SPEAK THE TRUTH! And Redeem This World From Hell

[Travis]

[Pederson] is one of the most idiotic, egocentric loudmouths out there. I guess it makes sense that many people adore him, given that we live in the age of Trump&friends.

Dude! He's Canadian, give him a break . . . Would you pick on a kid in a wheelchair?

 

[x-ray peat]

Henry Ford wrote a book called The International Jew - The World's Foremost Problem, which can be found here:
https://ia802707.us.archive.org/16/items/TheInternationalJew_655/TheInternationalJew.pdf
Here's a quote from it:
“(...)the question of the Jews has come to the fore, but like other questions which lend themselves to prejudice, efforts will be made to hush it up as impolitic for open discussion. If, however, experience has taught us anything it is that questions thus suppressed will sooner or later break out in undesirable and unprofitable forms.”
- Henry Ford, The International Jew - The World's Foremost Problem
And of course, it certainly doesn't mean it's true because he wrote the book, but since we cannot know for sure it's important to remain open to the possibility.

Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite who also published the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion after it had already been proven to be a fake document that plagiarized an existing play word for word. Is Mein Kampf also something you think we should remain open too? That was actually ghost written for Hitler by a Catholic Priest, Bernhard Stempfle. The scapegoating of Jews has been going on for a long time because it works. As Hitler said it’s a good thing for leaders that their people don’t think.

It seems that you and your friend are more than “open to such possibilities. ” You should actually research these documents first before you start promulgating them as “possibilities.”
Henry Ford was sued for Libel in 1927 for the International Jew and after reaching an out of court settlement he apologized for the lies he published. If the Jews were such a real threat to the world and he was telling the truth he would have never settled. Of course the damage was already done, as the world was slowly being prepared for the upcoming Holocaust.

Interestingly, somebody wrote to my inbox the other day on this subject:
"Everyone says it's the Illuminati, Bilderbergers, communists, New World Order, elite, Israel, Zionists, deep state, etc. All those really mean, "It's the Jews who worship Lucifer." But if you say who is doing the evil, the ADL will attack you. Judaism follows the Talmud. The Talmud says it is okay for a Jew to kidnap, enslave, rape, sodomize, torture, kill, lie to, cheat, break a contract with, etc. a non-Jew. Not all Jews follow the Talmud, and not all Jews push for a New World Order. So it is not their race, but their religious and political agenda that is a problem. Jews worship Lucifer. The god of the Talmud is Lucifer."

There are a lot of Jew haters on the Internet and even on this forum so I’m not surprised. Again have you or your friend actually researched this or ever read the Talmud?

I’m not Jewish but I looked into those claims before and they couldn’t be further from the truth. The Talmud is a collection of sayings from hundreds of Rabbis about everything under the sun, but, mostly how to interpret the laws of the Bible and is over 6,000 pages. It spanned a period when the Jews were being butchered by the Romans and kicked out of Judea, so it shouldn’t be surprising that one or two Rabbis have said some unflattering things about non Jews. But it certainly doesn’t say the thing your friend is claiming. Moreover every religion has negative statements about other religions, and I have to tell you the ones I’ve read are much worse than anything in the Talmud. Have you ever heard of the Inquisition or the Crusades? Or read the Council of Trent or the Koran?

 

[Blossom]

Jordan Peterson about to be on Tucker Carlson/Fox News. Will post interview later if you missed it

Thanks! I'm working so I couldn't watch.

 

[x-ray peat]

Thanks! I'm working so I couldn't watch.

Your welcome. Unfortunately not one of his best interviews.



this was more interesting and was the interview Tucker referenced

 

[mt_dreams]

I had a good laugh listening to the 30 min interview he did on channel 4. Surely intellectuals who are not familiar with political warfare would cringe at her conclusions of what was being said. The points Jordan makes about equal pay are the exact same points Thomas Sowell was making 40 years ago. There's absolutely no desire for either party to change it's stance on divisive ideologies. it seems the divisiveness of the society is more important/beneficial than actually coming to a compromise and moving on. It's funny that people actually think channel 4 is regretting asking Jordan onto the show. We think we're watching a interview, but we're really just watching two salesmans in action. Ones got a book to sell, the others selling adds. Selling votes is the game, and it's usually win win for both parties when titans interact on news channels.



the political warefare happening both during the interview, as well as after, is quite impressive.

