It’s Crazy News!


It wasn’t as if I didn’t already know. I mean I did manage to make it through the 2008 election and it was so obvious that the MSM (mainstream media/corporate news ) and especially CNN was in the bag for Barack Obama and there was really no one around to call them out about that. What happened to indifferent news reporting? Probably the same thing that happened to it in 1917 and 1945.

At least in the past the press had very little to fear from being called out on their half truths, exaggerations, it’s mountains from mole hills construction, propaganda and just straight up lies. What is interesting today at the end of 2017 is how these subversive weasels react to finally being called out for what they have been doing since Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press. The truth is they have been getting away with this for a very long time while claiming some kind of nobility of thought and deed when the reality is the MSM has never been anything more than very bias entertainment.

I used to really enjoy picking up a copy of The Weekly World News. You know the grocery store rag that claims space aliens land on earth in New Orleans every Fat Tuesday. I particularly enjoyed the stories of Hillary Clinton being a Reptilian. But I can see now why the magazine was discontinued. As full of shit as the WWN was even that housewives rag couldn’t compete with the level of bullshit being pumped out by the “legitimate media.”

Honestly, I don’t think organizations like CNN, MSNBC, NBC, PBS and the rest of the lot gave a dam that some people have figured them out or that their ratings are worse than reruns of Sponge Bob Square pants. Their crazy news agenda is all that matters and as long as their are a buncha Mooks and useful idiots they are going to continue to pump out the lies even if they were exposed on the front page of The New York Times.

The truth is they still think they run the show.


