Our "die in" simulated what campus might look like if NYC were nuked. We received national and international coverage. The war machine was very angry. They sent Barry to find dirt on us.
He wrote it up in a long tirade published by Sundial magazine. It makes no mention of me. A buddy of mine asked me to take over his job at a midtown bank. He liked his boss but found the cheque processing work boring. So I went and got hired. Good pay for the time and a subway ride away.
So Barry went out of his way to find me on campus during stop week before final exams in Spring 1983. He tried to ingratiate himself by pretending to like my iconic hat with political buttons. He showed me a red white and blue forager cap and a handful of lapel pins, mostly from defence contractors. Then he quizzed me about my involvement in Students Against Militarism and Young Americans for Freedom.
I explained about my job and studies. He asked if I would be involved in Students Against Militarism during the next school year. I said that I would not. He asked me why not. I said that the job paid well and I was a poor scholarship student. I also said that I had attended one Spring 1983 meeting of the group and met the graduate student who was chosen to be chairman of the group in the next school year. I said, "He's a Maoist. I can't have anything to do with that."
Barry asked, "What's wrong with Maoism?"
I looked at him for a while. The whole scene became disgusting to me. All my concerns about why this stranger had hailed me from across campus, knew my name, had all these questions, came up again. I am sure my expression became cold. I looked him in the eye and said, "You know, all the dead people."
That was the end of the conversation. I walked on to the Furnald grocery. He went wherever. I never heard of him again until he ran for the Senate. I met nobody who had any classes with him. This is the entirety of my conversation with Barry. Further more deponent sayeth nought.
Wow! That's quite the story! Have you published it somewhere?
Yes, here and there, over the years.
The banksters have used the people of "the west" in general as a crowbar against the global south, the same way they have used the Jewish people in general as a crowbar against the people of "the west" in general. Now they are using the alphabet people (LGB etc.) as a crowbar against us all.
Since moving to Mexico, my attitude towards anti-semitism has change because the taboo that exists in Canada simply doesn't exist here.
You can't go to a bookstore or book fair without seeing titles like Mein Kampf, Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Henry Ford's book about globalist Jews, etc...
(No, I haven't read any of these books.)
People see WWII very differently here, because they weren't part of it and didn't take a side. Honestly, I kinda think Mexicans were hoping that Germany would win, because the U.S. is the traditional enemy of Mexico.
How many times has the U.S. invaded Mexico? I don't know. A lot. More than you think.
Also, there is just cultural factors. There is a strong streak of mysticism in the German character, which is something they have in common with Mexicans. This is less evident in the post-WWII era, but if you look at the Volkisch movement, or the wandervogel, or the utopian community of Ascona, which involved Jung, Otto Gross, Bakunin, Hermann Hesse and many others, I think you'll conclude that Germans have a strong predilection for animism, shamanism, pantheism, mysticism, and the occult. It's worth noting that the Germanic tribes were converted to Christianity by the sword, and that they were the first to rebel against the authority of the Roman Church in a major, major way.
When I first learned that many people in South America have Nazi sympathies, and that it Neo-nazi skinheads are often part of the same punk scenes as anarchists, it made absolutely zero sense to my brain. We're talking about Latinos here. Didn't they know that the Nazis were white supremacists who wanted to take over the world?
Here's the thing, though - it really depends what you're comparing Nazism to.
From the perspective of Latin America, white supremacists have in the process of taking over the world for the past 500 years. Were the Nazis any worse than the Conquistadors? If you think they were, I recommend reading Stolen Continents by Ronald Wright, because you need a history lesson. The Third Reich lasted for 12 years. When did the Conquista end?
I know that the Nazis were racist as fuck, but were they racist against the indigenous people of North or South America? I'm not asking rhetorically. This is a real question, because I haven't studied this question in detail, but my perception is that they weren't, possibly due to the fact that Germans have always had a fetish for indigenous culture.
If you know anything about the ancient Germanic Bear Dance ceremony, it seems pretty similar to the Sun Dance. I suspect that Germans love indigenous cultures because they recognize something in them that they lost when Caesar conquered the Celts.
(I highly recommend a episode of Hardcore History called The Celtic Holocaust by Dan Carlin to people curious about this history.)
I also think that Latin Americans in general like Germans better than other Europeans because Germans haven't fucked them over.
Think about it. What did Germans ever do to Latin America? I'm sure you could come up with some things if you thought about it long enough, but compared to the crimes of England, France, and Spain, they're nothing. Also, there are more Germans in Latin America than you might think, and they don't seem to be disliked.
From what I've observed, Mexicans also seem to like Italians better, possibly for the same reason.
So when thinking about WWII, this is worth considering. Reasonable people don't tend to assume that one person is all right and the other is all wrong when it comes to conflict.
