Sad discovery for me ... another hero hung on the gallows of truth.

In investigating the Holocaust claim, I wanted to know about Norman Finkelstein's perspective of concentration camps ... were they internment camps? Or extermination camps? In pursuing this point, I came across the video below. I had held Finkelstein in the highest esteem up until now.

Without further ado:


I did further research to find the answer I was looking for (as per the nature of the concentration camps). From 1:45 to the end, we find Finkelstein endorsing the narrative of extermination. Mind you, it was wrong of Hitler and the Nazis to uproot people, load the uprooted into boxcars, then intern them in congested camps with only the basic necessities (for future banishment) ... but the narrative of designed extermination has no factual basis:


Feel like I've been punched in the stomach.

After watching both videos, I have no option but to declare Finkelstein as a deep level asset of Zionism. 95% of his contributions are righteous and anti-Zionist in nature ... but it's the other 5% that does indeed give value to Zionism. Indeed, so much value that the Zionists are willing to absorb Finkelstein's jabs and punches and whatever else he throws at them - including the kitchen sink and the copper pipes - so that they can then deliver the knockout punch themselves with the dual establishment of (1) the extermination camp narrative; and (2) the Osama bin Laden-engined blowback narrative of the 9/11/2001 attacks.

When one inspects the 95%, we find that Finkelstein merely agrees with everything that is already known about the Zionist movement. No significant gain in new information, to be sure, but it does encourage truthseekers to warm up to Finkelstein as a genuine hero of our times.

But then, when we inspect the 5%, we find that Finkelstein is giving the Zionist agenda a greatly needed boost, for our purported hero of our times is giving his personal weight to two narratives that are patently false (e.g. extermination camp narrative and the Osama bin Laden blowback narrative). Zionism and those responsible for it stand to be obliterated if either the official Holocaust narrative ... or the official Osama bin Laden 9/11/2001 blowback attack narrative ... or both ... lose traction with the common masses.

To wit, Finkelstein works the 95% to gain credibility with the masses ... then he insinuates the 5% in the form of slick wet mud to remove traction from the unofficial factual narratives and keep the wheels spinning on two self-evident sentinel events (e.g. The Holocaust story ... and the Osama bin Laden story). Deep level stuff. And diabolical.

Pax

ps: Finkelstein is not the first deep-level operative that the Rothschild bankstering empire has sent down to gain the confidence of the common masses.

ps2: David Duke is another confidence man that weighs in with 95% rigtheous arguments and facts ... but then he undermines himself (by design) by pointing away from the Khazarian conspiracy. I will shortly retrieve and post a video of Duke where he categorically rejects the Khazarian conspiracy. Alas, the Khazarian conspiracy is real. No less an authority than Benjamin Freedman had confirmed it. Genetic studies have confirmed the predominantly Khazarian origins of the nonethnic Jews (e.g. Ashkenazim). Ashkenazis are not from Judea, and have no right to be called ethnic Jews. Such a right only belongs to the Biblical Judeans and their ethnic progeny that had survived into the 21st century ... but this progeny numbers less than 10% of all that are called Jews today.

ps3: Finkelstein and Duke are two more reasons why genuine truthseekers must maintain eternal vigilance against impostors in our midsts. Still reeling from this discovery. I really really believed in Finkelstein. So be it. There is no other event that is easier to prove to the common masses than the 9/11/2001 attacks. It happened in real time in the internet age of easy event-recording. The Holocaust, by contrast, requires extensive study to reveal its factual basis. IMO, the 9/11/2001 attacks offer a chance to expose to the masses, the grand conspiracy committed against them by the Rothschild bankstering empire ... a conspiracy that spans almost 3 centuries. How Finkelstein or anyone can think it's a waste of time and truthseeking resources to pursue the factual nature of the 9/11/2001 attacks event, boggles intellectual sense.

ps4: FTR, the 95% that Finkelstein correctly validates is already well-established for the most part. Re-establishing prior established stuff <----------- well, that's the very definition of wasting resources, isn't it?