European politics: leaders struggle to contain rising populism


Anne-Sylvaine Chassany in Marseille and Guy Chazan in Radebeul

Via: Financial Times (

Marseille’s far-right politician Stéphane Ravier feels robbed. After winning control of the Northern district of the French Mediterranean town in 2014 — one of the dozen victories emblematic of the National Front’s surge in local elections that year — he targeted a seat in the National Assembly. The race, in June, was his to lose: the outgoing Socialist had been convicted of embezzlement. But a 34-year-old political novice threw her hat in the ring at the last minute. Alexandra Louis, the candidate for La République en Marche, President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist movement, came second to Mr Ravier in the first round of voting. But in an echo of the presidential runoff, which saw Mr Macron defeat FN leader Marine Le Pen in May, Ms Louis won the seat with a 52 per cent share of the second round vote, amid low turnout and a campaign to stop her far-right rival. “She applied for the En Marche endorsement on the internet and secured it hours before the registration deadline,” says Mr Ravier. “My voters were gutted about losing the presidential elections. They didn’t show up.” Mr Ravier’s defeat in Marseille is typical of the impact of Mr Macron’s unlikely political rise on the FN and its blend of national-populism in France. After winning the presidency, the Europhile leader secured a large majority in parliament — triggering a sigh of relief in liberal circles across the EU. Rise of the far right charts (europopulus) Months before, nativist parties feeding on fears of multiculturalism, globalisation and European integration had seemed to be almost unstoppable. European capitals braced themselves for a turbulent electoral year in which populist parties vowing to upend the EU looked set for huge gains. Then the tide seemed to turn. First there was Mr Macron’s victory in France. And in September, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor who let in more than 1m refugees in 2015-16, most of them from Muslim countries, won the federal election. There were hopes that the populist wave may have peaked: and that France and Germany would now come together to relegitimise the European project. But academics warn that Mr Macron might be the exception, not the rule. More than 11 weeks since the Bundestag poll, Ms Merkel has still failed to form a government, and may face repeat elections. It is not the most stable of foundations on which to build an effective defence of the EU’s liberal values. Meanwhile, nativist ideas are continuing to infiltrate mainstream politics throughout Europe. Some warn that, as migratory pressures grow, the EU’s unity could come under threat. “Many have misjudged the French presidential outcome, when in reality all the facts are pointing in the other direction,” says Patrick Moreau, a Berlin-based researcher at Centre National de Recherche Scientifique, a French state research institute. He identifies the 2015 refugee crisis as the turning point. “Since then, immigration and its perceived threat to national identity have been key factors to understand shifts in European politics,” adds Mr Moreau. Michael Kretschmer, the new prime minister of Saxony from the CDU’s conservative wing © FT montage / Getty Anti-immigration sentiment is on the rise. Nearly two-thirds of EU citizens believe immigration has a negative impact on their countries, according to a survey released last month by Fondapol, a Paris-based liberal think-tank. In 2014, 52 per cent of Europeans believed immigration was “an economic burden” according to Pew Research Center. In Germany, the rate was 29 per cent — compared with 51 per cent now saying it has a “negative impact” in the Fondapol survey. After a series of Islamist terror attacks, 58 per cent of Europeans now view Islam as a threat. They are ambivalent about refugees: two-thirds of those polled say it is a duty to rescue them, but 54 per cent say their countries cannot afford to take more of them. It is no surprise therefore that in a string of elections this year, voters have veered to the right. Nativism is now a generally accepted notion in countries such as the Netherlands and Austria, says Cas Mudde, a Dutch political scientist at Georgia university in the US. “Their leaders have banged on about a ‘nativism-light’ strategy to win,” he says. The trend intensified amid the economic decline and austerity policies engendered by the eurozone debt crisis. Some wonder if it might recede now that growth has returned to the region and unemployment is falling; this is the reformist Mr Macron’s gamble. But many experts say it is here to stay. “Populism doesn’t just feed off economic insecurity, but also off cultural clashes,” says Jean Garrigues, a French historian. Rise of the far right charts (europopulus) The liberal People’s party of Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte warned immigrants during elections in March that they had to assimilate or leave the country. Sebastian Kurz, the 31-year-old wunderkind who took over the leadership of Austria’s centre-right People’s party, campaigned on halting “illegal immigration”. He is now in talks with the far-right Eurosceptic Freedom party to form a government and has also suggested a rapprochement with the Visegrad group — Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia — that opposed Brussels’ plan to relocate refugees across the bloc. This tougher line is already beginning to influence broader EU policy. Last week, the European Commission ditched its “burden-sharing” system in favour of a voluntary plan and vowed to beef up border controls. The backtracking may herald less solidarity among EU members in other areas: the Netherlands, for instance, now has a four-party rightwing coalition which has enshrined a tough stance against eurozone integration in its coalition deal. “I fear the rise of the nationalistic right, which has its roots in the migration crisis, will put the brakes on economic reforms too,” says Enrico Letta, a former Italian prime minister and head of Institut Delors, a pro-EU think-tank. “The whole notion of EU solidarity is under threat.” The National Front’s Stéphane Ravier, who lost out on a National Assembly seat to En Marche’s Alexandra Louis © FT montage / Getty Prof Mudde is among those who believe that “it all falls down on the Macron-Merkel axis to resist”. But relying too much on Ms Merkel might be risky. She, too, is under pressure from the rightwing of her party, the Christian Democratic Union, in the wake of elections in September that saw the conservative bloc fall to its worst result since 1949. Its performance was particularly bad in Saxony, a small east German state of 4m