It's normal to assume that it takes two to tango, and I think that is the Mexican attitude to WWII. No one's making excuses for the Holocaust, or anything like that, but the Jews aren't assumed to be blameless scapegoats who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, which is what people believe in Canada.
If you had to pick a side in a conflict, though, chances are that you're going to side with the ones you like better, right?
Latin Americans like Germans and Italians better than the English, French, Jews, and Russians. Also, they're part Spanish.
To any Latin Americans reading this - please correct me if I'm wrong. Obviously, these are broad strokes. Latin America is huge, and I've only been to Mexico, Guatemala, Panama, Costa Rica, and Cuba...
I think I know what I'm talking about, but I could be wrong, and I stand to be corrected if I am.
If you never read the Protocols you should. It reads like a history book about the 20th century. Mein Kampf should also be read. If you don't, you leave it up to others to form your opinion of the author. ;-)
Another fantastic read on this subject is Douglas L. Reed's "The Controversy of Zion". He was a correspondent for The Times in London, and resigned in disgust in 1939. He tried to warn the British people about what was happening in Gemany, but the editors trashcanned his writing. The book changed my perception of Communism and of Joseph McCarthy. Now I see him as a good guy. Had he lived another decade he would have said "I TOLD YOU SO, MOTHERFUCKERS!" The Khazar owned media and Hollywood has done a good job smearing him. Which reminds me of a quote:
"You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism created the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrator."
- Alexandr Solzhenitsyn -
He was, of course talking about the Khazar banking mafia.
Lots of Gemans went to Latin America after WW II. The Khazar banking mafia wanted to crush Germany. They blame two world wars on Germany, and split the country in two in 1961.
As for NATO, in the late fifties the General Secretary stated in no uncertain terms the organization's three objectives.
1. Keep the US in.
2. Keep Russia out.
3. Keep Germany down
I have called Nordstream a trifecta in that regard?
Yes, if Latin Americans should have a hate object Spain should top the list. Imagine what these countries would be if they still had all that gold.
If Mexicans should have a hate object the US is the perfect choice. It stole Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and California from them. That's a lot of real-estate. Top that off with all the wars you mentioned.
Oof, I really don't like that wink, and hope that it doesn't mean that you think that I'm a Nazi sympathizer because I'm anti-Zionist.
Maybe that's not what you meant, though. You seem like you're beyond Pepsi-Coke, Republican-Democrat, double-bind false dichotomy politics, but I'll say it anyway: Fuck the Nazis.
You know how many schizophrenics, anarchists, and "undesirables" the Nazis murdered?
Personally, I blame the Third Reich on the Prussian model of "education", which was developed as part a long-term military strategy by the Prussian aristocracy after Prussia was defeated by Napoleon.
Obviously, the Nazi obsession with Aryan atomic ubermensch tells you something. They were insane. The fact that some of the grievances they had were legit doesn't change that. They were brainwashed to be highly nationalistic patriots, and after WWI they entered into a mass psychosis caused by the cognitive dissonance created by the incompatibility of their beliefs with their material reality. This is my pet theory, but we should be able to agree on one thing - the Third Reich was a direct result of a mass psychosis.
As for reading books like Mein Kampf and Protocols of Zion, I think that the serious student should read primary sources, and those are primary sources, even if the latter is a forgery, as Zionists claim.
Tough to know how to respond to your comment because you seem to know a lot of things that I don't, but your anti-Zionism bias seems to be much stronger than mine, and it makes me a little uncomfortable.
Joe McCarthy a good guy? Seems highly unlikely but I'll hear you out if you'd like to go into greater detail.
After finding out that I am 1/64th Ashkenazi Jew, I read a book called The Thirteenth Tribe, so I know about Khazaria, but I don't know about the "Khazarian banking mafia". What are you basing this on, and why do you think they control Hollywood?
That's quite the Solzhenitsyn quote. Thanks for sharing. If you care to put that in context, I'm all ears.
Breeeeeath........ No I don't think so. I myself am an anti Zionist. I am also an anti socialist. Even of the National kind. ;-) I also hate to listen to, or read comments from people who are stuck in the false left/right paradigm. If I were to describe myself politically with one word it would be anarchist. Why should you have power over me, or vise versa? Why should anyone?
If you get hold of a copy of Douglas L. Reed's book, you can start reading from Napoleon and on. When you get to the October Revolution (which actually happened in November because of the calendar difference. Nit picking again), that's where it really gets interesting. How the author has been able to find out the details of how the Romanovs were butchered is unknown to me, but they wrote on the walls with their blood, and he describes it in gory detail. Khazars did it.
