Hi Karl, regarding Pyotr Stolypin, you might enjoy reading Solzhenitsyn's novel "August 1914." It is pretty strange. In the novel, published in 1971, he writes about the start of World War 1 and the disastrous (for Russia) Battle of Tannenberg, but then he went back and added well over 100 pages to the novel in a much expanded 1984 edition - which had been suppressed in the prior edition, seen (correctly) as too anti-Soviet - and which provides much color and commentary on Stolypin, his philosophy, and Dmitry Bogrov. Other than from this novel, there is very little information on him available in English.
Thanks for the recommendation. I have tried at times to read Solzhenitsyn, and did not get far. I was listening to a audio reading of the first few chapters of 200 Years Together, in the voice of Jordan Peterson--LOL--but failed to pay attention either. I did read a good summary of Solzhenitsyn in a book by Quinn called Solzhenitsyn and the Right from Antelope Hill.
It's hard to imagine anything being too anti-Soviet, unless the editors of the 1971 edition were Jewish (which is likely given Jewish dominance over the publishing industry).
I found a great deal more on Solypin and Bogrov too which I did not put in the essay. Stolypin was said to be heavy-handed in his use of the Okhrana and other domestic policing, and engaged in a bit of cronyism, among quite a bit more. Theories abound regarding Bogrov's motivations and affiliations, but I say it was his Jewish Communist nature that really motivated him. And as always, we should not assume he was a deranged lone gunman, but was directed by Jews in the Social Revolutionary party and possibly Jewish bankers.
Hi Karl, yes, I meant seen as too anti-Soviet by the Soviet censors in charge of publication. Solzhenitsyn was living in the west when the expanded edition came out. My take on Stolypin is not far off from yours, which delves into his so-called "heavy-handed tactics", which in practice were quite light: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/solzhenitzyn-on-the-importance-of
I just finished your fine essay on Stolypin. Excellent work, it brought so much into clarity in a succinct but sufficiently thorough way. So those were the 'kulaks' the Bolsheviks attacked! Enterprising peasants who pursued the opportunities Stolypin offered. It is never safe to be an enterprising peasant when Bolsheviks come around.
Thanks Karl and yes, exactly. The white, Christian middle class in America is the 21st century version of the liquidated Russian kulak, targeted for similar destruction as this older Revolver article makes clear: https://revolver.news/2021/11/are-you-ready-to-be-an-american-kulak/
Oh I see, thanks for clarifying. Do you see S's novelization as depiction of historical fact, at least in the case of Stolypin/Bogrov?
Stolypin's "heavy-handed tactics" were quite light, and probably quite right. Hitler and the NS Party had to be firm in destroying the effects of Marxism and Jewish capitalism in Germany. They succeeded, with practices that were far more light than portrayed.
The novel jumps from character to character, putting the reader into the mindset of each of the depicted individuals, which includes Stolypin and Bogrov among many others. I think Solzhenitsyn was aiming for an immersive experience so the reader would understand the forces at play as they were going on. I think he took the facts that were known (and he clearly did deep research) and then weaved a narrative around them, so where the line between fiction and fact is I'm not quite sure. Stolypin's depiction matched up with the facts as I understood them to be.
This, apparently, has just become available on the Web!
Notice, the outlines where the explosions took place do not conveniently match-up to what an airplane "might look like" if it had gone through the buildings. So, it appears the outside of the buildings were doctored video-graphically as well.
Thank you for sharing this. If we stop at exactly 11:30, we can see fireballs and ejecta out at least 3 sides of the tower at once. I don't imagine a plane impact can produce such explosions in at least 3 directions at once.
Unfortunately, the camera angle was away from the tower at the moment of impact, showing the small crowd gathered on the roof, but swung back to capture the explosion in time. Thus we are unable to see if a plane approached just before the moment of impact.
But--
The camera man was recording everything on and near the towers: falling debris, falling people, people on the ground and other rooftops, an approaching helicopter...
If the camera man had heard another plane approaching, which he certainly would have, he would certainly have focused on it and recorded it. But he did not. He had swung to view the rooftop crowd, as he did periodically.
So the explosion occurred without the approach and impact of a plane. In fact, nothing visual or capable of making a significant auditory sound could have approached the 2nd tower--such as a missile or drone--because otherwise the camera man would have focused on it. He focused on everything else, even a helicopter. He surely would have focused on an approaching object of any other kind.
