Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook 
Author Message
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
By strange synchronicity, I just took a little trip down Memory Lane, and what should I find but UncleZook plying his con-artistry! And wouldn't you know it, even over five years later, Zook's con-artistry still looks the same!

UncleZook begins his attack here, but the thread is short so you can read the whole thing to see how it started, developed, and ended. Master con-artist Zook is always exclaiming that "the archives hold it" as evidence for his false assertions, yet he never points to where exactly the archives confirm his propaganda (i.e. compelling nonsense). But I usually agree that the archives do indeed hold it, where "it" is not what Zook implies "it" is, but is actually proof to the contrary. This little thread illustrating Zook's mendacity from over five years ago is a good example negating UncleZook's never-ending boasts of being the only genuine truth-seeker to be found at United People.

And yeah, I just stumbled on that thread tonight by accident while searching for "ancient" within thread titles, looking for a thread about ancient structures and building technologies for a post I want to do, inspired by this video (and two others like it), which was also an accidental but synchronistic discovery.

Do you get the sense from all this synchronicity that the universe does not approve of your huckstering, Zook? I sure do.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:43 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
I don't think I need to add anything more.

I have given plenty of opportunity for Chico to discuss the facts of the rise of Hitler. So what is his response? Well, the last two posts of his stand on their own as an indictment of his purpose on this forum, namely, to keep things in a state of confusion and to abuse those who dare seek clarity.

Chico's not interested in facts.

I do encourage the readers to read the links Chico provides in these last two posts of his. Please read the threads in their entirety to get a full grasp of the mischief Chico is seeking refuge in. He's hoping the good readers don't have the appetite to chase down the contents at those links ... for he himself knows there is nothing there to back any of his absurd claims about me. But innuendo is seldom intended with any greater purpose in mind than messenger abuse. Facts are not the target of innuendo meisters, noise is. And our resident innuendo maestro is hoping that noise will drown out the attempted signal of the facts of Hitler's rise in the waning days of the Wiemar Republic. Facts which make a mockery of his Hitler narrative.


Pax

ps: FWIW, Andy and I were exchanging mutual unpleasantries in one of those links Chico provides ... but both Andy and I have since reconciled after both arriving at the same conclusion, namely, that Chico is unfit to be a moderator because he engages in censorship quite often.

ps2: Just goes to show that Chico is not above digging up unrelated things from the distant past (to wage a character smear) because he can't deal with the facts as they are being presented in the present. He uses the past to mine for things (even trivial things) that he can use to show the messenger in a bad light. Fortunately, none of the links he provides show me in a bad light because I have never behaved in a bad light. Sure, I've made errors in facts and judgments every now and then (as normal humans are expected to do) ... but I always follow my errors with a "mea culpa" and/or an apology whenever warranted.

ps3: Still, it's imperative for Chico to show me with some egg on my face, for he lacks the tools in his toolbox to defeat my arguments and narratives on facts alone. Which is why he will never orient the past for a factual accounting of things ... he largely orients the past for character paints. Which is why I always encourage the readers to read the contents of the archived links that Chico points to, for I know what his purpose is ... and I have confidence in the readership that they will quickly realize Chico's game as well.

ps4: FWIW, the last post in one of the threads Chico references ("Is Cancer An Ancient Survival Program Unmasked?") was made five years ago? You really are desperate, Chico. Then again, we can't discount the possibility that your data mining from the distant past in lieu of rational arguments in the now and here, are an unflattering reflection of your level of maturity.

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:17 am
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
UncleZook wrote:
I don't think I need to add anything more.

Promise?

UncleZook wrote:
Please read the threads in their entirety to get a full grasp of the mischief Chico is seeking refuge in. He's hoping the good readers don't have the appetite to chase down the contents at those links ...

Not only is your research embarrassingly shoddy, but so is your logic. I post links so that people will read them, Zook. I don't do it so that they won't pursue those links. Expecting people to read my linked material has been my consistent habit ever since I started posting twelve years ago.

UncleZook wrote:
Facts are not the target of innuendo meisters, noise is. And our resident innuendo maestro is hoping that noise will drown out the attempted signal of the facts of Hitler's rise in the waning days of the Wiemar Republic. Facts which make a mockery of his Hitler narrative.

