Archive for August 2015

Was Hitler REALLY the demon we are taught he was?

Like all of us in the West, I was brought up on a full diet of the monster that Hitler was.

But like so many things I have questioned about the picture of the world we are given, I had begun to have my doubts.

Firstly, I recognised that the picture we are given is constructed by those who have effectively run our world and present us with a version of events and social mores that suit their purposes.

Then I came across two separate sources who reported that those who lived and worked with Hitler held him in high regard. The first was contained in the reports by Harry Cooper, from his research in Argentina where Hitler lived out his life, living in a grand house reportedly built for him by Daimler Benz. There is also a British researcher who spent some 10 years speaking with senior WWII German officials and others and reported a great deal of respect for Hitler. (If anyone knows of this, please get back to me as I can’t locate it. Someone other than David Irving.)

And something has never added up for me – something I have commented on before – who funded Hitler? How did he get Germany from a devastated country with no money, massive unemployment and horrific war reparations imposed by the Zionists at Versailles (with the terms drafted by the Dulles brothers) and turn it into the powerhouse it became? I had always figured that the Zionist bankers must have funded him behind the scenes.

It has also been clear to me that the global Zionists have controlled the media since early in the 20th century at least (not owned it all, but used the threatened withdrawal of advertising to get their way when they did not), including Hollywood (which they created), so I understood the propaganda machine that painted the picture we see in the West.

I also understood that the Rothschilds had controlled Britain’s finances since the Battle of Waterloo and the United States since at least 1913 and perhaps a long time before that, I have shared clear evidence that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was  Zionist revolution, and hence ALL of the so-called Allies were serving the global Zionist agenda during WWII. Now, you might find your beliefs challenged by this understanding, but it makes it no less true and is simply a result of what you believe to be true.

So it was in this place that I began to watch The Greatest Story Never Told.

And some pieces began to fall into place.

Hitler banned usury early on. When I saw this, I began to wonder how he’d funded the transformation of Germany, since the Zionist bankers rely on usury for their power over the world. So I went looking and found this:
Hitler and the National Socialists, who came to power in 1933, thwarted the international banking cartel by issuing their own money. In this they took their cue from Abraham Lincoln, who funded the American Civil War with government-issued paper money called “Greenbacks.” Hitler began his national credit program by devising a plan of public works. Projects earmarked for funding included flood control, repair of public buildings and private residences, and construction of new buildings, roads, bridges, canals, and port facilities. The projected cost of the various programs was fixed at one billion units of the national currency. One billion non-inflationary bills of exchange, called Labor Treasury Certificates, were then issued against this cost. Millions of people were put to work on these projects, and the workers were paid with the Treasury Certificates. This government-issued money wasn’t backed by gold, but it was backed by something of real value. It was essentially a receipt for labor and materials delivered to the government. Hitler said, “for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done or goods produced.” The workers then spent the Certificates on other goods and services, creating more jobs for more people.

Within two years, the unemployment problem had been solved and the country was back on its feet. It had a solid, stable currency, no debt, and no inflation, at a time when millions of people in the United States and other Western countries were still out of work and living on welfare. Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, although it was denied foreign credit and was faced with an economic boycott abroad. It did this by using a barter system: equipment and commodities were exchanged directly with other countries, circumventing the international banks. This system of direct exchange occurred without debt and without trade deficits. Germany’s economic experiment, like Lincoln’s, was short-lived; but it left some lasting monuments to its success, including the famous Autobahn, the world’s first extensive superhighway.1
It also included this Hitler quote:
“We were not foolish enough to try to make a currency [backed by] gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done or goods produced. . . .we laugh at the time our national financiers held the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank.”
End of quotes.
No wonder the Zionist bankers wanted to both destroy and discredit him. Their track record is clear – those who deny their right to print the money for a country and charge interest for it will be destroyed. No quarter will be given. The financial history of the US, for example, demonstrates it admirably. They know that any country that chooses to print their own money will transform their financial state dramatically and quickly, just as Germany did under Hitler. And no wonder the Germans loved him.

We hear Hitler was against the Jews, yet there were some 150,000 Jews in the German armed forces, many with high rank and a number who were awarded high honours. Moreover, there was the 1933 Transfer Agreement with the Zionists, which saw Jewish people allowed to move to Palestine from Germany, along with their assets, and this continued until around 1940. Scarcely consistent with him trying to kill them all.

This documentary not only exposes some of the Holocaust lies, it also reveals the nature and scale of the atrocities of all of the so-called allied forces during and after WWII – which are hidden us – and the fear of the Bolsheviks that was so widespread in Eastern Europe and in Germany, with good reason as this documentary explains.

It also revealed how the Germans were reacting to the corruption of morals in Germany and the Jewish takeover of films and theatre, along with producing the first pornographic films in the early part of the 20th century. This parallels EXACTLY what Henry Ford had to say about their role in the United States. Anyone spot a plan?

This and what happened in the two world wars both have their genesis in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. For example:

From Protocol No. 1:

Behold the alcoholized animals, bemused with drink, the right to an immoderate use of which comes along with freedom. It is not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the goyim are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents—by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the goyim. In the number of these last I count also the so-called “society ladies,” voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury.

