Christopher Jon Bjerknes
"Judenfrei" proposes that,
"We didn’t mention 'deliberate sabotage.' We said it was a bad idea. [A reference to my online Einstein book] Yes, Hufschmid could not taint Bjerknes except in the eyes of the weak of mind: if Eric makes plenty of good arguments and exercises a rare bad judgment then it doesn't undermine his credibility, and no reasonable person would assume that if Danner is a liar then Bjerknes, interviewed by Eric, must be too. Again, we’re not contradicting ourselves."
Though "Judenfrei" considers my voluminous text on Einstein and related issues a "bad idea", my book has in fact changed the entire study of Einstein, as well as Zionism and the Holocaust, on a universal, international basis. That "bad idea" has in fact done great good.
Eric Hufschmid does not make "plenty of good arguments" nor does he only rarely exercise "bad judgment". He has in fact thoroughly discredited himself, and constantly whines that everyone ignores him. If I were to associate with Hufschmid after he had discredited himself by promoting an obvious hoax, then many reasonable people would tend to reject my work on that basis alone, especially since Hufschmid has so small an audience as for there to be no rational justification for associating with him merely to reach his audience. Jeff Rense promotes many things that I find to be obvious hoaxes, but he reaches a vast audience, so what he is doing has a positive impact, though it also casts doubt on the legitimate work he does in the minds of many reasonable people. There's the rub. Would it be better for him to risk losing his vast audience and stick only to hard fact, or is it better that he maintain his broad appeal and vast audience and supply them with solid information together with what I consider entertainment. This is not an easy issue for me, I assure you. Hufschmid is thoroughly discredited and to associate with him would only spell disaster with no redeeming gains.
Whether or not someone has an abnormally weak mind, the human mind thinks in terms of images and symbols and associations. This fact, which has powerful beneficial effects, can be exploited as a weakness in all human beings. In fact, Neuro-linguistic programming is generally thought to be most effective on people of above average intelligence. When a person associates with a known hoaxster, that is reasonable evidence that said person cannot be taken seriously. Such evidence can be outweighed by other facts, but it is an uphill climb, for the person has already evinced poor judgement in associating with a known hoaxster.
"Judenfrei" asserts that the Sam Danner incident was a "minor issue". This assertion is made in the context of the Holocaust, and in that sense is legitimate, but not in the sense of the conclusions we should draw about Eric Hufschmid and his colleagues over the years. If memory serves me correctly, this came on the heels of his interview with me, which would have directly impacted upon my credibility if I had let it, as I have already explained. Much more importantly, if memory serves me correctly, this came at the time when Israel had attacked Lebanon and the court of public opinion was against Israel. The Sam Danner hoax served as a terrible distraction at that time when we could have made far greater strides discrediting Israel and exposing their atrocities committed against the Lebanese. The Sam Danner hoax was an obvious hoax and the fact that Hufschmid, Piper and Bollyn were promoting it had a disastrous effect on the momentum we were gaining in exposing Jewish crimes against the human race. It was, therefore, no minor issue.
"Judenfrei" yet again speaks in contradictions when asserting without proof that I promote the "Holocaust hoax". "Judenfrei" knows, as proven by its own statements, that my view is that the Nazis were working in the interests of the Zionists to terrorize Jews and transplant them to Palestine. That is not the "Holocaust narrative" as defined by "Judenfrei" and does not in any way profit Jewry, but rather brings terrible shame on the Jews, while in part exonerating the Germans. "Judenfrei" knowing my beliefs misconstrues my statements about the death of European Jewry which demise is a fact he has not attempted to refute. The "Holocaust hoax" is the unproven assertion that six million Jews were systematically gassed in Nazi death camps. I have not espoused that view. Rather I have pointed out that the claims made by Jews of selective murder, and the survival of only the fittest Jews, would have a eugenic effect and are congruous with the documented Zionist Jews' statements that they only wanted a relatively small number of Jews to survive the war, and then only those who would be fit to contribute to the Zionist cause. To be clear, I have published two books on Einstein which do not address Einstein's racism, the other being Anticipations of Einstein in the General Theory of Relativity which has itself universally and internationally changed the debate regarding Einstein's avowed creation of the general theory of relativity.
"Judenfrei" states, "After World War II, millions of Jews eventually moved to Israel, voluntarily." This statement disregards the horrors to which Jews were subjected in Europe, horrors which were designed, financed, led and enacted by Jews. Stating these facts does not help Jewry. It discredits the official "Holocaust narative" and reveals the vile nature of World Jewry.
I note that "Judenfrei" claims that Christopher Bollyn has been kidnaped, which is an unproven and frankly preposterous claim.
"Judenfrei" misunderstands what I mean when I say I haven't specialized in 9/11 research. For me to assert myself as an authority on 9/11 would require that I engage in intensive novel research and contact credible persons on the issues involved. I have seen the video to which "Judenfrei" has referred me. To add to that body of work would require novel research and tremendous effort. I may make that effort, but have not done so yet nor do I have any immediate plans to do so. I agree with "Judenfrei" that 9/11 has the potential to awaken the masses, but so do many other things, things in which I have done intensive research including my intensive research into the Jewish origins of the Nazis. I think far more attention should be paid to Barack Obama and his ties to Jewry than is being paid, with a focus on his rise to fame, which I have partly documented from a novel and demonstrably factual basis. It is not my duty to do everything nor should I be criticized for not doing everything. I have done far more than you or anyone else you can name and for you to cast aspersions on my character and my motives for not covering 9/11 is ridiculous on its face.