Your "facts" are nothing but mainstream propaganda, Zook. They don't merit rebuttal by me when the rebuttal is already documented in the Hitler thread. The Truman Smith story is an example. I read his book and reported what it revealed about the Hitler lie. Did you read those posts ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 )? In fact, it is you who doesn't "have the appetite to chase down the contents at those links." You hypocrite! You should be hiding your face in shame, but we all know sociopaths don't feel shame!

UncleZook wrote:
ps: FWIW, Andy and I were exchanging mutual unpleasantries in one of those links Chico provides ... but both Andy and I have since reconciled after both arriving at the same conclusion, namely, that Chico is unfit to be a moderator because he engages in censorship quite often.

Why can't you let the readers make up their own minds about what you were doing in that thread? Is it really necessary for you to steer people with your bogus interpretation? And that bit about you and Andy reconciling because Chico censors is another enormous whopper that should have you hiding your face in shame!

UncleZook wrote:
ps2: Just goes to show that Chico is not above digging up unrelated things from the distant past (to wage a character smear) because he can't deal with the facts as they are being presented in the present. He uses the past to mine for things (even trivial things) that he can use to show the messenger in a bad light. Fortunately, none of the links he provides show me in a bad light because I have never behaved in a bad light.

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Liar, liar, pants on fire!


UncleZook wrote:
ps3: Still, it's imperative for Chico to show me with some egg on my face, for he lacks the tools in his toolbox to defeat my arguments and narratives on facts alone. Which is why he will never orient the past for a factual accounting of things ... he largely orients the past for character paints. Which is why I always encourage the readers to read the contents of the archived links that Chico points to, for I know what his purpose is ... and I have confidence in the readership that they will quickly realize Chico's game as well.

You are working this ploy to death, Mr. Zook! "Chico can't defeat my arguments, so he calls me a sociopath!" It's precisely because you are a sociopath that your arguments have no merit. In fact, your arguments that were so lacking in merit (calling everyone a gatekeeper) for such a long period of time were what led me to suspect your sociopathy.

UncleZook wrote:
ps4: FWIW, the last post in one of the threads Chico references ("Is Cancer An Ancient Survival Program Unmasked?") was made five years ago? You really are desperate, Chico. Then again, we can't discount the possibility that your data mining from the distant past in lieu of rational arguments in the now and here, are an unflattering reflection of your level of maturity.

I have the impression that you don't read my posts with a significant level of comprehension. There's no data mining going on. I explained how I ran into that thread through synchonicity only, and yet you spin it into desperate and deliberate data mining for the purposes of avoiding your unimpeachable "facts". You are truly a sick man, Zook.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:42 am
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
Zook, you are going to have to limit your posting on the UP forum to only this thread. Like I said before, you can create BS faster than I can clean it up, so I'm going to keep all your mess in one place. Your trolling is polluting the forum and distracting me from real truth-seeking. I've already had enough of your mischief in the eleven posts you've made since you reappeared. That mischief hasn't changed one iota since the last time you were suspended, or from any of the other times you were suspended (5 suspensions total). So keep your posts in this thread and follow the rules you would impose on others as a forum moderator, and you can continue to have a voice here. That's better than a sixth suspension for 32 weeks, don't you think?

I'll address your latest Hitler arguments in this thread, though I wonder why I bother, given your resistance to change.

.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:17 pm
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
UncleZook wrote:
Question begs: why is Chico bringing up totally unrelated stuff like my alleged psychology...

I already explained this to you earlier in this thread, but I'm sure it doesn't register because of your sociopathy. Your psychology is highly related to the deceit of your posts. As a sociopath, your intention is to deceive and manipulate, dominate others, belittle others, boast about yourself, show off, and win the game by any means necessary. Your intention is not to seek the truth. Your "verifiable content like the facts" is not truth, because your "facts" are propaganda. Your "preponderance of evidence" is a preponderance of propaganda. It doesn't matter how much preponderance you have if it is not truth. That's why you cannot deviate from your stubborn insistence that Hitler was a Rothschild stooge. You are faced with a wall of disinformation. Rather than look at the cracks in the wall that allow us to see it is hiding something, you look at the wall and declare it is solid!

You already agreed with me that most of what has been written about Hitler is a lie, and yet you rely on those lies to build your case about Hitler. This simply doesn't work for uncovering the truth, especially when one is a sociopath. As I mentioned earlier, it was the preponderance of your deceitful and manipulative arguments over such a long period of time that led me to suspect you were a sociopath. That's why your sociopathy is especially relevant to the Hitler argument now. You are still playing the same game!

