Post

More from @DefiyantlyFree

Insurrection Barbie

@DefiyantlyFree

Nov 2

🧵🧵In the 1930s, Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist regime launched one of history’s most audacious religious experiments: to tear Christianity away from its Jewish foundation. The project, called Positive Christianity, aimed to purge every trace of Judaism from German religious life — to create a Christianity without the Old Testament, without Israel, without the Jewish Christ.

It was, in effect, an attempt to rewrite the Bible and redefine faith itself.

From the earliest days of the Nazi Party, Hitler used the language of faith to win the confidence of Christian voters. The 1920 Party Programme declared that Nazism stood for “Positive Christianity” — a deliberately vague term that sounded pious while freeing the party from any specific doctrine.

“Positive Christianity” was never about theology; it was about control. It promised freedom for churches only if they aligned with “the moral feelings of the German race.” In practice, that meant silencing pastors, rewriting Scripture, and bending the pulpit to serve the Reich.

Once in power, Nazi ideologues and sympathetic theologians began to remove the Jewish heart of Christianity. Their argument was simple and sinister: the Old Testament was a “Jewish book,” and the New Testament must be cleansed of its “Semitic spirit.”

In 1939, Protestant leaders created the Institute for the Study and Eradication of Jewish Influence on German Church Life, known as the Dejudaization Institute. Its mission statement was chillingly clear — to “liberate” Christianity from “Jewish intellectualism.”

Bibles were rewritten.

•References to the Old Testament were deleted or reworded.

•The genealogy of Jesus was stripped of Jewish names.

•Hebrew psalms were replaced with nationalistic hymns.

•Sermons spoke not of Israel’s God, but of “Providence” and “the Eternal Creator” — vague deities safely compatible with Nazi race ideology.

Even the Lord’s Prayer was rewritten to remove “Jewish” imagery. Jesus was reimagined as an Aryan hero, not a Jew from Bethlehem. The Ten Commandments were replaced with new “Germanic commandments” extolling blood, honor, and loyalty to the Führer.

Read 7 tweets

Insurrection Barbie

@DefiyantlyFree

Oct 27

🧵🧵In August, a story broke that should have been everywhere. It wasn’t.

It barely made a sound.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that some of America’s biggest companies, including Amazon, Pfizer, and Walmart, were quietly funding a nonprofit that flies state attorneys general around the world for so-called “rule of law” trips. One of those destinations was Qatar. Yes, that Qatar, the one constantly criticized for human rights abuses and shady lobbying in Washington.

If you missed it, you are not alone. Almost nobody covered it. Which is unbelievable, because this is one of the most serious examples of quiet corruption we have seen in years.

What Is Actually Happening

There is a group called the Attorney General Alliance, or AGA. On paper, it is a bipartisan nonprofit that helps state attorneys general share ideas and work with international partners. In reality, it looks more like a private club for people in power and the corporations that want to stay close to them.

Here is how it works. Big companies donate large sums of money to AGA. The group uses that money to host conferences and international trips for attorneys general and their staff. One recent trip took them to Doha, Qatar, where they stayed in luxury hotels, met with Qatari officials, and discussed issues like human trafficking and global justice.

It all sounds professional and educational until you realize that many of these same companies are under investigation by those very same AGs for things like antitrust violations, data privacy issues, and drug pricing scandals.

It is not technically illegal. But it looks a lot like influence.

Why Qatar Is Involved

Qatar has a clear reason for doing this. The country has spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to clean up its image in the United States. Hosting powerful American officials makes it look like a legitimate partner in global law and governance.

It also gives Qatar direct access to people who might one day hold higher office. Many state attorneys general go on to become governors, senators, or cabinet members. Building those relationships now is a smart long-term move.

This is not a conspiracy theory. A former U.S. ambassador actually pleaded guilty to secretly working for Qatar. A retired four-star general was investigated for similar behavior. This pattern has been going on for years.

Read 7 tweets

Insurrection Barbie

@DefiyantlyFree

Oct 26

Everyone thinks Trump’s new aggression toward Venezuela is about drugs, migration, or Maduro.

It’s not.

It’s about China — and who controls the Western Hemisphere. 🧵👇

Over the last two decades, China has poured more than $130 billion into Latin America, mostly into energy-rich nations like Venezuela, Brazil, and Ecuador.

Those weren’t loans in the traditional sense.

They were strategic footholds collateralized by oil, copper, lithium, and political loyalty.

Each “loan” was really an exchange: resources for influence.

Debt became diplomacy.
Interest became control.

Venezuela alone borrowed over $60 billion from Chinese state banks, the largest sum ever lent to a country in the Western Hemisphere.