 

[EndAllDisease]

@x-ray peat You know I guess I was wrong to expect that all people on the Ray Peat Forum would stray from beliefs and be scientifically minded. Every single word you wrote in your last post about WWII, were your beliefs.

My definition of belief:
Something you pretend is true but don't actually know is true. Aka a lie that you tell yourself.

Why? Because it's history, meaning before your time - so you weren't there. It is illogical to fully commit to either side of history because you never saw any of it with your own eyes. And it's dangerous because it makes possible the scenario that you're being manipulated and completely oblivious to it. The antidote to belief is aggressively pursuing a thorough understanding of both sides of history through books, videos and other information sources. When you seek truth, you will eventually find it. The determining factor is whether or not you're willing to stop lying to yourself.

The media - owned by 3 corporations last time I checked - uses buzzwords to discredit anybody simply asking questions about World War II. Some questions you might want to ask yourself regarding that blatant tactic to control public perception:

• Why do they get to decide what is true?
  
• And should I unquestioningly believe a version of World War II that is taught to Americans essentially by Hollywood?
• How about an open discussion and mutual attention to the information on both sides?
• If the mainstream version is true, then persecuting people so heavily simply for questioning it seems a bit weird, doesn't it?

The Cure to Your Swiss Cheese 'Logic'
The only way to guarantee you can never be manipulated in this world is through adherence to the philosophy that only the things you've seen or experienced yourself are true and all other things are equally possible possibilities. Instead of choosing one side of the arguement and rejecting the other, one: stop lying to yourself and pretending that you know something you don't, and two: learn all the perspectives you can find. Thinking this way makes learning opposing viewpoints exciting instead of a battle. The Canadian and American public school systems have been doing a great job for decades at training people to believe what authority figures tell them even over their own experiences and ensuring people don't know how to think for themselves in the way I've just described.

Instead people are indoctrinated to respond to any conflicting information with anger and suppression - the precise way that the angry mob of SJWs at McMaster University in March 2017 did in their attempt to silence Dr. Peterson.

"It's best to let the unreasonable opposition speak, because they manifest themselves as unreasonable."
- Dr. Jordan Peterson
​

New Possible Truths: 'The unreasonable opposition' speaks
Those who don't know the official story well can easily learn it by watching any of the 100+ Hollywood WWII films that have been made since the war.
And for the other side of the scale, here is some evidence that you can use to help you determine - not what you believe - but what you think is most likely true about World War II based on your research.

• Hitler Allegedly Liberated Germany from debt/slavery, like JFK and Lincoln did in America before being assassinated. (So did Andrew Jackson, and he had two murder attempts on him but both shots misfired.) Hitler freed Germany from the control of the international banking cartels by issuing a national currency - that's currency produced by the government, not loaned to it at interest. Because the country was no longer indebted, Germany went from highly unemployed to highly prosperous in just one year. Today, the US government and governments of all but a few countries are loaned their currency, putting their people needlessly in debt, and thus financially enslaved by these interests.

"Give me control of a nation's money supply and I care not who makes its laws."
- Mayer Amschel Rothschild, [Mayer Amschel Bauer](1744-1812), Godfather of the Rothschild Banking Cartel of Europe.​

• David Irving is a WWII revisionist who essentially 'started from scratch' and interviewed the people that worked directly with Hitler while they were all still alive. This method of investigation seems to paint a very different picture of the events that took place during the war and those responsible for it. Irving doesn't deny Jews were killed but he has made it clear that he doesn't believe Hitler was responsible for it. Is that really so hard to consider? Do you really believe Trump is the one making the decisions in American right now? To top things off, Irving has been beaten and jailed simply for speaking the conclusions he has derived from his research. If someone is simply wrong, there's no reason to beat them, is there? Here's one of Irving's talks:

​

• Ernst Zundel is another fascinating character. Those who are legitimately seeking truth will enjoy listening to him. In the following video, he pulls out a book about every 10 seconds to reference where he got the information from. While his concepts and ideas about WWII may be partially true, entirely true, or not true at all, he is clearly very well read and worth listening to.

​

• Charlie Chaplin tried to tell the world what he believe to be true about WWII in a creative way that was absolutely brilliant. In 1952, after a trip to Europe to promote his new film at the time called Limelight, Chaplin was banned by the United States government from returning home. That must be because of his extreme views, like "I believe in liberty - that is all my politics," or for being a man "who wants nothing more for humanity than a roof over every man's head," wouldn't you agree?

