new

To this day, nothing strikes fear into the black hearts of Jewish Mafia Globalists like the name of Adolf Hitler aka “The Great One.” He was, at least for a while, the only man who had totally rid his nation of the Marxist Globalist pestilence. For that reason, his name must be dirtied on a daily basis.

Convincing libtards and normies that AH was the devil-incarnate is a simple enough task -- easily accomplished through surround-sound Fake News – Fake Academia – Hollywood repetition. But how are (((they))) to misdirect the thoughts and emotions us pesky, disobedient, critical thinking, “Far Right ™,” alternative media, “conspiracy theorists” ™ who are wise to the tricks of the New World Order and their controlled bullhorn barkers? Legends of the “great men” of World War II, who “saved the world” from “Nazism” ™ -- scum such as Winston Churchill, Franklin Demono Rosenfeld and Dwight D. Eisenhower – won’t impress us "extremists" ™ because we know they were all corrupted Globalist agents of the International Jewish Finance Mafia.

Absurd fairy tales of the Holohoax won’t move our crowd to tears either because we are informed, confirmed and immovable “Holocaust Deniers ™.” So, what’s a Globalist propagandist got to do to divert our relatively small but growing community of truthers away from Hitler Truth? Simple --- (((they))) label Hitler a secret “Bolshevik, ” a “Zionist” or a “Rothschild agent” -- and then paste together past smears from history and new lies from the present with the flimsiest circumstantial “evidence” to create a phony case.

Sadly, these poison propaganda pills -- often packaged within pages and pages of authoritative-sounding hot air and deceptively "supported" by hundreds of "footnotes" which, upon closer inspection, only lead to some other writer's hot-air -- seem to have infected more than a few truthers. The ranks of the deluded (or devious?) Hitlerphobes of the "Far Right" ™ include writers like Christopher Jon Bjerknes (Adolf Hitler: Bolshevik and Zionist) and Michael Hoffman II (Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People) – whose recent books on the subject are truly a black stain on their body of work.

Bjerkness, by the way, believes in the Holohoax -- which alone ought to disqualify him from being considered as a serious truth researcher -- in spite of some of his other perceived "anti-Semitic" and accurate writings. He is also, self-admittedly, of partly Jewish lineage. As for the bow-tied Hoffman -- who is excellent on Holohoax debunking -- his sanctimonious anti-Hitlerism smells of virtue-signalling. It's almost as if he is trying to ingratiate himself back into the world of "serious" academia by distancing himself from us big bad "Nazis" -- as if we are crazy smelly family members that he is ashamed of.

The great British historian and "holocaust denier," David Irving, flirts with such virtue-signalling from time to time as well, with his erroneous claim that Hitler only wanted a "small war" with Poland (False! Poland, backed-up by France, UK & FDR, started the fight which Hitler did everything possible to avoid); his grossly inaccurate courtroom characterization of Little Joey Goebbels as "evil;" and his post-arrest claim of possible "gas vans" having been utilized by the Germans on the Eastern front, after all.

As an inoculation for the benefit of the weaker-minded among our CyberTruth fraternity, The Real History Channel presents a debunking of eight of the most significant pillars (not all necessarily shared by the aforementioned writers) of the phony case against Hitler being perpetuated by Marxist moles, virtue-signalling chicken-men, and other assorted dupes within our ranks.

[…]

Baseless Claim #3:

Hitler was a Rothschild / British agent -- perhaps even the bastard child of a Rothschild!

In a piece (here) published at our former TomatoBubble home about three years ago, titled, Hitler was NOT a Rothschild-British Agent, yours truly thoroughly addressed this lunatic libel and offered a $500 reward for any actual evidence to support this preposterous propaganda. Still no takers, and the offer still stands. (here)

Far from being a Rothschild agent (secretly trained in England according to some of these crooked crackpots!), or, as some of really deranged cultists claim, a bloodline Rothschild himself -- Hitler was actually the family's worst nightmare. In Hitler's Germany, the Rothschilds, who thrive under the protective cloak of relative anonymity, were made known to every man, woman and child in Germany. Baron Louis de Rothschild was even arrested and had his bank seized. Have a look below at the headlines, and the movie poster for a popular German Hitler-era film about the evil clan.

image

[…]

Baseless Claim 7:

"Mad Man" Hitler Doomed Germany by Invading the Soviet Union

This one is Hoffman's favorite fallacy -- and he wastes more ink in his book on this than any other one of his ignorant claims. In so doing, Hoffman displays an astonishing ignorance -- perhaps willful, perhaps not -- of the real story of World War II, so accurately presented by yours truly in "The Bad War."

