Fred, you really need to read carefully what I've written; I don't believe there are any major grammatical errors. To answer some of your questions:
"It" refers to the "event", not to quantities.
God himself took their homeland from them in the wars of the 0070s (see Hebrews chapter 8 [particularly noting the last verse]; 1 Corinthians 10:11 [never forget to read the context in any of these]; Matthew 24 [and corresponding passages in Mark and Luke]; and 20-23 in the final chapter of John -- hint: the grownups contemporary with Jesus would see the new covenant start and the old covenant end and they would live in the overlapping "ends"). Is it correct for man to take it upon himself (collectively) to reverse that? (rhetorical question) The "end of the world" spoken of in the Bible is the "world" of the Israelites having a kingdom/homeland/special_covenant_with_God. The book of Revelation was written prior to and accurately describes that event which most definitely and definitively occurred long ago.
Not to categorize
all of them, but [some of] the Jews have long ago learned to overtake nations without invasion, etc. I reiterate again that I am not declaring animosity in any way, shape, or form when I say this stuff; merely stating facts. [Who is it, as a group if it were one, that owns or controls the major media/entertainment/financial organizations pretty much worldwide?]
Particularly, in this context, there is/was a thing called
the Jewish Question. Hitler, et. al. eventually derived a
Final Solution to it [note the quote which contains "Regarding the Jewish question, the Führer is determined to clear the table. He warned the Jews that if they were to cause another world war, it would lead to their own destruction. Those were not empty words. Now the world war has come. The destruction of the Jews must be its necessary consequence."] Carefully read the text of that first article. They were initially "invited" to leave and it progressed in steps from there when they balked.
I'm not siding with him/them. Just stating facts. Should have been born Swiss, I guess. In my studies, which include both mainstream and "extremist" sources, I've come across the notion that, being saddled with the debt from the first world war, Hitler told the international bankers to stuff it. He printed up tons of paper money to pay them off (remember hearing tales of German wives fetching their husband's pay several times a day to buy things with it while they could, and folks essentially carrying wheelbarrows of "money" around?) The banks didn't take it lightly. Pretty soon much of Europe lay in piles of rubble and was available for pennies on the dollar. Do you honestly think there's no possible truth whatsoever, not even the tiniest shred, to that scenario? I for one cannot totally dismiss it.
Suffice it to say that were I living in Germany in the '40s I'd have undoubtedly been "relocated" because of my heritage on my mother's side even though I am literally/technically not a Jew. See the attachment. I could not possibly have been the only person there/then with the same combination of credentials and characteristics.
Read my lips. I really, really don't care to discuss this here any further. The only reason for this reply is to clear the air that I'm not an extremist in any direction. I'm totally independent and not affiliated in any way, shape, or form with any individuals or organizations who are or could be characterized as either extreme
or mainstream. I attempt to glean the truth from all sources (they
all contain some) and develop my opinions from my private research.
Over and out.
