PLANDEMIC 2.0 - INDOCTRINATION

COVID19: CONNECTING THE DOTS - [thehighwire.com]

1:09:33 MM
“So in this era of character assassination, it’s very little any more do we debate about, you know, real science or real facts - it’s just, you know, let us, you know, make the public hate you and in that way anything that comes out of your mouth they will resist.” -Mikki Willis, Director, Plandemic Indoctrination

"make the public hate you and in that way anything that comes out of your mouth they will resist"

There is nothing righteous or magical or even necessary about a nation’s currency being “backed” by gold or silver. This was proved by Adolf Hitler during the 1930s. It was proved so conclusively that the Jews want to make sure that it’s never tried again. The best way to ensure this is to associate debt-free currency with mass murder!

Offensive as usual Rose...

Hitler was one of the most OFFENSIVE human beings in recent history. Even if he didn't give direct orders, he is guilty by COMPLIANCE, and sat back and watched the bodies BURN...





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2020 03:34AM by NuNativs.

it's actually Indoctornation


and what bodies burning?

Here's another link where they spell it correctly...

Plandemic 2: Indoctornation - Full Movie

<<<and what bodies burning?>>>

HELLSTORM

At least 6.5 Million Germans were murdered after the War. The Real Holocaust happened to the Germans and the Jewish Holocaust NEVER happened!

Who has a brain tumor?

"This book was written by a Neo Nazi, or as his bio more favorably spins it: "a White Nationalist"
I thought you should know."
=====
Make no mistake, this book is a work of fiction, absolute fiction. I have been overseas. I have read the treatises in the original language. I have visited concentration camps. I have spoken with survivors. That other 'story,' the one this author refers to as a work of Hollywood, it is no Hollywood story, it is the truth.
=====
The author certainly does a decent imitation of legitimate historian/author. It took me until page 50 to feel uncomfortable enough with the author’s whitewashing of Hitler’s actions and zero recognition of Nazi atrocities that I did some investigating. Turns out the author is a white supremacist with an agenda that includes repositioning Nazi Germany as the innocent victim of WWII.

There’s plenty to be said about Allied excesses in WWII, but a slanted, hugely imbalanced account that absolves Germany of all wrong is not the honest way to do it.
=====
It is a piece of Nazi propaganda, plain and simple.
=====
Rather, what is happening here is typical for Neo-Nazis and holocaust deniers: Citing incomplete facts and narratives or refusing to contextualize them, they seek to either negate the historical record or impose a new narrative. Goodrich is trying very hard in his book to create a moral equivalent between Allied policies and events from post-war history and the Holocaust, essentially arguing that the latter wasn't that bad in light of what the others did.

Furthermore, Goodrich has no real interest in the explaining or even showing the full extent of the history he portrays in his book. While ostensibly adhering to the standards of the profession by supplying citations, he purposefully leaves things out in order to fit his narrative of the Germans being the real victims of WWII because of Allied policies.

Let's take a look how he does this:

The book starts out in the prologue with building up Erich Koch, former head of the civil administration of occupied Byalistok and Reichskommissar of Ukraine and responsible for – among other things – killing thousands of Poles and Jews. He is built up as heroically mounting a last line of defense in Eastern Prussia against an "onslaught of hostile Slavs" in 1944. Though he justifies Koch's harsh measures in his defense, which included shooting civilians trying to flee the advancing front line, he also claims they were not necessary because – paraphrasing – Prussians laughed in the face of the dangers of the advancing Red Army.

Enter Nemmersdorf: Goodrich describes with glee what happened in the first village beyond the border of the then Reich. He cites extensively from documents describing the alleged horrors inflicted by the Red Army upon the villagers of Nemmersdorf, including how the Soviets allegedly nailed women and children to barn doors. Now, Nemmersdorf is not just an obscure example: It is well known among historians for what happened there and especially for the controversy that ensued from it, and for what people like Goodrich like to use this example.

What we know is that in Nemmersdorf on October 21, 1944, between 23-30 German civilians were killed. At least 13 of them were shot by a Soviet unit after having been discovered in a German bunker. For the other 10 to 17, the cause of their deaths remain unclear as do the motives of the Soviet troops who shot the 13 civilians in the bunker.

When the Soviets had to retreat from the place shortly after and it was taken back by the Germans, Goebbels ministry of propagnda manufactured evidence of Russian atrocities and enhanced the death toll greatly. As we know now through extensive research conducted in the early 1990s, the sources Goodrich cites in his book about Russians nailing Germans to barn doors were made-up by the Nazi newspaper Völkischer Beobachter in order to motivate the German populace to resist more fiercely. They neither match the recollection of survivors of Nemmersdorf nor the official and initial Wehrmacht and NSDAP reports from Nemmersdorf in 1944.

Long used as a symbol for Soviet atrocities, the history of the massacre in Nemmersdorf has since been greatly revised and re-interpretated though the exact reason for shooting 13 civilians still remain unclear.

But Goodrich isn't interested in that and despite having had access to all this research when he wrote his book, neglects to mention any of it. Rather, he is trying to built a politicized narrative of "tu quoque", which portrays the Allies in a negative light in order to rehabilitate the Nazis.

Goodrich isn't really interested in the story behind the Nemmersdorf massacre or in painting a historically accurate picture of it, the expulsion of Germans, or the conditions in Allied POW camps. All the people he cites describing bad conditions, their experience of sexual violence on the hands of the Soviets or their expulsion from their homes are just arguments to build his narrative of a victimization of Germans with the intention of relativizing the Holocaust and German war-crimes and thus rehabilitate Nazism.

Through purposely omitting and changing facts, sources and interpretations, he shows that his real interest lies not in these stories and unraveling them historically by contextualizing them but in writing his version of a fantasy history that takes suffering from the people forced from their homes and subjected to violence to portray Nazism as a positive thing.

Rather than treating history with the seriousness and professionalism it deserves, he just peddles Nazi propaganda, going so far as alleging (also in the prologue), an Allied intention driven by Jews to commit genocide against the Germans. Again, taking stuff out of context or citing it not in full, he twists and turns history to fit his ends and blame Jews. He essentially makes demonstrably false Nazi propaganda his main source.

This is a typical endeavor of Holocaust deniers and neo-nazis and goes to show that just because a book cites something, it is necessarily true or has the meaning it assigns to it.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2020 01:21AM by NuNativs.