[rerevisionist]

'Holocaust' (TM) Exit Strategy - UK ex-Secretary of Education Kenneth Baker

Interesting exit strategy. Rather than simply tell the truth, that Jews and the cowardly allies and the murderous USSR manufactured the nonsense of the 'Holocaust' (TM). It has been used to help with money-making scams, but also social engineering projects - covers for real genocides, forced immigration, dumbing-down education, etc. The facts about propaganda ought to be incorporated into any serious history teaching.

But we now have a new strategy in the UK by Kenneth Baker (one-time 'Education Secretary') who says 'the Holocaust' shouldn't taught at all. Watch for suggestions soon that atom and nuclear weapons should not be taught.

Stop teaching about the holocaust so that children see Germany in a better light, says Lord Baker
British schools should no longer teach children about the Nazis because it makes them think less favourably of modern Germany, the architect of the National Curriculum has claimed.
By Tom Rowley 6:00AM GMT 24 Dec 2011 Daily Telegraph

Lord Baker of Dorking [Kenneth Baker - rerev], who spent three years as Margaret Thatcher’s education secretary, said that he would ban the topic and concentrate on British history instead. In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, he said that schools should concentrate on teaching “the story in our own country” rather than the events of the Second World War, including the Holocaust. Lord Baker, who introduced the National Curriculum in the 1980s, said: “I would ban the study of Nazism from the history curriculum totally. “It’s one of the most popular courses because it’s easily taught and I don’t really think that it does anything to learn more about Hitler and Nazism and the Holocaust. It doesn’t really make us favourably disposed to Germany for a start, present-day Germany.”

Lord Baker now runs a series of university technical colleges which teach courses on the lives of great British engineers, scientists and inventors, a model he would like to see applied more widely.

"Why I’ve got a thing against the Holocaust and all of that is I think you study your own history first,” he said. “I’m sure that German children are not studying the British Civil War, right? I think children should leave a British school with some idea of the timeline in their minds – how it came from Roman Britain to Elizabeth II.”

He stressed that he would not entirely exclude European history, saying that in order to study the Tudors and Stuarts, students would have to learn about Luther.

“I would focus much more on British history basically. But that takes you over the seas – we’ve been a great international country. It takes you into the empire. We’ve been a seafaring nation – you get to know other countries.”

Holocaust charities dismissed his suggestion. [NB this phoney subject is compulsory in many parts of the British education system - rerev]

James Smith, Chairman of the Holocaust Centre, said: “The study of the Holocaust leaves children ill-disposed to present day Germany only if it is badly taught. The period of the Nazis was not just a blip in German history; the Holocaust was a Europe-wide crime. The Holocaust is why the nations of the world, not only Germany, ratified the United Nations Convention to Prevent and Punish the Crime of Genocide and why the United Nations looked forward to the day the International Criminal Court would be established. Forgetting how much of our legislation that protects fair and equal societies is rooted in the knowledge of how far humans can sink would be a backward step for civil society and democratic values.”

His remarks come as ministers prepare to overhaul the curriculum. The Coalition has tasked an expert panel with reviewing the structure of existing lessons in England and is expected to issue a report next year. It could recommend making history compulsory up to the age of 16 – instead of the current cut-off of 14.

Lord Baker said that his biggest regret as education secretary was not extending the school day by at least one period. He said it was “outrageous” that most schools finish for the afternoon at 2.30 or 3pm, causing “huge, huge problems with childcare”. He would prefer schools to teach until at least 4 or 5pm, extending their lunch hour to include an hour of sport, drama, debating or even puppetry. By extending the teaching day until 5pm and adding two extra weeks a year in his university technical colleges, the institutions have gained the equivalent of an extra teaching year for every pupil over five years. But he was forced to retreat on his ambitions as education secretary because of opposition from teaching unions, he said.

“There was a two-year teachers’ strike and by settling it, we made an agreement with the teachers that they can only spend – I think the figure is still the same – 1,215 hours a year “If I was going to ask them to do another 40 minutes, I’d have had to reopen the negotiations – I just couldn’t take it on.” He added that union resistance would still block the idea today.

[rerevisionist]

Exit strategies from the 'Holocaust' fraud as pointers to further possible nuke exit strategies

This is the late Christopher Hitchens (19 Feb, 2001):--

IS THERE a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel? I suppose there may be. But not, surely, a poseur and windbag who receives (and takes as his due) such grotesque deference on moral questions. ... etc

Hitchens knew perfectly well there are very many far more contemptible poseurs in the media, politics, military etc. Why pick on Wiesel? Probably because Wiesel's lies were out of adjustment with the traditional 'Holocaust' lies. There's a lot in CODOH.com on this. And for example (a recent email to the Daily Telegraph--

Elie Wiesel, whom I have mentioned several times without a single person proffering an explanation for his statement in the book "Night" regarding "truckloads of Jewish babies being tipped into Pits of Fire".

If - here's a metaphor - you have a ramshackle shed, cobbled together from assorted lies and distortions, and part of it is unacceptably rotten, probably it's best to excise it entirely. Hence Hitchens. Hitchens as far as I know supported all the official crap about 9/11.

