Ryan Dawson

[zangtang]

I'm not going to correct you, because i have read the self-same thing, & no i cannot recall who or where, so it could have been from a wellspring of the 'lying scumbags'.....

That having been said, & I will go back to page1 post1 after this & hoover up the whole thread.....because this is THE THINNEST ICE i've ever walked on & i'm not the idiot i sometimes appear &
the massive preamble is a pain in the arse but you have to qualify to protect yourself BUT.......

Its my limited understanding that this is a grimoire-style prerequisite for proper foundation of (magickal?) manifestation of the required result ie reclaiming the land and anchoring it at all four corners
for the foundation of the state....the # HAS to be 6MIllion..........

- and if it wasn't ACTUALLY 6million in physical reality, then it HAS TO BE 6million cemented into the global public mind / collective astral psyche (insert preferred word for mystical amorphous substrate plane here) FOREVER
- i guess because for the purpose of magickal operations thats just as good/the next best thing?

Then again i also read once that some people believe the whole world is governed not by the 'illuminati' or Rothschilds & Rockefellers (gave it a shot, surely?) or the committee of 300 or the military Industrial Complex,
but by an invisible cadre/cabal of Kabbalist MAGI.

You never forget the sound of ice cracking underfoot..............................

[zangtang]

i.e. industrial strength ritual burnt offering sacrifice

[brainpanhandler]

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I do recall reading that 6 million is a number of significance in the Judaic religion. According to Judaic scriptures/Judaic authorities/some "official" religious source, the Jewish people cannot reclaim a nation of their own until 6 million of them have been killed, or something to that effect.

Once again, someone please correct me if I'm in error here.

A brief search revealed scripturally unsourced bs from sites I won't link to. Maybe a more in depth search would reveal more, but I smell bs.

[Nordic]

Just saw this on Facebook:

Ry Dawson
12 hrs · Edited ·
Guess who just issued a FOIA for the 76 pictures the dancing Israelis took the day they became available.
Im getting paper photo copies. Best I could get after fighting about it since 2002

[Nordic]

If anyone's curious about Dawson, I followed him on FB, and like a lot of really smart "libertarians" he's an asshole. Racist and misogynist and full of himself.

I unfollowed him after he used the N word.

[tapitsbo]

if they really are clever or smart the "libertarian" is probably not sincere

[Joao]

I unfollowed him after he used the N word.

Goddamn it. Another one bites the dust. Thanks for making me aware.

At this point, the only non-douchebag critic of the WWII Allies I know of is Kurt Vonnegut. Anybody wanna broaden my horizons?

[Nordic]

I'm not saying he's wrong about what he studies and the conclusions he draws. He's is in fact very smart. I am saying that he's an asshole.

[tapitsbo]

I unfollowed him after he used the N word.

Goddamn it. Another one bites the dust. Thanks for making me aware.

At this point, the only non-douchebag critic of the WWII Allies I know of is Kurt Vonnegut. Anybody wanna broaden my horizons?

I don't understand - much of this board reads like criticism of the WWII Allies (w/o supporting the Axis)

[Joao]

I don't understand - much of this board reads like criticism of the WWII Allies (w/o supporting the Axis)

Thanks for your response. My take is that this board focuses more on the world built under post-war Allied hegemony (Western Allies, anyway), which is not really the same thing.

I guess what I was trying to say is that although I'm interested in deconstructing the victors' propaganda, virtually every source I find turns out to be pro-Nazi once you scratch the surface. Or at least just a racist bastard like the eponymous subject of this thread, which is close enough for me.

I'm hardly saying that's all that's out there, just that I've had a hard time finding worthwhile material in my non-systematic searching. Where on RI can I find a methodical, neutral analysis of Fascist economics, a legitimate (and iconoclastic) overview of the Nazi rise to power, insight into why various Axis-conquered countries were treated differently, or a dissection of the propaganda that Hitler was a one-testicled gay INFJ urophile with Jewish ancestry? Not to mention a substantive inquiry into firebombing cities, the use of atomic weapons, and the demonization of Axis citizens. Preferably without personal enmity and flamewars in every other post.

That is to say, IMO discussion forums aren't often definitive or sufficiently scholarly--for example I rarely see terms defined and it often seems people are talking past each other--but perhaps you could provide a few links If you're thinking of particular threads. (I'm not knocking anybody--I'm certainly not contributing this stuff and there's been good discussion on many other topics over the years.) Cheers.

