There are a couple of interesting observations to be made if you carefully consider exactly what he was saying. Like most people I'm sure, I read the headline as, "Only a million people were killed in the Holocaust, not six million." But no, he's not saying that at all:
At least five million of the six million were “total goyim,” Mizrachi told the crowd....
See, the magical, mystical "six million" were killed, to be sure, but he's only pointing out that most were not Jews by Jewish law. Taking his claim as presented, that brings up two important points, neither of which were discussed by the rabbi or anyone the Times of Israel cared to talk to. (They should have talked to me.)
First, did this rabbi nor anyone else care to speculate on why the Nazis would kill five million fellow goyim? Were they just randos? The first five million to walk past empty boxcars? Were there that many Freemasons and gypsies walking around Germany at the time?
Second, well... what about them? No one in the article seems to care in the least that, still, six million people were killed (sic) however you care to divide it up. Five million living beings literally bear no mention whatsoever.
So when you wrap it all back around, maybe that first impression really was correct, at least according to these Hebraics: "Only a million people were killed in the Holocaust, not six million." Get it?
(And see why they didn't talk to me?)
Just a raw guess, but I think this is all Color Revolution Level 2 after Color Revolution Level 1 didn't work out:
Ecuadorian Presidential Candidate Previously Denied Being Connected to CIA Several Times Before Assassination (TGP 8/11/2023)
Or, you know, just pure happenstance!
It has proceeded almost unnoticed, but this fits in to a larger pattern of the suppression of anything beyond the mundane and materialistic. There's a counterpart to the "Overton Window" for all human development and it's been steadily shrunken.
An example similar to the glasses is Kirlian photography. It became quite a popular subject in the 1970s. That was perhaps a unique time in living memory, when the population was both interested in pushing back the boundaries but was also aware of what a charlatan was.
As a residue of that popularity, you can see a Kirlian photograph of a left hand in the montage of images in the opening of the 1990's series "The X-Files".
Who knows what was going on, but everyone should dispense with any notion that the Jews got where they are by any kind of creativity.
After I heard "tunnels", it took me two seconds to think up, "Oy vey, Hamas has infiltrated Jew York! Quick, collapse all the tunnels before they pogrom us all! And don't look first, because those rats set booby traps!"
They do keep lying. I know it's not the point of the post, but it's not just that, "They're dumb and uncreative and They don't know what else to do and everyone is going to put up with it anyway."
That's certainly true to a great extent, but I would suggest something deeper (perhaps we could even use the word "occult") is at work. This quote has haunted me since I first came across it:
In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of.”probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to. – Theodore Dalrymple
"A society of emasculated liars". Now think of all the professional and highly educated readers of The Lancet, a high-profile and prestigious academic publication. Could and should they "get what's going on" just as well as anyone else? Of course!
But how many will speak up about it? We'll see, but I suspect the number will round down to zero percent. All the others will, I suggest here, have undergone a variety of "alchemical processing".
PS: All the popular charlatans talking endlessly about alchemy on the popular podcasts never talk about anything like this. That should tell you what you need to know about the relevance and importance of anything they say, and why they're promoted in the first place.
The regrettable part of the situation we're faced with in the world is that (no matter the truth of the Lloyd Austin situation) if you approached a normie with any of the evidence--strong or weak or absurd--of this thesis, they'd just say, "Uh, people go to the fucking hospital sometimes, you fucking idiot," as if that settled the matter.
And I don't think Lloyd was a bottom, so I reject that one explanation. Well okay, maybe he was a power bottom.
For those interested in a little more detail, this is a link to what I believe is the recent article discussing the deterioration of the Minuteman III:
Likelihood Grows of America Abandoning Nuclear Triad: Would ICBM Funds Be Better Used Elsewhere? (Military Watch Magazine 12/16/2023)
As the title implies, the focus of the piece is how utterly lame the replacement program is. It cannot even get off the drawing boards:
he LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) currently under development for the United States Air Force is facing growing prospects of deep cuts and possible cancellation due to tremendous cost overruns very early in development,
I find it utterly shocking that the MIC--addicted to spending money--would actually say out loud that they may not want to spend some money.
Even without getting this far and assuming they only deploy something like voice-to-skull tech, you have to wonder about the numbers. That is, if everyone suddenly heard an insistent voice in their heads telling them what to do, how many would think, "Motherfuck, the gubmint hacked my damn brain!" versus those who think, "I hear and I obey, and all shall be according to Thy Will and for Thy Glory."
I think about that because, just today, I happened to see a clip of a group of Christian Zionist farmers from America who paid for the privilege of going to the Holy Land to help bring in the grape harvest used to make kosher wine. All the men were away dropping bombs on hospitals and babies, etc.
I found that terrifying enough.
You have to wonder precisely what orders were given to these cops. If anything, I'd guess it was something like, "Make sure no bad guys step out of line."