Soviet boss Josef Stalin’s objective all along was to let Germany and Britain wear each other out in the West, and then launch a surprise attack from the East (as he had already done to Poland in 1939; and Finland, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia in 1940) of such magnitude that it would subdue all of Europe. Hitler is hardly to blame for launching a preemptive strike, nor is he to blame for the massive amounts of U.S. aid which FDR would ship to Stalin to keep his evil regime afloat until the mighty U.S. could join the fray and open-up additional fronts which Stalin badly needed, and was desperately demanding.

The Great One, in a speech before the Reichstag on December 11, 1941, explains:

"Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation of the build-up of Soviet military power in the East during a period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a military build-up of world-historical dimensions was being carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was being threatened, but rather to attack that which seemed incapable of defense ... I may say this today: If the wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion against the Reich, Europe would have been lost." (emphasis added)

The German preemptive strike -- code-named Operation Barbarossa -- and the heroism of the Waffen SS saved Germany and all of Europe from the same Bolshevik terror that had already exterminated or imprisoned scores of millions in the former Russian Empire. Would Hoffman, in retrospect, have allowed the Soviet hordes to storm all the way to Portugal and do the same? What the hell is the matter with you, Hoffman?!

The fact that Germany ultimately lost the war in the East was a tragedy which ought to be blamed on Franklin Demon Rosenfeld and the Red Jews surrounding him, not Hitler.

[…]

There are other ridiculous claims made by other ridiculous "researchers" on the "Far Right" ™ --- which we can just as easily debunk and/or dismiss for total lack of evidence, as well as lack of logic. But at some point, when it has become clear what the game is all about -- we need to just start ignoring this garbage and call it for what it is: deliberate disinfo originated by "the usual suspects" and aimed directly at the "less sharp-minded" among us -- and then retold by deceived innocent writers and bloggers who ought to know better.

More crap:

Hitler was an occultist -- Hitler persecuted Christians (only the Marxist preachers) -- Hitler was a blundering traitor who ignored his Generals (actually, more than a few of his generals were the aristocratic-class traitors) -- The "Nazi" leaders were closet homosexuals -- Hitler had only one testicle -- Hitler was the bastard child of a Rothschild -- Hitler was brainwashed/mind-controlled as a young man in Britain -- Hitler banned gun ownership (exact opposite is true -- here) -- The "Nazis" utilized mandatory euthanasia (False. Only very rare cases of terminal illness and extreme suffering were permitted) -- Hitler abandoned his people and fled to Argentina (debunked here) -- Hitler was a drug addict .... blah blah blah.

It is interesting to note that this same dirty game of "projection" -- in which "Far Right" ™ analysts and activists of dubious background smear Nationalist leaders as secret Rothschild agents -- is today being utilized against Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Bjerknes, in fact, has authored another book of comedy titled, "Putin's Reign of Terror," in which he breathlessly claims that Putin is essentially a Communist Trotskyite who secretly runs ISIS while working hand-in-hand with Trump to subdue the region for Israel. I kid you not! (summary here).

For his guarded optimism regarding Trump and his Q Anon operation, even your true-blue reporter here has been anonymously (and viciously) smeared in certain forums and on You Tube comments as a "secret Jew" because, according to some of these infiltrators and their innocent dupes, Q Anon is a "Jewish psyop" -- ergo, any blogger lending so much as the slightest bit of credence to Q Anon must be a spy too (palm to face, sighing, shaking my head.)

See their game now? It's all bullshit, boys and girls, and it's bad for you.

So we must ask, What spots and blemishes did Yahweh God create? What “cursed children” did God create? Some so-called Identity Christians insist that the non-White races are the “beasts” of God’s creation in Genesis chapter 1. But what people as beasts did God create which were “made to be taken and destroyed”, when everything that God created was good?

We posted a draft copy of this opinion in a certain Christian Identity group on Facebook, along with a link to the Christogenea podcasts from Pragmatic Genesis which discuss the non-Adamic races. Those programs discuss the points which we have already made here, along with many similar remarks concerning the other races which were made in the prophets and the writings of the apostles which support those same points. Then a certain woman, whose name we will withhold here, came back with a remark and said “So are you saying that Satan created the dark races? And what about Lucifer (Satan) didn't God created him to be the highest angel? But look… he is now God’s greatest adversary and will not be in the kingdom in the end days. The Bible says that God created all things and without Him nothing would exist?!?”