Of course Zionists (and everyone with any sympathy for Israel) say the Protocols are a forgery.That's why in 1919 the DoS assembled a committee to find out whether or not it is. The committee's report was presented in 1920, and promptly got a TOP SECRET stamp on it. Then it was purposely misfiled because people who knew about it were unable to find it. At some point a zealous clerk must have found it and put it where it belonged because it was released on a FOIA request in 2001. I have not seen the report nor the FOIA request, but I trust the source I got the info from. As for the contents of the report it doesn't take a lot of imagination to conclude what the result was considering the classifying and subsequent misfiling of it. Another fact that supports its authenticity is, as I have mentioned before, that it reads like a history book of the 20th century.
Who has been runing the US after 11/22/1963? Khazars, that's who.
http://viewzone.com/dualcitizen.html
"Israel controls the United States, and the Americans know it."
- Ariel Sharon -
This is exactly what Joseph McCarthy was trying to stop. He knew that "colonel" Edward Mandel House was the hand inside the sock puppet we know as Woodrow Wilson. The Khazars in Germany went to London when Germany was winning WW I, and asked them if they wanted to defeat Germany. They contacted E.M.House, and the US entered the war.
I can't recall his name right now, but there was another guy (A banker. Khazar, of course.) in between Edward M. House and Heinz Kissofdeath (as I call him).
Either way, there is no doubt, or rather glaringly obvious, that the Khazars have total control over both the district of criminals, London, Brussels and so on, and so forth. There is even a Khazar in charge of the Russian central bank last I checked. Of the seventeen original oligarchs in Russia under Yeltsin, 16 of them were Khazars.
It is well established that the international media is under Jewish control. Rothschild owns Reuters which in turn bought up AP. The names of most of the movie makers in Hollywood is a dead give away as to who owns and controls them. Put the Solzhenitsyn quote, and the fact that we are reminded ad nauseam of the Holocaust® into that context.
The one world government is their ambition. They want to rule the planet from Oded Yinon's Greater Israel which spans from river (Nile) to river (Euphrates).
Edit: Finally there is a book by Paul Findley (R-IL). In this book he shows how they continue to control the entire political system in the US from the federal, state, county and down to the municipal level.
www.hourofthetime.com/1-LF/TheyDareToSpeakOutPaulFindley.pdf
Well... I suspect there is some truth to what you say, and in a few years maybe I'll be better qualified to judge.
With all due respect, if you're actually trying to convince me of something, I would suggest narrowing your focus down to one or two things, because you're kind of all over the place.
Could you give me a link for that Ariel Sharon quote please? That's quite a zinger if real.
There are a few red flags in what you say:
"How the author has been able to find out the details of how the Romanovs were butchered is unknown to me, but they wrote on the walls with their blood, and he describes it in gory detail. Khazars did it."
This makes me think of the "babies on bayonets" WWI propaganda trope, so George Bush Sr.'s riff on that theme (about how Saddam's soldiers were ripping babies from incubators in Kuwait).
If you don't know where the author got the information, then why do you believe it?
On the subject of the media, I myself have said that Zionists own the media, which might be a bit of an overstatement, especially now that Elon Musk owns Twitter.
It seems to me that the power of the Zionists might be declining, as suggested by all the powerful Jews (Weinstein, Epstein, Shermans) who have been taken out in recent years.
Thompson-Reuters Trusted News Initiative was at the top of the Facebook fact-checking Ministry of Truth, wasn't it?
The Thompson family, which owns the Globe and Mail, is the richest family in Canada and appears to have massive influence in international media.
They aren't Jewish. Then again, neither is Rupert Murdoch but he might as well be.
Thoughts?
"On the subject of the media, I myself have said that Zionists own the media, which might be a bit of an overstatement, especially now that Elon Musk owns Twitter."
Elon Musk is just as Jewish as Ariel Sharon, and contrary to what he said last year, the bird is not free. Speaking of Sharon:
https://www.azquotes.com/author/13410-Ariel_Sharon
and at the top here:
https://elevatesociety.com/quotes-by-ariel-sharon/
As for the Thompsons and Murdoch. As you know, you don't have to be Jewish to be a Zionist.
Have you ever considered the possibility that the people you describe as rich or powerful Jews might not be Jews at all? Ever heard them described as name-stealers? Check out the history of the Radanites, from Babylon. Very interesting. Could be the original founders of the "Synagogue of Satan", mentioned in the bible as "saying they are Jews but are not".
I have absolutely considered that. After finding out that I am 1/64th Ashkenazi Jew, I read the Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler and concluded that a majority of world Jewry are not descended from Semites, but Eurasians.
That doesn't mean they're not real Jews, though. If they practice the religious, they're Jews.
People who don't believe in God and identify as Jewish?
Dr. Seuss wrote a book about them.
You've got me on that last point. I thought I knew all Seuss's books.🤔
Thanks NM. At least you now know you're over the target!