Jim and Diane, WALK AND TALK, Sep 12, 2025, Iryna; Kirk; 9-11; Irving; Sodom&Gomorroah; Medical Corruption

Holotruther
Published on Sep 12, 2025
*** Iryna, Ukranian Model (seriously???!!!)
*** Charlie Kirk (not so much a mystery): Netanyahu is now being overwhelmed with accusations Israel assassinated Charlie Kirk, and Netanyahu is jew-splaining to us lowly goyim that these are just ‘absurd rumors.’ The widespread suspicions and allegations are in no way ‘absurd.’ I’m finding many examples of Charlie Kirk quite aggressively criticizing and exposing Israel, the ADL, and the Jewish lobby. He correctly states that jews are the top donors to radical leftist causes and are also behind the radical open border policies. Also saying Jeffrey Epstein worked for the Israeli government. Kirk also said he was afraid Israel was going to assassinate him. These things are all absolutely true. And Netanyahu just lies and says Charlie had this great relationship with Israel, when in fact he was in the middle of exposing a whole slew of Israeli and Jewish crimes, ruthlessness, and treachery. Sep 11, 2025, Trevor Labonte
*** Abortion WORSE than Holocaust, Charlie Kirk
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/123837800.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
*** Asian Japan/Korea FIRST - Charlie Kirk was spreading his conservative message in Asia days before
he was killed
https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/charlie-kirk-was-spreading-conservative-message-asia-days-was-killed-rcna230759
*** 9-11 bogus narrative
*** David Irving
*** David Irving In Ottawa (Circa 1990), Sep 11, 2025 https://old.bitchute.com/video/4AGHG1TUqrH0/
*** https://robert-faurisson.com/history/a-challenge-to-david-irving/
David Irving: only “some feelings” about the extermination story: Now I come to David Irving’s presentation at the Revisionist Conference. The impression of magic persists there again. Irving has the honesty to advise us that, in fact, he has not studied the particular aspect of the history of the Second World War that some call the “Holocaust.” With some insistence he repeated that about the “Holocaust” specifically he only has some “feelings.” He said that in his mind there has been formed a certain impression of what “probably” took place. He does not for a moment attack the revisionist authors. He does not act like those persons who issue denunciations of the revisionists that are more and more categorical in proportion to the extent that they have not studied the question. However, even a David Irving sometimes gives in to the temptation to maintain opinions that, from his own point of view, he ought not to maintain since he has not studied the question. The errors that he makes here and there prove by themselves that he is a layman on this subject. According to the manuscript transcription of his presentation taken from the tape recording, David Irving uses the following words: (p. 42): … my suggestion that, if there was any kind of liquidation program going on, then Hitler did not know about it.... Setting aside for the moment the question of Hitler himself, let us deal only with the question whether or not, according to Irving, there was a program for the physical liquidation of the Jews. The words that I have just quoted show me a David Irving who answers my questions neither with a yes nor a no. However, by this very fact alone he takes, in my opinion, a courageous position, which must prompt his readers to some reflection since here Irving does not place himself among those who assume the extermination as an established fact. He speaks about it in the conditional mood (with “if”). That scepticism or that refusal to commit himself is encountered elsewhere on the same subject in his same presentation. Here are some quotations in which I have added emphasis to certain words. ... On several occasions David Irving, instead of talking with the degree of certainty that one can obtain from an investigation, prefers to talk about a “feeling” or about “feelings” that one can simply have in “mind”: I am now going to reproduce in its entirety a passage in which Irving tried to define his position. I emphasise the words in it which seem to me especially worthy of note – either because they frankly show the lack of certainty of the author, or because they call for explanations that are not forthcoming; from this comes the general impression that David Irving is making some accusations which are very serious, and yet about which he himself is not entirely sure, at least at this time. He says, as a matter of fact (p. 42): I would say I am satisfied in my own mind that in various locations [?], Nazi criminals [?] acting probably [?] without direct [?] orders from above, did carry out liquidations of groups [?] of people including Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, mentally incurable people and the rest. I am quite plain about that in my own mind. I can’t prove it, I haven’t got into that, I haven’t investigated that particular aspect of history but from the documents I’ve seen, I’ve got the kind of gut feeling which suggests to me that that is probably accurate. We would love to learn from Irving the facts about precisely how many such “locations” there were and at what geographical points? How many “Nazi criminals” in this matter were there, and what were the specific responsibilities of each? If they acted “probably without direct orders from above,” does that mean that they perhaps acted with indirect orders or perhaps even without orders at all? What does “from above” mean? About which level(s) of the hierarchy is Irving thinking here, if he is not alluding to Adolf Hitler alone? What were the processes of physical liquidation that were used? How large were those groups of victims? If, on the one hand, Irving has the honesty – rare among historians – to tell us: “I can’t prove it, I haven’t got into that, I haven’t investigated that particular aspect of history” and if, on the other hand, he mentions “the documents I have seen,” I can allow myself to deduce the following: David Irving has studied some documents which are not the ones that he would have studied if his research had dealt with the exterminations. In that case, not having carried out research on that aspect, he is not able to say very much about it. He can simply express his “feelings”. When he declared to his audience at the Revisionist Conference: (p. 42): … I am sure you realise that I take a slightly different line from several people here.
*** Crimes of Sodom and Gomorrah - God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their pervasive wickedness and widespread sin, a destruction described in Genesis 19 as a result of "sulfur and fire". While some interpretations emphasize sexual immorality and the city's demand for homosexual acts with Lot's visitors, others point to their general moral corruption, including arrogance, injustice, oppression of the poor, and a severe lack of hospitality. The cities served as a warning of divine judgment for all forms of sin and injustice.
*** Most Medical Journals Printing Mostly Lies, Sep 12, 2025 https://old.bitchute.com/video/ONLhuA5Vm6Vt/

Add to

Please Sign In or Create Account to use this feature!

Flag Video

Please Sign In or Create Account to use this feature!

Rate video

Please Sign In or Create Account to use this feature!

Rate video

Please Sign In or Create Account to use this feature!

DISCLAIMER

The content presented in this stream and/or video may be satirical in nature for entertainment purposes. It may contain realistic scenarios that may include themes of racism, anti-semitism, anti-LGBT sentiment and even elements such as death threats, all purely in the context of parody. In addition, this content may depict or refer to acts of violence in a satirical manner. Shock factor is a common and deliberate element used in these displays to emphasise the satirical message. By continuing to view this content, you acknowledge that you understand the satirical nature of this content, including the depiction of violence and the use of shock factor, and agree that you will not use or interpret this content outside of its intended context. Please remember that humour and satire are complex; they are not intended to belittle or demean, but to engage and challenge social norms through exaggeration. If you have any concerns about content, please feel free to engage in constructive dialogue or report issues to GTV staff.