Is there an analogy with nuke lies? I'd suggest radiation may be the first thing to go. Watch for accounts of how it was exaggerated and so on - though this may be tricky as it seems to have been used for land clearance in Ukrainia and in Japan and no doubt the USA. They'd have to find a fall guy; Oppenheimer might have worked years ago, but he's long gone..

[rerevisionist]

Looking at a large branch of Waterstone's today - British bookselling chain. The second world war history section had, of course, no books by David Irving, since he's disliked by Jews for telling the truth. I was interested to see, however, that there seemed no books on the 'Holocaust' (TM). And in addition, I could see not one on Hiroshima/Nagasaki. This may well be part of the backpedalling and exit strategy on these two latter subjects. The war books were all the usual gung-ho stuff, presumably aimed at male readers who like fantasy violence. I suppose I need hardly say that books on the backup stuff of war - weapons and ammunition and bomb factories, plane and tank production, and the agreements and deals by which these things were paid - simply do not exist.

I remember a small publisher once, at a meeting years ago, complaining that most of the public never go into bookshops, and he thought this was a problem bookshops should address. I didn't like to say I have some sympathy for the public; many people, looking at the stuff promoted for them, must sense there's something not quite right, even though it takes a lot of mental effort to imagine products which don't exist. I've sometimes thought it might be a good idea to start a Revisionist Bookshop, maybe in Hay-on-Wye, with everything from WW2 and 'Holocaust' and wars-started-by-fraud, to modern science and cell biology, the Darwin/Wallace issue, pressures against the family, complaints against legal systems, Marco Polo, Titanic, revisionist historical redatings such as Peter James and the Russian school, paper money and the Rothschilds and others, NASA of course, the media and TV, art history fakes, literary frauds and so on.

[rerevisionist]

The AIDS fraud has been going since 1984-ish. It's a significant part of modern scientific fraud. Is there an identifiable exit strategy?

The website https://www.aidsisover.com has what they'd no doubt all a 'strapline' - It's Official - They've Admitted They Were Lying All Along! However, what's on that site is a ridiculous confused mixture, from which no obvious pattern emerges. One rather obvious fact is the omission of Jewish involvement, which is I suppose predictable, and means that none of the official exit strategies in any field will ever be intellectually satisfying, since the entire motive force will be omitted. (In the same way, official post-mortems of wars since maybe the US Civil War, and of atrocities such as the Armenia genocide, have never been satisfactory - think of A J P Taylor looking back on WW1 and WW2 as examples). It's clear that as long as there's significant Jewish stranglehold over information, exit strategies will have this incomplete element. It's also clear that the issue is serious - as long as Jewish or Jewish-funded liars get priority, important lessons will not be learnt.

Incidentally (sigh) 'Aidsisover' was linked from a site called https://www.breakfornews.com which is itself a Jewish-controlled site trying to find a Jewish-friendly exit strategy from 9/11 truth.

[NUKELIES]

There's no doubt that the AIDS industry is floundering. They've got a new ad campaign in New York City to promote the myth that AIDS drugs are sustaining people indefinitely now. At the 59th Street Columbus Circle station there are a series of posters showing people who supposedly have AIDS / HIV who are supposedly surviving because of their drug prescriptions. Interestingly, most of the people are black.

There's one poster of a muscular black guy in full drag queen makeup - but wearing lumberjack clothes. His eyes look like ostrich eyes and it's rather repulsive. I couldn't stop myself from staring at it because it caused my eyes such pain One must partake of the ferment on occasion.

I've been noticing that subway AIDS ads have been targeting specifically latinos and blacks for years now - obviously because they are likely to be less informed. What that suggests about the possible declining interest among white people is rather encouraging. Let's hope 'minorities' catch on quick. (They are definitely not minorities in NYC.)

Update: I took a picture of the poster today at 59th Street Station / Columbus Circle:

AIDS.jpg (36.12 KiB) Viewed 128 times

[rerevisionist]

Thanks NL for the blacks/ latinos info, which I didn't know. I Googled for images - see montage below - and see what you mean about targeting blacks, in particular, I think (I'm not sure about Latinos because Spanish language material of course doesn't specifically show up in an image search). Less informed than whites, no doubt; but it could also mean there are now fewer gullible Freddie Mercury types, and the 'industry' is increasingly shifting towards indirect government funding from pressure groups and industry lobbies, and recipients of handouts and 'benefits' as is likely to happen with any state-backed lobby group fraud with little informed popular support.

The final image below is not the 'AIDS' related drag queen poster - but does suggest there are limits to promotion of blacks by Jews.