people. Local party chiefs are still shocked at the outcome in the state, a CDU stronghold since German reunification in 1990. “I have no explanation for it,” says Ulrich Reusch, the CDU’s regional chairman in Meissen. The party was beaten into second place in Saxony by the rightwing populist Alternative for Germany, a group that exploited anger over the influx of refugees. The election marked a breakthrough for the AfD. Set up only in February 2013 to protest against the Greek bailouts, it won 13 per cent of the national vote and entered the Bundestag for the first time, the first far-right party to do so in 60 years. Again, the biggest factor was immigration. Ms Merkel’s decision to keep Germany’s borders open at the height of the refugee crisis and the resulting backlash fuelled the rise of the AfD, particularly in eastern Germany. Saxony, the most successful of the east German states, with the lowest unemployment and one of the best education systems in the country, did not take in that many asylum-seekers. But that was the point, says Detlev Spangenberg, one of the crop of newly elected AfD MPs from the state. “Saxons have looked very closely at what has happened in the west of the country, and they don’t want to end up like that,” he says in his office in Radebeul. High levels of immigration have, he says, scarred Germany’s big cities, leading to “parallel societies” and “no-go” areas for police. Rise of the far right charts (europopulus) Even CDU politicians say the government misjudged the mood in the east. “People here feel ‘we brought down communism in 1989, we fought for and won our freedom and then these politicians come and say we have to open the border and let in all these refugees’,” Frank Kupfer, head of the CDU group in Saxony’s parliament, says. “There is this fear that someone is going to come and take everything away from us again.” In response to the AfD’s success, the CDU in Saxony is tacking to the right. The man named in October to succeed Stanislaw Tillich, who resigned as the state’s prime minister after the CDU’s election humiliation, is Michael Kretschmer, a conservative opposed to gay marriage and adoption rights for gay couples. He last year co-authored a pamphlet calling for a strong German “national culture”, based on the concepts of “homeland and patriotism”. Mr Kupfer says that to regain the trust of voters the CDU needs to push for speedier deportations of failed asylum-seekers and scale back “too generous” welfare payments to refugees. “We have drifted too far to the left,” he says. En Marche MP Alexandra Louis, centre, listens to a constituent in Marseilles © Franck Bessiere/FT The CDU leadership in Berlin has also got the message. In October it finally acceded to a demand from its more conservative sister party, the Bavarian Christian Social Union, that Germany should not let in more than 200,000 refugees a year, except in the case of humanitarian emergencies, and should keep them in special transit zones from which they can be swiftly deported if their asylum requests are rejected. The CDU’s French sister party, Les Républicains, is drawing similar conclusions after the stinging defeat of François Fillon, its scandal-stricken presidential nominee. Laurent Wauquiez, its new leader, has rejected any alliance with the FN, but has vowed to “bring back the disappointed voters who voted for the FN”. The 42-year-old former EU affairs minister intends to do so via a dose of identity politics and returning to the “true values of the right”. He is advocating measures including an end to medical health insurance for undocumented migrants. “France should not adapt to foreigners. Foreigners must adapt to France,” he has said at party meetings. Pressure is mounting on Mr Macron, whose popularity has slipped from two-thirds to about 50 per cent since his election, and his cohort of new parliamentarians. They appear increasingly isolated in Europe in their efforts to hold the centre by betting that economic reforms will help address anxiety over immigration, identity and security. Rise of the far right charts (europopulus) Back in Marseille, Ms Louis, a labour relations lawyer, listens to André Pinatel, a resident of Château-Gombert, one of the 100 former villages that are now part of the city. Robberies have increased in this wealthier part of town and Mr Pinatel suspects petty criminals from the nearby Clos La Rose estate, one of the deprived immigrant enclaves that make the city and its 1m residents a mosaic of distinct communities. It is no secret in Marseille that the police are reluctant to intervene in some estates, tightly guarded by drug dealers. Ms Louis tells the retiree she is pushing for the constituency to be one of the first to experiment with a new local police force. But the measure will not be just for Château-Gombert, she says. The estates must feel safe, too: “There are troubled neighbourhoods, it’s true. Clearly, in my constituency, there are lawless zones, I have no problem admitting it, but security should be for everyone.” Recommended Tusk reignites EU refugee row with call to end quotas Spectre of immigration sparks rightward turn in Italy FT Big Read: Europe’s integration project Ms Louis believes En Marche will uproot the FN by dispelling false ideas about immigration and Islam rather than adopting their rhetoric, “improving the people’s daily lives, in areas such as housing, jobs, transport”, and better integrating the second or third generations of immigrants. Prof Mudde reckons it is the best strategy: “The more you talk about immigration and Islam, the more important the issues become,” he says. But he doubts this will be enough to counter nativism. “Macron’s recipe can hardly be exported,” he says. Germany and other countries in northern Europe have already carried out similar reforms, he says, and are doing better economically than France, yet they still have experienced a rise in populism. “Nativism is progressing in countries where there’s low unemployment,” he says. In Marseille, Frédéric Pinatel, Andre’s son who also attended the meeting with Ms Louis, says the FN ideas are now well established. “You know why people vote for the FN here? It’s because they have had enough of immigration,” he says. “You have five or six kids from the estates scouting the area. Then cars are dismantled, there are robberies. People connect the dots.” Mr Ravier, the FN politician who is a member of the Senate, France’s upper house, believes Ms Louis is missing the point: “Even if the results of the legislative elections suggest otherwise, people are worried about immigration, insecurity, multiculturalism,” he insists. “People want to feel French in France, and Marseillais in Marseille”. Additional reporting by Mehreen Khan in Amsterdam and Ralph Atkins in Zurich

