Sergei Lavrov: Hitler Was Part Jewish

[VikLevaPatel]

Here are some interesting tidbits. And there's an interesting irony here.

Here's an especially interesting finding: The current war is not only bringing out the Jew-haters in America but also in Europe. Yesterday, one of Norway's leading writers, Jostein Gaarder, author of best-seller "Sophie's World," with 26 million copies in print, wrote an astonishing op-ed in Aftenposten, Norway's leading paper. It's called "God's Chosen People."

One synoptic illustration of this is described below.

The celebrated Norwegian writer, Jostein Gaarder, regarded as a friend of the Jewish people, marks The Second Lebanon War as a turning point. Gaarder (2006) was in fact so shocked he wrote: "It is time to learn a new lesson: We do no longer recognize the state of Israel. We could not recognize the South African apartheid regime, nor did we recognize the Afghan Taliban regime. Then there were many who did not recognize Saddam Hussein's Iraq or the Serbs' ethnic cleansing. We must now get used to the idea: The state of Israel in its current form is history."

In this book, The Tyranny of Guilt, Pascal Bruckner (2012) disapprovingly quotes that the Jews, who were victims of a ruthless order, impose their ruthless order on the Palestinians. Even more pertinently, he then quotes, disapprovingly again, from a piece by the Norwegian philosopher Jostein Gaarder who wrote: "Behaving like a people chosen by God is not only stupid and arrogant, but a crime against humanity. We call that racism."

Of course, the irony is not lost on us. But let's put these assertions to the test. Most especially, the assertion that the biggest antisemites are the Jews themselves.

Asked in an interview with an Italian news channel about Russian claims that it invaded Ukraine to “denazify” the country, Lavrov said Ukraine could still have Nazi elements even though its president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is Jewish. “In my opinion, Hitler also had Jewish origins, so it doesn’t mean absolutely anything. For some time we have heard from the Jewish people that the biggest antisemites were Jewish,” he said, speaking to the station in Russian, and dubbed over by an Italian translation.
https://archive.ph/WkZhb

Trust me the irony of that statement is not lost on me. It is not lost on others either.

As is correctly pointed out here, throughout Jewish tradition, the origin of hatred of Jewish arch-enemies is the most primitive sort: animosities are rooted in clan-based feuds. The despised are actually blood-related with common, not so terribly distant, ancestors. As noted, the Israelite patriarch Abraham had two sons: Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac is considered by modern day Jews to represent the Jewish lineage; Ishmael, even according to Islamic tradition, fathered the Arab line. In the Jewish family tree, Isaac's sons were Jacob and Esau: Esau is a kind of symbolic patriarch of all Gentiles. Only the children of Jacob are considered to continue the Jewish line. Esau fathered Eliphaz, who in turn fathered Amalek, the most-hated enemy in Jewish tradition. For purposes here, suffice it to note -- as startling as it may sound -- that the Old Testament commands Jews to "blot out the memory" of him by exterminating all his descendants. Amalek is, hence, actually not that terribly remote from the Jewish bloodline: he was the great-great grandson of Abraham.

Even more troubling, the Old Testament asserts that "the Lord will be at war with Amalek throughout the ages." "Amalekites," notes the Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion, "were regarded as Israel's inveterate foes, whose annihilation became a sacred obligation ... Only after the final destruction of the Amalekites will God and his throne be complete." A disturbing modern perspective on the Amalekites is their reinvention in some Orthodox and Zionist Jewish minds as Arabs and any other non-Jews, or even Jews, that are understood to want to "destroy" Israel. Michael Asheri's Amalek, for instance, is generic Germans. "Amalek is also an ideology that denies Israel's unique mission in perfecting the world," wrote Shlomo Riskin in 1996. "The spiritual heirs of Amalek include the Nazis, the Soviet Communists and Moslem fundamentalists."

To read more about Amalek, click here.

Oh the irony of ironies.

You can't get more iconic than that.

As if that wasn't ironic enough, both (of the two distinct Hebrew societies) were originally Canaanite, and that's the irony of ironies here, Finkelstein and Silberman rightly observe.

