Oh ya, and yes. I think Hitler was probably a Jew (or one of those people I am talking about that hides among the Jews and calls themselves Jews. At the very least he was a Jewish Puppet, where by Jewish puppet (since you don't seem to get it) I mean a puppet of those people who call themselves Jews
Though really that is completely irrelevant to the weaponized word "Anti-Semitism" and the idea that permeates society because of that weaponized word that prevents us from looking at these people that hide among the Jews.
Hitler was a patriotic man who loved his country and took a stand against the bankers, and piece of shit jews who were exploiting the Germans. He fixed Germany without central banks, he created a barter system that left the bankers out. Of course they wanted him dead, and the country destroyed. So they used the communists from russia, that drunk half-jew, churchill from england, and the freemason, roosevelt from the usa to kill as many German civilians as possible.
He invaded poland because the polish, under jew supervision, were murdering the Germans that were in the territory that had been arbitrarily given to poland by a bunch of assholes in a meeting. Shit man, stop falling for jew lies. They have controlled the media for a very long time.
ok well Hitler wasn't a jew. thats literally the most stupid thing I've ever heard.
Listen, I get it. I'm not providing evidence to support that. You should be skeptical, of course. I also said "maybe". I haven't done enough research into that myself. But to suggest "its the most stupid thing you've ever heard"...
Wow
You need to do some more research into reality. There are things that are provably almost certainly true that are WAY more outrageous than that.
Though the idea may seem preposterous to some, the question seems to stem from the remote possibility that Hitler's grandfather was Jewish. Hitler's father, Alois, was registered as an illegitimate child with no father when born in 1837 and to this day Hitler's paternal grandfather is unknown. Alois’ mother, Maria Schicklgruber, is known to have worked in the home of a wealthy Jew, so there is some chance, however small, that a son in that household got Hitler's grandmother pregnant.
In 2010, the British paper The Daily Telegraph reported that a study had been conducted in which saliva samples were collected from 39 of Hitler's known relatives to test their DNA origins and found, though inconclusively, that Hitler may have Jewish origins. The paper reported: A chromosome called Haplogroup E1b1b1 which showed up in [the Hitler] samples is rare in Western Europe and is most commonly found in the Berbers of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia, as well as among Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews ... Haplogroup E1b1b1, which accounts for approximately 18 to 20 per cent of Ashkenazi and 8.6 per cent to 30 per cent of Sephardic Y-chromosomes, appears to be one of the major founding lineages of the Jewish population. This study, though scientific by nature, is inconclusive.
Of course they finish off with:
Despite the claims, Adolf Hitler was not Jewish.
They provide no evidence to support that claim. It seems to be made in protest of the evidence.
can you tell me, with 100% certainty, that he was not a lizard person alien? in fact, NO studies have done to determine whether he had lizard DNA or whether he would shed his skin while toasting under a heat lamp. I've heard rumors that he laid eggs, but could not confirm these. In fact, the very fact that there has been NO discussion by the mainstream media into his lizard ancestry means they MUST be hiding something!
and follow with
Do you realize how fucking stupid you sound?
Back at ya. This is called a straw man argument. It has nothing to do with what I was talking about nor the evidence (such as it was) that I presented, but you want to pretend that they are the same thing.
you looked into hitlers jewish origins
What?
I showed evidence that he was Jewish. Where do you get that I found he wasn't Jewish? You REALLY need to read what I am writing, not pretending I am saying things I am not.
the cognitive dissonance you have is astounding.
Believe it or not, I am trying to help you out of this exact trap.
and just because you read on someones blog that words can be "weaponized" does not mean you're right in what you're saying.
You are attempting to discredit my words by attacking my source (of which you are completely ignorant). In this case your assumption of my source happens to be completely incorrect, I did not get my information from any blog, but from the C_A documentation on "conspiracy theorist" and substantial deep dives into past newspapers.
This will all be coming out in Part 2 of my report on the media. The detail and sourcing is exhaustive.
well your first source, of the source of anti-semitism, you convenentialy forgot that it was created by an anti-semite so yeah, i of course doubted your sources.
I didn't conveniently forget anything. I literally have no idea why that is relevant.
Besides, not all is what it seems.
The best way to control the narrative is to control both sides of it. The evidence for that is also overwhelming. It will be in my report.
i highly doubt your sources.
Read Part 1 of my report (linked above) it will give you an idea of what type of sourcing I do (primary sources or publicly available databases only).
It's not about what we are talking about (directly) but it is a gateway to a much larger world than you seem to be aware of.
Its also best to not start name calling. That does no one (nor the conversation) any good.
Oh ya, and yes. I think Hitler was probably a Jew (or one of those people I am talking about that hides among the Jews and calls themselves Jews. At the very least he was a Jewish Puppet, where by Jewish puppet (since you don't seem to get it) I mean a puppet of those people who call themselves Jews
Though really that is completely irrelevant to the weaponized word "Anti-Semitism" and the idea that permeates society because of that weaponized word that prevents us from looking at these people that hide among the Jews.
Hitler was a patriotic man who loved his country and took a stand against the bankers, and piece of shit jews who were exploiting the Germans. He fixed Germany without central banks, he created a barter system that left the bankers out. Of course they wanted him dead, and the country destroyed. So they used the communists from russia, that drunk half-jew, churchill from england, and the freemason, roosevelt from the usa to kill as many German civilians as possible.
He invaded poland because the polish, under jew supervision, were murdering the Germans that were in the territory that had been arbitrarily given to poland by a bunch of assholes in a meeting. Shit man, stop falling for jew lies. They have controlled the media for a very long time.
Listen, I get it. I'm not providing evidence to support that. You should be skeptical, of course. I also said "maybe". I haven't done enough research into that myself. But to suggest "its the most stupid thing you've ever heard"...
Wow
You need to do some more research into reality. There are things that are provably almost certainly true that are WAY more outrageous than that.
This is from the a the official Jewish library.
Of course they finish off with:
They provide no evidence to support that claim. It seems to be made in protest of the evidence.
You said:
and follow with
Back at ya. This is called a straw man argument. It has nothing to do with what I was talking about nor the evidence (such as it was) that I presented, but you want to pretend that they are the same thing.
What?
I showed evidence that he was Jewish. Where do you get that I found he wasn't Jewish? You REALLY need to read what I am writing, not pretending I am saying things I am not.
Believe it or not, I am trying to help you out of this exact trap.
You are attempting to discredit my words by attacking my source (of which you are completely ignorant). In this case your assumption of my source happens to be completely incorrect, I did not get my information from any blog, but from the C_A documentation on "conspiracy theorist" and substantial deep dives into past newspapers.
This will all be coming out in Part 2 of my report on the media. The detail and sourcing is exhaustive.
Part 1 can be found here. It is not about the media, but it leads into it.
I didn't conveniently forget anything. I literally have no idea why that is relevant.
Besides, not all is what it seems.
The best way to control the narrative is to control both sides of it. The evidence for that is also overwhelming. It will be in my report.
Read Part 1 of my report (linked above) it will give you an idea of what type of sourcing I do (primary sources or publicly available databases only).
It's not about what we are talking about (directly) but it is a gateway to a much larger world than you seem to be aware of.
Its also best to not start name calling. That does no one (nor the conversation) any good.