The other people on the rooftop would surely have called out if they heard or saw a plane approaching. But they did not. Because no plane or missile or drone was present. Even if the theoretical object approached the tower from the exact opposite side on which they viewed it, concealing its approach, they would have heard it and remarked on it. The camera man would have remained focused on the direction of the sound, as he did with other sounds such as the helicopter.
This shows that no object of any kind impacted the 2nd tower. The explosion must have been triggered from within, some form of pre-planted bomb, with pyrotechnic effects such as thermate. This supports the no-plane theory.
Yes, he was obviously a young kid at the time, and got caught up in the moment, not really thinking how should I best film this event. There's obviously more footage where this came from; we'll see if any additional footage is posted in the near future.
Like I indicated, when you cross-refer the explosion damage, or so-called "collision area" with the "live footage" that was broadcast on networks like ABC, you can see the obvious differences. The "live feeds" show what conveniently looks like a "plane-contour" or "cookie-cutter" plane image cutting through the outer columns, as if a wing-tip could slice through double-rowed steel columns like butter- laughable! There are still people who believe it was the "speed of the planes" which allowed for such a violation of the principles of physics.🙄
There is this footage, which you might have already seen before:
I tended to focus more on the no-plane details than the impact shape, but I take your point. The camera man zoomed in at times--his camera seemed quite good to maintain such sharp focus--and the impact shape in no way indicted the shape of a plane. If you are saying the main media showed a plane shape for impact, then that must have been shopped. Some of the wreckage at the edges of the impact hole was jutting outward, not inward, indicating a blast from within outward rather than an impact from outside inward.
Precisely! Just the lack of engines present on the streets below the towers alone are indicative of no planes in, and of themselves. Because many people brought-up such questions, especially 'Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth,' this ridiculously fabricated story surfaced "coincidentally" over a decade later:
Here's why the engines should have immediately been noticed on the ground below, long before either Tower came down- most commercial jet engines are attached to the pylon struts of the wing with 3 bolts(some hv 4), 2 forward and 1 aft. There are what's called sheer-pins that work with the bolts, and are important during acceleration on take-off and hard landings, but the engines are primarily held to the pylon by the bolts.
The engines are specifically designed to sheer off under any type of forceful collisions, or, excessive stress or torquing for two primary reasons: 1) Any potential damage to the rest of the planes airframe, especially the wing, 2) Potential fire.
Had planes actually hit the Twin Towers, the engines on both wings would have immediately detached intact from the pylons in colliding with the outer columns of the building, and fallen to the ground below!
Also, as a side note, even though we couldn't see on the camcorder video the initial point of impact while the kid was filming at, say approximately a mile or so away; we would have heard the well-defined scream of two Pratt & Whitney's, along with the accompanying Doppler Effect, just before, and as he panned back up to the South Tower to witness the explosion. Of course, there wasn't even the auditory hint of a Piper Cub- lol!
Yes exactly. The sound of an approaching jet would have drawn his attention long before it came close to the tower, and he would have tracked it. He would not have wandered over to show the crowd on the rooftop with him. He would have fixated on an approaching plane without deviation.
No plane again. Clearly a multi-side (4?) explosion from inward outward. Bollyn says Marsh & McLennan had installed huge boxes of what were said to be batteries for electrical back up on that floor. Most likely they were thermate bombs.
You might like this Karl, if you haven't seen it already.
It's an excellent animated satirical "mockumentary" on our future enslavement vis-a-vis the fast approaching not-so-Great Reset. Whoever put this together did an excellent job with their exaggerated creativity! It's titled 'Beyond The Reset'
Damn! I haven't seen this before. It's creepy. It looks like the CDC Shielding Approach, which it announced in 2010. Not funny.
How long has this been posted? It's by someone named Kuznetzov. Someone by that name was a Soviet general, but it is not an uncommon Russian name. What a hellish life. It does have the appearance of the kind of life they are promoting for each of us. An interesting ending, but there is a sequel as the law enforcement vehicles close in.
Gentlemen, This is part 1 of the Unseen Bombshell Camcorder Footage from Plymouth Fury. It throws a loony wet blanket on part 2. It's dated a year before. This guy and his friends seem to be Qbies, probably Jewbies of the neo-con persuasion. Their casual racism reminds me of Talmudic humor I've seen before. Notice also the insistence on the slogan No Planes.