Biblical diatribes against the Canaanites suggest this common origin; after all, the Israelites protested too much.

[Sebastianus Rex]

Fuck, The old testament or whatever they call it is like a soft porn story, a bunch of degenerated inbreds killing, scheming and forbidding each other...and yeah I've read it. Cancel culture was established a long time ago.

The New Testament is something completely different and revolutionary for the time, the message of sanctity and universal love...of course in real life that doesn't work well but at least is compelling and not repulsive like the old testament.

[VikLevaPatel]

How could I pass up the opportunity to comment on this interesting article in The New York Times. The article is about the personal assistant of the top general in the California National Guard, who had been placed on leave after revelations that the aide's personal Web site contained derogatory statements about women, jokes about black Jamaicans as "cannibals," and violent references. Here's the relevant quote:

The site includes off-color commentary and postings like the 50 worst comic book characters. (Airman Gruber is not fond of Superman). But the site sometimes dips into more offensive territory. “Everyone on earth needs to die,” reads a satirical letter addressed to the singer Sheryl Crow. “That’s really the only option. If you think about it Hitler probably wasn’t a genocidal maniac. He was probably a staunch conservationist who realized that people were the greatest threat to our world, not terrorism or the erosion of civil liberties.”

It is interesting to note that Maria Shriver, ex-wife of the great and now late Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, gets a mention here, in a very unfair and unflattering way, and her mouth gets called a "gaping maw." And I can't believe there's even a book called "The Kennedy Family and the History of Mental Retardation". And it is written by Edward Shorter, ‎Hannah Chair in the History of Medicine and Professor of Psychiatry.

Ms. Shriver, of course, is a member of the Kennedy family and a former journalist who reluctantly gave up her career when her husband, Arnold Schwarzenegger, became governor of California.

And there were people who didn't think Mr. Schwarzenegger could be married to a member of the Kennedy family and be a conservative on social issues, at the same time. Can something be and not be at the same time? Why not both?

And is it confusion, or can you just be both at the same time?

I think we can be both. That is, we can be conservative and we can be progressive or modern at the same time. In the same way we can be both prosperous and secure. It can be both at the same time. And, in fact, I don't think you can have one without the other. And Arnie certainly proved that point. He was both at the same time. (Although many California conservatives remained queasy about his moderate-to-liberal views on social issues, which matched the opinions of a majority of Californians but greatly offended many die-hard Republicans).



Meanwhile, death awaits.



Arnie came up the hard way, and I have great respect and admiration for others like him who have also come up the hard way. But it's amazing what the environment can do. In case you didn't already know, he had Nazi or Nazi-esque sympathies, but probably not strong ones, as they were slowly whittled down.

And you could say that by time of his circumcision, Arnie's apparent Nazi sympathies (or whatever was left of it) had vanished into thin air.

Very much like how his foreskin was completely gone. And he didn't have regrets either. I seem to recall reading something along those lines. On the contrary, he seemed to be advocating it.

He certainly kept busy with his work, to the point that he failed to attend his father's funeral in Austria. I recall reading about his reasons for not attending. And let's not forget another interesting tidbit: his trainer was Joe Weider, who had a major influence on his life and work, to the point that you could say that "Weider could talk him into doing anything." And that would include his own circumcision in the United States. It looks like good old Joe had a hand in this as well.

Arnie probably kept hearing "his master's voice", that is, the subtle and peaceful voice of good old "Uncle Joe" Weider whispering in his ear: "Arnie, the foreskin has to go - and it has to go now".



Anyway, getting back to the points made above regarding the ongoing threat to the world, who can possibly forget or deny the human factor in all of this?

Sue Arnold's article is right on! I must admit, this article hits the nail on the head, and it hits all the right notes. Best quote from the article:

A VERY LARGE elephant in the climate change room is the most telling evidence of a national and international refusal to discuss, much less address, the most critical issue facing humanity.

Over-population.

The major driver of climate change. Too many people for the planet to feed and shelter.