​

 

[Badger]

"All the grandstanding to "shut down" Jordan Peterson has certainly been excellent for his visibility and profit margin. He gets the equivalent of 1/3 of a full professor's annual salary *each month* in private donations. Well done #Resistance." Maximilian Forte on Twitter

 

[Dhair]

I think he is absolutely correct about Marxist influence in academia, but that's where it ends for me. I cannot in good conscience support a man who advocates for the use of SSRIs and spreads lies about serotonin supposedly being the happiness hormone. The buck has to stop somewhere, and I am sick and tired of hearing excuses from psychiatrists about the serotonin issue.

 

[Ritchie]

"All the grandstanding to "shut down" Jordan Peterson has certainly been excellent for his visibility and profit margin. He gets the equivalent of 1/3 of a full professor's annual salary *each month* in private donations. Well done #Resistance." Maximilian Forte on Twitter

That all comes mainly from his Christian supporters.. See my earlier post.

 

[Tarmander]

@x-ray peat You know I guess I was wrong to expect that all people on the Ray Peat Forum would stray from beliefs and be scientifically minded. Every single word you wrote in your last post about WWII, were your beliefs.

My definition of belief:
Something you pretend is true but don't actually know is true. Aka a lie that you tell yourself.

Why? Because it's history, meaning before your time - so you weren't there. It is illogical to fully commit to either side of history because you never saw any of it with your own eyes. And it's dangerous because it makes possible the scenario that you're being manipulated and completely oblivious to it. The antidote to belief is aggressively pursuing a thorough understanding of both sides of history through books, videos and other information sources. When you seek truth, you will eventually find it. The determining factor is whether or not you're willing to stop lying to yourself.

The media - owned by 3 corporations last time I checked - uses buzzwords to discredit anybody simply asking questions about World War II. Some questions you might want to ask yourself regarding that blatant tactic to control public perception:

• Why do they get to decide what is true?
  
• And should I unquestioningly believe a version of World War II that is taught to Americans essentially by Hollywood?
• How about an open discussion and mutual attention to the information on both sides?
• If the mainstream version is true, then persecuting people so heavily simply for questioning it seems a bit weird, doesn't it?

The Cure to Your Swiss Cheese 'Logic'
The only way to guarantee you can never be manipulated in this world is through adherence to the philosophy that only the things you've seen or experienced yourself are true and all other things are equally possible possibilities. Instead of choosing one side of the arguement and rejecting the other, one: stop lying to yourself and pretending that you know something you don't, and two: learn all the perspectives you can find. Thinking this way makes learning opposing viewpoints exciting instead of a battle. The Canadian and American public school systems have been doing a great job for decades at training people to believe what authority figures tell them even over their own experiences and ensuring people don't know how to think for themselves in the way I've just described.

Instead people are indoctrinated to respond to any conflicting information with anger and suppression - the precise way that the angry mob of SJWs at McMaster University in March 2017 did in their attempt to silence Dr. Peterson.

"It's best to let the unreasonable opposition speak, because they manifest themselves as unreasonable."
- Dr. Jordan Peterson
​

New Possible Truths: 'The unreasonable opposition' speaks
Those who don't know the official story well can easily learn it by watching any of the 100+ Hollywood WWII films that have been made since the war.
And for the other side of the scale, here is some evidence that you can use to help you determine - not what you believe - but what you think is most likely true about World War II based on your research.

• Hitler Allegedly Liberated Germany from debt/slavery, like JFK and Lincoln did in America before being assassinated. (So did Andrew Jackson, and he had two murder attempts on him but both shots misfired.) Hitler freed Germany from the control of the international banking cartels by issuing a national currency - that's currency produced by the government, not loaned to it at interest. Because the country was no longer indebted, Germany went from highly unemployed to highly prosperous in just one year. Today, the US government and governments of all but a few countries are loaned their currency, putting their people needlessly in debt, and thus financially enslaved by these interests.