And Protocol No. 7:

The intensification of armaments, the increase of police forces—are all essential for the completion of the aforementioned plans. What we have to get at is that there should be in all the States of the world, besides ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers.

Throughout all Europe, and by means of relations with Europe, in other continents also, we must create ferments, discords and hostility. Therein we gain a double advantage. In the first place we keep in check all countries, for they well know that we have the power whenever we like to create disorders or to restore order. All these countries are accustomed to see in us an indispensable force of coercion. In the second place, by our intrigues we shall tangle up all the threads which we have stretched into the cabinets of all States by means of the political, by economic treaties, or loan obligations. In order to succeed in this we must use great cunning and penetration during negotiations and agreements, but, as regards what is called the “official language,” we shall keep to the opposite tactics and assume the mask of honesty and compliancy. In this way the peoples and governments of the goyim, whom we have taught to look only at the outside whatever we present to their notice, will still continue to accept us as the benefactors and saviours of the human race.

We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition by war with the neighbours of that country which dares to oppose us: but if these neighbours should also venture to stand collectively together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal war.

The principal factor of success in the political is the secrecy of its undertakings: the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat.

We must compel the governments of the goyim to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called “Great Power”—the Press, which, with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands.

In a word, to sum up our system of keeping the governments of the goyim in Europe in check, we shall show our strength to one of them by terrorist attempts and to all, if we allow the possibility of a general rising against us, we shall respond with the guns of America or China or Japan.

End of quotes.

These examples are clear enough and appear to have taken this final form in the late 19th century. Now, there are those who argue the Protocols are false. I am not going to argue this here, other than to say that when it takes 22 pages to print out the Wikipedia entry aimed at refuting them, you know it is a Zionist hot button that they want to discredit if not destroy – and go way over the top in their attempt. I will present the case on their truth when I have time.

As I’ve said before, until you recognise the lens through which we view the events of the world, you cannot begin to truly understand it.

I commend The Greatest Story Never Told to you. I expect you will learn a great deal, as I did.

One final note: I am not seeking to argue Hitler was a saint. What I am saying is that we are presented with a lens of lies constructed by the Zionists through which to view him, and we need to recognise this and seek out a more accurate perspective.

Why do people think computers will be alive? by Jon Rappoport

I reproduce Jon’s article in full:

“Because, supposedly, one digital processing unit will eventually be able to manipulate zillions of pieces of information at a faster rate than all the human brains on the planet taken together…the result will be…what? And if that digital unit is sitting in The Cloud and every human’s brain is hooked up to it, the result will be…what? A person will be able to master French in five minutes? How does that work? Information can be injected like a drug and produce instant learning? Automatically? Perhaps this is a fantasy hatched at Disney World. Two machines can rapidly exchange data and programmed methods of analysis, but it so happens that humans are not machines, even if they believe they are.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

How do you think a super-brain would be constructed? I’m talking about the technocrats’ dream to build a computer that would rival and surpass the human brain, in terms of “reliable data.” And don’t forget, the plan is to somehow connect brains directly to the super-computer, so data can be downloaded into humans.

And this computer would, technocrats believe, come alive.

Why?

Because a) it can store far more information than the human brain; b) it can choose how to utilize that information to solve problems; c) it can solve those problems at lightning speed; and d) it can work on millions of problems at the same time.

Basically, technocrats believe a super-computer will be alive because it can process enormous amounts of data—as if there is a threshold beyond which the sheer volume of processing triggers an event…birth. What was merely a machine is now something More.

I’ve boiled down the above statement, in order to remove mystical fluff.

The statement looks strange, quite strange.

By way of analogy, if you could outfit a Porsche so it can run at 400mph, without need of a driver; and also view detailed traffic patterns within a radius of a hundred miles, adjusting its trajectory to minute changes; also report weather, stock market moves, headlines, and the moment-to-moment output of home surveillance sensors; also cook soup; acquire hostile targets and fire beam weapons to eliminate them; shop remotely at any of 50,000 stores; interview and pitch prospective customers to win contracts; deliver a haircut, shave, and minor surgery; write your autobiography in 5000 volumes; track ice flows at the North Pole; day-trade stocks and commodities; report the second-to-second movements and conversations of up to 100,000 people; record every event taking place on a million other planets…and do all this simultaneously… at some point the Porsche will cross over and become alive.

I’m afraid not.

It will still be a machine.

For technocrats, “information processing” is basically a religious undertaking. As if it were a form of prayer, a blessing conferred, a ritual connecting the computer to the innards of the universe.

There is no level of complexity beyond which life suddenly occurs. Complexity, in and of itself, does not initiate life.

There is no number of “correct answers” which triggers life.

At bottom, technocracy assumes quite juvenile concepts: accumulation of data automatically imparts learning; the power of information-processing bypasses the problem of false, authority-based data; enough learning eliminates the need for imagination.

Technocrats assume that mysteries about how humans learn can be solved by claiming: “well, the brain is doing something we’ll eventually understand. It’s all happening in the brain because…what else is there?”