What I really suspect is that nothing of the sort had to be written down or even said out loud. What I fear--what we should all fear--is that exactly this phenomenon underlies all historical outrages and atrocities..
I might think so too, but there are several points that work against it:
- first trench at most only 30 meters or so away with a clear line of sight
- the attacking squad doesn't try to repel them as they approach
- in fact, they hide themselves until the retreating soldiers are in their own trench
- they try to kill a lone guy running full-speed away from them
You have to ask yourself, in principle, how would this differ from an ambush? Because as an ambush, it was hella effective. They could show it for infantry training on that basis.
I have to point out the Ukrainians evidently aren't even doing the barrier troops thing right. The conscripts must know about the barrier: "Don't come back this way or you'll be shot."
In this clip, the Ukrainian conscripts appear to have no idea whatsoever what is happening and why. They seem to think they will be (certainly temporarily) safe in the second trench, since it is to the rear of the line of contact.
Had had they been aware of the function of the barrier squad, they would have either moved away in the trench immediately, or assaulted the squad itself.
Are these barrier squads not just savages, but also incompetent?
Final note: you don't often get karma that instantly.
I've been studying the general topic for several years, and just from casually collecting evidence have come up with enough for several books. Which no one would read, and the few that did would just be "hate reading" it.
But the idea is solid and the evidence is all around, it's just that it's ignored, misinterpreted, and hijacked. Most people have no interest in it, the few that do will never get to the truth because they already "know the answer". Finally, the handful that could and should put the pieces together end up avoiding it because the truth is pretty disturbing on a very deep level. And pushing back the frontiers necessarily means having every single other person disagree with you.
I consider it the premier "conspiracy", but for certain reasons it's beyond the reach of almost all so-called conspiracy theorists. The space is filled with disinformation agents and various charlatans. Mauro Biglino was the last researcher whose work I could recommend without reservation, but it seems even he was "turned" in 2023. If you choose to study it, you have to be prepared,to--at some point--break with the opinion of every "expert" or "authority" for this reason.
I've noticed that same phenomenon, and that it has become quite common across the conspir-o-sphere. It's not quite as obvious and I haven't done much research, but it fits into the same model so there's a finer point to be made here.
I've mentioned that about 80% are normies, and we can think of them as "asleep". Then there are the fully "awake", which is maybe about 5%. In between are the "drowsy", struggling from one to the other. (And one does have to develop from one state to the other, because I was just going along with the flow of the normies myself for almost all my life.)
Anyway, it seems like the drowsy have become prevalent among conspiracy theorists. That's a good thing because it shows they are developing or "waking up". But as the normies are driven by the psychological comfort of conformity, the drowsy seem to be driven by the psychological comfort of "being right". They have got to be the smartest person in the room.
So with that goal established, they easily fall into all the traps of what we think of as normal cognition: confirmation bias, cherry picking, moving the goalposts, the list goes on. It's like, whatever new evidence comes along, the response is, "Called it!" What a psychologically comfortable place to be, eh?
And if you're wondering, what I conclude to be the driving force for the awake is the search for the truth. How wrong you were before and how uncomfortable it makes you is irrelevant.
I look back and realize I was wrong about almost everything I "knew" about the world. Had to pitch it right overboard and replace with it with things that would cause the vast majority to consider me a lunatic if they knew. Not at all comfortable.
And even the subject we have been discussing--that most of the world would technically be described as in a state of hypnosis or psychosis--is that welcome news? No way.
If you've followed it this far, the best way I've found to conceptualize their way of thinking is that it's inverted from what we all assume it to be. That is, they begin with the conclusion and engineer backwards through "moral principles" to "reasoning" to "facts". (Ever wonder why, for some, "my body, my choice" could just evaporate like the morning dew?)
They start with themselves being "good", and immediately after that they must have the "truth". Note that they didn't get reasoned into this view and it's virtually impossible to reason them out of it. Starting there and working reverse from the normal direction, they can find and fit whatever they require.
Even mainstream science touches on this phenomenon:
You create your own false information, study finds: People misremember numerical facts to fit their biases (ScienceDaily 12/9/2019)
As I mentioned, it's a big secret and so everyone just lightly brushes on it with their finger and never drives to the heart of it. When your "radar is on" for this kind of research and little factoids, you'll notice these types of confirmations too.
No surprise with this, but I will note for the record:
Maine Democrat Secretary of State admits she personally decided Trump was “guilty” of an insurrection… (Revolver 12/28/2023)
The point to reflect on, though, is that no one that supports the result objects to it being arrived at arbitrarily, which is especially appalling given that the Fourteenth Amendment itself includes the Due Process Clause.
You're absolutely thinking of the same things I did as I moved along in my investigations. Perhaps I could offer another couple of key observations you can keep in your back pocket as you try to put the pieces together.