"Give me control of a nation's money supply and I care not who makes its laws."
- Mayer Amschel Rothschild, [Mayer Amschel Bauer](1744-1812), Godfather of the Rothschild Banking Cartel of Europe.​

• David Irving is a WWII revisionist who essentially 'started from scratch' and interviewed the people that worked directly with Hitler while they were all still alive. This method of investigation seems to paint a very different picture of the events that took place during the war and those responsible for it. Irving doesn't deny Jews were killed but he has made it clear that he doesn't believe Hitler was responsible for it. Is that really so hard to consider? Do you really believe Trump is the one making the decisions in American right now? To top things off, Irving has been beaten and jailed simply for speaking the conclusions he has derived from his research. If someone is simply wrong, there's no reason to beat them, is there? Here's one of Irving's talks:

​

• Ernst Zundel is another fascinating character. Those who are legitimately seeking truth will enjoy listening to him. In the following video, he pulls out a book about every 10 seconds to reference where he got the information from. While his concepts and ideas about WWII may be partially true, entirely true, or not true at all, he is clearly very well read and worth listening to.

​

• Charlie Chaplin tried to tell the world what he believe to be true about WWII in a creative way that was absolutely brilliant. In 1952, after a trip to Europe to promote his new film at the time called Limelight, Chaplin was banned by the United States government from returning home. That must be because of his extreme views, like "I believe in liberty - that is all my politics," or for being a man "who wants nothing more for humanity than a roof over every man's head," wouldn't you agree?

​

Nice post man, but I would give it a rest. The arguments in this thread against Petersen boil down to the same ole claptrap...he is selling books, he is making money, I have heard this before/this isn't new, people are fanbois and followers LUL, etc. Ritchie had an interesting thing about truth, but I do not think you are going to get a lot of great engagement here otherwise, which is a bummer.

 

[LUH 3417]

Nice post man, but I would give it a rest. The arguments in this thread against Petersen boil down to the same ole claptrap...he is selling books, he is making money, I have heard this before/this isn't new, people are fanbois and followers LUL, etc. Ritchie had an interesting thing about truth, but I do not think you are going to get a lot of great engagement here otherwise, which is a bummer.

Why do there need to be final solutions to problems?

 

[Tarmander]

Why do there need to be final solutions to problems?

I am not sure I understand what you are asking...

 

[x-ray peat]

@x-ray peat You know I guess I was wrong to expect that all people on the Ray Peat Forum would stray from beliefs and be scientifically minded. Every single word you wrote in your last post about WWII, were your beliefs.

My definition of belief:
Something you pretend is true but don't actually know is true. Aka a lie that you tell yourself.

Why? Because it's history, meaning before your time - so you weren't there. It is illogical to fully commit to either side of history because you never saw any of it with your own eyes. And it's dangerous because it makes possible the scenario that you're being manipulated and completely oblivious to it. The antidote to belief is aggressively pursuing a thorough understanding of both sides of history through books, videos and other information sources. When you seek truth, you will eventually find it. The determining factor is whether or not you're willing to stop lying to yourself.

The media - owned by 3 corporations last time I checked - uses buzzwords to discredit anybody simply asking questions about World War II. Some questions you might want to ask yourself regarding that blatant tactic to control public perception:

• Why do they get to decide what is true?
  
• And should I unquestioningly believe a version of World War II that is taught to Americans essentially by Hollywood?
• How about an open discussion and mutual attention to the information on both sides?
• If the mainstream version is true, then persecuting people so heavily simply for questioning it seems a bit weird, doesn't it?

The Cure to Your Swiss Cheese 'Logic'
The only way to guarantee you can never be manipulated in this world is through adherence to the philosophy that only the things you've seen or experienced yourself are true and all other things are equally possible possibilities. Instead of choosing one side of the arguement and rejecting the other, one: stop lying to yourself and pretending that you know something you don't, and two: learn all the perspectives you can find. Thinking this way makes learning opposing viewpoints exciting instead of a battle. The Canadian and American public school systems have been doing a great job for decades at training people to believe what authority figures tell them even over their own experiences and ensuring people don't know how to think for themselves in the way I've just described.

Instead people are indoctrinated to respond to any conflicting information with anger and suppression - the precise way that the angry mob of SJWs at McMaster University in March 2017 did in their attempt to silence Dr. Peterson.

"It's best to let the unreasonable opposition speak, because they manifest themselves as unreasonable."
- Dr. Jordan Peterson
​

New Possible Truths: 'The unreasonable opposition' speaks
Those who don't know the official story well can easily learn it by watching any of the 100+ Hollywood WWII films that have been made since the war.
And for the other side of the scale, here is some evidence that you can use to help you determine - not what you believe - but what you think is most likely true about World War II based on your research.