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:43 am
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
UncleZook wrote:
The narrative I offered was specific and limited to any and all meaningful challengers/enemies that could reverse the Rothschild banking juggernaut of that time ... for only those challengers/enemies would have had the potential to disturb Europe during the 30s and 40s.

Hitler and National Socialism became that challenger/enemy over the course of 15 years while Hitler worked his way up from exemplary soldier to exemplary national leader. If it was all part of a Rothschild plan funded by Rothschild money, it wouldn't have taken 15 years, and it wouldn't have relied on so much chance and happenstance.

UncleZook wrote:
So the question begs: if Hitler started out as an average Joe...

He wasn't an average Joe. You'd know that if you really studied his life from people who knew him well, instead of propaganda you harvest off the Internet.

UncleZook wrote:
...how did he become a meaningful challenger/enemy IOW, how did Hitler rise in power ... from there, to power?

This you should also know already if you really studied Hitler. You can get a lot of information by reading the Hitler thread and investigating the links.

UncleZook wrote:
And I've already provided plenty of evidence to the financing connections, and virtually all connections lead back to the Rothschild hegemony.

That's wrong. Most of his financial support came from party members and party supporters. He also did quite well on the royalties from Mein Kampf. And he didn't waste money on himself or his comforts, but dedicated his time and resources to the growth of his movement. He was a man dedicated to Germany, and not to the Rothschilds. You would know this if you did any real study of Hitler, as I have.

UncleZook wrote:
I reiterate, the global hegemony was so complete by the 30s and 40s, that no independent Joe from any street in any country on the planet had the means to independently organize against this hegemony.

Germany was a threat already in 1914, which is one reason why WW1 was started. It was still a threat even after the war, which is why the terms of the Jewish-orchestrated Treaty of Versailles were so punitive and crippling for Germany. So it wasn't just Hitler that made Germany into a viable threat, which turns your theory into mush.

UncleZook wrote:
The hegemons controlled Hitler and the nonJewish Germans under Hitler ...

They tried to control Hitler and the nonJewish Germans, but they failed miserably, which is the whole reason they had to orchestrate WW2 and make it look like it was Hitler's fault. You would also know that if you properly studied all the intrigue and mendacity the British diplomats perpetrated behind the scenes prior to WW2, all at the behest of the Rothschild dynasty.

UncleZook wrote:
Not my illogical premise, facts. Irrefutable facts. The mathematics of so many Hitler connections to the Rothschild hegemony cannot be negated by your gatekeeping or anybody's conjecture.

They certainly can't when they are not concrete. I suggest you summarize these Rothschild connections in order of importance and provide concrete evidence that is irrefutable. So far, in our long debate from the past, none of your evidence was irrefutable. Au contraire, my refutations with source information are still posted in the forum for all to see. And you do know that.

UncleZook wrote:
From his orchestrated rise out of nowhere to the pinnacle of power in Germany ... to his controlled fall and departure from the sinking ship of Germany - as its captain - to latin America. Hitler was the hegemons' player and he did their bidding at each step of the play, including cosigning the Ha'avara agreement to displace "people without a land to a land without a people" (with both the landless people and the peopleless land being artificially induced by the hegemony); retreat from Dunkirk; attempted expansion into Moscow against the advice of his own general staff, thereby guaranteeing certain death of many of his own troops; etc.

Everyone of those points you have argued repeatedly in this forum, and I have refuted all of them repeatedly, with far greater study and research than you. You simply ignore all information that does not support your claims, and repeat those faulty claims ad infinitum.

UncleZook wrote:
The facts faithfully transcribe what was being planned as far back as 1909 (as per Norman Dodd's exposee of elitist thinktank thought of the time period in question), namely, contrived wars to change the face of Europe (WW1 and WW2).

Your Norman Dodd material has been thoroughly refuted. Have you no shame? Never mind, we know the answer...

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:56 am
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
Oh yeah, Zook, I have some more information on your projective identification syndrome, a symptom of your sociopathy. This is really a good find for me, as it helps illuminate the strategies and tactics you use in your charming posts. Other people who have to deal with you will surely find it useful, too!




