America is on the wrong side

Will we ever finally realize that the bottom line leads straight to hell?

19th April 2011

[ includes ClarityQuest podcast with Zane Henry and John Kaminski, which touches on currency as consciousness, the right to resist government poisons falsely called medicines, and America being on the wrong side of every important issue in the world here]

At this very moment, staunch allies of the United States in Bahrain and Yemen are shooting their own citizens in the head and following the Jewish practice of harvesting them for their organs � all for protesting government tyranny. But in Libya, the story is very different, where a legitimate and independent government is being destroyed so that the Western powers and international bankers can steal the valuable supplies of oil and water from a much defamed but always peaceful and productive nation. here

America is on the wrong side, in every subject, on every question, concerning any matter of principle, practice or policy in the world. Instead of being on the side of people it pretends to protect, America is on the side of the international bankers who are squeezing the life out of everyone. How many more disasters will it take for people to realize this? And if America ultimately succeeds in its totalitarian quest, how long will it be before people everywhere are forbidden to think about the moral depravity of state-sponsored criminality at all?

America as a government and hence as nation is on the wrong side of everything. One need look no further than how it is misleading its own citizens on the dangers of radiation from Japan as it closes down its radiation monitoring stations and deliberately deceives the public with rosy reports of minuscule radioactivity over North America. All the while, reports from nongovernmental radiation monitors reveal the worst. The question of which reporting is true will be answered in a very short time when millions of people begin to get seriously sick.

America has become like an abused pi�ata that has been slammed so many times by people stealing its money that all its treasures are spilling to the ground like so much blood from a bleeding heart that has been forcibly carved out of the carcass of its owner, who is each one of us.

In matters of money, medicine, media and aggression against other hapless target countries whose resources we want to steal and whose people we want to enslave, America is absolutely, irrevocably and permanently on the wrong side.

Why? Because America is not run by Americans. It is run by people who claim to have no nationality, they just work for the common good. That's why they've let all those nonAmericans into the country, they say. It's for the common good. Now that we have a bonafide nonAmerican president, who refuses to defend American borders that are being overrun by illegal immigrants, we can see clearly that America is no longer being run by Americans. Who are they, you ask? No, the problem is you're afraid to ask. I've been telling you the answer for years, but you think you'll be harmed if you believe what I tell you, never realizing that you are being terminally injured because you don't.

The rest of the world should realize (and I believe they probably already have and I just don't know it) that any country that lies to its own citizens will lie to every other country it deals with. The U.S. track record with its own native population should have answered that question a hundred years ago, but the American people have gone on believing their government has always been telling them the truth, and that is the course that was followed in our way to the ultimate destruction of America day, which to all observers appears to be not more than a few months off, if that long.

I began to think about how America has always been on the wrong side after I read Adolf Hitler's declaration of war against the U.S. four days after Pearl Harbor. In part, Hitler said: "The American President and his plutocratic clique have called us the "have not" nations. That is correct! But the "have nots" also want to live, and they will certainly make sure that what little they have to live on is not stolen from them by the "haves."

( Read Hitler's whole speech here )

It will definitely open your eyes as it sounds like a description of the world today.

America is on the wrong side. Think about it. Where does that put your "support our boys in uniform" shtick, our boys who are raping Iraqi children for kicks, bombing wedding parties in Afghanistan by pushing buttons in Tampa, and siding with the Israelis as "God's Chosen people" as these insane Jews slaughter well-meaning people who try to bring food to starving people in Gaza?

America is on the wrong side. Think about the big push to get you to take the poison swine flu vaccine, the coverup of autism-producing Thimerosal in most vaccines, forcing its own troops to take vaccines whose ingredients are never revealed, and vaccinating the cervixes of little girls to prevent a disease they will never get and likely complicate the delivery of healthy children they will never have.

America is on the wrong side. Think about the buildings they blew up in New York City. That there are still people who believe Muslim terrorists did this dastardly deed attests to the dumbing down of the greatest country that ever was into an Army of robot droids willing to do the bidding of their Jewish masters who control them with trivial television and meaningless religion.

I could write a thousand more paragraphs like this and so could you.

But the point of it all is to realize that this group of paid off politicians who supposedly represent American interests around the world actually do not represent Americans at all, they represent the international Jewish bankers who control all the countries of the world except the half dozen or so the U.S. is constantly threatening and/or invading.

America is on the wrong side in everything. And as a result, whether you like it or not, if you're an American, so are you. So while you're looking for a way to rebut this argument, you need look no further than your own soul. If you continue to keep your head down, try not to rock the boat, and hope some government program doesn't suddenly remove you from this life, I'm afraid the odds are increasing daily and exponentially that you are going to die in that position.

The people now in charge all need to be removed and arrested for their easily provable crimes. That you are not now working to make this happen with all possible speed, you might say, is counterintuitive to your own chances of survival, because as long as they continue to remain in charge, their policies of population reduction and the eradication of all peoples' most basic rights will only accelerate.

The whole world knows this, except for people in the United States � America is on the wrong side.

John Kaminski is a writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, urging people to understand that no problem in the world can be authentically addressed without first analyzing tangents caused by Jewish perfidy, which has subverted and diminished every aspect of human endeavor throughout history. Support for his work is wholly derived from people who can understand what he�s saying and know what it means.