"Judenfrei" states that, "The central issue driving Christian Zionism isn’t the Khazarian issue, but the belief that Jews are the Israelites to whom the holy land was promised. Jewish money and Jewish corruption of organized Christianity have gone toward promoting this belief. It’s this flawed belief then needs to be demolished." I disagree. The Israelites, in Christian doctrine uncorrupted by Jews, were dispersed for disobedience to the Jewish god. They have no claim to the Holy Land because they violated the covenant made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses. Jewish law has been fulfilled and the Temple destroyed. Christ is a new covenant. Only a remnant among the tribes is to be restored at the second coming of Christ, in Christian dogma, so your points are false and moot to authentic Christians, and only sponsor Christian Zionist beliefs that Israelites (whom they are convinced are modern Jews, but which group never existed) are entitled to steal Palestine from the natives, in that it reinforces the false claim of the fabricated Torah that any people ever have had the right to genocide the indigenous populations of Palestine. No populace has ever had the right to exterminate the native populations of Palestine or steal their land. Introducing the Khazarian issue would only confuse a powerful presentation to Christians that no one has the right to steal the land of Palestine, that Jews were feared and reviled by Christ and Christians, slew Christ, and hate and want to decapitate Christians today. I will not weaken that powerful presentation with obscure issues, parsing words, or introducing new concepts to an uninformed audience. Again, thanks, but no thanks for your advice.
"Judenfrei" ignores my clarifications as to what is meant by Jesus and Mary being of the Tribe of Judah and I do not intend to ride that unmerry-go-round again.
"Judenfrei" must distinguish what "Judenfrei" is willing to do, and what the World community will be willing to do when led by a political party that informs the World about the truth of the Jewish war on the human race. If the World is willing to form Herzl's World Ghetto, then I think the World will be more than willing and eager to implement more effective and permanent solutions such as those I propose. The impracticality and uncertainty of the solution "Judenfrei" advocates indicate that it is a bait and switch scam meant to fulfill the Zionists' stated desire to use "anti-Semitism" to force Jews to live in Israel. I suspect this is why "Judenfrei" mischaracterizes my stance on the "Holocaust" given that I have exposed the Nazis as working for the same Zionist interests for which "Judenfrei" is obviously working.
There is nothing extreme about defending ones self and the human race from an openly aggressively attack meant to destroy the human race. What would be extreme is to acknowledge this attack and then subvert authentic efforts to counter it by unifying the Jewish People and preserving them for future generations if any there are.
Once again, "Judenfrei" has offered not one scintilla of proof that the banks will have the means to abide by Federal requirements for 100% reserves for the loans which are already outstanding, let alone to write new loans. The American People are deeply in debt, which will soon consume their meager savings, those who have any, that is. American business is failing. Where are the deposits going to come from to create the 100% reserves for the loans which banks must make? Where is the loan capital going to come from, and how are we to direct it so that it does not result in a bubble, nor sail overseas, but instead creates a sustainable economy in America, which at this time does not exist? I still await answers to these questions. Without loan capital directed to investments which create a sustainable economy, we are doomed. Giving the power back to the Jewish controlled banks to regulate loan capital with no intervention from the society or State guarantees that the Jews will remain the masters of the money markets. I think "Judenfrei" fails to understand how an economy functions and does not represent the views nor level of sophistication of Carmack. Money created out of nothing can find its way straight into the pockets of the wealthy, or can find its way into the pockets of a growing middle class and a rising poor, and into the capitalization of projects which build a sustainable economy. Giving the rich money deprives the general taxpayer of that money and puts him at a greater disadvantage to the rich against whom he must compete. I would have thought that would have been easily understood, and rather than try to argue against what I have not said, I suggest "Judenfrei" ask questions so that I can determine where it is that our communications are failing and try to more effectively explain myself to "Judenfrei". If at that point "Judenfrei" wishes to raise objections, then that would be the appropriate time to do so, but I first ask that what I am saying be understood.
How will your proposal guarantee that the money going to the rich will end up as bank reserves, that those reserves will be anywhere near sufficient to meet our national demands, that 100% reserves will offer a viable profit motive, and that the same old Jewish bankers will not remain in control of this loan capital, and thereby the economy of the World? Do you propose we first export the Jews, or first implement Carmack's proposal? If you maintain the banks as masters of loan capital, you maintain the Jews as masters of the economy. If that point eludes you, I will have to take several steps backwards to explain this matter to you, which might not be an unprofitable exercise.
I am not certain whether "Judenfrei's" assertions regarding the valuation of government debt that Carmack wants to close out within one year represent the proposals of Carmack. I think it would be better to receive a response from Carmack as I suspect "Judenfrei" does not understand his proposal and does not speak for it in a way that accurately depicts it. So at this juncture, I will severe the discussion on that point so as not to be unjust to Carmack.