When sanctions collapsed its economy, Beijing didn’t walk away.

It tightened its grip, converting debt into oil-for-loans deals that kept tankers flowing east.

Every barrel repaid interest, but it also cemented dependency.
While Western firms left, Chinese companies moved in building refineries, power grids, and surveillance systems.

By the late 2010s, Venezuela wasn’t just indebted.
It was anchored.

Beijing had turned a failed state into a permanent energy colony.

Read 12 tweets

Insurrection Barbie

@DefiyantlyFree

Oct 23

🧵🧵Thread: The Danger of the Sarsour-Wahhaj-Mamdani Machine

1. Imam Siraj Wahhaj’s History and Extremist Connections

Imam Siraj Wahhaj was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing after serving as a character witness for Omar Abdel-Rahman (the “Blind Sheikh”), mastermind of the attack and leader of the Egyptian terrorist group Gama’a al-Islamiyya.

Wahhaj did not face charges, but federal prosecutors and retired FBI agents cite his history of defending terror plotters, fundraising for convicted jihadists, and hosting “radical preachers and gun-training circles” at his Brooklyn mosque, Masjid At-Taqwa.

Wahhaj’s platform has included explicit calls for an Islamic state in America, refusal to condemn violence by Islamist regimes, and statements highlighted by critics and some reformist Muslim leaders as fundamentally incompatible with pluralist democracy.

2. Linda Sarsour’s Strategic Elevation of Wahhaj

Linda Sarsour has openly called Wahhaj her “mentor” and brought him onto organizing stages at high-profile conferences, including her own Women’s March-related events and major Muslim-American activist rallies.

This partnership is strategic: Sarsour uses Wahhaj’s respected name within some Muslim communities to mobilize and build coalition power, especially in districts with large immigrant or Muslim populations.

Wahhaj’s endorsement and participation open doors for candidates and activist campaigns, often boosting turnout and fundraising.

Through vehicles like the Muslim Democratic Club of NY (MDCNY), the Working Families Party, and MPower Change, Sarsour channels his network’s resources, endorsements, and organizational know-how to support preferred candidates including Zohran Mamdani and allies aligned on issues of policing, Palestine, and multicultural equity.

These efforts have tangible results. MDCNY, for example, explicitly works to increase Muslim-American voter turnout and shape candidate pipelines, with Wahhaj and Sarsour regularly referenced together in its promotional materials and at events.

MPower Change, Sarsour’s digital advocacy group, frequently invites Wahhaj to its webinars, using his influence to activate fundraising and lobbying initiatives.

The Working Families Party, New York’s most prominent left-wing independent power broker, has formed alliances with MDCNY and MPower Change to endorse candidates jointly, effectively mainstreaming Wahhaj’s ideological agenda within Democratic local primaries.

Within these circles, Wahhaj’s history, controversial to many outside observers, does not act as a barrier but as a badge of honor, allowing his ideas about social justice, Islamic law, and advocacy against “imperialist” U.S. policy to circulate among ambitious activists and policy staffers.

Sarsour’s approach, which frames Wahhaj’s legacy as “social justice leadership,” ensures that his platform and connections penetrate multiple verticals of New York’s Democratic political climate and influence candidate selection, messaging, and organizational partnerships well beyond the Muslim community.

muslims.brooklynhistory.org/narrators/lind…

nypost.com/2025/10/18/us-…

3. Organizational Ties and Donor Networks

The Sarsour-Wahhaj alliance has cultivated influential fundraising and organizing power.

MDCNY’s board and campaign infrastructure are stacked with activists who’ve served in groups such as CAIR and ICNA both named in congressional and DOJ probes for their alleged support of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Financial disclosure records and watchdog analysis show Mamdani’s races have received significant direct and indirect support from these networks (over $100,000 by some estimates).

jpost.com/middle-east/al…

Read 6 tweets

Insurrection Barbie

@DefiyantlyFree

Oct 17

🧵🧵The “Rothschild-funded Scofield Bible” myth falls apart with one fact (in addition to the fact that there is not one iota of actual historical evidence the Rothschilds helped write or print that Bible).

Jesuit Francisco Ribera wrote his futurist theory of a future Antichrist in 1590, over 150 years before the first Rothschild was born. C. I. Scofield revived Ribera’s idea in 1909.

It was not Zionists who changed prophecy. It was a Catholic Jesuit, and conspiracy fans are just repeating his 16th century defense of the papacy.

As always, I bring actual receipts below. And yes I know the paid propagandists will never engage in a debate on the facts because they are impossible to refute. They will just say I am paid by Israel. And I will laugh.

Francisco Ribera invented futurism in 1590

•Primary source: Francisco Ribera, In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarij (1590).