250 N. McCall Rd. #2,
FL 34223

[ PS: My Mac spellchecker doesn't recognize Kaminski as a valid spelling; it only lists the Jewish version of the name, Kaminsky, as correct. Imagine that. Just like Wikipedia, Google, and all those people who write me pretending not to be Jews. ]

[ For further study, also see Andrew Winkler's brilliant recap of "Eustace Mullins and the Zionist Complicity with the alleged 'Jewish Holocaust'" here]



Carolyn ( [email protected] )


You are confused about many things, and you therefore confuse your readers who want to think you are a fount of wisdom on all things "Judaic."

Please justify your statement at the end of this emai that Andrew Winkler's recap of "Eustace Mullins and the Zionist Complicity with the alleged 'Jewish Holocaust'" is "brilliant." Brilliant is what way?

Yes, Mullins is wrong. But Winkler only corrects him halfway. Winkler says: "the Zionists did not only closely cooperate with the Nazis on their common goal of relocating all European Jews to Palestine, but actually financed and controlled them. " Do you know this to be a fact? What is your source - the two book Winkler lists? If so, that is poor scholarship, John.

Winkler also mentions the revisionist work of Arthur Butz, Robert Faurisson, Carlo Mattogno or Germar Rudolf ... supposedly to prove that he knows the "holocaust" is a hoax. Fine. But what does that have to do with what he further says -- his final point -- that "German National Socialism was a merger of Italian style fascism, controlled by elements in the Italian aristocracy and Catholic Church, and Rothschild-Zionism." How does this make any sense? Winkler adds that "the Israeli conduct in Palestine reminds us so much of Nazi Germany."

I personally know all four of the revisionists mentioned and I know they would not agree with Winkler. So what is Winkler's game? He sounds a lot like Gordon Duff, John ... who you believed in too, until I told you differently and you finally saw the light with Libya. Or did you?

Is it the anti-racism that has you hooked? Winkler points out in this "recap" as you call it-- as Duff similarly always manages to get into his posts-- the "blatant racism displayed by some Nazis towards non-Germans, for example Julius Streicher's "Der Stuermer", was nothing more than a Germanised version of 3000 year old Jewish supremacism."

Who believes this, John? The four revisionists Winkler stuck into his "recap" in order to show his bonafides? I say no. I certainly don't believe it. Do you believe it? I would like to hear something really clear from you on this.

Regards, Carolyn ( [email protected] )


Ingrid Rimland ( [email protected] )

Carolyn, John, et al -

I need to give my two cents' worth to this erupting and maybe disrupting disagreement. I want to say this gently, but it seems to me that we have vastly more important, overriding things in common than areas where we disagree. I think that's what we need to keep in mind that - when we disagree with someone - we don't let our disagreement be sands of friction to the much more important goals that we have in common and need to protect.

I think the temptation of arguing with someone and then getting everybody to take sides is destructive of our Volksgemeinschaftsgeist. We don't do that with snail mail - why do it with email? Because it is easy and free?

To be specific to your objection to John's article, Carolyn. In general, I believe you have merit on your side - because what little I know of the topic - was Hitler, or was he not, "controlled" by the Jews? - is an important one. I only know what Ernst told me - that Hitler took Jewish money in the beginning, but he didn't let the Jews put a ring in his nose in exchange - and that THAT was the reason things got deadly between them. They couldn't control him. He didn't do what they wanted him to do, because the man couldn't be bought. He did what he felt was right. So if John brings the Rothschilds and the Pope and whatnot into his essay, I believe that he is wrong on that specific point, but that is not ill will or malice or even sabotage, that's ignorance - and ignorance on a specific fact in history is hardly a sin. We have all been guilty of that. What is far more important is that he provided a URL to one of Hitler's speeches, and people will go and read stuff for themselves - and maybe revise their opinion.

And if Andrew is only "half-right", that is a valid criticism also in my book, but that is not a sin either. Those two can still learn. Maybe they will, and maybe they won't. We can all still learn. Who was it that said, "Meine Herren, die Generallinie nicht vergessen!"?

What is far more important, to me, is that both John and Andrew and even Gordon Duff and Michael Rivero and you and I have done excellent work for quite some time on MOST topics, and we each in our corner have helped to erase all kinds of misconceptions. Do we have disagreements? Of course. I remember Bruce Campbell once calling Ernst "a pacifistic old man" - and did he ever put my nose out of joint! But that did not impact on our friendship because we respect each other for our strengths and strive to overlook our weaknesses. In my book - and this has only come to me lately - I believe that it is far, far more important not to attack somebody openly on an itsy-bitsy point of disagreement and be tolerant if our comrade in the trenches does 90 or 95 % of good work. We should write off the 5% where he does not - or tell him privately.

I have felt strong misgivings, even shame, when otherwise sane, moral people keep nitpicking on Hitler - when it is clear they don't know anything whatsoever about Hitler from beans. They regurgitate what the enemy has put into their hard drive. Why do they do it? Because they think they get themselves some brownies by putting themselves in a good light - brownies likely from the enemy who loves it when they do it. It's unworthy of any one of us to do that - it isn't chivalrous to kick a dead man in the shin - but is that a battle I need to take on? When it is costing me a useful comrade who is 100% on my side in other, far more important ways?

I think if we feel strongly enough to write to a comrade about a disagreement, we should not broadcast it on the Net. It only dissipates our energy and time and soul essence. We should keep that private and see if it can be resolved amicably - or if not, to just set it aside for a better opportunity.

As we say in German, Nichts f�r ungut. Don't misunderstand what I am trying to say.

Ingrid Rimland ( [email protected] )

back to previous page