I have spoken and written very highly of, and with such admiration and high hopes for Tulsi Gabbard – her theme of “Servant Leadership” (“Service Above Self”) is all very appealing.
But she started to lose me with her presidential announcement speech. My reaction - Americans can’t be “who we [they] are” until they “talk about 911”.
And then this interview with Stephen Colbert
She seems to say all the right ‘anti-war’ things but then it starts to go downhill from around 2:50.
Then at 4:20+
Colbert: Do you believe that he [Assad] is a war criminal? Do you believe he gassed his own people or committed atrocities against his own people?
Gabbard: YES – reports have shown that that’s a fact … [I’m afraid the rest is blah]
Or christian. It depends on how service is rendered.
The christian teaching is to serve your brother (not the invader, not the enemy), but it is you who choose, based on your knowledge and subjective valuation, HOW to serve him.
It might not be serving him to give him ten dollars when what he's going to do is buy a bottle of cheap booze with it.
One error of many fascists is they fail to make the distinction between brotherly cooperation and transactions based on a war footing. "The economy" is 'NOT maximized' by some Karen decreeing that all car bumpers must be made of steel. But many self-styled 'fascists' imagine that this must be the right way. T hat's what you get with slavish devotion to hierarchy. That is exactly the hierarchy that was used to impose vaccine mandates, banning of oil furnaces, effective detergents, high-flush toilets etc etc etc.
It is also worth considering the austrian economics law of pareto optimality. When two people voluntarily agree to a transaction, absent coercion or duplicity, they do so because they both expect to be better off by it. This is the condition for a human interaction that is win-win, not win-lose. This is the basic essence of any value generation. It is the definition of co-operation.
Thus a free trade between brothers is mutual service. Fully christian.
What is unchristian is trading with the enemy. Any 'win win' net profit with an avvowed or eternal enemy will not help your struggle for survival. Libertarians need to be taught the form and shape and eternal nature of the LAW that trading with the enemy is never a "win win".
On the other hand, fascists need to be taught that the state is not God. Command and control is not the recipe for success in every aspect of life, and that the un-subverted bible is actually their law.
The true and historically accurate definition of Fascism is simply the state when a nation, subverted and attacked, goes on a war footing, in defense of the nation (natas, family). The ethnic family comprises the nation. A nation is NOT a geographic political entity comprised of mixed ethnicities.
The definition of Fascism could be: A political, social, cultural, economic and spiritual ideology which espouses strong central leadership regulating a nation and its people to ensure all elements are in harmony supporting the nation and people.
That is why the Lictor Rods, the bundle of sticks held together with a spiraling band, is the most common symbol of Fascism. War is not necessarily a pre-condition of Fascism, but Fascists are willing to fight to protect their nation and people, primarily from the threat of Communism, which is Fascism's anti-thesis, but also Jewish bankers, also an anti-thesis of Fascism. That is why sometimes at the core of the bundle of sticks is the handle of a battle ax, with the blade showing through the surface of the bundle.
-"It is the function of government to ensure that the freedom of the few does not become the enslavement of the many." William Joyce, Irish-American British Fascist broadcasting out of Germany to Great Britain.
Fascists idolize Nature. They pattern their society on the Order of Nature, and seek harmony among all of society's elements, including the different classes--unlike Marxism which inflames conflict between the classes.
Fascists don't need to be taught anything, they need to teach others.
Julius, I see you linked more than one url to support your pertinent remarks. (Tulsi, tho a foxy dissident, is controlled opposition.) How do you manage that feat? I've tried different things. Can't find any easy way. Maybe I'm just too old. But never seen or heard anyone explain the technique.
I was able to follow your instructions and sequentially view and copy your 2 links. However when I tried to replicate that technique with different url's of my choosing, upon return to Comments w/ the second url, the previous writing/comment would be gone. That had happened several times in the past and eventually I gave up in frustration.
Julius suggests composing in Word first then copying and entering in Comments. Works for him.