Time to Kick the Kicks


Did you know kids were spending $550 for a pair of sneakers? That is insane. Why because some basketball player put his name on them? It isn’t like someone glued some flubber on the soles and suddenly the wearer is bouncing 10 feet in the air or something. I tell you what they better have flubber glued to the bottom of those dam shoes before I spend $550 dollar on a pair.

I own 2 pairs of Michael Jordan sneakers. I wasn’t stupid enough to buy them at the mall I bought them at Ross for $50 a pair. Apparently most of the guys who wear these things have feet the size of shovels so for once my average sized feet came in handy. Black men have actually stopped me in the store to talk about my shoes. I didn’t have a clue what they were talking about but they were taking like those darn things were a 67 Mustang or something. Hello they are sneakers.

They aren’t even special sneakers either. To be fair they are a little bit better than the average sneaker and certainly better than the Converse canvas sneaker I could have gotten for the same amount of money but hey let’s be honest Converse are way overpriced.

The problem with this foot or shoe worship of whatever the hell it is, is that people are getting killed over footwear. I can think of a lot of reasons to kill someone but unless it is post apocalypse footwear isn’t one of them. No sneaker is worth a life not even Michael Jordan’s sneakers.

I think it is time that we as Americans stepped up and said no more. Stop buying over priced sneakers for whatever status you think accompanies them. You might be putting you life on the line just over the brand of tennis shoe you’re wearing. It is time for the sneaker revolution. How about a nice pair of Payless Airwalks like these for $15 a pair?


No other sneaker style has ever been as cool as this style and for the price of a single pair of Michael Jordans you can get enough of these to last a lifetime. The best part is, unlike the Jordans that pretty much turn into garbage at the slightest hint of wear, these sneakers actually look better with age. And you can put them in the clothes washer to clean them.

But whether you op for the el cheapo version like I have or kick out $50 for something else this hundreds of dollars B.S. for a pair of sneakers has got to stop. It’s arrogant and obnoxious. Let’s change the sneaker trend to practical instead of extravagant and maybe in the process we can save some lives and get some of the kids focused on something that will help them in life instead of wasting their time and money on overpriced sneakers.

Besides let’s be honest. Only the people who wear those dam things know what they cost the rest of the people think they look like clown shoes.


I Hate Stupid People


Probably one of the things that grins my gears the most is stupid people. As a lifetime student of human psychology as an element of my professional choices, I have often found myself struggling to understand why so many people are just plain stupid and worse why the majority of the people who are stupid are stupid by choice. They actually make to lifestyle choice to be stupid.

Running 2 pro Trump pages I hear a lot of stupid, poorly thought out comments all the time. But what really makes me want to pull my hair out is when someone comments on something they have not read or watched. Sometimes you can tell by their comments and sometimes you can tell from the amount of time it took between the posting and their comment. This was a choice to be stupid. Do these people have crystal balls? Was there something in the title that gave the entire post away? And if they didn’t read or watch, what is their opinion really worth? Blathering from some idiot and nothing more.

How about all of those leftist protestors. Most of them or at least a large percentage of them are supposed to be college students right? Doing research is a part of their every day lives much like math. Yet they have chosen to be stupid. Can someone please tell me the last time any protest in the U.S. ever resulted in anything positive? And yet no matter how many times their protests result in a bag of nothing burgers they are right back out in the streets with their signs and uncouth behavior. Isn’t the definition of stupidity repeating the same action and expecting a different result?

The truth is most people spend a significant portion of their own lives dumbing themselves down. Someone please explain the reasoning in spending several hours of your weekly free time on watching someone else do something. Shouldn’t you be spending that time doing something yourself? Instead of watching someone else do something you could be learning a new trade/profession, building a birdhouse, playing sports at a park, helping the less fortunate ….. and a ton of other activities that can make you smarter and stronger. Instead many Americans would rather sit in a worn out old chair with a bag of chips and a beer and their bookie on the line. One has to wonder if that last part is even worse than the first part as if you couldn’t find something better to do with your money.