Re No Planes, I think I've stated before my discomfort w/ the slogan and also w/ Simon Shack. I think it's extreme, designed to divert us away from some aspect of the 9/11 flying circus.
Your essay on socialism is as well argued as can be done in a short piece of writing. Of course there can be much added, but to do the subject justice it would take a book. Since I'm well-informed as to National Socialism, I will add some comments later when my time permits. Something that has been missed by most is that China has morphed from communism into National Socialism, which is the secret of its success. It is not by accident the MSM keeps calling China communist. The reason is to obscure the fact that this is the second National Socialist society that has been able to outperform the so-called democracies. Russia today is closer to National Socialism than to a western democracy, and maybe incrementally will change into National Socialism once the Western propaganda machine trying to prevent this is neutralized. At some point it will become obvious that democracy, US style, is not able to compete against more autocratic systems not corrupted by a donor class.
I look forward to your further comments. Yes indeed, this is only a succinct summary and much more has to be added to give a fuller account. A few books already exist on the topic of Socialism, and this was the vision that crystallized in my mind this morning.
I have presented the possibility that China today has NS attributes, and been viciously denounced for it. Even groypers and the dissident right resist this possibility and cling to the propaganda that China is Communist. But after the Gang of 4, Deng Ming Dao came in and purged the government of communists, and it does appear the nation has trended much more toward ethno-nationalism, which is largely NS, since.
I don't know if Russia is subject to the Western propaganda machine at all. I wonder if Russia is even participating in it, with Putin's many denunciations of Western depravity all part of the agreed-upon script. Autocratic systems may be subject to a donor/investor class too, but they may be members of the donor/investor class themselves, rather than puppets.
You might like to see my essay on today's Multipolar developments:
Hi Karl, regarding Pyotr Stolypin, you might enjoy reading Solzhenitsyn's novel "August 1914." It is pretty strange. In the novel, published in 1971, he writes about the start of World War 1 and the disastrous (for Russia) Battle of Tannenberg, but then he went back and added well over 100 pages to the novel in a much expanded 1984 edition - which had been suppressed in the prior edition, seen (correctly) as too anti-Soviet - and which provides much color and commentary on Stolypin, his philosophy, and Dmitry Bogrov. Other than from this novel, there is very little information on him available in English.
Thanks for the recommendation. I have tried at times to read Solzhenitsyn, and did not get far. I was listening to a audio reading of the first few chapters of 200 Years Together, in the voice of Jordan Peterson--LOL--but failed to pay attention either. I did read a good summary of Solzhenitsyn in a book by Quinn called Solzhenitsyn and the Right from Antelope Hill.
It's hard to imagine anything being too anti-Soviet, unless the editors of the 1971 edition were Jewish (which is likely given Jewish dominance over the publishing industry).
I found a great deal more on Solypin and Bogrov too which I did not put in the essay. Stolypin was said to be heavy-handed in his use of the Okhrana and other domestic policing, and engaged in a bit of cronyism, among quite a bit more. Theories abound regarding Bogrov's motivations and affiliations, but I say it was his Jewish Communist nature that really motivated him. And as always, we should not assume he was a deranged lone gunman, but was directed by Jews in the Social Revolutionary party and possibly Jewish bankers.
Hi Karl, yes, I meant seen as too anti-Soviet by the Soviet censors in charge of publication. Solzhenitsyn was living in the west when the expanded edition came out. My take on Stolypin is not far off from yours, which delves into his so-called "heavy-handed tactics", which in practice were quite light: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/solzhenitzyn-on-the-importance-of
I just finished your fine essay on Stolypin. Excellent work, it brought so much into clarity in a succinct but sufficiently thorough way. So those were the 'kulaks' the Bolsheviks attacked! Enterprising peasants who pursued the opportunities Stolypin offered. It is never safe to be an enterprising peasant when Bolsheviks come around.
Thanks Karl and yes, exactly. The white, Christian middle class in America is the 21st century version of the liquidated Russian kulak, targeted for similar destruction as this older Revolver article makes clear: https://revolver.news/2021/11/are-you-ready-to-be-an-american-kulak/
Good stuff! Thx!