[NUKELIES]

it could mean there are now fewer gullible Frddie Mercury types

I think that may be true, and metrosexuality has overtaken the whole gay thing in New York, London, California, etc. - so basically there are fewer "gays" than there used to be. Having grown up in San Francisco, I've been exposed to what I call "The Cult of Gay" since I was a boy. It was just another trend, fashion, and fad - just with much more virulent (no pun intended) political aspects. The whole definition of the label 'gay' is being blurred by a generation of Americans and Europeans who are coming of age after the fact. They perceive few or no taboos concerning sexuality, with the probable exception of pedophilia, so the line established in the 1960s-80s between "gay" and "straight" has lost most of its relevancy for them. The proliferation of porn on the internet has drastically eroded most ideas about sexuality that were ironclad and immovable up until just a few years ago - basically until YouTube paved the way for feasible internet video distribution.

The world is changing at a rapidly accelerating pace - and since humanity is showing itself to be almost absurdly flexible - it's now time for it to wake up from the dominating fear of nuclear bombs.

I would add to your favourite author's quote that "There is no nonsense so arrant that it cannot be made the creed of the vast majority by adequate governmental action," by appending the cliché "You can fool all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all of the people all of the time."

[rerevisionist]

Yes, good stuff here. I see you put a lot of emphasis on homosexuality - that must annoy some of the propagandists; if you remember there were huge attempts made to claim it was NOT a 'gay plague' in spite of the fact it was made up based on a handful of 'gay' males with very extreme anal sex and drug lifestyles.

However part of the grip of 'AIDS' was the fear of a new 'black death' and of course the horrible iatrogenic deaths helped this mythology. Poor Freddie Mercury was too high profile to escape.

I can't help wondering if there's quite a large proportion of populations who simply don't believe the fear propaganda. Either through not listening, or being in some sense uneducated, or just finding it not credible. Or perhaps there's a limit to the time people can feel fear - do many people fear Hell these days? Presumably they once did. Do you remember Mooninquirer (I think, on this site) saying his mother just laughed at the idea of a multiple H-bomb warhead? I'm pretty sure at the time of the AIDS scare many people didn't believe it. I can recall a statistic - that condom use went from 34% to 43% - I remember the figures because of that numerical coincidence. What 'condom use' meant wasn't clear (new partners? Untrusted partners?) but the obvious fact was it didn't go to 100%. Now that fear seems largely absent. Many porn videos show 'unprotected' sex. As far as I know (from one 'chat') 'webcam models' in between trying to lure men into signing into their irrevocable online clubs get medical checkups, but that's it. The Channel 4 sex TV programmes hardly mention AIDS at all.

But, again, maybe that's a natural reaction to genuine danger. If you visit sites around the British coast, there are small settlements, some dating back to prehistoric times; consider Tintagel, for example, a sort of castle built on rocks in the sea. Anyone who lived there must have been in constant danger of falling to their deaths. Maybe it was sufficient strain that they became careless of that real danger?

The best bet of the exit strategians is (I suppose) to phase out AIDS, and declare it has been cured by the wonders of modern science. But that means they'd lose a lot of money. ... The one constant is that the truth has to be kept obscured.

[NUKELIES]

They are already announcing an AIDS "vaccine." Whatever that is. I think you hit the nail on the head with the term "exit strategy" - it applies to "AIDS" more than anything else including nukes. If you really weigh crime against crime, AIDS is even more heinous than nuke propaganda - with the sad and major exception of Hiroshima/Nagasaki. But now they're killing everybody off with pharmaceuticals - not just "gays" - witness the proliferation of "auto-immune" disease, which is the most bogus pseudo-medical concept ever dreampt up. Pills anyone?

[rerevisionist]

I got the idea of 'exit strategy' (or at least it crystallised in me) from Richard Branson, who, on a TV programme said in effect that whenever he plans a takeover or new operation, he also works out an exit strategy if it's needed. It's a similar idea to a 'prenuptial agreement'. It must be a common idea among prime movers or principals, as of course applies to Branson & to marriage agreements. It's less common among non-principals, i.e. most people; for example, I doubt if people faking 'nuke' movies in Lookout Mountain ever thought about the 'industry' exit strategy. It must be fairly routine amongst the designers of the huge frauds we have had in recent centuries, though the 'exit strategy' must often be the simple formula "Well, it's worked so far, the goyim will never work out what we've done."

[NUKELIES]

though the 'exit strategy' must often be the simple formula "Well, it's worked so far, the goyim will never work out what we've done."

Exactly... up until now that the internet can shine the light on them! Even if some or all of them have altruistic motives, there is a great balancing taking place because of the information highway - and it's healthy.

[rerevisionist]

This is a new (20 Feb 2012) BBC item https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16909592 What has happened to Nasa's missing Moon rocks? The BBC tactfully doesn't mention the 'moon rock' identified as fossil wood. And no doubt there were other anomalies...

One fake moon rock was split up into 370 bits and made into gifts for 270 nations, and 50 US states (who presumably got 2 each). They sound like the sort of thing given on game shows - wooden plaque, national flag, and enclosed in lucite. (Perspex in Britain).

The large-scale disappearance is not a new story (Google or Bing or Ask etc for 'hundreds of nasa moon rocks missing'). There are queries going back to 1970.

This must surely be an 'exit tactic' - part of the 'exit strategy'!