This is great point that cannot be emphasized enough. Too many people, indeed. Too many people everywhere. And the refusal to even discuss or acknowledge, let alone address or debate the demerits of, is high here. It is shocking, it is jaw dropping, and it is very telling.

But here's some good news for a change: population growth is actually increasing at its slowest rate since 1950.

And so I guess there is still hope and there is still cause for hope! Hallelujah!

In other news: the world is round.

Oh, and millions more people could be at risk of dangerous temperatures sooner than expected.

This article sums it up rather nicely. So beautiful, and the title, "The Animal Crisis Is a Human Crisis", is fitting, and more or less sums it up. Here are a few relevant points:

Today it is undeniable that the human use and destruction of animals and their habitats, including practices that result in mass animal deaths, have existential implications not only for non-human animals but also for human beings and the entire planet. Human activities are polluting and destroying animal habitats on land and sea at such a rate that we are confronting what some scientists call a sixth mass extinction. Pollution is heating the seas and leaving them strewn with plastics that degrade ocean ecosystems, while the size and number of fertilizer-laden, run-off–triggered, hypoxic aquatic “dead zones” continue to grow. The wide-ranging destruction of land-based ecosystems is also intensifying. Anthropogenic destruction of animals is enormous, deliberately perpetrated in laboratories, hunting grounds on land, in the sky, and in the oceans, and aqua-farms and land-based industrial farms. Factory farming alone, increasingly global in its reach, accounts for the slaughter, worldwide, of around 200 million land animals every day, and the industrialized harvesting of the sea accounts for the extermination of more than 1 trillion creatures annually. These technologies are some of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emission, pollution, and the decimation of animal habitats.

However, this one takes the cake.

Many practices that harm animals are embedded in institutions that also systematically harm human beings.

There can be no true compassion without compassion towards animals. THIS is true compassion.

And how someone or anyone can HATE dogs, is beyond me. And whatever you do, just don't take it out on "man's best friend".



The future might well be meat-free, and you could say that vegetarianism is really the diet of the future, or even say that vegetarianism is the future. Leo Tolstoy, the revered author and influential thanatologist, claimed that "vegetarianism is the taproot of humanitarianism". Although you could well argue that vegetarianism does little in terms of animal rights. And it goes without saying that people tend to up their dairy intake as vegetarians. This is not to take away from the big picture, and this is not to take anything away from Tolstoy. His ideas were ahead of their time. However, it is imperative to point out here that what we eat is embedded in social and cultural contexts, and especially so in affluent societies, where animal protein consumption is high and considered ‘normal’. As is correctly pointed out, food choices are not easily changed, and this observation by Johanna Meier, however, cannot be overlooked and cannot be emphasized strongly enough:

Men appear to have stronger preferences for meat that are harder to overcome. This may be related to other studies that have found a link between perceptions of masculinity and meat-eating.

This is great point that cannot be emphasized enough. And judging by the thousands of comments that I have read in, and that have been posted at, various forums, such as 4plebs and India Chan, the Indian men are certainly not happy with that state of affairs, and when it comes to their face and physique, they usually blame either diet or genes, but more specifically, they blame the former even more than the latter.. As already noted, I have been reading various forums regarding this whole sorry saga and would guess that there are many others in a similar predicament. Globally, the consumption of meat is increasingly being viewed as a contributor to climate change, but in India, however, more people seem to be consuming non-vegetarian food than before, and not surprisingly, more men than women eat non-vegetarian food. Women, however, seemed to be less inclined to eat non-vegetarian food. Another observation especially worthy of note is that "the Indians just love their eggs." And here is where it gets blurry or fuzzy.

The bottom line: Eggs are not meat, but they do have a similar level of protein.

And is fish meat? The definition of meat varies according to source. Fish is the flesh of an animal used for food, and by that definition, it's meat. However, many religions don't consider it meat. And some experts use meat to specifically describe the flesh of mammals. (See this study, "Meat: the edible flesh from mammals only or does it include poultry, fish, and seafood?"). Though this paper did not make a clear and final distinction on the definition of meat, the differences in muscle fibers alone and the impact that they have on meat quality and our eating experience is remarkable.