Edit: Here's one I'm in interested in lately:

The Gleiwitz incident was a false flag operation by Nazi forces posing as Poles on 31 August 1939, against the German radio station Sender Gleiwitz in Gleiwitz, Upper Silesia, Germany (since 1945: Gliwice, Poland) on the eve of World War II in Europe. The goal was to use the staged attack as a pretext for invading Poland. This provocation was the best-known of several actions in Operation Himmler, a series of unconventional operations undertaken by the SS in order to serve specific propaganda goals of Nazi Germany at the outbreak of the war. It was intended to create the appearance of Polish aggression against Germany in order to justify the subsequent invasion of Poland.

Your search - gleiwitz site:rigorousintuiton.ca - did not match any documents.

[Harvey]

I unfollowed him after he used the N word.

Goddamn it. Another one bites the dust. Thanks for making me aware.

At this point, the only non-douchebag critic of the WWII Allies I know of is Kurt Vonnegut. Anybody wanna broaden my horizons?

I don't know about WWII but you can go back a little further for a critical look at WWI history.

WWI:

Christopher Clark's The Sleepwalkers describes the conditions which existed pre WWI and how they unfolded up to it's beginning with admirable detachment. Clark goes into fascinating detail on the subject of the Serbian nationalist group Black Hand.

Then there's Ring of Steel I'm about to read by Alexander Watson, a look at WWI 'from the Central Powers perspectives.'

The Middle East:

The Great War For Civilisation by Robert Fisk particularly interesting for the original research it contains on the Armenian genocide, certain German industrialists who witnessed aspects of the genocide at first hand, including how to hush up a mass murder later turn up in the Nazi hierarchy.

[tapitsbo]

How is anyone going to pull off a supposedly neutral or scholarly investigation of these topics, given their explosive nature and the control over archives? This isn't a rhetorical question - I really don't understand how this could happen.

To what extent the Nazis were or weren't a "false flag" themselves is tough to tell. I doubt many of their higher ranks sincerely believed in their populist PR - though I understand that my conjecture isn't worth a lot here as far as what Joao was looking for.

The extent to which the Soviet Union was a "false flag" interests me greatly, but information about this is deeply contradictory and contaminated with distractions and red herrings as far as I can make out. There is no chance in hell that I view the books by a "libertarian" (Anthony Sutton) as making the situation anything approaching easy to understand.

Dare I say that everyone on all sides of the conflict would count as a "rascist bastard" by 2015 standards? (with maybe the exception of some obscure anarchist factions, or something)

I understand that I don't have materials to offer here, but trying to better understand the context of the questions asked here immediately raises more questions.

[coffin_dodger]

How is anyone going to pull off a supposedly neutral or scholarly investigation of these topics, given their explosive nature and the control over archives? This isn't a rhetorical question - I really don't understand how this could happen.

Welcome to the World of the Surreal, where everything not allowed, is forbidden.

[Joao]

I don't know about WWII but you can go back a little further for a critical look at WWI history.

Thank you, Harvey. Appreciated and I'm looking forward to checking out those materials.

I was listening to the following podcast last night and found it interesting as well as apropos to my rant above (link in headline):

Catherine Epstein
Model Nazi: Arthur Greiser and the Occupation of Western Poland
Oxford University Press, 2010

The term "totalitarian" is useful as it well describes the aspirations of polities such as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union (at least under Stalin). Yet it can also be misleading, for it suggests that totalitarian ambitions were in fact achieved. But they were not, as we can see in Catherine Epstein's remarkably detailed, thoroughly researched, and clearly presented Model Nazi: Arthur Greiser and the Occupation of Western Poland.

Greiser was a totalitarian if ever there were one. He believed in the Nazi cause with his heart and soul. He wanted to create a new Germany, and indeed a new Europe dominated by Germans. As the Gauleiter of Wartheland (an area of Western Poland annexed to the Reich), he was given the opportunity to help realize the Nazi nightmare in the conquered Eastern territories. But, as Epstein shows, he was often hindered both by his own personality and the chaos that characterized Nazi occupation of the East. Grieser emerges from Epstein's book as someone who wanted to be a "model Nazi," but couldn't really manage it because he was a crooked timber working in a crooked system. His personal life was an embarrassing tangle of marriages, affairs, and break-ups that at points threatened his career. His professional life was marked by ambition, ego-mania, and fawning, none of which endeared him to most of his colleagues and superiors. And his murderous attempts to "work toward the Führer" in the Wartheland–by displacing Poles, murdering Jews and other "undesirables," and populating the East with Germans–were stymied by the cross-cutting jurisdictions, conflicting agendas, and professional jealousies that were one of the hallmarks of Nazi rule. Grieser did his best (or his worst, depending on how you look at it) to Germanize the Wartheland. He improvised, maneuvered, and "worked the system" such as it was in pursuit of the Nazi totalitarian project. Thankfully, he failed, demonstrating again that totalitarian dreams, though they can be horribly distructive, are a far reach from totalitarian realities.