Oh I see, thanks for clarifying. Do you see S's novelization as depiction of historical fact, at least in the case of Stolypin/Bogrov?
Stolypin's "heavy-handed tactics" were quite light, and probably quite right. Hitler and the NS Party had to be firm in destroying the effects of Marxism and Jewish capitalism in Germany. They succeeded, with practices that were far more light than portrayed.
The novel jumps from character to character, putting the reader into the mindset of each of the depicted individuals, which includes Stolypin and Bogrov among many others. I think Solzhenitsyn was aiming for an immersive experience so the reader would understand the forces at play as they were going on. I think he took the facts that were known (and he clearly did deep research) and then weaved a narrative around them, so where the line between fiction and fact is I'm not quite sure. Stolypin's depiction matched up with the facts as I understood them to be.
This, apparently, has just become available on the Web!
Notice, the outlines where the explosions took place do not conveniently match-up to what an airplane "might look like" if it had gone through the buildings. So, it appears the outside of the buildings were doctored video-graphically as well.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/pIihjv6sEtpW/
Thank you for sharing this. If we stop at exactly 11:30, we can see fireballs and ejecta out at least 3 sides of the tower at once. I don't imagine a plane impact can produce such explosions in at least 3 directions at once.
Unfortunately, the camera angle was away from the tower at the moment of impact, showing the small crowd gathered on the roof, but swung back to capture the explosion in time. Thus we are unable to see if a plane approached just before the moment of impact.
But--
The camera man was recording everything on and near the towers: falling debris, falling people, people on the ground and other rooftops, an approaching helicopter...
If the camera man had heard another plane approaching, which he certainly would have, he would certainly have focused on it and recorded it. But he did not. He had swung to view the rooftop crowd, as he did periodically.
So the explosion occurred without the approach and impact of a plane. In fact, nothing visual or capable of making a significant auditory sound could have approached the 2nd tower--such as a missile or drone--because otherwise the camera man would have focused on it. He focused on everything else, even a helicopter. He surely would have focused on an approaching object of any other kind.
The other people on the rooftop would surely have called out if they heard or saw a plane approaching. But they did not. Because no plane or missile or drone was present. Even if the theoretical object approached the tower from the exact opposite side on which they viewed it, concealing its approach, they would have heard it and remarked on it. The camera man would have remained focused on the direction of the sound, as he did with other sounds such as the helicopter.
This shows that no object of any kind impacted the 2nd tower. The explosion must have been triggered from within, some form of pre-planted bomb, with pyrotechnic effects such as thermate. This supports the no-plane theory.
Yes, he was obviously a young kid at the time, and got caught up in the moment, not really thinking how should I best film this event. There's obviously more footage where this came from; we'll see if any additional footage is posted in the near future.
Like I indicated, when you cross-refer the explosion damage, or so-called "collision area" with the "live footage" that was broadcast on networks like ABC, you can see the obvious differences. The "live feeds" show what conveniently looks like a "plane-contour" or "cookie-cutter" plane image cutting through the outer columns, as if a wing-tip could slice through double-rowed steel columns like butter- laughable! There are still people who believe it was the "speed of the planes" which allowed for such a violation of the principles of physics.🙄
There is this footage, which you might have already seen before:
https://i.imgur.com/XGzHBYz.mp4
I tended to focus more on the no-plane details than the impact shape, but I take your point. The camera man zoomed in at times--his camera seemed quite good to maintain such sharp focus--and the impact shape in no way indicted the shape of a plane. If you are saying the main media showed a plane shape for impact, then that must have been shopped. Some of the wreckage at the edges of the impact hole was jutting outward, not inward, indicating a blast from within outward rather than an impact from outside inward.
Precisely! Just the lack of engines present on the streets below the towers alone are indicative of no planes in, and of themselves. Because many people brought-up such questions, especially 'Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth,' this ridiculously fabricated story surfaced "coincidentally" over a decade later:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2315518/Plane-fragment-9-11-wedged-Manhattan-buildings.html
Here's why the engines should have immediately been noticed on the ground below, long before either Tower came down- most commercial jet engines are attached to the pylon struts of the wing with 3 bolts(some hv 4), 2 forward and 1 aft. There are what's called sheer-pins that work with the bolts, and are important during acceleration on take-off and hard landings, but the engines are primarily held to the pylon by the bolts.