I prepare my comment in a Word document to get my thoughts clear (and brief) and for spell-check - including any url links - then simply copy-paste the comment.
uh there's VIDEO'S of nuclear test's that were filmed dating back to the 40's and 50's....you can fake an invisible "virus" you can't fake a nuclear explosion....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vPAoaRPi2k
I have a couple of books, but don't know how to add additional links nor does Amazon carry them any longer, tho that's where I originally bought them. If people are interested, I'll at least come up w/ the titles.
You can make pronouncements all you like but you haven't begin to justify your hypothesis that nukes don't exist.
The pictures from hiroshima and nagasaki clearly show a huge blast destroying and pushing-over concrete and brick structures. The cause you allege (napalm) doesn't do that.
I note that the greatest nonsense Karl writes gets the most tweets and exposure. What are they trying to reward him with? What's the nudge?
"If you want to be popular, Goy, keep writing this stuff."
Which is the greatest nonsense? Klaus Schwab, Nazi or Jew? is rather popular. It is a consideration many want to explore. Sometimes the essays I expect will get the most interest do not, so I guess my assessment of the popular will can be off. Many authors experience this, and musicians too. I'm fine with it, whatever people are interested in I am interested in writing about. Mostly I write what interests myself, and find others agree.
I'm open to this, but do you have more sources and info? Are the mushroom cloud explosion images from the 50s and 60s done with special effects? Are there books or sites that provide a more substantive explanation you recommend?
I thought about providing some sources, but was a bit lazy and focused on other things today. A good analysis of phony mushroom cloud images and videos comes from Miles Mathis. I don't espouse everything Mathis critiques, and his long lineage analysis gets too diffuse and irrelevant, but some of his analysis, especially of photographs (Mathis is an expert) is superb.
I found a long list of videos on Bitchute when searching for "nuclear weapons fake". Some I avoid because they are presented by flat earth believers, but others provide good analysis in some areas. A year ago I saw one video that tracked the bombing run schedules for the fire bombing of Japan, and showed how bombers could have been diverted to Hiroshima and Nagasaki through anomalies in the schedule. I can't find that video now, but here is a good example.
I am open to other sources. Some of the pictures of test blasts look completely ridiculous. They seem fabricated from carefully selected cloud formations and even some kind of plumbing parts. Well no not that bad, but close. Why have we never seen a mushroom cloud distorted sideways by wind? They are all perfectly vertical and straight. Wouldn't wind push the columns to one side, distorting their shape? Are we to believe no wind ever affected any of the many mushroom clouds depicted in photos? Unbelievable.
"How did the huts survive the first blast?" They were far enough away.
"Why are the nearer boats brighter?" They're not under the shade of the condensation shock-wave cloud.
"Why do the the different pictures of the blast look different?" They were taken at different times.
His 'analysys' of the pictures is devoid of logic, and doesn't explain the FILM FOOTAGE we have of these blasts.
To answer Von West:
Generation of the cloud happens quick enough and at a scale large enough that the wind doesn't distort it quickly. They all eventually smear-out but people don't find those pictures as impressive.
Mar 18, 2023·edited Mar 18, 2023Liked by Karl Haemers
This doesn't really answer the critiques bongoben, not sure if you read the articles and books closely. The beach images are identical between the Bikini Atoll photos, and regarding the film footage, looking at this one for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dveVOMg0ix4
the images remain strange if nothing else. For instance, comparing the patch of clouds
to the left of the screen at pre-blast second 14 to post-blast second 29 they are closer to the blast, when you would expect them to have been blown away from the blast. Meanwhile, there is no deformation of the clouds as you would expect.