 

You are so far off-base, it's dumbfounding. It's as if you don't even comprehend what Duke is talking about.

Did you not hear him say he is presenting the Jewish perspective, in other words how they see themselves? And he is spot-on concerning this. Really Zook, I'm once again seeing evidence of a learning disability in you.

Binary thinking, oversimplification, and diseased certainty, just like always. Perhaps these are indeed symptoms of your learning disability. Have you been diagnosed with any learning disabilities that you haven't shared with us, Zook? I'm serious. Something is definitely wrong here.

After what you've just demonstrated with your dismissal of Finkelstein and condemnation of Duke, you are in no position to offer yourself up as an expert on anything. What an arrogant, cock-sure, egocentric monster you are!

 

Well I'll be dog-gone! I'm actually seeing the first effect, a baby step of real progress, from Zook discovering the results of his cursed binary thinking, oversimplifications, and diseased certainty! Finkelstein has lost his revered status! And it's coming from Zook's investigations into the Holocaust, which I know I am directly responsible for!

Are you going to apologize for all the times you waved Finkelstein in front of my face like some golden boy proving the magnificence of Discernment King UncleZook? That's a rhetorical question, as I know from your psychology that you are not so inclined. But you might do it just to sow doubt and confusion regarding my assessment of you as a sociopath, n'est-ce pas? Interesting dilemma.

Your condemnation of David Duke is just as short-sighted as your abandonment of Finkelstein, which is no different than your damnation of anyone who doesn't share your particular beliefs about 9/11. Because all of us are dealing with incomplete knowledge, and even worse, deliberate propaganda, there are no experts who have it all figured out. The bits of truth can come from any source, and they can be presented in any form with any underlying bias, as I demonstrated with the eyewitness testimony of Kitty, the "Holocaust" survivor. She believes the official Holocaust story even though her testimony directly contradicts it, and she can't even see it! Nevertheless, bits of truth are in there that can help us understand the Holocaust con-game we have fallen for, a con-game so massive and reprehensible that it staggers the imagination.

You need to climb down off your high horse and stop presenting your beliefs as truth. Become a seeker of truth, instead of a dictator of truth. But with your particular psychology, that will be quite the challenge, unfortunately. I don't think it's possible, any more than a leopard can change its spots, but I'd sure like to see you try.

In my opinion, Finkelstein is completely wrong regarding the need to investigate 9/11 (video #1), and completely right about condemning the Israeli genocide of Palestinians (video #2). I find it revealing how easily your support for an individual changes based on so little substance. That's always been your problem, Zook. What's important is not individuals, but truth. When will you ever learn?

 

Here's that video I promised about David Duke, another deep-level operative working for the Zionist agenda:


David Duke argues as if King Bulan and the Khazars did not exist or convert to Judaism back in 740 AD. His argument makes no sense if King Bulan, his large kingdom, and the conversion to Judaism of his subjects, is factored in.

Indeed, when he argues about Jews preserving their own race while trying to bastardize all other races ... he is actually arguing about the conservative marital practices that may or may not have existed in King Bulan's kingdom. The Biblical Judeans may also have had these practices, but guess what ... so do many cultures the world over. As a matter of fact, where I come from, in Andhra Pradesh, India, we used to have the world's highest coefficient of inbreeding at one time. My indigenous Telugu culture still practices consanguinous arrangements today, tho' thankfully, exposure to modern science and the politically-engined dissolution of the caste system, however snail-paced that is, is contributing to more liberal practices, e.g. intercaste marriages. The Brahmin class of Hinduism are the equivalent of the Cohanim priesthood class in so-called religious Judaism, which is really Phariseeasm repackaged as Judaism (google Benjamin Freedman's exposee on the topic). Indeed multiple religious sects derive from Biblical Judea, Phariseeasm being just one of the major three (the other two being the Saduccees and the Essenees). If there are three major sects, then it is illogical and politically-contrived to consider any one sect to be the religion of Judea, e.g. Judaism. It is only correct to refer to three different religions occupying the same space (e.g. Biblical Judea) by their respective names, namely, Phariseeasm, Sadduceeasm, and Essenesasm. To wit, there is no such actual religion as Judaism. That name has been appropriated by the descendants of the modern Pharisees, who practice extra-Judean moral codes (derived outside Biblical Judea in Babylon and elsewhere and codified in the Babylonian Talmud). And the modern heirs to the Pharisees ... are upwards of 90% descendants of King Bulan's kingdom, IOW, an Asiatic-Turkic peoples that have no significant genetic links to the Levant. Religious conversion is not a genetic bridge.