• Hitler Allegedly Liberated Germany from debt/slavery, like JFK and Lincoln did in America before being assassinated. (So did Andrew Jackson, and he had two murder attempts on him but both shots misfired.) Hitler freed Germany from the control of the international banking cartels by issuing a national currency - that's currency produced by the government, not loaned to it at interest. Because the country was no longer indebted, Germany went from highly unemployed to highly prosperous in just one year. Today, the US government and governments of all but a few countries are loaned their currency, putting their people needlessly in debt, and thus financially enslaved by these interests.

"Give me control of a nation's money supply and I care not who makes its laws."
- Mayer Amschel Rothschild, [Mayer Amschel Bauer](1744-1812), Godfather of the Rothschild Banking Cartel of Europe.​

• David Irving is a WWII revisionist who essentially 'started from scratch' and interviewed the people that worked directly with Hitler while they were all still alive. This method of investigation seems to paint a very different picture of the events that took place during the war and those responsible for it. Irving doesn't deny Jews were killed but he has made it clear that he doesn't believe Hitler was responsible for it. Is that really so hard to consider? Do you really believe Trump is the one making the decisions in American right now? To top things off, Irving has been beaten and jailed simply for speaking the conclusions he has derived from his research. If someone is simply wrong, there's no reason to beat them, is there? Here's one of Irving's talks:

​

• Ernst Zundel is another fascinating character. Those who are legitimately seeking truth will enjoy listening to him. In the following video, he pulls out a book about every 10 seconds to reference where he got the information from. While his concepts and ideas about WWII may be partially true, entirely true, or not true at all, he is clearly very well read and worth listening to.

​

• Charlie Chaplin tried to tell the world what he believe to be true about WWII in a creative way that was absolutely brilliant. In 1952, after a trip to Europe to promote his new film at the time called Limelight, Chaplin was banned by the United States government from returning home. That must be because of his extreme views, like "I believe in liberty - that is all my politics," or for being a man "who wants nothing more for humanity than a roof over every man's head," wouldn't you agree?

​

It’s obvious that you have been watching too many too many Brother Nathaniel videos and don’t seem to be very capable of doing any historical research or "scientific" thinking of your own. Just like your claim that the Jews worship Lucifer or that the International Jew is true, your current batch of BS is no better. You are just falling for the latest version of blame the Jews, just like the poor abused people in Germany did.

I’m not going to waste a lot more time on your nonsense because as before, you will most likely ignore my response and just throw out some more BS picked up on YouTube. It’s like playing whack-a-mole with dumb and dumber. I will however point out a couple more obvious errors for the sake of others unfortunate enough to be reading this.

David Irving is a court proven fraud. He sued a real historian on the holocaust for libel and lost when his holocaust denial fantasies were proven false. This is what the judge had to say about your latest historical find.

“Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist, and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism.” Irving v Penguin Books Ltd - Wikipedia

As for Hitler freeing Germany from the grasps of the western banks, this is even more laughable. Hitler was funded by those very banks, which along with your friends at Ford and other American firms helped to build up the German war machine. Your idea that Hitler was some kind of hero standing up to the International Jew is what can be more rightly called Swiss Cheese thinking. Hitler’s primary banker in the US was Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to two presidents.

https://www.amazon.com/Wall-Street-Hitler-Antony-Sutton/dp/0945001533

The truth is that WWII like WWI was a war between controlled oppositions and was actually an inquisition hiding behind a war. Protestant Germany, Orthodox Christian Russia and the Jews were the primary victims.

Given your little understanding on the subject, your speech about knowledge and belief and my lack of scientific thinking is really astounding. I guess accusing others of what you are doing is standard operating procedure for the Hitler is my Hero crowd.

 

[Badger]

Dr Peterson destroys Islam with facts? Don't understand the title of that video, as he admits from outset he does not know much about Islam and finds it difficult to understand. It's easy to destroy something you're ignorant about. But it only will be persuasive to those as ignorant as the attacker. I like Peterson on issues he has real expertise in. But on Islam, I pay no attention to what he says. Aside from his admission, the little he has said about it makes his knowledge obviously less than that of a rank amateur, as would be evident to anybody who has studied it.