Similarly, there is a 'wave' travelling along the water, but it just disappears around second 23. Why? Would it not have travelled until hitting something solid, at which point it should have crested and been more visible? And if not, why would there not have been a tsunami? A mushroom cloud is supposed to be formed by the uplift of material from the ground into the sky -- so it should have been very disturbing to the water, sucking water out of the lagoon and sucking it away from the shore, followed by a shock wave pushing it out -- yet there is no evidence of either phenomena, and again the beach appears undisturbed between the photos when you would expect it to look like a tsunami hit it. These lagoons are small, the explosion creates a mushroom cloud as tall as the epicenter is distant from the beach. Again, just think about the energy involved. If an explosion can send millions of liters of water a mile into the air, it will also send a shock wave through the water for a mile along the lagoon floor and onto the beach.
The still and video images are at least very counter-intuitive. I would be interested to have someone with naval ballistics expertise explain why these things run counter to common sense. At this point, I lean toward these events having been faked for political reasons.
Thanks for these links Karl, Miles Mathis' analysis does create a plausible basis for doubt. I read his Bikini Atoll and Trinity essays, and the clouds, water movement, and many other aspects of the photographic record don't make sense. Interesting that Mathis has very little to say about J Power though, browsing his extensive site, or am I missing anything? Do you have thoughts on other aspects of this work?
Mathis' best work comes in his photograph analysis. He was a portrait artist, who examined photographs and turned them into paintings. Pets, houses, family portraits, landscapes etc. He says he learned to make detailed intensive examinations of photographs. So he started to see the fakery in official media photos. His analysis of the car JFK was riding in is fascinating, as well of the picture of JFKs body on the autopsy table. It wasn't him!
Mathis' weakness may be that he ascribes almost everything as a hoax, many deaths we have been told about were faked, many well-known public figures were actually someone else, many historical events never happened... But maybe this is his strength, and he is right. We already know so much has been faked, why not almost all of it?
I don't think of Mathis as someone particularly focused on the Jewish Issue. Like Whitney Webb, he has significant overlaps with it, but does not make it a central focus. Anyone studying the hoax world such as Mathis and Webb must inevitably confront the Jewish Issue (to a degree Webb does), and if they don't they are probably obscuring.
Wow, good article Karl - I have been on board the "nuke hoax" train for many years now. I'm convinced it's a fear-based mind control program at its essence!
I'm impressed, RR. I am relatively new to this theory. It does have all the telltale signs of a useful hoax: broad fear for all humanity, immense funding rationale, necessity for more control, theatrical depiction of inter-national conflict, reason to fear Israel (Sampson Option), reason to invade Iran (and Iraq, N Korea, China...), and control of aspects of academia and the sciences.
So yes, I agree with you, a fear-based mind control program, a kind of MK Ultra trauma-based behavior modification agenda writ large on the world's populations through fears of a Biblical-scale but yet man-made catastrophe. The Jew Oppenheimer the fake physicist apparently said after the alleged U.S. atom bomb was first built: "I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." Basically claiming to be a force of nature personified in the God of Death (Satan I suppose). Such drama! How pathetic.
I did an interview with Chris Caskie about a year ago - he wrote a great book called The War Against Goyim and has an entire section on nuke hoax research:
I was talking to the check-out girl at the grocery store some time ago, and she expressed fear of a nuclear war with Russia. I assured her nukes did not exist but were simply boogey-bombs meant to frighten us.
I am often a bit apprehensive making such statements to strangers, wondering how they will react. She said, "it wouldn't surprise me." LOL! The silent majority.
Thanks again. A couple of things. I have now also listened to a few more of Chris Caskie’s (aka Marshall Lore’s) podcast discussions. In particular, the one with Christopher Jon Bjerknes was riveting and enthralling on the question of the kabbalah as this is a completely unresearched field for me. I will take a lot more convincing regarding their conclusions about Adolf Hitler however, having read the entire collection of speeches 1922-1945 and most of Mein Kampf (on hold while I plough through Solzhenitsyn). So I am not prepared to accept the thesis of ’Hexzane527’ yet, but if true, then it makes the holohoax doubly absurd and diabolical. I am just not buying that, but am looking forward to reading Chris’ book as I am very impressed with his genuine scholarship.