And lumping these four categories together, as "eggs, fish, chicken and meat", tends to blur the crucial distinction.



Lumping those four together is a real problem. However, getting back to the point, there are, perhaps not surprisingly, significant differences by state or ethnicity. To quote from the study report:

Men who eat non-vegetarian food are highest in number in Lakshadweep (98.4 per cent) and lowest (14.1 per cent) in Rajasthan (despite the state’s signature meat dish laal maas!) in 2019-21. Along with Rajasthan, Haryana (13.4 per cent), Punjab (17 per cent), Gujarat (17.9 per cent) and Himachal Pradesh (21.1 per cent) account for the states at the bottom of this list. And along with Lakshadweep, Goa (93.8 per cent), Kerala (90.1 per cent) and Puducherry (89.9 per cent) lead in men consuming non-vegetarian food at least once a week.

Of course, there are other factors at play here. That is to say, variables like age, education level, marital status, geography, wealth and caste. Those who have studied up to five years eat the highest amount of eggs and meat. The highest consumption of eggs and fish, chicken or meat is among those who said they did not know their caste.

Well that's a load of shit for a start. Every Indian knows their caste. Every Indian knows this to be a fact. And everybody knows their own caste. They were born into it.

[VikLevaPatel]

"Is the UN Useless in an Age of Great Power Competition?" So asks the Foreign Policy Association. This is a great line, a great question in the form of the old rhetorical question and rhetorical answer: 'Is the Pope Catholic?' And is it, as the Japan News quite rightly asks, a friend of justice or a useless bystander? The Japan News is of the opinion that it is neither. Most importantly it should be noted that the founding principle of the United Nations was to prevent the outbreak of World War III. Moreover, it is no surprise that there is much overlap and there is so much blurring between the two sides from the perspective of realizing international peace and security. The Foreign Policy Association, in fact, says that over 80 years ago, the League of Nations, forerunner to today's United Nations, infamously and tragically failed to prevent the Second World War. Even following the post-war establishment of the United Nations, many questioned how much diplomats in Geneva and New York were actually able to help nations reach agreements and avoid open hostilities during the Cold War. Today, as media coverage, and even expert analysis, increasingly treats the 21st century as an age of potential 'great power competition', particularly between the United States and China, how useful are multilateral organizations like the UN? Dr. Richard Haass, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, has an answer for that and for all of us:

What we learned during the Cold War that many institutions don't do well, when the great powers disagree. Indeed, if you go back to the United Nations, which in some ways is the the most basic of the multilateral institutions, it created the Security Council, it gave the five countries that were anticipated to be the great powers of the post World War Two world gave them all a veto. And the entire premise of that veto was these institutions should not be used by one great power against another. [...] So the US-Soviet Cold War's come and gone as as the Soviet Union. But now you've got a Russia that in many cases opposes what the United States wants to do in the world. And in many instances, now you have China that opposes what the United States wants to do in the world. So that that suggested institutions like the United Nations, will not be terribly effective going forward.

WikiHow thinks we do have a world government, called the United Nations, but goes on to say that it is not powerful enough to lead the entire world. The New York Post is of the opinion that the United Nations is useless, stating that Zelensky is right and quoting him as saying that if the organization won't actually work to end Russia's Ukraine war it should dissolve itself. Moreover, the veto, as the Statesman notes, is a permanent bug. Unfortunately, this is how the UN was designed from the very beginning. Zelensky's certainly right to ask. And he's certainly right about this. As he put it: "Where is the security that the Security Council is supposed to guarantee?" Where, indeed! But I have news for him. Where's a cop when you need one, as they say. Looks to me like the United Nations is not supposed to guarantee anything at all. Long fetishized by progressives around the globe as the last bulwark of civilization against unending war, the United Nations, as the New York Post rightly points out, has proven singularly inept at actually preventing violence and isolating dangerous regimes. In fact, it often empowers them. And certainly the image of the United Nations as a "clean and innocent" organization has been shaken in recent years. The Japan News also noted that there is waste and inefficiency among the agencies and there appears to be little appreciation of the fact that the budget is funded by money paid by countries around the world. Not only that but China is increasing its influence within the United Nations. In effect, the pendulum has now swung to the point at which radical claims that the United Nations is unnecessary are beginning to spread.



