Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #390605

Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS

Show all headers | View raw

Am 22.08.2016 15:47, schrieb Odd Bodkin:

>>
>> The faked 'Kaiser' Wilhelmm II was actually the nephew of Queen Victoria
>> and not particular German and not elected, as the title 'kaiser' would
>> require.
>>
>> But it was actually him, who led Germany into a conflict, which was not
>> designed to solve any problems, but to kill as many human beings as
>> possible.
>
> And so you are claiming that Kaiser Wilhelm, who led Germany into the
> conflict, was not German and so Germany is not responsible for Germany's
> involvement with WWI?


Germany as a nation was created in the year 1871. Before this year there 
was no  country named 'Germany' or similar. 'German' is a language, not 
a people.

The first Kaiser was in fact elected like formerly the emperors of the 
'Holy Roman Empire of German Nations'. These 'german nations' were 
actually the Francs, which spoke French and had Paris as their capital.

'Austria' is derived from 'East Francia' and was the eastern part of the 
medieval empire of the Francs. Germany was the middle part of that Empire.

The Francs had a Kaiser and that was an office, into which someone was 
elected. Kaiser Wilhelm I was in fact elected. To call the middle part 
of the francish Empire 'Reich' was a little questionable, but was 
somehow acceptable.

But  Wilhelm II was not elected.

This is important, since that throne was not inherited.

Doesn't matter too, much, since Germany wasn't a 'Reich' neither.

So, who was that guy and what was he doing there on  that throne?

To blame the people of Germany for the deeds of this 'Kaiser' is rather 
sick.

> Are you nuts?
>
>>
>> Most of the victim were in fact British and French.
>>
>> It was actually Churchill himself, who headed the idiotic campaign of
>> Gallipoli.
>>
>> Also the trenches in Flanders had no other purpose as to kill as many
>> people as possible.
>>
>> Same with the so called Revolution in Russia, initiated by the very same
>> circles.
>>
>> Who these people are, that is not exactly known.
>>
>> (I personally assume certain sects, like Rosecrucians and Illuminati,
>> who secretly pull the strings from behind the scenes. But actually I do
>> not know.)
>>
>> These groups have also banks and control the money flow, what they had
>> used to initiate hyperinflations.
>
> So you are saying that an underground conspiracy by a secret society was
> responsible for all the ills that Germany suffered in the 20th century?

No, I assume, that these hyperinflations were actually fabricated by 
certain international banks.

This was similar to the so called 'world economic crisis' of 1929, from 
which predominately US citizens suffered.


WWI was an unnecessary conflict, which was carried out against simple logic.

So this war caused tremendous losses of life and material, but for no 
obvious gain on neither side of the conflict.

So what was that war good for, what were the objectives and why did it 
not end after stalemate in the trenches?

It was not meant to be won (by the Germans), since the war seems to 
follow a certain plan.

Such a scheme we find in other wars, too, especially in WWII.

There were many campaigns, which were obvious nonsense, like siege of 
St. Petersburg, Stalingrad or Rommel's Africa campaign.

The entire war was nonsense and could not possibly be meant as winnable 
by the Germans.

So the war was against the German population, maintained by spies in top 
positions.




>> This was exceptionally profitable, since money and property lost by
>> ordinary people went into the hands of the 'bad guys'.
>>
>> And hyperinflation was definitely nothing, what the common man would
>> usually chose. So, Germans did neither want trenches in Flanders nor
>> hyperinflation.
>>
>> Similar with communist and/or fascists riots and coups.
>>
>> To say 'the Germans' made that is simply a lie.
>>
>> It was nevertheless made and among the makers were Germans, but the
>> common people did not participate in such events.
>>
>> Same pattern with the Nazis.
>
> Who were not Germans?


Since the term 'German' could have different meanings, you must say, 
what meaning you have in mind.