Does anyone have a link to the podcast series “The Killing Fields’ hosted by ‘Patrick3Stacks’ (which featured Caskie and Bjerknes)?
Regarding the nuke hoax, I had never given it a moment’s thought – but then just five or six years ago I had never given the moon landing or 911 … or WWI / WWII a thought either!
I lost respect for Bjerknes after his atrocious performance in the debate with Dennis Wise of The Greatest Story Never Told documentary, moderated (poorly) by Adam Green. Bjerknes acted like a Bjerk. When I found out he was at least part Jewish, it explained a lot. Bjerknes does good work on Judaic religion, as does Green, but he is hopelessly over-enthusiastic in his condemnation and demonization of Hitler and NS. Wrongly, I must say.
What is the Hexzane527 theory?
Right! I'm newer than that to the nuke hoax theory, but it fit right in with my conceptual frameworks of Awakening. One investigation into truth leads to others. Many of them are of a pattern. Nukes fits right in. What else? Were dinosaurs real?
I have experience with chainsaws and felling trees. The forest supposedly charred and burned by a nuclear blast was actually felled by chainsaws and burned in the conventional way, with drip torches. I should show you the pic. Talk about asinine...
Russ Winter is across this also ... (I linked your article in a comment)
Was Hiroshima Firebombed and Not Nuked?
https://www.winterwatch.net/2023/04/was-hiroshima-firebombed-and-not-nuked
I have spoken and written very highly of, and with such admiration and high hopes for Tulsi Gabbard – her theme of “Servant Leadership” (“Service Above Self”) is all very appealing.
But she started to lose me with her presidential announcement speech. My reaction - Americans can’t be “who we [they] are” until they “talk about 911”.
And then this interview with Stephen Colbert
She seems to say all the right ‘anti-war’ things but then it starts to go downhill from around 2:50.
Then at 4:20+
Colbert: Do you believe that he [Assad] is a war criminal? Do you believe he gassed his own people or committed atrocities against his own people?
Gabbard: YES – reports have shown that that’s a fact … [I’m afraid the rest is blah]
https://youtu.be/i0jnKb8MDks?t=261
And then … Tulsi Gabbard – Shaloha!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXskfLafU2A
Tulsi is Kosher. Not a surprise, but good to know.
Servant leadership is very Fascist. I approve.
Or christian. It depends on how service is rendered.
The christian teaching is to serve your brother (not the invader, not the enemy), but it is you who choose, based on your knowledge and subjective valuation, HOW to serve him.
It might not be serving him to give him ten dollars when what he's going to do is buy a bottle of cheap booze with it.
One error of many fascists is they fail to make the distinction between brotherly cooperation and transactions based on a war footing. "The economy" is 'NOT maximized' by some Karen decreeing that all car bumpers must be made of steel. But many self-styled 'fascists' imagine that this must be the right way. T hat's what you get with slavish devotion to hierarchy. That is exactly the hierarchy that was used to impose vaccine mandates, banning of oil furnaces, effective detergents, high-flush toilets etc etc etc.
It is also worth considering the austrian economics law of pareto optimality. When two people voluntarily agree to a transaction, absent coercion or duplicity, they do so because they both expect to be better off by it. This is the condition for a human interaction that is win-win, not win-lose. This is the basic essence of any value generation. It is the definition of co-operation.
Thus a free trade between brothers is mutual service. Fully christian.
What is unchristian is trading with the enemy. Any 'win win' net profit with an avvowed or eternal enemy will not help your struggle for survival. Libertarians need to be taught the form and shape and eternal nature of the LAW that trading with the enemy is never a "win win".
On the other hand, fascists need to be taught that the state is not God. Command and control is not the recipe for success in every aspect of life, and that the un-subverted bible is actually their law.
The true and historically accurate definition of Fascism is simply the state when a nation, subverted and attacked, goes on a war footing, in defense of the nation (natas, family). The ethnic family comprises the nation. A nation is NOT a geographic political entity comprised of mixed ethnicities.