There is the individual.

You.

If you are your brain, an ant is a spaceship pilot.

Technocrats are making the brain into a sacred totem, a magic gizmo.

If you’re aware you have a brain, who is being aware? You’re just an artefact fed illusions about self by your brain? You aren’t there at all?

I’m an illusion writing illusions to the illusion called you?

Now, we’re getting to the core of the matter. A great many channels of propaganda, for obvious reasons, are aimed at the eradication of the concept of the individual, of self. It suits the collectivist model.

The assertion that the brain is “all there is” is a piece of political puppetry. It leads directly into the effort to “enhance” (alter, re-program, control) the brain.

The brain is not conscious.

A computer is not conscious.

A brain-computer interface is not conscious.

There is no function or system that equals consciousness.

Individual consciousness comes before any function or system.

The individual is not defined as the passive recipient of signals from the brain. The individual is intensely creative, although for various reasons he can bury that capacity to the point where he will deny he has it.

When the individual expresses his imagination and creative power intensely enough, he surpasses the habitual and passive acceptance of things as they are. And in doing so, his consciousness assumes a different level, and he sees life from a far different perspective. All this does not emanate from the brain.

Theoretically, if one had a super-computer of sufficient power, he could program it to spit out all the paintings in all the museums in the world, and all the music ever composed, and all the poems and novels and plays ever written, plus billions of new paintings and songs and poems. But…

So what?

Does that mean that human imagination is just an illusion?

If a carpenter makes a cabinet, and a computer running a machine produces the same cabinet, does that mean the carpenter is useless, and has gained nothing from his endeavor? Of course not.

Imagination is the source of reality, including the creation of computers.

Imagination is also the means by which an individual can attain a state in which he truly understands that the universe of “rigid natural laws” is actually an infinitely malleable stage play.

Technocrats want to be machines. They aren’t, but they keep trying.

If necessary, let them have their own island, where they can fiddle and diddle to their hearts’ content, without imposing their machinery on the rest of us. Call it an experiment. We run it. We watch what happens to them as they expend titanic effort to be brains and computers. We’ll call the experiment: “A Self-Selecting Cohort of Humans Who Think They’re Machines Attempt to Attain a Lowest-Common-Denominator Default Setting As If It Were Enlightenment.”

In my search for a different approach to the power of individual consciousness, I came upon the history of early Tibet, before the society hardened into a theocracy.

Several sources were particularly helpful. The work of author John Blofeld (The Tantric Mysticism of Tibet), the writings of the intrepid explorer, Alexandra David-Neel, and a quite unconventional healer, Richard Jenkins, with whom I worked in the early 1960s in New York.

Jenkins once wrote to me:

“There are people who want to tell us what consciousness should perceive. They’re blind to the electric, alive, and free nature of awareness. They’re wrapped up in content and addicted to it. Their biggest mistake is omitting the creative nature of human beings…”

That creative nature was the intense focus of the early Tibetans.

These practitioners, teachers, and students, some 1500 years ago, realized that most people viewed consciousness as an accumulator of knowledge. A searching tool, or a receiving apparatus.

Instead, the Tibetans embarked on a far more adventurous course.

Their many images (e.g., mandalas) weren’t meant as depictions of what finally exists in higher realms. Those realms were just as provisional and changeable as the physical world. You might call the multiple locales and dimensions representations of “what humans in certain Asian cultures would expect to encounter in their journeys of spirit.”

In other words, the Tibetans consciously treated their pantheons of gods and semi-gods as convincing illusions.

Several of their key exercises and techniques were all about having students mentally create these illusions in voluminous and meticulous detail. That was difficult enough, to be sure. Far more difficult was the next aspect of their practice: get rid of these creations.

Put them there; destroy them.

The Tibetans were committed to living life on the level of imagination, with all that implied.

And what does it imply?

A new psychology. A psychology of unlimited possibility:

A person’s past, his history, his problems, his relationships are all framed against the wider context of what he can imagine and then invent, create, in the world.

Living through and by imagination long enough, the individual discovers that his prior relationships are transformed. They no longer set themselves up as questions or problems.

He is operating from a platform that affords an utterly different, original, and unexpected outcome.

A psychology of possibility not only looks forward to the future, it has a reason to do so. Bringing electricity back into life depends, initially, on viewing possibilities in the space of one’s own imagination.

It may strike you at this point that our current civilization is bent on lowering possibilities; and that is true. That is the psychology of the psyop.

There is a good reason for this programming, as well as the staging of events that seem to give the programming validity. Those who aim to control the destiny of humankind want to shrink the “size of humans.” That is their intent.

A psychology of possibility would reverse that trend and expose it.

To the casual observer, the weight of this civilization and all its accoutrement seems enormous. But the creative potential of the individual outstrips that structure by light years.

How does the individual realize that fact? What is the spark that ignites his understanding? It all begins in imagination, which is the home of possibility.

Against this background, the computer is a drop in the ocean.

Jon Rappoport

WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Follow Me
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join lots of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com