See we don’t have to worry about the government implanting stuff under our skin, or brainwashing us through the TV or poisoning us with Monsanto foods or any of the things many conspiracy theorists think are making us stupid. An incredibly large percentage of the populace is going out of its way to stay as stupid as they possibly can because life is hard. Life is confusing. There is too much to know and too much responsibility. There are others who can deal with life let them do it.

Somehow Americans have gotten the lazy bug. Work sucks, family sucks, community sucks, nationalism sucks, it all sucks. Because it all sucks we’ve just been wasting away in a sea of helplessness. Nothing a few beers and a dube won’t cure.

Now I really wouldn’t care all that much about people choosing to be stupid if it didn’t affect me so adversely. It isn’t just the foolish political stances, economic opinions, etc but it is trying to have a decent conversation with someone who wastes much of their free time on sports or shopping. As impressed as I am with your ability to memorize the names of players on several teams and perhaps even have memorized a lot more about those players than just their names, these conversations are as much a waste of my valuable time as the 10+ hours a week you spend on watching instead of doing.

Stupid people are also very much a disease on the nations psyche. People who stupidly waste their time encourage others to waste their time as well. They form support groups to encourage and promote time wasting. They gamble on time wasting.

Who needs Monsanto? Who needs the NSA, CIA, MSM, or FBI? At the rate stupid people are recruiting in a couple of generations well be scraping our knuckles on the sidewalk as we meander down the street.

Stay stupid my friends.

WWII: Oh Crap not Again

child of mine

One really can’t tell the story of the second world war without first telling the story about its main player Adolf Hitler. As with the previous narrative my intent is to tell the story in the simplest terms possible.

Adolf Hitler led a better than average childhood. Yes his father beat him but most fathers beat their children back then. He loved his Church and he loved the arts and like so many a teen he had lofty dreams of a Bohemian lifestyle.

Once war broke out his duty was clear even though he was still a teenager.  He often complained that his fellow soldiers were slackers and not doing their part. He even got into a couple of fistfights will senior officers he viewed as slacking in their duties. Hitler himself was a message runner. The very last job you’d want in the army. Somehow he managed to survive that and was awarded some of the German military’s highest honors.

Adolf Hitler was a decorated war vet.

Like many vets things didn’t go so well for him after the war. When Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, Germany was a poverty stricken land that was saturated in debauchery and starvation. It is said that it took a wheelbarrow of German Deutschmarks to buy one loaf of bread. And no one, no one gave a dam about the German people…….


It didn’t take long for many Germans to realize what had happened to them after WWI. Many Germans spoke about how the bankers stabbed their own country in the back and of course the bankers were all Jews. The Jews had conspired against Germany and as a result Germans by the tens of thousands were dying in the streets. Prostitution everywhere. The nation stripped of its land and resources. And then there was the French. Somehow, someday they would have to pay for their treachery. To make matters worse the same Jews who stabbed Germany in the back also dominated their media and now politics. The Jews had essentially taken over Germany and England was in the motion of making good on the Balfour Declaration.

I’m not sure that after all this the Germans wouldn’t have been justified to take every Jew within their boarder and burn them at the stake when the Germans finally got control of their own country again. If someone did that to my country ….. I might feel a little put out.

Hitler burned the Reichstag  and the Jews got sent packing and Hitler commenced with rebuilding his very broken nation. Within 6 years he turned a destroyed nation into the biggest economic powerhouse in the world and while the rest of Western Europe and the United States were suffering through a manufactured depression Germany, free of those markets was unscathed.

Hitler was guilty of 2 crimes that were to doom him and Germany. Even Winston Churchill admitted that it was Germany’s strength and her bowing out of the financial markets. Few are likely to remember Secretary of State James Baker anymore but he also said in an interview with a German newspaper that it was an economic war. But that is just the first and one might argue only the secondary crime that Hitler committed.