The definition of Fascism could be: A political, social, cultural, economic and spiritual ideology which espouses strong central leadership regulating a nation and its people to ensure all elements are in harmony supporting the nation and people.
That is why the Lictor Rods, the bundle of sticks held together with a spiraling band, is the most common symbol of Fascism. War is not necessarily a pre-condition of Fascism, but Fascists are willing to fight to protect their nation and people, primarily from the threat of Communism, which is Fascism's anti-thesis, but also Jewish bankers, also an anti-thesis of Fascism. That is why sometimes at the core of the bundle of sticks is the handle of a battle ax, with the blade showing through the surface of the bundle.
-"It is the function of government to ensure that the freedom of the few does not become the enslavement of the many." William Joyce, Irish-American British Fascist broadcasting out of Germany to Great Britain.
Fascists idolize Nature. They pattern their society on the Order of Nature, and seek harmony among all of society's elements, including the different classes--unlike Marxism which inflames conflict between the classes.
Fascists don't need to be taught anything, they need to teach others.
Julius, I see you linked more than one url to support your pertinent remarks. (Tulsi, tho a foxy dissident, is controlled opposition.) How do you manage that feat? I've tried different things. Can't find any easy way. Maybe I'm just too old. But never seen or heard anyone explain the technique.
Testing here. I copy url from the tab, come here and control+v to paste it here. Then I hold shift+enter to skip lines, then repeat another url.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/hSXQHXEQtS8M/?list=notifications&randomize=false
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApuMysM8PQw&list=PLPPNay9z7eEqJwmCdJ2mziswgP40lBzQE&index=9
I was able to follow your instructions and sequentially view and copy your 2 links. However when I tried to replicate that technique with different url's of my choosing, upon return to Comments w/ the second url, the previous writing/comment would be gone. That had happened several times in the past and eventually I gave up in frustration.
Julius suggests composing in Word first then copying and entering in Comments. Works for him.
I prepare my comment in a Word document to get my thoughts clear (and brief) and for spell-check - including any url links - then simply copy-paste the comment.
uh there's VIDEO'S of nuclear test's that were filmed dating back to the 40's and 50's....you can fake an invisible "virus" you can't fake a nuclear explosion....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vPAoaRPi2k
https://mpalmer.heresy.is/webnotes/HR/download/hiroshima-revisited.pdf
Some support for fake nukes.
I have a couple of books, but don't know how to add additional links nor does Amazon carry them any longer, tho that's where I originally bought them. If people are interested, I'll at least come up w/ the titles.
You can make pronouncements all you like but you haven't begin to justify your hypothesis that nukes don't exist.
The pictures from hiroshima and nagasaki clearly show a huge blast destroying and pushing-over concrete and brick structures. The cause you allege (napalm) doesn't do that.
I note that the greatest nonsense Karl writes gets the most tweets and exposure. What are they trying to reward him with? What's the nudge?
"If you want to be popular, Goy, keep writing this stuff."
Which is the greatest nonsense? Klaus Schwab, Nazi or Jew? is rather popular. It is a consideration many want to explore. Sometimes the essays I expect will get the most interest do not, so I guess my assessment of the popular will can be off. Many authors experience this, and musicians too. I'm fine with it, whatever people are interested in I am interested in writing about. Mostly I write what interests myself, and find others agree.
I'm open to this, but do you have more sources and info? Are the mushroom cloud explosion images from the 50s and 60s done with special effects? Are there books or sites that provide a more substantive explanation you recommend?