Basing comments about Islam as a whole on extremist and inherently super-politicized Wahabi and Salafi versions of Islam that the MSM has constantly paraded to the general public as "real Islam" for years is a very gross and fatal error that would-be experts on Islam make all the time. If he follows the typical path of most trendy pundits, he'll read a few books on Islam written by biased people who hate or dislike Islam and proceed to tell the world what Islam is really all about based on such readings. If he has integrity, he won't do it. Time will tell.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Basing comments about Islam as a whole on extremist and inherently super-politicized Wahabi and Salafi versions of Islam

The issue starts being when mosque-goers do this. Which seems to go over the head of the public debate that's going on, more concerned with definitions and "debating to appear as a good person" rather than "debating to generate consensus".

 

[YourUniverse]

Ive noticed that Dr. Peterson cries somewhat frequently for his place in the public spotlight. Does this say something about his internal hormonal climate, and if so, what? He is an open advocate for SSRIs, but despite him not fully understanding serotonin, the SSRIs do in fact work for some people (they simultaneously increase adrenaline and dopamine).

 

[Badger]

Who tells us what the mosque goers are doing? The MSM, unless you check it for yourself. There is as much diversity among mosque goers as there is among Christian church goers. Among Muslims, they range from screaming, angry Wahabi imams to whispering, prayerful Sufi-influenced Muslim communities, and everything in between. Cherry-picking the worst examples as representive of the "mainstream" and ignoring the good ones as peripheral, as is typical of the MSM and ignornant pundits, utterly distorts what's going on.

The issue starts being when mosque-goers do this. Which seems to go over the head of the public debate that's going on, more concerned with definitions and "debating to appear as a good person" rather than "debating to generate consensus".

 

[Badger]

Hey Insaneacinamide, the speaker, Walter Veith, in video referred to here: "In case you are wondering what is the connection between Jesuits/Roman Catholic/Islam, who really runs the world/Canada etc, I suggest you watch this video, and the rest of the series," is a kook. He's from a small Protestant sect whose more aggressive members routinely hate on Catholicism. I know of one who until he died recently, owned a large, excellent health food store in a southern state and used some of his store space for exhibiting posters mocking Catholic beliefs. He was well-educated as Veith is supposed to be, but not in Christianity, as he was, like this guy is, grossly ignorant about it except for his warped fanatical Christian but wacko ideas. These types have been a dime a dozen for a long time in US religious history. Veith's original contribution in his sect's historic hostility to Catholicism in this video - revealing his crazy notions - is to link Islam to Catholicism as as a continuation of ancient Babylonian paganism.

Hating on Jesuits, as you seem to, is just a thin veil for anti-Catholic bigotry, the only socially acceptable and even encouraged form of bigotry in many fundamentalist Christian and ironically, liberal social circles, these days. And I notice this as someone who is not a Catholic.

EndAllDisease, let's use Jordan Peterson's "clean up your room" quote and put it towards the country you live in which is Canada.

Let's start with your countries current leader Justin Trudeau:
Justin Trudeau - Wikipedia
-his government passes bill c-16 a bill Jordan is much against as you say SPEAK THE TRUTH: An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code - Wikipedia
-Jesuit educated at same place as his brother/father: Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf - Wikipedia
-Huge payouts to Terrorists since he took office: Three Canadians tortured in Syria receive $31-million settlement from Ottawa | Toronto Star
Ottawa to pay $10.5M to Omar Khadr, government source says
-Has media/speech ready for a recent muslim(Islamaphobic) hijab cutting incident that allegedly happened. All before the police could finish their investigation which was proven to be false.
'Islamophobic' Hijab Scissors Attack Story Championed by Justin Trudeau Revealed as Fake News

And his father and former leader of Canada Pierre Trudeau:
Pierre Trudeau - Wikipedia
- Jesuit taught/educated
-Introduced bill c-195 and it passed while he was leader as bill c-150 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968–69 - Wikipedia
decriminalizing gay marriage, contraceptives, tougher gun control, gambling, abortion... though this is stuff that many people say is pushed by the Jews!

In case you are wondering what is the connection between Jesuits/Roman Catholic/Islam, who really runs the world/Canada etc, I suggest you watch this video, and the rest of the series.