You have to understand the mindset that comes with the belief in the Talmud and Khazar’s were absolute believers in the Talmud. According to the Talmud non Jews are at best pets. One step above farm animal. How dare the livestock throw us out and think they can rule themselves. And when you control the entertainment and news media and the banking industry in all of western civilization, you can exact revenge. They did of course.

Jews did everything they could to get the people they financed in the last war to go to war with Germany again because Germany belonged to them and they were taking it back. Trust me I have lived and worked around Jews my entire life I know exactly how they think. They do think different. That is why they own your country.

In 1933 and again in 1939 World Jewry declared war on Germany. Jews were also the communists who murdered the Czar and his entire family and were trying to spread communism in Germany. Adolf didn’t really hate the Jews, he didn’t hold them all accountable, but he did hate communism and communists just happened to be Jews.

Germany invaded Poland because the Polish people were abusing the native German citizens and no one was doing anything to stop it. Also Poland was built out of what had been Germany up until just a few years before which caused Germany to be split as a nation without a road between the 2 Germany’s and Poland was being as difficult as it could about the whole affair. Additionally Poland wanted to annex half of what was left of Germany and tried to get France to join them in an invasion of Germany. Finally, as if that wasn’t enough Polish agitators started passing around maps showing Poland considerably bigger having consumed half of Germany.

I’m not sure that after all this the Germans wouldn’t have been justified to take every Pollack out into the street and shoot them like a dog. If that happened to my country I …….. might feel a bit put out.

England and France jumped at the chance to ensure “balance of power” and immediately declared war on Germany. Surprise France and England were once again no match for Germany. Like his predecessor the Kaiser, Hitler again proved to be too kind and allowed the British to escape instead of vanquishing them when he invaded France. They wanted war they got it.

England and France didn’t bother Hitler half as much as Communist Russia did. They had developed the most advanced tank of its day the T-34 which was basically the best parts of every other tank in the world. He was right about the Russians. They were in fact posed to attack Western Europe.  Stalin’s plan was to let Western Europe exhaust itself in war and then roll in and conquer the continent and make it communist. It wasn’t Hitler that wanted to conquer the world it was Stalin.

Hitlers timing could not have been better in fact it was too good. The Russian army was in fact stacked up on their boarders preparing for a western assault but they just weren’t prepared good enough. The only part of their army that was on the front was their offensive army and without the defense to back them up even near impenetrable armor wasn’t going to win the day. No one at German high command expected German troops to just run over the Russians but that is exactly what they did. The army outpaced the backup and that was the end of that. Sometimes you have to stop winning.

On the other side of the pond FDR wanted in on the war badly. The problem was the people vehemently demanded that the government sit this one out. Some Americans had also figured out what the Jews had done to the Germans and what their own countries role was in the destruction of Germany and probably figured France and England had it coming. Those Russians murdering the Czars family maybe had it coming too.  Nonetheless Americas government was supplying arms and funds to both England and Communist Russia.

It is highly probable that to enlist FDR into entering another war he was convince that Germany posed an economic threat to the world by bowing out of the investment markets (his success was proof of that) as well as the institutions that were financing America. Additionally everything FDR tried to make the Great Depression go away failed miserably and more often than not made things worse. Nothing like a good war to ensure his reelection and reset the economic clock.


FDR got his war by poking one of Germany’s allies, the Japanese, until they had enough and poked back. It was the only hand they had to play. A Hail Mary. Once again Germany came to the aide of an ally. There is evidence that suggests that FDR knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor, new what day it would happen, and did nothing to stop it so that he had an excuse to declare war on Japan and get into the European theater.

Now for the elephant in the room the Holocaust.

But before we get to the elephant let’s visit Mr. Hitler once more. What kind of man was he anyway? We have established that his father beat his ass, he was a decorated Vet, and he had dreams of being an artist or maybe even a writer.

There are some other tells about Adolf’s personality. Animals were very attracted to him. There are many pictures of the Chancellor with wild animals gently feeding them and pictures of him with his dogs. Hitler was in fact a vegetarian and enacted the first animal protection laws in the west. He was also very good with children who seemed to adore him. Still pictures from that era often look kinda scary but the home movies of him with children are delightful. One in particular  in which a young lady maybe 5 or six years old is bossing him around and dragging him by the hand. Not exactly the image of a monster.

