Ok, I will think about how to organize the topic.
Yes, Critical Mass I was shooting different examples to awake interest and force the readers to think.
Of course it needs to be organized.
For starters, I would ban, for a week, any talk of history, first we would need to think about information, about saving and protecting it, about theory, just in abstract with no details or specific references.
Just take a week to meditate on how hard it is to save information from the past, against wars, new dynasties, occupations, revolutions, new governments, mistranslations, personal egoisms, natural catastrophes, religious and cultural changes, political changes...
Only after such thing has been done, could we proceed to question, in a serious matter, history.
How? As in a trial.
Easy, simple, fair, in a trial you have to prove that such an event happened this way and only this way for this reason and at such time, beyond any shadow of doubt.
And any witness will be questioned, the key elements will be questioned, when was the homicidal weapon found? By whom? What happened later? Was it under custody of the police all the time? Who had access to it?
Is it unequivocal and absolute proof? Could it be faked? Would we detect it?
Has the event been remade with actors/volunteers/models? Is it physically possible?
History should be treated like that, in a Sherlock Holmes way. Not as a religious dogma as it's today.
Once we realized how politicized it is, how it is used, how fast it can change (see Nazi Germany, before Hitler, during and after, in 13 years there were three Germanies, and after the occupation 35.000 books were made illegal and burned, house by house searches in every city, for prosecuted books, statues, buildings take down, just simple geometric symbols were made illegal, in front of our eyes, in the time and name of freedom and democracy...) then we will start to have the mind's attitude to research on our own and see what's there.
Any previous war will be like the occupation of Germany, another 35.000 books forbidden, a complete political change, prosecution of the old order, censure, massive brainwashing...
The scope of the war will be minimized, see Dresden, see the bombing of civilians, it will be hidden as "only military and industrial installations", millions of displaced and murdered east-germans will be censored.
Would you trust a history of pre-Hitler and Hitlerian Germany only to Soviet sources? Of course not.
In this case there was too much information, it already was a highly globalized and almost information-age epoch.
But, in the 1860s? That's different, information about other countries was slower, only the telegraph (easy to block), travel was way slower, no planes, books were more scarce and expensive, and more centralized in known key archives.
And we have time, old documents of and before that era will eat the dust.
I highly suspect the discoveries of new biblical and gnostic documents, they want to give the impression that paper survives forever, therefore supporting official history. No, paper ages very fast.
And the culture, the way of thinking of centuries ago is impossible for us to guess, the cultural differences between us and the 60s for example is enormous... expand it to a few centuries... no, we have no idea, we can't put ourselves in their brains, the idea of history, of a linear chronology, of the necessity of writing down historical events... there may be reasons or technologies we just don't suspect.
They were more clever, they wrote in stone, we are the stupids who "save" information in paper.
The word lithography gets its root from lit, stone.
How much do we know about the past? Do we know the situation of the continents, the sea-level?
We don't. Carbon dating and other methods don't work. We know the sea-level changed, and we know many sunken cities, from England to the black sea and the Mediterranean.
Are we really sure of how Europe was 300 hundred years ago? How?
Ask your family members, do any of you know of one single ancestor's tomb of 300 years ago? I bet none of you.
So, they managed to get us into believing we were under Christianity for 1600 years, we managed to keep even older ruins, but we have no graves of 300 years or more?
Why? Why the discrepancy between the official history (know it all, to the details, sacredness of the past and truth) and the real, popular level of our families, who barely know their grand-grand-parents and didn't give a f...
How is it possible that all cultures of all continents... decided to paint maps with the north up? Could it be that they are fake?
Many old maps of coastal cities were painted from the sea, to be as useful to sailors as possible.
This topic includes two subjects, one, proof of the artificial construction of history, another, awakening the truth that history is a pseudo-science, an impossibility, an ideal, you can't verify it as chemistry or biology or physics, history is either a "sherlock Holmes" detective art of enormous difficulty, or a political weapon and an easy way to earn money parroting the script.
But it's not science, it's not sacred.
It's paper, written by who knows who and when.
If you want truth, check it, as in a trial, "re-live" it, does it make physical sense?
Money is another factor, an example, many countries invented their legendary inventors to avoid paying patents in the XIX century.
Nationalism is also a factor, Fomenko points to a unified European empire (official history too, the caesars, napoleon, etc...) so, after the breakup, the same guy was remade with different names in every region/country.
It's known Europe was ruled by the same royal family, and it makes sense, power grows, economy of scale...
The key is to look at history from the present to the past, not from some particular date in the past and from there forward to the present, that method is absurd, it's used only to solidify that "ancient" past, to give life and "love" to something that doesn't exist.
Use the present, and look back, see how cavalry, armor, "roman" style, galleys, cathedrals, circus, medieval fights, musketeer clothing, walled cities, latin and greek, all that is already there in the first half of the XIX century, see the books of the time, "re"printing of the roman "classics", see the paganism of the time.
And go back to the second half of the XIX century, the masonic institutions, Royal Academies of History, Royal Institutes, printing press, the revolutionary change of advanced rifling and machine guns...
