Jump to content
The World News Media

CHINA: Fake News vs. Real News


JW Insider

Recommended Posts

  • Member
On 11/16/2021 at 5:03 AM, Thinking said:

It has to be…The Old World Order is dying …thus making way for The New World Order…

And unfortunately when everything resets, some people will either endure or cave in. Some who choose Freedom, some would choose Compliance, and speaking about Compliance, Germany and even Austria, walked into the Lion's Den with that one, and in regards to Austria, Authoritarianism is increasingly drastically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 13.5k
  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Are you one?….being a witness of the Almighty does not make us push overs..or doormats….I dont join in a lot here because it gets a bit childish ….but do not be mistaken Dmitar….Jesus is the Chief Com

Right here:  I’m working up a post on this one. Not quite there yet, but an excerpt is:  It didn’t take long for word to spread about the new UN statue—doesn’t it looks a lot like one

Oh great! You’ve doxxed them. Now they’ll be deluged with scammers and telemarketers! Good work, Bowser.

Posted Images

  • Member
On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

That’s not to say that such jokes would not be wildly popular in the West, but it doesn’t seem they were originated for that purpose.

True. That's why I would never say they originated for that purpose, only that the popularity in retelling them served a new purpose. I thought it was very astute when you applied this even more generally, even to some of us, saying:

Quote

I think it is more in the line of stating a universal truth that applies everywhere. . . . Others . . . can yuk it up here and there, it serves as a relief valve to the discipline and self-sacrifice . . .

With respect to Western sabotage in many Eastern European countries that tried communism, you said:

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

The sense I got from two series of lectures is that they sabotaged themselves, making any Western sabotage beside the point.

That's quite true, too. Which is exactly what I had in mind when I said:

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Sometimes this was not so subtle, like the US supporting "death squads" to get rid of the communist parties in Italy for example after WW2, but other times the failures of unprepared and faltering communist states could be left on their own to fail.

But there was also a lot of direct interference that most people haven't read about. The initial "Operation Gladio," for example, was when the CIA (at the time just one of the offices of army or naval intelligence) purposely set out to destroy and sabotage communist parties in Italy, France, Switzerland and Germany after WWII. They trained local armies in sabotage, promoted terrorist activities, and were even involved in massacres, most with a primary goal of breaking up communist parties which were being clamored for in many European countries more than ever before.

As an aside, especially for those who would like to think of Hitler as socialist or communist, it should be remembered that this is also one of the ways Hitler himself came into power. Hitler, working as an intelligence agent after WWI, worked to sabotage the communists parties rising after WWI. There were several communist parties in Germany and Hitler worked to attack and sabotage and purge them in his own "CIA" operation, finally getting the support of a large group, (something like "berniecrats against communism") in Germany to outnumber the communists for the 1933 election. This is why the famous 1946 confessional poem by Niemöller, in its final version, goes like this, as carved on a memorial:

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

It is the aspect of ‘command economies’ that disincentivize initiative and thereby make trade with outside powers impossible because whatever goods are produced soon fall behind in the quality that competitiveness spawns.

Adam Smith in the late 1700's and Karl Marx in the 1800's, speak of the inevitable wastefulness of capitalist economies which always drive to excess production as part of the profit motive. It results in cycles of panics and recessions and depressions that have been with the US economy every few years, especially since the early 1800's. Obviously there were huge mistakes, such as China's (Mao's) Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution and the Five Pests Campaign, and "backyard" steel production, but the idea of a command economy was precisely to avoid these kinds of wastes, and subsequent hoarding of inventory to control pricing.

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

I gather that those communist economies had no interest in trade anyhow, except with other satellite countries—and even feared it, since goods could not be imported without the attitudes of entrepreneurship and relative freedoms that enabled them—attitudes corrosive to those communist governments.

Mao may have been a slow learner but it was Mao not Deng who finally accepted that he should open up for trade with Nixon and Kissinger.

Clearly, they wanted to see how far production wpuld take them on their own, and initial industry was meant to meet internal purposes. In some cases wider trade would have been very useful but there was little trust of trade partners who had things they really needed. So they often over-hoped and over-hyped their initial abilities to raise agriculture production. Mao, for example, raised agriculture production just about high enough, but did not have a distribution system in place. Lenin didn't trust the West far enough to trade for necessary wheat/grains. Still, the goals were finally met in spite of several years of natural disasters all over Asia.