There is no scientific evidence or any other evidence that even CSI could find that supports the story of 6 million Jews being exterminated in German detainment facilities. In fact the scientific evidence points to the opposite. There is plenty of testimony from prisoners at Auschwitz and other such camps that indicated that the Germans treated these prisoners unusually well. Doctors, hospitals, daycare centers, cheap beer, grand pianos, guards socializing with prisoners, swimming pools.

According to the International Red Cross (they aren’t Nazis fyi) in the neighborhood of 250,000 died in detainment camps. The vast majority of these deaths were due to the disease Typhus which was carried by lice and fleas primarily and killed millions. Emaciation is one of the symptoms of Typhus which is why those who died from the disease look like they have been starved to death.

So why would people lie about exterminations? Because of the Typhus threat prisoners often had all their body hair shaved off and that hair was placed into bags to be burned. Have you ever smelled burning hair? How about a ton of burning hair. And then there is the whole end of the war starving to death because the allies bombed all the supply roots which might make you a bit punchy and you might even start seeing things (dementia is also a symptom of Typhus). The best reason of all is because if you kept playing along you and your children would be getting life long pensions from the Germans. There are plenty of reasons to lie knowingly or not.

I believe that if you do some serious research and look for the situation from both sides you will come to a similar conclusion. You should want to know the difference between what is true and what is not.


WWI: The Great War (uncensored)


After more than a year and a half of intensive research I have come to the conclusion that very little of what I was taught in school about the great wars was actually true. It isn’t simply that what they are teaching is falsehoods, but most important and disturbing is that there has been a concerted effort to keep information which contradicts the official narrative from existing. Much of the information I used and collected during my research as been scrubbed from the net by organizations like Google, Yahoo, Facebook, and YouTube. One can assuming they are being pressured  by Jewish groups like the A.D.L. who have been profiting from the false narrative for decades.

The following is part one of my narrative. How I see these events after some grueling research and more sleepless nights than I care to remember stressing out about what I had learned and trying to absorb and wrap my arms around it. I’ll be telling my narrative in laymen’s terms as much as possible and though it is a very complex story I’m going to be describing it as simple as I can.

Way back before the first world war Europe was a very dangerous place. Of course it could be argued that it always has been with few respites. For those of you who know a bit about history England and France were the superpowers of their day and had been for a very long time. Germany and especially Austria were much larger countries than they are today and Germany was pledged to defend Austria. Austria acted pretty much like a bratty younger brother whose older brother was bad bad Leroy Brown. You know the kind who tries to start crap all the time only to end up hiding behind his older brother? Yeah that was Austria so when Austria got itself into trouble big brother Germany came to her rescue again.

England and France weren’t stupid. They had watched the kingdom of Germany get strong and powerful and though Germany was peaceful to them these 2 superpowers saw Germany as a threat. You have probably heard some B.S. about maintaining a “balance” of power. This was the excuse for France and England to go to war with Germany, while Germany was already engaged in a war. Crush Germany and England and France remained to top dogs on the worlds stage.

The problem was England and France grossly underestimated Germanys resolve and it wasn’t long before Germany had won WWI on both fronts. The Tsar and his family had been killed by the Jewish Communists, the French were running away as fast as they could, and England stood alone and was getting soundly thrashed. There was no hope for England and yet the King of Germany Kaiser Wilhelm offered to cease all hostilities and return everything to the way it was prior to the war. In the end it was the kindness of the King of Germany which did him and his country in.


While the English were considering the Kaisers proposal they were approached by some Jewish bankers many of whom were German Jewish bankers. See a couple of decades before the first world war a bunch of well to do Khazar Jews got together and formed the first Jewish congress with one goal in mind, to have Palestine. They offered the British money to continue their war effort and guaranteed they could get America into the war. Thus the Balfour Declaration was written even though at the time England was not in possession of the land the Khazar Jews wanted.

So how could these Jews make such promises? Jews of the era ran most of the banks in Europe and America just like now. They had gotten very wealthy from the North Atlantic slave trade and over those many years and built a financial empire from a foundation of slavery. And just like today Jews ran the entertainment and news media. They could print anything they wanted and people would believe it because they were the only game in town.