See Also: Hazzard, ShirleyHG. "The League of Frightened Men: Why the UN is So Useless". We Need Silence to Find Out What We Think: Selected Essays, New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2016, pp. 127-135. https://doi.org/10.7312/hazz17326-017

[Mopi Licinius Crassus]

highly unlikely Hitler had any recent Jewish ancestry
In the part of Upper Austria where he was from there hadn't been any Jews for centuries

[Eurasian Adam]

Nietzsche and the Nazis by Stephen R. C. Hicks

[SchizophrenicSociety]

WEST SEEKING HITLER-STYLE 'FINAL SOLUTION'

A comment by "KSDICanada" is worth repeating:
"MR LAVROV AND PRESIDENT PUTIN UROCK
UR ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY"



Russia’s Lavrov says West seeking Hitler-style ‘final solution,’ sparking protests

In latest controversial remarks on Holocaust, Moscow's top diplomat claims
US and Europe trying to wipe out Russia by waging war via Ukraine;
Israel calls comments 'unacceptable'

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused the US and Europe on Wednesday of seeking a “final solution” to “the Russia question” comparable to Adolf Hitler’s plan to wipe out the Jews in World War II, drawing anger from Israel, Germany and some of Moscow’s other Western adversaries. “Just as Napoleon mobilized practically all of Europe against the Russian Empire, just as Hitler mobilized and captured… the majority of European countries and sent them against the Soviet Union, now the United States has organized a coalition,” Lavrov said at an annual press conference. Western countries, he said, are “by proxy through Ukraine waging war against our country.” “The task is the same: the final solution of the ‘Russian question.’ Just as Hitler wanted to finally solve the Jewish question.” Israel said Lavrov’s remarks were “unacceptable.” “Any comparison or relating current events with Hitler’s final solution plan for the extermination of the Jewish People distorts the historical truth, desecrates the memory of those who perished and the survivors and should be strongly rejected,” said the Foreign Ministry. Germany said the statement was “appalling.” “The historical lesson to draw here is: Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine will neither be forgotten nor left unpunished,” said Berlin’s Ambassador Steffen Seibert. France’s embassy in Israel called Lavrov’s remarks “outrageous and disgraceful.” “The one and only ‘Final Solution’ left an unspeakable scar in mankind’s history,” read the French statement. Ties between Israel and Russia soured in May following Lavrov’s claim that Adolf Hitler had Jewish heritage and that “some of the worst antisemites are Jews,” in an attempt to explain Moscow invasion as an attempt to “de-Nazify” Ukraine, whose president, Volodymyr Zelensky, is Jewish. Israel — along with many Western nations — harshly criticized Lavrov for those comments, which then-foreign minister Yair Lapid called “unforgivable.” Russia’s Foreign Ministry then doubled down on the claims in a statement that accused Lapid of making “anti-historical statements” that “largely explain why the current Israeli government supports the neo-Nazi regime in Kyiv.” Moscow has repeatedly sought to justify its invasion of Ukraine by claiming that it is working to counter neo-Nazi forces in the country, something largely dismissed by most Western nations. Under the Lapid-Naftali Bennett government, Israel sought to walk a diplomatic tightrope between Moscow and Kyiv, preserving relations with both of its allies and offering to broker talks, while supplying Ukraine with humanitarian assistance. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to maintain that approach, though Foreign Minister Eli Cohen angered Kyiv and its backers when he indicated ahead of talks with Lavrov earlier this month that Israel would avoid denouncing Russia publicly. Jerusalem and Moscow have in recent years maintained a so-called deconfliction mechanism that works to prevent Israeli and Russian forces from clashing in Syria. Russia is a main player backing the Syrian government in a grinding civil war, while Israel has waged a years-long campaign of airstrikes aimed at pro-Iranian fighters located there and at preventing the transfer of Iranian-supplied weaponry.