The choices are:

- citizens of the Federal Republic of Germany (now) or of the nation 
'Deutsches Reich' at that time

- speakers of the German language

- members of certain tribes, which the Romans called 'Germanes'.

Most English/US people believe in the nazi propaganda, that Germans are 
'a people' ('Volk'). Only this is not true, since the citizens of 
Germany are not that ethnically related to each other. This is similar 
to the USA, which also have people from many regions of the world.

Since German is a language, which is spoken in several other countries 
besides Germany, you obviously mean German citizenship with 'German'.

But you certainly know, that several Nazis were not German citizens. 
This was especially the case for Hitler, who was born in Austria. He 
later moved to Bavaria, what was also another country until relatively 
recent.

Arthur di Gobineau was actually French and Houston Steward Chamberlain 
was English, like King Edward, Winifried Wagner or Unity Midfort.

But we had also Americans, who liked the Nazis. E.g. Henry Ford was 
famous for friendly relations to Hitler (and for anti-semitic attitudes).

About this we can be quite certain, since Ford wrote a book with the 
title 'The International Jew'.

>>
>> Personally I believe, that 'Hitler' was the false identity of a British
>> spy, who had the real identity Noel Trevenen Huxley.


The idea stems from Greg Hallet, who wrote a book called 'Hitler was a 
British Agent'.

The answer to the question, which Englishmen posed as 'The Fuehrer' was 
my own idea. And Huxley was the only person  which seemed possible: he 
was also born in 1889 and the Huxley family has several connections to 
nazi topics (Eugenics, Darwin, Brave New World).

Aldous Huxley also had connections to Ludwig Wittgenstein, who was 
schoolmate of the real Hitler in Linz.

So I assume, that the 'Apostles' were kind of hub, where certain 
influential people met (Wittgenstein, Russel, Huxley and others)

>> He lived in the house of the Wagner family in Munich, to where he was
>> brought by his brother Julian Huxley. That was a British spy and head of
>> 'Eugenics'. He went to Bavaria in 1913 for a year (for WWI planning).
>>
>> Forerunners of the Nazis were actually British and American, like the
>> BUF and the Silver Shirts.
>>
>> Supporters of German Nazis were people like Henry Ford or Prescott Bush.
>>
>> Churchill also supported the fascists, as we can see in the relation of
>> niece Diana to Sir Oswald Mosley and niece Unity to Hitler himself.
>>
>> It was also found out, that Mussolini was on the payroll of MI6.
>>
>> Anyhow..
>>
>> The Nazis have never won any election. Their takeover was actually a
>> coup, supported by Ludendorf and Hindenburg.
>
> A German coup against Germans.


Secret societies are not related to nations, but act international. (At 
least I have heard, this would be the case.)

So 'Germans' is the wrong category and we should consider different 
attributes to group people together.

Ethnic relations are such a category. E.g. we could follow the trail of 
the Vikings, Visigoth, Vandals or the Phoenicians and how they emerged 
of the centuries and whether or not hey had influence on such developments.

Religion is also a possible category.

E.g. 'Arians' was actually an early form of Christianity, which was 
common among the Vikings.

Or we could follow the Romans and what they have done, since their 
Empire vanished.

The Romans had certain sun-Gods and this motive we find in 
Nazi-symbolism, too.

'Fasces' stems actually from the Etruscans and we could search for 
influences of these people in modern times.

But ethnicity seems to be the wrong track, since there were too many 
people, tribes and Empires, which could eventually create things like 
secret societies.

'Remains of the Roman Empire' (its ancient 'military industrial 
complex') seems to be my most likely hypothesis so far.

TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-16 23:23 +0200
  Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-16 14:48 -0700
    Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-08-17 08:07 +1000
  Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:33 -0500
    Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-19 02:45 +0200
      Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 07:30 -0500
        Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-21 07:12 +0200
          Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 17:41 -0500
            Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-22 06:02 +0200
              Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-08-21 21:47 -0700
              Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 08:47 -0500
                Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-22 23:47 +0200

csiph-web