But we can't ignore that in Eastern Europe, the United States also refused to trade with or help communist countries after the war, except the USSR itself.

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

Western media was blocked to the extent possible, since when it was not possible, Eastern Europeans saw just how much better Western Europeans lived, and that fostered still more discontent with their governments.

If this came from the GC prof, then he must have anticipated that it was western media that provided the propaganda to these countries. It was media that made them discontent. This was exactly the purpose of US backed VOA (Voice of America) and Radio Free Asia, etc. The US poured MILLIONS into the propaganda campaigns, especially directed at intellectuals and elites, to offer them good paying jobs in the West, promise of much better housing, etc. But our view of exoduses from Eastern Europe and Russia is also somewhat skewed by the fact that the far, far greater exoduses (exodi?) happened after the fall of communism. Even birth rates in Eastern European countries had been rising, but with the glut and orgy of capitalism after the fall of communism, THIS is what sent more people running. In fact, in Ukraine, people fled in both directions, some going to the West, but some thinking that going to a newly capitalist Russia was still a bit better off than new capitalism in Ukraine. Someone called it the largest mass migrations on earth in the century. Things were much better in the West materially, but many Eastern Europeans also had a memory of how much worse many had been off materially before communism, too. We get much of our view from elites and intellectuals who fled, after WWII, but there were migrations of poor people going in both directions, even into communist countries, wherever a living could be made. And we shouldn't forget, too, that even in Western countries, USA included, there are many places where economic conditions are worse, with dozens of people jammed into small dilapidated apartments, surrounded by crime, scraping for enough food, etc.

That's enough for one post, but I will pick up on the implication that the USSR didn't really meet their production needs until Kruschev. For now I'll just say that the very reason they were able to beat Hitler was because they had already boosted production in farm equipment, steel, railways, agriculture, buildings. (Also literacy, health, etc.) I've heard interviews with Nazi Wehrmacht fighters on one of those history channels where they admit they had been so steeped in anti-Russian racism that they expected mud-huts and no ability for the Russians to fight back with any kind of war machine. Oddly, they admit that when they flew over major cities to drop bombs, some said they were not only shocked but taken back that they might be destroying "historical moments" and landmarks, not expecting architecture and tall buildings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
8 hours ago, Arauna said:

Most studies are paid for by someone who has the numbers skewed to reflect their view so they can make more money.  So rather follow the money (investments) and the laws that were broken to see which scientist or person is speaking the truth - these days that is the criteria!   scholars are al bought these days!

I would suspect an academic view can supersede a private opinion. But thanks for having one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, NoisySrecko said:

I would suspect an academic view can supersede a private opinion. But thanks for having one. 

You would think so. That makes perfect sense. But there are so many cases in which academics has been purchased so as support whatever is the preferred view. For every case of academics forming the preferred view, there is another in which the preferred view forms academics. See the response I gave you re Pharma and the Brazilian study that has superseded the doctor-patient relationship. Many maintain that the evolution of college and school curricula is another example in which the preferred view molds academics.

To adapt the words of Yakov Smirnoff and satisfy JWI, is this a great [world] or what that can turn soundness of mind on its head? Nor can we look to “academics” for support on the origin of life. Certainly not with regard to any flood. Nor on the utility of blood transfusion. Apparently not with secular dating chronology. And not in what is called social “science,” even gender “science.” Is the foregoing all examples of Jehovah turning the wisdom of the wise into foolishness?

The earthly organization is not blind to academics but it certainly doesn’t allow itself to be shoved around by it, nor even its hand-in-glove “critical thinking” that is all the rage today, which so manifestly can be hijacked by other interests as to be anything but a reliable guide—something to factor in, but no more.

From Day 1 the organization has run experiences to illustrate whatever point they make that will infuriate academic devotees of “critical thinking” and, truth be told, sometimes even some of us. “Consider Danny,” it will say. “He and his wife decided to put God to the test by doing such and such” and it goes on to relate the successful outcome. It’s a single example. What about Sammy and his wife who also did such and such and it turned out horrendously for them? But in fact, as long as you do not claim it as more “proof” than it is, as long as you do not claim it is guaranteed outcome everyone will experience,, I guess you can reason this way. I mean, everyone else does when trying to motivate you into doing something. College recruiters certainly do. So it’s okay. Very few things can be reduced to simple enough terms so that “academics” or “science” or “critical thinking” can be of overriding use.