-Why does Jordan like the Jews, and not talk out about Jesuits? You say Peterson is talking the truth, then why is Peterson talking against laws Jesuits(Trudeau government) passed? But yet the Jews are in control you say?



As for Mayer Amschel Rothschild controlling the international banking cartel, why does the Rothschild coat of arms also use some of the same symbols in the Holy Roman Empire coat of arms?
Rothschild family - Wikipedia
Mayer Amschel Rothschild - Wikipedia
Were Hitler and the Nazi's hoaxed by some fake news?
Why not mention a lot of the other European banking families?
List of banking families - Wikipedia



a
-Toronto star Vatican City of University of Toronto where Peterson teaches at:
U of T is Toronto's very own Vatican City | Toronto Star

 

[Such_Saturation]

Who tells us what the mosque goers are doing? The MSM, unless you check it for yourself. There is as much diversity among mosque goers as there is among Christian church goers. Among Muslims, they range from screaming, angry Wahabi imams to whispering, prayerful Sufi-influenced Muslim communities, and everything in between. Cherry-picking the worst examples as representive of the "mainstream" and ignoring the good ones as peripheral, as is typical of the MSM and ignornant pundits, utterly distorts what's going on.

Do you not live in a European capital, by chance?

 

[Travis]

It’s obvious that you have been watching too many too many Brother Nathaniel videos and don’t seem to be very capable of doing any historical research or "scientific" thinking of your own. Just like your claim that the Jews worship Lucifer or that the International Jew is true, your current batch of BS is no better. You are just falling for the latest version of blame the Jews, just like the poor abused people in Germany did.

I’m not going to waste a lot more time on your nonsense because as before, you will most likely ignore my response and just throw out some more BS picked up on YouTube. It’s like playing whack-a-mole with dumb and dumber. I will however point out a couple more obvious errors for the sake of others unfortunate enough to be reading this.

David Irving is a court proven fraud. He sued a real historian on the holocaust for libel and lost when his holocaust denial fantasies were proven false. This is what the judge had to say about your latest historical find.

“Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist, and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism.” Irving v Penguin Books Ltd - Wikipedia

As for Hitler freeing Germany from the grasps of the western banks, this is even more laughable. Hitler was funded by those very banks, which along with your friends at Ford and other American firms helped to build up the German war machine. Your idea that Hitler was some kind of hero standing up to the International Jew is what can be more rightly called Swiss Cheese thinking. Hitler’s primary banker in the US was Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to two presidents.

https://www.amazon.com/Wall-Street-Hitler-Antony-Sutton/dp/0945001533

The truth is that WWII like WWI was a war between controlled oppositions and was actually an inquisition hiding behind a war. Protestant Germany, Orthodox Christian Russia and the Jews were the primary victims.

Given your little understanding on the subject, your speech about knowledge and belief and my lack of scientific thinking is really astounding. I guess accusing others of what you are doing is standard operating procedure for the Hitler is my Hero crowd.

Some of those Antony Sutton books can be found for free in .pdf form.

Sutton, Antony C. "Wall Street and the rise of Hitler." Clairview Books (2010)​

I had read around half of this book over a year ago, before I had switched to reading science exclusively. This is a serious book, and Antony Sutton is a serious historian. All of what he says is supported by telegraphs and documents; the financiers did leave a paper trail.

In another weird synchronicity I had intended on mentioning that this was the last history book that I'd read a few weeks ago to the very same person who'd brought it up, but hadn't simply because I couldn't remember the name of the book or the author.

But David Irving also seems like a serious historian and I think he had made a good point that the the Holocaust—most specifically the 'seven million' figure—could have been exaggerated by the Jews merely for sympathy points, with perhaps a bit of post‐war propaganda thrown in by the winning party; emphasizing the crimes of the enemy mitigates those of the 'winning' side both by comparison and through diverting attention. There's a sect of historians who believe that the 'gas chambers' were simply delousing chambers, and that the notorious concentration camps are probably better seen primarily as labor camps—not extermination camps. But these are physical structures, so the evidence still stands for anyone interested; there's been chemical analysis of the brickwork and other scientific arguments put forth against many aspects of 'Holocaust textbook history. I don't think anyone who necessarily takes a different historical line here is necessarily 'racist,' as some might accuse them of being, especially if they follow the course laid‐out by the documented evidence. Besides Antony Sutton and David Irving, the historian Michael Parenti is also serious—and he's funny!