Russia's Lavrov compares West's approach to Russia with Hitler's 'Final Solution'

"Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov drew a sharp rebuke from the White House on Wednesday for saying the United States had assembled a coalition of European countries to solve "the Russian question" in the same way that Adolf Hitler had sought a "final solution" to eradicate Europe's Jews. How dare he compare anything to the Holocaust, anything. Let alone a war that they started," White House national security spokesman John Kirby said. Lavrov, who caused an international furore last year with remarks about Hitler, said Washington was using the same tactic as Napoleon and the Nazis in trying to subjugate Europe in order to destroy Russia. Using Ukraine as a proxy, he said, "they are waging war against our country with the same task: the 'final solution' of the Russian question." "Just as Hitler wanted a 'final solution' to the Jewish question, now, if you read Western politicians ... they clearly say Russia must suffer a strategic defeat." Lavrov has caused outrage before with remarks about Hitler. Last May he said the Nazi leader had "Jewish blood", drawing angry protests from Israel. "It's almost so absurd that it's not worth responding to, other than the truly offensive manner in which he tried to cast us in terms of Hitler and the Holocaust," Kirby told reporters at a briefing.

EU slams Lavrov for claiming West seeking Nazi-style ‘final solution’ against Russia

The EU on Thursday denounced Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s claim that Western policy towards Russia over Ukraine resembled the Nazi’s “final solution” plan of genocide against the Jewish people. “Latest comments by Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov accusing ‘The West’ of seeking a ‘final solution’ for Russia are entirely misplaced, disrespectful and trample on the memory of the six million Jewish people, and other victims, who were systematically murdered in the Holocaust,” the EU’s foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said in a statement. “This adds to previous antisemitic remarks of Minister Lavrov.” Borrell said, “the Russian regime’s manipulation of the truth to justify their illegal war of aggression against Ukraine has reached another unacceptable and despicable low point.” “Just as Napoleon mobilized practically all of Europe against the Russian Empire, just as Hitler mobilized and captured… the majority of European countries and sent them against the Soviet Union, now the United States has organized a coalition,” Lavrov said. Western countries, he said, are “by proxy through Ukraine waging war against our country. “The task is the same: the final solution of the ‘Russian question.’ Just as Hitler wanted to finally solve the Jewish question.” Borrell insisted “there is no parallel between the crimes of Nazi Germany and the international help for Ukraine in defending its territory and people against an unjustified aggression.” “Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring country, targets and kills civilians there on a daily basis, with the stated aim to destroy the country and the Ukrainian nation,” he said. “Holocaust denial, distortion, and trivialization are against EU law and EU values. The EU made the unequivocal commitment to ensure that such atrocities never happen again.” Israel said on Wednesday that Lavrov’s remarks were “unacceptable.” “Any comparison or relating current events with Hitler’s final solution plan for the extermination of the Jewish People distorts the historical truth, desecrates the memory of those who perished and the survivors and should be strongly rejected,” said the Foreign Ministry. Germany said the statement was “appalling.” “The historical lesson to draw here is: Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine will neither be forgotten nor left unpunished,” said Berlin’s Ambassador Steffen Seibert. France’s embassy in Israel called Lavrov’s remarks “outrageous and disgraceful.” “The one and only ‘Final Solution’ left an unspeakable scar in mankind’s history,” read the French statement. It is not the first time Lavrov has invoked Hitler and the Jews in his outspoken anti-Western remarks, and the 72-year-old has faced antisemitism accusations before. In May last year, Putin apologized to Israel after Lavrov claimed Hitler had “Jewish blood.”

[LETTER "Z"]

Why is Lavrov always right?


CIA SABOTAGE

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...70#post7659370

'Europe is in a terrible, terrible position'

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...65#post7659365

So Lavrov was proven right again, showing me once more how insightful, farsighted and ingenious he was.