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2021/11/a-scientist-pours-one-liquid-after-another-upon-a-duck-placed-on-the-table-his-companion-carefully-calibrates-the-results-on.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

This makes no sense at all to me and strikes me that you are trying to have it both ways. In the case of a communist, or socialist economy, yes, but Russia at the time was coming over ‘from the dark side,’ into democracy and free market.

Whether it makes sense or not, there's a huge story there, and a lot of the evidence comes from many sources that might seem surprising. It's not really an exception to the idea that communism must still be sabotaged wherever possible. In this case the sabotage was drunken capitalism. And, of course, the form of government is less important to the US and Western allies than the idea of keeping all other other economies too weak. If it still seems like an exception to the rule, there is a lot to say here, but I'll save it for later.

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

if only in self-interest, just as they did with Germany and Japan after the WWII. 

The US also destroyed the Japanese capitalist economy, beginning in the 1980's, with specific trade policies. For now, I'll also just leave this topic for later. This doesn't mean that the US doesn't want shining examples of democracy producing strong economies. It's just that certain types of direct competition couldn't be allowed under particular historical circumstances.

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

Several examples are offered of the US thwarting the economies of South American economies when they chose the ‘wrong’ government, even when they did so democratically.

It's almost too easy to see it with Central and South America. Coups, assassination attempts, kidnappings, riots, sanctions, embargoes, sabotage, US backed terrorism, training small armies in bordering countries. There is also the constant drone of reporting only on dissatisfaction, and twisting facts everywhere. Yesterday morning I listenedd to BBC news on NPR:

  • the big anti-China story of the week, that you mentioned earlier (where I suspect the tennis player just knew she'd need and want some privacy after the bombshell).
  • a story about how the leftist parties of Chile will have to run off in the next election against a growing faction that will even admit openly to wanting another Pinochet
  • a story about how a precinct in Venezuela finally voted in a right wing opposition party candidate

The BBC topics the week before included daily mentions of protests in Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru, supposedly sham elections in Central America, etc.

A major point of all this news, especially the last couple of 60 Minutes that I watched, was to make sure that the US audience does NOT see any leftist/socialist government as "democratically" elected. The NYT even ran a piece decrying the fact that the Chinese people overwhelmingly "elect" to have a communist government because it does so much for them. It was almost like: "Why can't the people in China see how terrible their government is, the way we see it?" This popularity of communist governments with the people is, of course, why Chinese people (and their government) can claim to have a democratically "selected" government. They would say it is more representative of their interests than the US version of elected, but unrepresentative, democracy.

12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Vietnam remains Communist, yet their economy has boomed (with no apparent efforts of the US to thwart it, contrary to JWI’s thesis).

Hey! I saw that!! 😉

There's a historical and current reason for this. It goes for Cambodia and Laos, too. There actually has been a bit of fomenting again about Vietnam, but not at all to the point of "demonizing" them. I've heard the rumors here that US State Dept folks have expected Vietnamese communism to fall during a couple of previous US presidencies. But now it's actually looking more entrenched. A particular mode of government (like communism) doesn't have to look quite as good as shiny capitalism to still be better than what they had recently gone through.

Also, this ties back to the most viable method to weaken a superpower. In this case the superpower is China, and every method is used to try to foment unrest related to China (Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet, Taiwan, Inner Mongolia). If nationalist breakaway parties can be formed it could take a powerful country and break it into weaker pieces.

In this case Vietnam was thought to be a part of that equation. The arguments over who can fish how far out from their own borders in the South China Sea have probably gone on for over a thousand years. Japan hates China and the US has considered allowing them to arm their own military which would serve US purposes in case of a skirmish over this. (And the US floods Taiwan with military equipment for the similar reasons.) Vietnam and the Philippines have the same issue with China Sea fishing too, and Vietnam has had a negative history with China since Mao. (Mao stupidly funded and helped militarize variously chosen "sides" all over the place, including the muhajideen in Afghanistan, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge communism. And it did much damage to Viet Nam especially when Sino-Russian relations broke down.

