![Now that it's Columbus day, . . . [526x633 - 58KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/NrqyPh.jpg){kind=link}
Ah yes. Because we know that he definitely didn’t travel a lot and that definitely wouldn’t affect how he writes, and the people who (((analyze))) Columbus were oh so charitable, proven by how they buried the man in baseless rumors both while he was alive traveling and in current day.
I bet you think (((Lincoln))) wasn't a kike or philosemite too.
I stand by Every. Single. Time. When in doubt, it's the kikes. Especially when there is corroborating evidence/circumstances. There may be a few false positives, but it is statistically unlikely.
All I’m saying is that by all accounts I’ve read by people who weren’t out for blood from him, he was a devout Christian, not a kike.
I couldn’t care less about Lincoln. He fought a war to oppress half a country while claiming it was to free slaves. That’s top kikery, blood or no.
I think Columbus was just a useful kike who escaped the expulsion. He was a Zionist before the term was conceived. Lincoln too.
A "devout Christian" during the Spanish Inquisition just might be putting on airs.
(post is archived)