So David Duke is pulling a fluffy white rabbit out of his hat when he claims that Jews are a race. They were not even a name until the 18th century when the word Jew first appears in literature:
http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/OriginoftheWordJew.htm

beginExcerpt
If the generally accepted understanding today of the English "Jew" and "Judean" conveyed the identical implications, inferences and innuendoes as both rightly should, it would make no difference which of these two words was used when referring to Jesus in the New Testament or elsewhere. But the implications, inferences, and innuendoes today conveyed by these two words are as different as black is from white. The word "Jew" today is never regarded as a synonym for "Judean" nor is "Judean" regarded as a synonym for "Jew."


When the word "Jew" was first introduced into the English language in the 18th century its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was "Judean."

However during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" among the English speaking peoples of the world. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew."
end

Indeed, we see that "Judean" carries the only legitimate meaning for the word "Jew" which was coined in the 18th century ... alas, the area between and above the Black and Caspian seas, where King Bulan's kingdom once existed does not and has never intersected with Judea. King Bulan's people were never Judeans; and they are only Jews in the religious sense (after conversion in 740 AD) not in the genetic sense. If this Turkic genetic pool is conserved due to ultraconservative marriage practices, then that pool is still not Judean, but Khazarian. David Duke attempts to mislead by suggesting that ultraconservative marriage practices and gene-pool isolation are prominent features of Jewish culture. And he then tries to confuse the preservation of the Ashkenazi gene pool with the preservation of the Judean gene pool ... and in the confusion, the lack of intersect between the two gene pools is conveniently ignored.

Lest we forget, David Duke was once the Grand Wizard of the KKK, a race-dividing project of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, which is a a secret society and subsidiary of the Bulanic-descended Rothschild bankstering empire. Race is an important faultline to be exploited in the divide and conquer toolbox of the Zionist imperialists. David Duke. Old leopard ... new spots??

Like Finkelstein, Duke is allowed to throw everything and the kitchen sink at the Zionist empire ... just as long as he keeps denying the facts of the Khazarian conspiracy. That simple service of denying the Khazarian connection ... adds more value to the Zionist agenda than all the value it loses when David Duke attacks it. For Finkelstein, all the value lost by the Zionist agenda whenever Finkelstein attacks it, is gained back with interest when Finkelstein validates "the extermination camps" meme ... never mind that the meme has no factual basis for it.

In summation, we have a double dose of deep-level duplicity in Finkelstein and Duke. IMO.

Pax

ps: To give equal time, here's David Duke trying his best to squelch the Khazarian conspiracy (a conspiracy which Benjamin Freedman is privy to, being an insider at one time himself): http://davidduke.com/rethinking-khazar-theory/

ps2: To give original time, here's Eran Ehaik, an Israeli molecular geneticist, weighing in with his argument against the Rhineland Hypothesis and in favor of the Khazarian-origins hypothesis: http://forward.com/news/israel/175912/jews-a-race-genetic-theory-comes-under-fierce-atta/

ps3: Please study both hypotheses. If anyone needs help in understanding Elhaik's research, I have a good grasp of the topic matter and will be glad to assist you.