The last samurai is a good movie, in a few years the world was changed, he who had machine guns and steam power became ruler of the whole world, period. Could do whatever he wanted, his troops marched over every city, took every townhall, library, put occupation governments and the same ideology and way of thinking.
The same power still rules today.
What's the key message of the system? Stay calm, and pacifist, everything is good, known, and taken care for the good of all.
They immediately claim the ruins they created were "very old" from "romans from two thousand years ago"... nothing to see, keep walking...
They don't want us to check recent, 19th history, when they committed the biggest massacres possible to imagine, they destroyed it all, worse than WW2 level.
They don't want us to look at the legal changes of the 19th century, when capitalism and corporation were created, when they stole it ALL, when they privatized what we, our ancestors had created for centuries.
They waste our time with circus of ancient Greece and other worthless unimportant distant events.
They don't want us to look at the lack of legitimacy they have, all over the world, by their brutal revolt in the 19th century.
The incorrectly called French Revolution happened later, in 1848-1853 and from then on, all the possessions of Marie Antoinette were.. in Russia, in Saint Petesburg, in the hands of the richest family, Yusupov (the same family who killed Rasputin without a reprisal).
The French revolution was an anti-French revolution, French was spoken everywhere in all courts of Europe...and the legitimate power, the "French" or only Royal Family of Europe lost, was pushed out of Russia into today's France.
The hair of the Queen still has the date 1853.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/23 ... c84fcd.jpg
After that, the cossacks, the savages of the east, the insurrected, led by Jews (who later betrayed their useful tools, 1888 murder of the Czar) continue bombing and destroying Europe.
Paris was leveled in 1871, Spain later, here called "Carlist War" and "Insurrecion cartonal".
That decade, 1870 all walls in all cities were destroyed, isn't it weird? Why were the walls destroyed?
If you check pictures or drawings, European cities still had big walls, in stars... I'm tired of seeing plaques detailing the dates of the demolition of the walls of towns. All in this era.
Why? Because the war had ended, we lost, and there was only one power in Europe, the army of the Jews, very soon to be changed to just the Jews, the money power, the banks.
There was no gold before that, they launched a huge campaign to give the impression that gold had been used before, but that's false, silver was the standard.
In the case of Spain you can compare the 1869 "Republic" coin to the early centuries "Roman Republic" coins, they are the same, the exact same design and drawings.
It was the same process, the old law, the old regime was destroyed and defamed, "stone age, dark age, brutal feudalism..."
In fact, they lost because of their low taxation!
We know very little, in Spain police (Guardia Civil) records of the 19th century show huge rural insurrection and the charges were usually "defending the republic", which is absurd, because it was very short lived and chaotic.
But "republic" could mean something different, the old "republican" order, the old "roman empire" before the coup 'd état, the empire and Christianity, before the privatizations, the "desamortizaciones" (from mort, death, "death" land that belongs to the villagers and can't go to the banks or the market).
In the middle of the 19th century, in Spain, the central government sent envoys to every town, they had orders to check "old roman ruins", and find details about them.
Why? How is it that the government doesn't know it's own history? Explanations? They were new occupants, invaders, a foreign troop.
Also, why would they ask about roman ruins, directly? Wasn't "Rome" thousand and four hundred years ago? Why not ask about Al-Andalus, about the Visigoths? Nope, that part of "history" hasn't been written yet.
There was both a cataclysm and a massive war and change of regime.
The research on "new-chronology" or just rechecking of history today is lead by Russians, who after so many soviet lies have learned to recheck everything.
They found for example, that there's not a single tree in the pictures of the Crimean war. The forests there are all "new" (from that era, 150 years old, not more).
I myself found and photographed German inscriptions in "russian" Saint Petesburg, and they accepted that it was culturally French before... Russian is new, Hitler in his book talks a lot about his impressions of the de-Germanization and the slavization of Eastern and Central Europe. You can check many cities there and find German founders.
Go to wikipedia and look for Bistro, in Russian it means fast, in Paris it's a type of "fast" cafeteria, the Russian troops shouted that word all the time demanding food... but the official history puts those events in the Napoleonic wars... the trouble comes when the linguistics show that it only appeared after 1871...there's no evidence of the use of that word before...
So... the Napoleonic war was in 1871, the "P-Russian" troops are very similar to Russian troops...a Napoleon was in power too... a Napoleon that went to Russia (Crimean War).
After 1871 journals started giving accounts of previous battles of long ago... the government started centenaries...
Did you know there was a IV centenary of the "discovery of America" but neither a III, nor a II or a first centenary? Hm Curious.. isn't it?
What's the most famous book on the Napoleonic Wars? Tolstoy War and Peace... When was it written... in the decade of 1860...
Wait.. 50 years later? Can you imagine Bush, or General Petraeus writing about his Iraq war FIFTY YEARS AFTER? Or Churchill writing 50 years later? No! They write about it immediately, or a few years later, not half a century later!
I close remembering what I said about Intellectuals, they are INTELLIGENCE operatives, they don't do science, truth or research, they do war, on you.