This was his Latin commentary on Revelation. He proposed that:

•The Antichrist would be a single man who rules the world for 3½ literal years.

•The events of Revelation 4–22 were still future.

Secondary sources verifying this:

•Leroy Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2 (1948), chapters on Jesuit Futurism.

•H. Grattan Guinness, Romanism and the Reformation (1887).

•Henry Grattan Guinness describes Ribera as “the founder of the futurist school which removed the papacy from prophecy.”

•Encyclopedia Britannica entry: “Futurism (Christian eschatology)” credits Ribera as the earliest major expositor.

Read 13 tweets

Insurrection Barbie

@DefiyantlyFree

Oct 15

🧵 USS Liberty

Feel free to fact check this. Never take my word on anything. I never take anyone’s word, I fact check everything. But since this seems to be the top talking point for the IDS infected patients, let’s actually examine it.

The basic facts of the USS Liberty tragedy are not in dispute and have been examined by every relevant body on both sides. On June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War, Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats attacked the U.S. Navy signals-intelligence ship USS Liberty in international waters, killing 34 Americans and wounding 171. Israel apologized and paid compensation. Multiple U.S. and Israeli reviews acknowledged severe failures but did not produce proof of a deliberate attack ordered with knowledge the ship was American.

What remains contested is INTENT. Below are the main claims about motive, followed by why each collapses on the evidence and on basic strategic logic. 👇

Claim 1: Israel attacked to stop U.S. intelligence collection that could expose Israeli operations

The theory. The Liberty was a SIGINT ship. Some argue Israel wanted to prevent U.S. intercepts about its battlefield plans, so it intentionally destroyed the ship and witnesses.

Why it fails.
First, there is no “smoking gun” order or verified intercept showing Israeli leaders knew they were striking a U.S. vessel. Declassified NSA and CIA records, along with the U.S. Navy’s inquiry, have never produced such proof. They document confusion, misidentification, communication failures, and grievous errors, not confirmed intent.

Second, the cost would have been catastrophic for Israel’s interests. Deliberately killing Americans would risk destroying the alliance with the United States, Israel’s most critical partner. The behavior after the incident, formal apologies, reparations, and acceptance of U.S. inquiries, is consistent with a tragic mistake, not a planned murder of an ally’s sailors.

Even if Israel had been trying to hide something, destroying a U.S. Navy ship full of American personnel would have been the least effective and most self-defeating way to do it. Killing thirty-four Americans would guarantee the very scrutiny, outrage, and international condemnation they would supposedly be trying to avoid. The idea collapses under its own logic: if the goal was secrecy, a public scandal was the worst possible outcome.

Israel’s subsequent behavior reinforces that point. It immediately admitted responsibility, issued formal apologies, cooperated with U.S. investigations, and paid compensation to the families of the dead and the U.S. government for the loss of the ship. Those are not the actions of a state that planned an intentional strike and then sought to bury it they are the actions of a government scrambling to repair an alliance after a catastrophic mistake.

Claim 2: Israel attacked to frame Egypt and drag the United States into the war

The theory. Israel supposedly planned a false flag that would be blamed on Egypt to trigger U.S. intervention.

Why it fails.

By June 8, Israel already held a decisive upper hand. In the first three days of the Six-Day War, the Israeli Air Force had destroyed roughly 400 Arab aircraft, securing near-total air superiority. Ground forces had swept through the Sinai Peninsula, routed Egyptian divisions, and were advancing toward the Suez Canal. Jordan’s forces had been driven from East Jerusalem. Israel’s leadership was focused on consolidating its lightning victories, not dragging another superpower into the conflict.

U.S. archives and diplomatic cables from the Johnson administration show that Washington was extremely sensitive about escalation. The White House was desperate to prevent the war from widening, especially after the Soviet Union warned it might intervene if Israel pushed too far. For Israel to deliberately attack a U.S. ship at that moment would have been suicidal diplomacy, a direct provocation that could alienate the one nation capable of shielding it from Soviet or Arab backlash.

Strategically, the theory makes no sense. Israel didn’t need American intervention; it was already winning on every front. What it needed was to end the war quickly, maintain U.S. goodwill, and avoid an international backlash. A deliberate strike on an American vessel would have achieved the exact opposite triggering outrage in Congress, jeopardizing military aid, and casting Israel as reckless at the height of its success. That contradiction alone collapses the “false-flag” theory under the weight of its own logic.

Read 6 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Insurrection Barbie

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @DefiyantlyFree

Insurrection Barbie

Insurrection Barbie

Insurrection Barbie

Insurrection Barbie

Insurrection Barbie

Insurrection Barbie

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!