Aside from some of her silly Catholic ideas (such as using Lucifer as a proper name), which we had purposely overlooked, we replied and said “Right God created all things that were created. But God did not create bastards. We cannot blame God for our sin when we create bastards. we would ask you to listen to the podcasts. Wow, if we could prove all of this in a Facebook post, we would have done that.”

But this woman did not want to listen to any evidence, and that attitude is very common among Identity Christians. In some respects, they are more arrogant that most of the denominational Judeo-Christians, conceited and self-righteous with what little knowledge that they have, they imagine that there is nothing beyond what they think they know. So she responded “’Bastards’ are certainly a hybrid that God did not create. But you said above that God did not create the non-White races. But he certainly did. Genesis 2:19 clearly states… ‘And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field...’ End of discussion.”

End of discussion? So she actually thinks that we missed that verse? So she wants to chime in and make a decree in defense of the non-White races, and insist that the discussion must end there, in a group for which the explicit purpose is to discuss such things. Her arrogance escapes her, and her ignorance, so the conversation only got worse from there. A lot worse. But that we would be compelled to write about elsewhere.

We know it is a common belief in Christian Identity circles, that because all of the animals of God’s creation were presented to Adam, and we are told that no fitting wife was found among them, that there must have been potential two-legged animals among them, so therefore the other races must be the “beasts” that were presented to Adam. We ourselves believed that error at one time, until around 2005 when we wrote the Broken Cisterns essays, as it was taught by most of the elder Identity teachers. But now through much study, for some time we have understood it to be just that, an error.

It is sheer sophistry to insist that Adam was presented with the other races as “beasts”, when the Scripture at Genesis 2:19 also informs us that Adam was presented with cattle and birds as well, for the same reason that he was presented with the beasts. There were three categories in Genesis 2:19 representing “every living creature” which God had made. Those three categories are “every beast of the field”, “every fowl of the air”, and “all cattle”. So if cattle are a certain type of large animal, and fowl are birds, Adam did not find a wife among them, and they too must have been candidates. Therefore, “beast of the field” in this context must stand for every other animal which was not a large ruminant or a bird. That would include chipmunks and squirrels, lions and leopards, dogs and possums and racoons and all sorts of other animals. But it does not necessarily include any so-called “people” as beasts.

It is also absolute ignorance to believe that even if God did create some cognizant race as “beasts”, that any of the non-White races of today are representative of that original “beast” race, when there is no proof upholding such an idea and much historical proof to the contrary. The ultimate hypocrisy of the so-called Identity Christians who claim these things is to claim that these so-called other races are beasts in the Old Testament, and then to claim that they are men in the New Testament. We have seen and heard them do it with our own eyes and ears. That is also an element of universalism by the back door.

In order to understand what it is that Adam is being presented with and why, which we will call the antithesis, we must understand what the sin of the fallen angels was, which we will call the thesis. Yes, Genesis is the antithesis, because the sin of the fallen angels which is partially described in Revelation chapter 12 began before the creation of Adam, and that is why the serpent is the representative of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It is also why in the Revelation a flood consisting of all the world’s non-Israelite nations is said to come out of the mouth of the serpent. The Book of Enoch, from the Dead Sea Scrolls, tells us a little about that tree. This is from a presentation of Luke chapter 4 given at Christogenea in June of 2012:

From a translation of the Qumran scrolls, The Dead Sea Scrolls, A New Translation by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg Jr. and Edward Cook, on page 247, a translation of 1Q23, fragments 1 and 6, which are unfortunately highly fragmented: “1 [... two hundred] 2 donkeys, two hundred asses, two hund[red ... rams of the] 3 flock, two hundred goats, two hundred [... beast of the] 4 field from every animal, from every [bird ...] 5 [...] for miscegenation [...]”. And in the same source, 4Q531, fragment 2: “1 [...] they defiled [...] 2 [... they begot] giants and monsters [...] 3 [...] they begot, and, behold, all [the earth was corrupted ...] 4 [...] with its blood and by the hand of [...] 5 [giants] which did not suffice for them and [...] 6 [...] and they were seeking to devour many […] 7 [...] 8 the monsters attacked it.” Again, 4Q532, Col. 2 fragments 1-6: “2 [...] flesh [...] 3 al[l ...] monsters [...] will be [...] 4 [...] they would arise [...] lacking in true knowledge [...] because [...] 5 [...] the earth [grew corrupt ...] mighty [...] 6 [...] they were considering [...] 7 [...] from the angels upon [...] 8 [...] in the end it will perish and die [...] 9 [...] they caused great corruption in the [earth ...] 10 [... this did not] suffice to [...] 11 they will be [...]”. While they are quite fragmentary, the general theme of these fragments from what is known as the Book of Giants is readily evident. A very similar version of what is related here is found in 1 Enoch, i.e. chapters 86 and 88. It is highly probable that accounts such as these were the inspiration for the ancient chimera myths of both Greek and Near East mythology. The offspring which resulted from the unions of diverse species are later called bastards, for instance in the Dead Sea Scroll labelled as 4Q204 which is reckoned among the Enoch literature, and their extermination is forecast where it says “Exterminate all the spirits of the bastards and the sons of the Watchers”, which seems to have been speaking prophetically and is speaking of the offspring of the fallen angels. In the end there are sheep, and everything else is a goat destined for the Lake of Fire where are Hell and Death and the False Prophet.
Evidently, there are two trees in the Garden of Eden which without a doubt represent people. They are the Tree of Life, Christ and His Adamic race, and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which are the fallen angels, as the serpent is directly linked to them in Revelation chapter 12 and Genesis chapter 3. They had the knowledge of good, and rebelling against God by corrupting His Creation they wandered off into the knowledge of evil. Among other things, the apostle Jude relates these fallen angels to Cain, to Sodom, to the error of Balaam and Balak who tried to get the children of Israel to race-mix, and he says of these fallen angels that they are bound in chains of darkness. They are not bound in darkness in chains, rather, they are bound in chains of darkness, which can only be an allegory for the dark bodies of their corrupted genetics. That is especially evident when everything else which Jude says about them is considered.

So the error of the fallen angels was to corrupt God’s creation, and race-mix even themselves. But the antithesis is this: when God created Adam He taught him the law of kind after kind, and that animals were not suitable mates for men. So his wife must be flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone. If one do not believe that White people could sink to the level of having sex with animals, one had better check the headlines because the stories we hear about are quite frequent. Sheep, horses, dogs, donkeys, there is nothing below a man when he rejects his God.

We have said this a thousand times. We must say it once more. There are two trees in the Garden, one of Life, and one of evil. And in the time of the end, there are only two sorts of people: sheep and goats, wheat and tares, good fish and bad. Cain is not the only corruption of the devil. There were many more before him, so there was an entire tree of good and evil which was already in the Garden when Adam was created. The tares were planted by the devil from the beginning, and all of the other races are bad in the end. Tares are not Jews only, but rather, tares are every plant which Yahweh did not plant. Unless one can show specifically where Yahweh created non-White races and they are called good, one is deceiving himself if he thinks that Yahweh created them at all.

If one chooses to dispute with this assessment, then please set forth two or three verses in Scripture by which we know with certainty that there should be other races of so-called people among us in these last days who are good. The Bible describes the aliens among us: in Deuteronomy it says that they will take our sons and daughters, and we will grieve but we will not be able to do a damned thing about it, because of our own disobedience. Since Christians are instructed to come out from among them, and be separate, not be joined to the impure, if we teach that these other races are somehow “good” then we further invite such punishment. Rather, the prophet Joel described these other races devouring our wealth and our children as locusts, caterpillars, palmerworms and cankerworms. That is how we should see the aliens consuming our wealth and our goods in all of the formerly Christian nations of today. That is the only Scriptural way in which these other races should be considered, as non-entities, because they shall prosper for a time, and then they shall be as though they had not been.

If one does not understand the things which we have said here, and refuses to go study the matter and either come to agree or produce the necessary evidence to correct us if we are wrong, then we are confident that such a person does indeed have some unseemly agenda.

We can also say this, because half of the people claiming to be Christian Identity already hate us, so it really does not matter if they hate us even more: Any so-called Identity Christian who maintains that Yahweh created the modern non-White races is a liar and a fool. Any so-called Identity Christian who maintains that Yahweh created the modern non-White races is a hypocrite and denies the very words of Yahshua Christ, who describes them as a flood coming from the mouth of the serpent. There are people born from above, and the only alternative is to be born from below. The non-White races must therefore be born from below, as they come from the mouth of the serpent, and not from the mouth of God. So the serpent is responsible for them, as the serpent is the corrupter of the Creation of God.

It is time that Identity Christians slam the back door shut in the face of such universalism.

We hear it all the time. Oh, we have no love, because we do not kiss the asses of men. Oh, we teach with hatred, because we tell them what we believe to be truth plainly and bluntly. Oh, we are mean and stubborn, because we are confident and unyielding. We hear the same old broken tunes all the time, and those who sing them never want to sit and address the issues like men.

So the people who say those things are only looking for excuses. Or being jealous for the lies they have clung to for so many years, rejecting the truth they want to keep others from hearing it as well.