Theory On Meaning Of "Iron Eagle" In Q Posts
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (67)
sorted by:
I'm suspicious of all this, and words like, "...Remember, Hitler's rise to power was staged." "Nazi," and "Nazi Germany," were terms created by Jews, and circulated in the press to create hatred for Germany. "Nazi" is a play on words, to create a similar sentiment to "Stasi." No German EVER called themselves "Nazi."
Nothing I've read with respect to the truth about post-WWI Germany, or Hitler's rise to power, ever mentioned anything about his position being "staged." In fact, I've noted repeatedly on this messageboard that words like "Nazi" and "Hitler" are used to evoke a continued comparison and hatred for Germany. This hatred was a fabrication created by the cabal, who has controlled the press and allied governments for over a century.
I don't dispute the rest of the content, but the fact that these details I've mentioned are present makes me suspicious of the rest.
If you really want to understand comms and how much history is not what you'd think it is, then I'd start with this blog. It's a great place to begin digging, but try to keep an open mind. It can be a lot to take in and it make take several readings and doing your own research to really digest it.
https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/2021/09/03/secret-prep-for-world-wars-tut-merck-cig/
This guy might be a loon.
I get symbolism... But you can't assume a symbol means what you say it does, then base you're entire thesis on your own assumption.
So yeah, that's probably why they use symbols in the first place, I get it. But you're in a house of cards if your jumping off point is incorrect.
Just took a quick glance at the blog, and the first thing I see is that since the Bible mentions Egypt frequently but doesn't mention the pyramids, the pyramids must not be as old as claimed: hundreds of years old rather than thousands.
Based on that assumption, which is quite a leap (and a misguided one, I might add), the writer concludes that the King Tut discovery must have also been fabricated and was used as comms to demoralize Germany after WWI.
Does the entire blog use giant leaps of logic, or was I just unlucky to find this right when I began looking at it?
The pyramids themselves aren't central to the story of Moses vs Pharaoh. There aren't many biblical red's to any man made structures except for those that are central to humanity's story, such as the Tower of Babel, Walls of Jericho, King Solomon's Temple, etc. In fact, the Valley of Kings in Luxor aren't mentioned, yet you'd think they would be seeing as how Ramses' and Moses' father would've been buried there. It predates the pyramids, yet there's no mention of it anywhere in the Bible or Talmud.
On that basis alone, your logic is flawed.
Besides, no one truly knows how old the human race is, how far back in the timeline the Exodus really happened, and because of the faults in radio carbon dating, we likely will never know. And we certainly don't know how old these ancient megalithic structures really are.
Just because what's been presented by OP doesn't fall 100% in line with your interpretation of history, doesn't mean this post is wrong. And it doesn't mean your post is wrong, either. It means that we have to keep searching for the truth, wherever it's hiden.
Please reread what I wrote. My whole point was that the blogger's argument (pyramids aren't mentioned in the Bible therefore pyramids must not be that old) made a fantastic and unsupported leap.
The reason I can say this AGREES with what you wrote: the pyramids are not mentioned in the Bible because they play no role in the narrative being considered.
Therefore, if the blogger has such a hopeless failure of reasoning within the first 60 seconds of me reading the blog, there doesn't seem to be much reason to read the blog further as it is based on fantasy rather than reality.
Previously I’ve read the article on MK Ultra on this site. Definitely gives something to digest.
Using the Bible as a basis for all I can assume from the authors perspective, as the foundation of history and then stating everything about the pyramids is a lie is beyond any further look into that write up. Conjectural stretch made with some broad stroke paint brush logic there screams, i read wiki and watch youtube as the basis of my amazing education and opinion. Unfortunately small things like physics geological ware and erosion say otherwise and the pyramids are 100s of years old not thousands is completely ridiculous.
OK. So I followed the link, prepared to spend some time absorbing new revelations about German history I'm not aware of, and the links in the posts would have me go to The Guardian and the BBC. Really? I don't have time for this.
If garbage is used for references, then everything that follows is...
I sent it just five minutes ago. You couldn't have done more than scan through it and have just decided to call it trash without giving it more than a 2 minute look.
Not sure what you mean by links to the Guardian and the BBC. If you mean the blog posts where it got some of it's clips from, many here do that. It's providing sauce. Many here do that.
A lot have found the Decode Blog very informative and intriguing. It's a very good resource.
If you don't have time to research and dig, then there's nothing anyone can do.
I concur...this is a great place to garner better understanding of many misconceptions that exist, especially among former norimes (like myself) who've metamorphized into Q following anons.
The only thing I directly disputed was the references I posted above with respect to Hitler and Germany. I said I don't dispute the rest of the content, only that it was suspect based upon the flawed premise. I followed the link you provided, and, right at the top, are links as "reference" to known liberal propaganda media sites. My main argument was what was claimed about Hitler and Germany. If you call this "sauce," then it's propaganda to support a flawed idea.
Nothing I've ever read has even SUGGESTED what you claim about Hitler and the Third Reich. Plus, using the term, "Nazi," is also flawed. I'm willing to entertain something new that I'm not aware of, but give me a better source than what was provided. I will invest quite a bit of time in learning something new, if it is compelling. See below.
Europa: The Last Battle is a good resource to start, and cites many additional resources in its content. This was twelve hours' worth, alone. Yes, I do have time, but choose to spend it wisely.
Dude it's a website that decodes the COMMs hidden in mainstream news. Its worth looking through.
Agree with you on this one, thank you for pointing this out.
I am 100% agreement with you. This is nothing but another globohomo misdirect.
Nazi was short for Nationalsozialistische, or in English, national socialist. I do believe you are correct in that the Germans didn't use the term Nazi themselves.
The msm have got to be tried and e edited. Nations have been totally warped by their lies. They have to go