What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

I remember in the 2008 crisis Russel Brand nattering on and other occupy movement types about the bankers and they need to be brought to justice. Well I might agree with people who actually did something wrong need some kind of reigning in but imagine how this can go out of control if all the bankers were nearly all Jews? Imagine if your husband is spending all the family income on gambling and all the gambling venues are Native American run plus many neighbours have the same problem. Imagine the same in the midst of an economic collapse where people don't know where the next meal is coming from.

Imagine if the country is mostly run by whites, with many unhappy people or many problems and you have many people with the same such instincts that were expressed most strongly in the Nazi party? The hilarious thing is when all the positions of power are dominated by diversity the problems won't go away and they'll still have something to complain about, they still wont be able to get laid or rich (same thing really), and they'll then be cursing diversity.

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.

What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

I remember in the 2008 crisis Russel Brand nattering on and other occupy movement types about the bankers and they need to be brought to justice. Well I might agree with people who actually did something wrong need some kind of reigning in but imagine how this can go out of control if all the bankers were nearly all Jews? Imagine if your husband is spending all the family income on gambling and all the gambling venues are Native American run plus many neighbours have the same problem. Imagine the same in the midst of an economic collapse where people don't know where the next meal is coming from.

Imagine if the country is mostly run by whites, with many unhappy people or many problems and you have many people with the same such instincts that were expressed most strongly in the Nazi party? The hilarious thing is when all the positions of power are dominated by diversity the problems won't go away and they'll still have something to complain about, they still wont be able to get laid or rich (same thing really), and they'll then be cursing diversity.

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.

What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

I remember in the 2008 crisis Russel Brand nattering on and other occupy movement types about the bankers and they need to be brought to justice. Well I might agree with people who actually did something wrong need some kind of reigning in but imagine how this can go out of control if all the bankers were nearly all Jews? Imagine if your husband is spending all the family income on gambling and all the gambling venues are Native American run plus many neighbours have the same problem.

Imagine if the country is mostly run by whites, with many unhappy people or many problems and you have many people with the same such instincts that were expressed most strongly in the Nazi party? The hilarious thing is when all the positions of power are dominated by diversity the problems won't go away and they'll still have something to complain about, they still wont be able to get laid or rich (same thing really), and they'll then be cursing diversity.

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.

What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

I remember in the 2008 crisis Russel Brand nattering on and other occupy movement types about the bankers and they need to be brought to justice. Well I might agree with people who actually did something wrong need some kind of reigning in but imagine how this can go out of control if all the bankers were nearly all Jews? Imagine if your husband is spending all the family income on gambling and all the gambling venues are Native American run plus many neighbours have the same problem.

Imagine if the country is mostly run by whites, with many unhappy people or many problems and you have many people with the same such instincts that were expressed most strongly in the Nazi party? The hilarious thing is when all the positions of power are dominated by diversity the problems won't go away and they'll still have something to complain about, they still wont be able to get laid or rich (same thing really), and they'll then be cursing diversity.

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.

What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

I remember in the 2008 crisis Russel Brand nattering on and other occupy movement types about the bankers and they need to be brought to justice. Well I might agree with people who actually did something wrong need some kind of reigning in but imagine how this can go out of control if all the bankers were nearly all Jews? Imagine if your husband is spending all the family income on gambling and all the gambling venues are Native American run plus many neighbours have the same problem.

Imagine if the country is mostly run by whites, with many unhappy people or many problems and you have many people with the same such instincts that were expressed most strongly in the Nazi party?

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.

What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

I remember in the 2008 crisis Russel Brand nattering on and other occupy movement types about the bankers and they need to be brought to justice. Well I might agree with people who actually did something wrong need some kind of reigning in but imagine how this can go out of control if all the bankers were nearly all Jews? Imagine if your husband is spending all the family income on gambling and all the gambling venues are Native American run plus many neighbours have the same problem.

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.

What they don't cover is that there were some legitimate concerns about Jews. It didn't justify the hatred and especially not their brand of collective justice but they didn't pluck it out of thin air.

The relationship between Jews and Europe was very complex. A lot of things hail back to the Roman empire and its collapse. When the Roman military left Britain they needed another power to maintain law and order. They brought in the Anglo Saxons as mercenaries but they just took everything over and then basically walked in.

Muhammad was a bandit realising hang on a minute all the legions are gone and now all the land and commerce is unprotected. So he started a movement of them just going in and taking everything which snowballed.

When Europe fell into the dark ages they lost a lot of the expertise on running civilisation that the Romans brought. The Jews were very experienced in civilisation and came in filling the void making them a critical component in society and making them in the middle of a lot of things when it went wrong due to their exclusive domination over various areas.

They weren't always helped. They would be given exclusive licence over many things people saw as the source of many problems on societies. For example, in one place if I remember correctly the Jews were given special permission to sell alcohol or operate certain venues, almost like the Native Americans and Casinos, so when the drunk came home or made a mess it was because of those Jews selling stuff that shouldn't be available.

Jews brought a lot of things with them that Europe didn't have both good and bad businesses and were also less inhibited by their religion in certain respects to operate such places. Your religion might say you shouldn't engage in this or that practice but it doesn't necessarily speak to others.

Bolshevism was a part of it but one part of many leftist movements vying for power in Germany after massive destabilisation. Hitler was leftist but a bit more sensible and pragmatic as well as willing to draw from both sides on occasion. The CCP is based on Nazi Germany. Hitler had the basic sense to see his other left wing comrades were really just his worst competition most likely to attract people away from him and also that they were going too far with their communism.

The CCP allowed some greater degree of private enterprise when they saw directly and learnt the hard way it was just not feasible not to. They still however like Hitler maintain control over everything. A company or person is free until they inconvenience the party or so long as that works best for the party.

I think one thing people don't want to admit about Hitler is that it wasn't just like everything was going fine until this antichrist came along. Hitler was the result of failure after failure by the establishment. What I don't think many people will grasp is that as bad as Hitler was the other choices were often as bad or worse.