I've heard that the US loves it that the China Sea conflict is ongoing and has encouraged the Philippines to stand up to China. The US keeps a fleet there too in case any provocation can start and escalate. The US was supposedly really miffed that Duterte was elected again after saying he won't stand up to China militarily, but will just do his best to get along. If Vietnam would at least stand up with a voice against China, then the US could amplify that voice. And demonizing Vietnam would keep it from falling into trade partnership with the US if a split over communism develops. China is taking advantage by building rails and transportation in Laos, and plans to further help Cambodia and VietNam too.

The TPP and Pivot to Asia initiatives were set to help break the economic growth of China by favorable trade partnerships with countries all around that would exclude China. I think Trump either didn't realize that this was the purpose, or he knew that a lot of constituents didn't realize it, and therefore thought best politically to discard it as just an Obama/Hillary thing. But it would have had a more "successfully" negative effect on China's economy than the trade wars he initiated. China ended up winning the trade wars, and this caused a lot of farmers to change their minds about Trump while he was still in office.

12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

South Korea has an explosive suicide rate among the young.

Suicide is nothing to squid kid about so I had to scratch my comment about so many also dying from deadly games of red light, green light, etc.

On 11/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

know about anthromorphic coal.

At least I can laugh at anthro[po]morphic coal. But I wouldn't want to "lignite" any hard feelings under the surface. I didn't think you'd "mine."

You might have meant "anthracite," but here's my anthropomorphic coal joke:

Q. Peat and Re-Peat were in a bog. Peat fell out. Who was left?

A. Re-Peat.

Q. Peat and Re-Peat were in a bog. Peat fell out. Who was left?

A. Re-Peat.

etc, etc, etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
47 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Hey! I saw that!! 😉

So much for my own clandestine smear operations! I will have to better train my own secretive forces—the CTTHIA.

47 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

You might have meant anthracite

Okay okay, so I have not yet read Volume I either.

47 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Suicide is nothing to squid kid about so I had to scratch my comment about so many also dying from deadly games of red light, green light, etc.

I’ve read that the TV series is instantly soul-draining, that watching it destroys all vestige of humanity. I can’t imagine how you can watch some things and then just go about your daily life mentally unharmed. 

Or am I being old-fartish? I read one shocking review of the show from a source not known for being fuddy-daddy, but after that, nothing but admiration for how well Netflix is doing with its hit series..

47 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

This popularity of communist governments with the people is, of course, why Chinese people (and their government) can claim to have a democratically "selected" government. They would say it is more representative of their interests than the US version of elected, but unrepresentative, democracy.

“We know what is best for you” and therefore it is democracy? The fact that proclamation of the good news usually goes down in the crossfire of these guys makes this sort of “democracy” unpopular with many, though if it brings material prosperity, it may well be the bees knees in an irreligious world. It’s challenging enough when the Christian organization presents itself as a little too smothering for my preference, let alone a government that does consider itself master of your faith and does not confine itself to exhortation.

As Massimo Introvigne put it, China is democratic. All you need do is change the definition of democracy to see it that way.

https://bitterwinter.org/democracy-according-to-xi-jinping/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
47 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

“We know what is best for you”

Better throw in a bone for the dog @Pudgy. I mentioned how I would listen to Rush if driving with the car radio, but otherwise no. However, in my janitorial years, which ended well before my retirement, I used to record and play back his show every night. During Clinton’s presidency (and Clinton seems to have been a reasonably sound president, as presidents go) Rush had some impersonator who would adapt Beatles songs and sing in his booming Clintonesque voice, cracking at the peaks. They were sidesplittingly funny:

I’m a real nowhere man, sitting here in Washington, making all my nowhere plans for you, buddy. Don’t care bout you point of view. I know what is best for you….and so forth. (Sung to the tune of Nowhere Man, of course) Pudgy might even be able to recall all the lyrics.

Also for Pudgy: It is Rush that made me realize that my own Dad never cared for politics. On a trip of the three Harley boys—my dad, myself, and my brother—to visit family in Ohio, my brother and I conspired to play Rush when his show came on. It was no more than 10 minutes, if that, then my dad began to grouse about ‘You like that? All that contention and arguing?’