I thought about providing some sources, but was a bit lazy and focused on other things today. A good analysis of phony mushroom cloud images and videos comes from Miles Mathis. I don't espouse everything Mathis critiques, and his long lineage analysis gets too diffuse and irrelevant, but some of his analysis, especially of photographs (Mathis is an expert) is superb.
http://mileswmathis.com/bikini.pdf
http://mileswmathis.com/trinity.pdf
I found a long list of videos on Bitchute when searching for "nuclear weapons fake". Some I avoid because they are presented by flat earth believers, but others provide good analysis in some areas. A year ago I saw one video that tracked the bombing run schedules for the fire bombing of Japan, and showed how bombers could have been diverted to Hiroshima and Nagasaki through anomalies in the schedule. I can't find that video now, but here is a good example.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/1DALG9jrNz7M/
I am open to other sources. Some of the pictures of test blasts look completely ridiculous. They seem fabricated from carefully selected cloud formations and even some kind of plumbing parts. Well no not that bad, but close. Why have we never seen a mushroom cloud distorted sideways by wind? They are all perfectly vertical and straight. Wouldn't wind push the columns to one side, distorting their shape? Are we to believe no wind ever affected any of the many mushroom clouds depicted in photos? Unbelievable.
"How did the huts survive the first blast?" They were far enough away.
"Why are the nearer boats brighter?" They're not under the shade of the condensation shock-wave cloud.
"Why do the the different pictures of the blast look different?" They were taken at different times.
His 'analysys' of the pictures is devoid of logic, and doesn't explain the FILM FOOTAGE we have of these blasts.
To answer Von West:
Generation of the cloud happens quick enough and at a scale large enough that the wind doesn't distort it quickly. They all eventually smear-out but people don't find those pictures as impressive.
This doesn't really answer the critiques bongoben, not sure if you read the articles and books closely. The beach images are identical between the Bikini Atoll photos, and regarding the film footage, looking at this one for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dveVOMg0ix4
the images remain strange if nothing else. For instance, comparing the patch of clouds
to the left of the screen at pre-blast second 14 to post-blast second 29 they are closer to the blast, when you would expect them to have been blown away from the blast. Meanwhile, there is no deformation of the clouds as you would expect.
Similarly, there is a 'wave' travelling along the water, but it just disappears around second 23. Why? Would it not have travelled until hitting something solid, at which point it should have crested and been more visible? And if not, why would there not have been a tsunami? A mushroom cloud is supposed to be formed by the uplift of material from the ground into the sky -- so it should have been very disturbing to the water, sucking water out of the lagoon and sucking it away from the shore, followed by a shock wave pushing it out -- yet there is no evidence of either phenomena, and again the beach appears undisturbed between the photos when you would expect it to look like a tsunami hit it. These lagoons are small, the explosion creates a mushroom cloud as tall as the epicenter is distant from the beach. Again, just think about the energy involved. If an explosion can send millions of liters of water a mile into the air, it will also send a shock wave through the water for a mile along the lagoon floor and onto the beach.
The still and video images are at least very counter-intuitive. I would be interested to have someone with naval ballistics expertise explain why these things run counter to common sense. At this point, I lean toward these events having been faked for political reasons.
Thanks for these links Karl, Miles Mathis' analysis does create a plausible basis for doubt. I read his Bikini Atoll and Trinity essays, and the clouds, water movement, and many other aspects of the photographic record don't make sense. Interesting that Mathis has very little to say about J Power though, browsing his extensive site, or am I missing anything? Do you have thoughts on other aspects of this work?
Mathis' best work comes in his photograph analysis. He was a portrait artist, who examined photographs and turned them into paintings. Pets, houses, family portraits, landscapes etc. He says he learned to make detailed intensive examinations of photographs. So he started to see the fakery in official media photos. His analysis of the car JFK was riding in is fascinating, as well of the picture of JFKs body on the autopsy table. It wasn't him!
Mathis' weakness may be that he ascribes almost everything as a hoax, many deaths we have been told about were faked, many well-known public figures were actually someone else, many historical events never happened... But maybe this is his strength, and he is right. We already know so much has been faked, why not almost all of it?
I don't think of Mathis as someone particularly focused on the Jewish Issue. Like Whitney Webb, he has significant overlaps with it, but does not make it a central focus. Anyone studying the hoax world such as Mathis and Webb must inevitably confront the Jewish Issue (to a degree Webb does), and if they don't they are probably obscuring.