The engines are specifically designed to sheer off under any type of forceful collisions, or, excessive stress or torquing for two primary reasons: 1) Any potential damage to the rest of the planes airframe, especially the wing, 2) Potential fire.
Had planes actually hit the Twin Towers, the engines on both wings would have immediately detached intact from the pylons in colliding with the outer columns of the building, and fallen to the ground below!
Also, as a side note, even though we couldn't see on the camcorder video the initial point of impact while the kid was filming at, say approximately a mile or so away; we would have heard the well-defined scream of two Pratt & Whitney's, along with the accompanying Doppler Effect, just before, and as he panned back up to the South Tower to witness the explosion. Of course, there wasn't even the auditory hint of a Piper Cub- lol!
These small details matter!
Yes exactly. The sound of an approaching jet would have drawn his attention long before it came close to the tower, and he would have tracked it. He would not have wandered over to show the crowd on the rooftop with him. He would have fixated on an approaching plane without deviation.
No plane. I'll be damned!
No plane again. Clearly a multi-side (4?) explosion from inward outward. Bollyn says Marsh & McLennan had installed huge boxes of what were said to be batteries for electrical back up on that floor. Most likely they were thermate bombs.
You might like this Karl, if you haven't seen it already.
It's an excellent animated satirical "mockumentary" on our future enslavement vis-a-vis the fast approaching not-so-Great Reset. Whoever put this together did an excellent job with their exaggerated creativity! It's titled 'Beyond The Reset'
https://www.bitchute.com/video/J7E4Wzx9AL8B/
Damn! I haven't seen this before. It's creepy. It looks like the CDC Shielding Approach, which it announced in 2010. Not funny.
How long has this been posted? It's by someone named Kuznetzov. Someone by that name was a Soviet general, but it is not an uncommon Russian name. What a hellish life. It does have the appearance of the kind of life they are promoting for each of us. An interesting ending, but there is a sequel as the law enforcement vehicles close in.
I believe it was originally posted a few months back! Apparently it's been taken down a few times!
Maybe good to download this one.
It looks to be reposted by Sunislocal, and called "Life in a Quarantine Camp."
https://www.bitchute.com/video/jYQwa8BLfdDc/
Gentlemen, This is part 1 of the Unseen Bombshell Camcorder Footage from Plymouth Fury. It throws a loony wet blanket on part 2. It's dated a year before. This guy and his friends seem to be Qbies, probably Jewbies of the neo-con persuasion. Their casual racism reminds me of Talmudic humor I've seen before. Notice also the insistence on the slogan No Planes.
Re No Planes, I think I've stated before my discomfort w/ the slogan and also w/ Simon Shack. I think it's extreme, designed to divert us away from some aspect of the 9/11 flying circus.
Your essay on socialism is as well argued as can be done in a short piece of writing. Of course there can be much added, but to do the subject justice it would take a book. Since I'm well-informed as to National Socialism, I will add some comments later when my time permits. Something that has been missed by most is that China has morphed from communism into National Socialism, which is the secret of its success. It is not by accident the MSM keeps calling China communist. The reason is to obscure the fact that this is the second National Socialist society that has been able to outperform the so-called democracies. Russia today is closer to National Socialism than to a western democracy, and maybe incrementally will change into National Socialism once the Western propaganda machine trying to prevent this is neutralized. At some point it will become obvious that democracy, US style, is not able to compete against more autocratic systems not corrupted by a donor class.
I look forward to your further comments. Yes indeed, this is only a succinct summary and much more has to be added to give a fuller account. A few books already exist on the topic of Socialism, and this was the vision that crystallized in my mind this morning.
I have presented the possibility that China today has NS attributes, and been viciously denounced for it. Even groypers and the dissident right resist this possibility and cling to the propaganda that China is Communist. But after the Gang of 4, Deng Ming Dao came in and purged the government of communists, and it does appear the nation has trended much more toward ethno-nationalism, which is largely NS, since.
I don't know if Russia is subject to the Western propaganda machine at all. I wonder if Russia is even participating in it, with Putin's many denunciations of Western depravity all part of the agreed-upon script. Autocratic systems may be subject to a donor/investor class too, but they may be members of the donor/investor class themselves, rather than puppets.
You might like to see my essay on today's Multipolar developments:
https://karlhaemers.substack.com/p/the-world-plan-surrender-of-another