Projective Identification
(duration 9:20)

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:15 am
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
UncleZook wrote:
...retreat from Dunkirk; attempted expansion into Moscow against the advice of his own general staff, thereby guaranteeing certain death of many of his own troops; etc.

We have debated these points multiple times in the past, and they have both been well refuted.

Hitler knew better than to slaughter the British and French at Dunkirk. It would have been a black mark on Germany in the public mind. Hitler especially wanted to win the support of the British public for National Socialism, as they were the perfect candidates to throw off the oppression of the Rothschild cabal, as Germany had successfully done, He also considered the British to be an Aryan-like people in their principles and values, which had been undermined and redirected by the Rothschild sociopathic leadership. So while some of his military advisers saw an opportunity to crush the British militarily, Hitler saw an opportunity to win the respect of the British people. Of course, most of what we know about Dunkirk has been completely twisted on its head, with the British civilian fishing fleet mounting a courageous rescue of the "doomed" British troops. This is just opportunistic wartime propaganda.

Moscow was just the standard blitzkrieg model (designed to minimize civilian damage and casualties while maximizing military success) of Germany military fighting that had worked so well for Hitler. It would have succeeded again in Russia, and brilliantly, if the severe winter weather had not intervened prematurely. There were always members of Hitler's military staff who argued against this new form of military tactics (the blitzkrieg), as Hitler was not one to silence dissenting voices when considering military campaigns. He wanted all viewpoints to be considered, but it is true that he made the final decision. Everyone in the German leadership recognized the wisdom of this, for Hitler always had the best interests of Germany foremost in his mind. He hated the war and saw it as a distraction from his lifelong plans to restore the German nation to health and prosperity. For you to state that Hitler was aiming for the "certain death of many of his troops" is beyond ludicrous and shows the paucity of your understanding of Hitler and Nazi Germany.

Your interpretation of both events is firmly planted in the Allied wartime propaganda that is continually reinforced to this day. This is one of your major problems -- accepting propaganda as truth. Without questioning the false history that has been carefully crafted by the victors, you will never approach the truth of Hitler, WW2, and the Holocaust.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:14 pm
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
UncleZook wrote:
...including cosigning the Ha'avara agreement to displace "people without a land to a land without a people" (with both the landless people and the peopleless land being artificially induced by the hegemony)

This argument of yours trying to denigrate Hitler has also been addressed numerous times in the forum ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ).

So, Mr. Zook, you keep repeating the same old tired and debunked arguments while ignoring the alternative explanations that have higher credibility and make more sense when viewed from the German perspective. This reminds me of the behavior of a gatekeeper, which is what you call anyone who disagrees with you. Hmm, given what you accuse me of, I am seeing signs of projective identification coming from you once again.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:16 am
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 9933
Reply with quote
Post Re: Genuine Truthseekers: UncleZook
Hey Zook! Bet you didn't know this (I just learned it myself):

Quote:
Non seulement Hitler est « épargné » par les balles qui fauchent seize de ses amis conjurés mais il rate même sa tentative de suicide d’après – son amie Erna Hanfstaengl lui a retiré in extremis le pistolet des mains … -- source

Translation: Not only was Hitler saved from the bullets that claimed 16 of his activist friends, but he even escapes a suicide attempt afterwards – his friend Erna Hanfstaeng pulled the gun from his hands at the last moment.

The was on November 9, 1923, after the Beer Hall Putsch that occurred the previous evening, and after the march toward armed police forces that gunned down many of Hitler's party members, including a man directly next to Hitler (the front row had all locked arms together).

Quote:
After reaching the center of Munich, the Nazis headed toward the War Ministry building but they encountered a police blockade. As they stood face to face with about a hundred armed policemen, Hitler yelled out to them to surrender. They didn't. Shots rang out. Both sides fired. It lasted about a minute. Sixteen Nazis and three police were killed. Göring was hit in the groin. Hitler suffered a dislocated shoulder when the man he had locked arms with was shot and pulled him down onto the pavement.

Hitler's bodyguard, Ulrich Graf, jumped onto Hitler to shield him and took several bullets, probably saving Hitler's life. -- source

So the question begs (as Zook is fond of saying), if Hitler is so well supported by the Rothschild cabal, why would he feel his life was a failure and that he needed to commit suicide?

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Sat Oct 27, 2018 5:19 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.