Wow, good article Karl - I have been on board the "nuke hoax" train for many years now. I'm convinced it's a fear-based mind control program at its essence!
I'm impressed, RR. I am relatively new to this theory. It does have all the telltale signs of a useful hoax: broad fear for all humanity, immense funding rationale, necessity for more control, theatrical depiction of inter-national conflict, reason to fear Israel (Sampson Option), reason to invade Iran (and Iraq, N Korea, China...), and control of aspects of academia and the sciences.
So yes, I agree with you, a fear-based mind control program, a kind of MK Ultra trauma-based behavior modification agenda writ large on the world's populations through fears of a Biblical-scale but yet man-made catastrophe. The Jew Oppenheimer the fake physicist apparently said after the alleged U.S. atom bomb was first built: "I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." Basically claiming to be a force of nature personified in the God of Death (Satan I suppose). Such drama! How pathetic.
I did an interview with Chris Caskie about a year ago - he wrote a great book called The War Against Goyim and has an entire section on nuke hoax research:
https://therealistreport.com/the-realist-report-chris-caskie/
Here is his website:
https://chriscaskie.podia.com/
I am pretty well convinced the entire thing is an elaborate hoax!
I was talking to the check-out girl at the grocery store some time ago, and she expressed fear of a nuclear war with Russia. I assured her nukes did not exist but were simply boogey-bombs meant to frighten us.
I am often a bit apprehensive making such statements to strangers, wondering how they will react. She said, "it wouldn't surprise me." LOL! The silent majority.
Thank you. I will review your sources.
I agree. It has all the makings of another elaborate hoax. If they can fake the holocaust, they can fake anything.
Great interview with Chris Caskie. Subscribed and purchased his PDF book. Thank you.
I listened too. fascinating topics he covers.
Thanks for these shares as well Realist Report, I will give Chris Caskie a listen.
I listened to the Caskie interview. He was a bit tentative and hesitant, but his book sounds interesting and relevant.
Thanks again. A couple of things. I have now also listened to a few more of Chris Caskie’s (aka Marshall Lore’s) podcast discussions. In particular, the one with Christopher Jon Bjerknes was riveting and enthralling on the question of the kabbalah as this is a completely unresearched field for me. I will take a lot more convincing regarding their conclusions about Adolf Hitler however, having read the entire collection of speeches 1922-1945 and most of Mein Kampf (on hold while I plough through Solzhenitsyn). So I am not prepared to accept the thesis of ’Hexzane527’ yet, but if true, then it makes the holohoax doubly absurd and diabolical. I am just not buying that, but am looking forward to reading Chris’ book as I am very impressed with his genuine scholarship.
Does anyone have a link to the podcast series “The Killing Fields’ hosted by ‘Patrick3Stacks’ (which featured Caskie and Bjerknes)?
Regarding the nuke hoax, I had never given it a moment’s thought – but then just five or six years ago I had never given the moon landing or 911 … or WWI / WWII a thought either!
I lost respect for Bjerknes after his atrocious performance in the debate with Dennis Wise of The Greatest Story Never Told documentary, moderated (poorly) by Adam Green. Bjerknes acted like a Bjerk. When I found out he was at least part Jewish, it explained a lot. Bjerknes does good work on Judaic religion, as does Green, but he is hopelessly over-enthusiastic in his condemnation and demonization of Hitler and NS. Wrongly, I must say.
What is the Hexzane527 theory?
Right! I'm newer than that to the nuke hoax theory, but it fit right in with my conceptual frameworks of Awakening. One investigation into truth leads to others. Many of them are of a pattern. Nukes fits right in. What else? Were dinosaurs real?
No. Terrible article. An assembly of asinine assertions.
The man has no explosives experience at all.
I have experience with chainsaws and felling trees. The forest supposedly charred and burned by a nuclear blast was actually felled by chainsaws and burned in the conventional way, with drip torches. I should show you the pic. Talk about asinine...