He didn’t care for politics. All these years I had imagined he did, since at family gatherings politics was a frequent topic of discussion. Turned out that my mom’s dad, a staunch conservative, would carry on endlessly about it, and Dad was just too circumspect and amiable to tell his father-in-law to zip it.

Recently, now that Pop has died, I accompanied my brother, who is into ancestry. Believe it or not, he tracked down the grave of my great great great great grandfather. It’s off a dirt road drivable only by serious SUV, which is itself off a dirt road. The tiny gray speck at the focal point of the first pic is my brother’s non-SUV car. We had to walk from there.

I’m getting so I like to tell stories, and I do it right here on the old hen’s website, to reward her for being so indulgent with me.

Making all my nowhere plans for you, buddy!!” I love how that song ends.

D2D8A8E8-ABF6-4C71-9B8C-C2C7612C4493.jpeg

20F9DC07-E0B4-44E9-9CF2-65426B2112C1.jpeg

F9B18CF4-5A61-4AE2-A877-70BAAF2B2AD9.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/22/2021 at 9:43 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

I’ve read that the TV series is instantly soul-draining, that watching it destroys all vestige of humanity. I can’t imagine how you can watch some things and then just go about your daily life mentally unharmed.

If I had watched it for any kind of entertainment and enjoyment I would not likely have joked about it. I remember as a 16 year old some of the friends said they all were going to see "Billy Jack" (PG). I had just finished high school (GED) so I thought I was mature enough for any PG movie. There was a scene where a woman at a protest gets shot and killed, undoubtedly meant to be reminiscent of the Kent State shooting a year earlier, although I hadn't made the connection at the time. I was literally sick and had to leave.

So I hate the visceral violence, but will watch a series like this by speeding through at 4x and stopping every 30 to 60 seconds or so to see if I might have missed any plot points. This way I might be able to figure out why it was so highly recommended.

SPOILER ALERT

I made it through to the cartoonish ending this way and agree that it was, as you say, a Seoul-centered soul-drain. Its "appeal" to its initial South Korean audience would have been on the basis of the mountains of heavy debt that weighing on all ages there, the biggest factor in suicides. That was the "stract" from which the plot is abstracted. The disparity of rich and poor and the nebulous promises of shiny capitalism have desensitized everyone (mostly the young) to all types of immorality, including the influence of Christianity (as depicted) so that they are willing to put themselves through a living hell for the capitalist prize. And -- REAL SPOILER ALERT -- it turns out that uber-capitalists behind the games are actually even-more-decadent Western powers/individuals.   

Separately, there were reminders in the series that Korean propagandists of today have influenced their media (almost as badly as Australian media) in fearmongering and trying to depict China as pure evil. Every so often S. Korean media will make up an anti-North-Korean story that gets debunked without a retraction. Sometimes it's as blatant as depicting  Kim Jong so-and-so killing his uncle or brother, etc., in some terrible way. But then the S.Korean media shows no surprise when that same freshly killed brother or uncle appears on television a few weeks later (apparently not knowing that he had been killed). I guess the idea is that if you try this often enough, some of it will stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/22/2021 at 3:01 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

problem with a Mercola and Breggin’s books—their limited perspective

Most media people (mainstream and independent), who talk about the contracts signed by the  powers to be with the great reset, have a limited perspective. So we have to link up the dots with what Jehovah teaches us.  If you know their strategy and how Jehovah is going to work - you have the advantage!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/22/2021 at 2:35 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

They have brought material prosperity to the masses and they do what they are told socially, making it easy to implement climate policy, pandemic policy, and any other form of social engineering desired.

At the cost of treating all citizens with dignity and human rights.  So on the surface it is a success - lol.  Soon that system will be implemented in the west - then we will see how just it is!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, Arauna said:

Soon that system will be implemented in the west

Yep. Something I said a while back is that what is holding back and or slowing the process is because of the Constitution of the United States. As for other countries, namely some EU, even the UK, and the like, they will slowly crumble, which is happening now, to a system of which will cause a not so happy reaction among the people who are not among those who accept compliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • DL2APR60

      DL2APR60 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.