The first is that you have to recognize these are all the same people you grew up with, went to school with, worked with, and lived next to all your life, and until very recently you never noticed a problem with them at all. D's and R's, blue and white collar, rich and poor and middle class. If someone a decade or two ago asked you to point out all the normies you wouldn't even know WTF they were talking about.
But now there are stark faultlines, seemingly out of nowhere. I would suggest that those faultlines were not created but simply revealed. The normies were being told, well, relatively normal things, and that's what they accepted. We all just assumed from the outside that they arrived at those conclusions the same way we would have. Now they're being told all this crazy stuff, and that they accept such is evidence that no, no one would arrive at those conclusions through the conventionally accepted processes of reasoning.
The other phenomenon I would point to highlights the commanding role of the unconscious in their behavior. When you were a child, did anyone tease you by saying that you were adopted? You freaked out, right? Got angry, told them to take it back, and so forth. It was deeply upsetting.
Pretty much the same thing is going on when you tell a normie about 911 or COVID or the Moon landings. First, their subconscious determines that what you're saying is possibly or likely true. (If you tell them something ridiculous, like a guy you knew growing said he had a Dobby in his house, they won't react negatively at all. They may even want to know more.) But if what you say is true then that means all the people that control their world (the government, media, scientists, doctors, etc) are a bunch of fools, liars and murderers.
This is intolerably upsetting and their psyche has to find a way out. By far the easiest way out is just like it was when you were 9 years old: get increasingly aggressive until the claim is retracted. Voila, "safe" again.
The true nature of human consciousness is one of the biggest secrets I'm aware of, and that's because it's the main pathway to manipulating us. It's easiest to win a game if your opponents don't know they're playing, let alone the rules.
Well, I specifically posted to point out that they can't, and not that they they won't, and I find insisting on it otherwise to be erroneous and counterproductive. But everyone is free to believe what they choose, and they freely choose they do. I have also found arguing about it to be entirely pointless, which is another thing I learned about how people actually think.
But on the extreme outside chance anyone reading this actually wishes to research the idea further, a psychologist named Julian Jaynes came up with a key insight regarding it almost half a century ago. His work was just a small part of the overall picture and he got important parts wrong, but it's close enough to lead to the next step.
A decent description of his idea (again, incomplete, flawed and out of context) is in the wiki on what he termed bicameral mentality:
In this theorized state, individuals lacked self-awareness and introspection. Instead of conscious thought, they heard external voices or "gods" guiding their actions and decisions. This form of consciousness, devoid of metaconsciousness and autobiographical memory, persisted until about 3,000 years ago when societal changes led to the emergence of our current conscious mode of thought.
I would suggest that the ultimate cause is more subtle and thus easily misinterpreted. It has to do with the true nature of human consciousness, but for purposes of discussion can be formulated roughly as, "How do people determine what Reality is?"
The first observation should be that we do not all do it the same way. The unstated idea that we all do it the same way--the only difference being that some do it well and others poorly--is totally incorrect and should be consciously rejected.
To be brief and put it in very primitive terms, what makes "normies" "normies" is their in-built way of deciding what Reality is, and generally it is from those they consider "authorities".
This mechanism can overwhelm even first-hand experience. All reasoning and even facts will give way to it. With close attention to their "reasoning", they will often invent "facts" outright to support their views. To be more precise, they begin with their conclusion and reason backwards to necessary facts.
I've seen it here plenty. I think many of us have.
Everyone can fold this anomaly into whatever theory they have about the guy:
Gov. Gavin Newsom pans talk of banning Donald Trump from presidential race in California (LA Times 12/28/2023)
If it causes anyone to change their mind because it contradicts what they already believe, be sure to reply because that would certainly be news.
The article focuses only on DC and takes pains to draw attention to how it's not associated with the shutdown, but in a way this is all misdirection (or, on the outside, abject ignorance. The phenomenon of progressives making deserts of cities they run is widespread and devastating.
All the way on the opposite coast, and having nothing whatsoever to do with the shutdown, San Francisco is one such wasteland. A guy has even posted a series of startling first-person videos from SF and surrounding cities with such titles as: "every store is CLOSED on van ness San Francisco", "every restaurant is CLOSED in San Francisco", and "every bank is CLOSED in San Francisco". You get the idea.
His channel is here: METAL LEO
Poland is being turned into a Fifth-generation warfare state, a vassal state of the Empire. Duda is the liege subject and Brzezinski is the viceroy.
I sort of wanted to refer to it as "Vichy Poland", which is a catchy term, but that doesn't go nearly far enough. When Germany occupied France, they didn't turn right around and say, "Okay, now all you Frenchmen have to go fight Russia, and if France gets destroyed in the process, well, you all enjoyed the glory of sacrifice for the Reich".
I suppose this is just to say that things are a lot worse now than a century ago, but they're much better at disguising it.