The method the Jews used to get America into WWI was something we now call a false flag. The British passenger ship Lusitania was filled with munitions at Jewish controlled docks in America violating international law and sent that ship through one of the most dangerous areas of the sea during the war without a military escort. They also let it be known that they were using the ship to transfer illegal arms to the British. The Lusitania was hit by a single torpedo which normally wouldn’t have sunk a ship of that size but the torpedo hit the munitions stockpile which blew the ship in half killing 150 Americas. Think about that for a minute, America commits itself to a near global war over the death of 150 people. But of course the Jews controlled the story so it was made into the biggest slaughter in the history of mankind…..oh god the babies.

Even with an unlimited supply of money and the help of the Americans England and France could not beat Germany. England, France and America could not beat Germany period. At no time during WWI did any allied forces ever cross onto German soil.

What condemned the Germans was they weren’t as heartless and cruel as their enemies were. Germanys King didn’t like war. He took it personal. After 6 years of trying to put an end to the war Will had had enough. Too many people had died already and in the most horrible ways possible and he wanted that to end. In his mind regardless of the cost that had to be paid that cost was far better than the continued nonsense that wasn’t going anywhere. So Kaiser Wilhelm brokered a deal for peace in which he abdicated his throne and a democratic government would be set up ending the German monarchy.

In good will Wilhelm abdicated his throne as promised and left his beloved Germany for peaces sake. Unfortunately when dealing with the French and the English one can never depend on them to honor their agreements. When the German delegation arrived in France to sign the agreement the French and the English changed the agreement stripping Germany of its lands and its resources and plunging the nation into the kind of poverty you couldn’t imagine in your wildest nightmares. To add insult to injury the Jewish arts population descended upon Germans capital Berlin turning it into the 20th century’s version of Sodom and Gomorrah. Prostitution, homosexuality, cross-dressing, pedophilia and bestiality all became common and the presses were busy around the clock kicking out porn (those books the German eventually burned). Thousands died in the streets.

This is how World War One ended for the Germans. Betrayed by their own countrymen. Betrayed by fellow Europeans they had peaceful agreements with. Betrayed by the world that look onto the injustice the German people were suffering from with indifference.

Balance of power restored and Germany destroyed. Or was it?

Next time: My narrative about World War Two.

American Indian/Western Europeans: Common Stupidity


What would you do if you had a small farm and a few people started camping on one far corner of it? Those of you who claim that you would allow them to stay for as long as they like are a very special kind of person the world sees as prey. See eventually, and bear in mind the law is on their side, those people living in those tents might assert some kinda legal right on your land, they may think they have a right to some of your stuff and maybe some of your crops. They may even think they have some kinda squatters rights on your land and there’s always a chance that you could actually lose your land to them permanently and then get stuck with them for neighbors.

The person who can properly assess the threat will grab his shotgun, pistol and his working dog and chase squatters from his land without hesitation. He certainly isn’t going to be inviting them to squat.

Europe is like the farmer who invites the squatters to stay for as long as they like.

Now my story about the farmer is completely made up. It is little more than a metaphor that attempts to explain what is wrong with an open boarders policy. But there is a real example of why open boarders is an insane policy that Europeans should have learned from since they were the invaders.

The American Indians lost everything because they failed to properly assess the threat to them early on. They were completely mesmerized by their invaders and well, there was plenty of room. Surely the Indians had no idea how many pale faces were going to show up. Perhaps they couldn’t even imagine that many people being on the planet.

Had the American Indians correctly assessed the treat they were facing in 1492 every European who ever tried to get off a boat would have been killed. The ones who managed to sneak in would be raided, people taken captive, and the Europeans technology would have been stolen thus evening out the playing field some before too many could anchor themselves to the Indians land.

By the time the American Indians realized the threat they faced it was much too late. They lost everything because they did not realize that letting people live on your land meant that pretty soon it wasn’t going to be your land anymore it would belong to someone else.

Western Europe is following in the footsteps of the American Indian. Europeans are standing on their shores waving come hither to their own demise. Let their example be a warning to others. Wait. What good would that do? There is already such an example and clearly few have learned from it. Certainly not the Europeans.