[Wunder-Zeichen]

Claims England, France, and Germany are 'Nazi states'

A Russian TV host and close ally of Vladimir Putin has issued yet another threat against the UK for their support of Ukraine, and referred to the Kremlin’s claims that the West's support of Ukraine is encouraging neo-Nazism and Russophobia:

In this case we will not recognize at all—for us then there is no England at all. No France. No Germany. Instead, there are Nazi states united by hatred for everything Russian. And so let's get serious. Do they think there are no red lines? OK. Well, let's show them that there are no more red lines. Let's strike! So that the fist would ring.

He went on to describe French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak as 'Nazi b*****ds'. Solovyov continued to blame Western allies for arming Ukraine, and consequently allowing it to strike territory that Russia claims but is not recognised by the West, such as Crimea. He said: “Well, they're going to give planes [to Ukraine] to strike deep into Russia's territory. At the same time, they cunningly say: 'No, well, we just don't recognize Crimea as Russia'.“ He added: “You will now determine what Russia is for you? Not the people in Russia will determine it, not a referendum, not a vote, but you will determine what Russia is for us?“

US believes Crimea must be 'demilitarised'

Nuland told the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington on Thursday 16 February: No matter what the Ukrainians decide about Crimea in terms of where they choose to fight etcetera, Ukraine is not going to be safe unless Crimea is at a minimum, at a minimum, demilitarised. She added: Those are legitimate targets, Ukraine is hitting them and we are supporting that.

[Wunder-Zeichen]

Indians were never really good at history and it shows in this video piece.

Churchill, Hitler or Hirohito? - Why Indian's were Given Such a Raw Deal in WW2

See comments below.

@NotHassleHoff 1 day ago

Tricked into oppressing Europe? Hitler just wanted the Poles to stop slaughtering ethnic Germans left behind after the Treaty of Versailles.

@RevolutionaryCommandHQ 1 day ago

Germany was put into a corner by the west. They had to go to war. Just like Russia has been put in a corner by NATO today.

https://odysee.com/@TheFront:e/churc...04720a6b0e034d

@BubblegumCrisis 1 day ago

Stop using history to whine! You can't even get terminology right because it's nothing more than your silly opinion and whine hiding behind "facts" and "history".

I'm sure this is doing really well on youtube for you where opposing comment will be blocked or removed by youtube or yourself in it's echo chamber.

https://odysee.com/@TheFront:e/churc...73980523183e38

@Scottjohnty 1 day ago

Your content is just pure neo liberal propaganda not objective history.

The Germans never "opressed" Europeans they where literally fighting to save Europe from the very fate that it is now suffering.

Native European populations are now on the verge of becoming the ethnic minorities of their own ancestral homelands, in both England and France for example the native French and English are now complete minorities in all of their major cities and it estimated that the ethnic English Scottish welsh and Irish will all be minorities in Britain by 2066 not to mention that their PM is now A Pakistani man and A former Banker.

If you simply google the NGOs, lobbying groups, pro migrant lawyers and activist groups that are ferrying migrants into Europe and making sure they stay here they are all Jewish or funded by Jewish organizations Like HIAS, ISRA-AID, or the George Soros Open Societies foundation to name A few.

All of Hollywood and the MSM pushing non stop anti white anti European propaganda is owned by Jewish people again you only have to google who owns most media corporations and film studios in America and Europe and take A little look at their surnames and ethnic backgrounds look up how many "American" and "European" corporations and how much of our finance is owned by Blackrock and the jew Larry fink.

Even the insane gender bender propaganda effecting the west has its roots with Jews simply google Dr Magnus Hirschfeld the inventor of the transgender Ideology and the inventor of the terms Transsexual, transvestites, and transgender he performed the very first "Sex change" operations in Germany until the national socialist put A stop to his evil.

Everything the Germans warned of is coming into fruition all financed by the very people they where trying to stop.

https://odysee.com/@TheFront:e/churc...7944d51cf2b7e7