Hitler the Zionist Jew and Enemy of Europe?

[ada]

Hitler the Zionist Jew and Enemy of Europe?

Was Adolf Hitler a defender of Europe, who just happened to make bizarre mistakes such as letting the British Army escape from Dunkirk when their capture would have ended the War in the West?  Was he really a great politician, but a lousy military leader who failed to secure the Straits of Gibraltar thus allowing for a War in the South?  Was he so pre-occupied with his theory of Slavic inferiority that he made the honest mistake of sending anti-Bolshevist Russians into the arms of the Talmudic Soviets, ensuring that certain victory in the East was turned to defeat?  Was he just a nice, good Christian man, who happened to personally oversea military strategy which was responsible for the Talmudic occupation of Central and Eastern Europe, mirroring the Zionist takeover of Northern and Western Europe?

Hitler is a figure who courts controversy.  His infamous declaration that the War would result in the victory of Jewish rule over Europe, if the Jews were not expelled from the entire continent, has been interpreted as a threat to annihilate European Jewry.  However, it could just as easily be interpreted as a prediction for the annihilation of Europe and its total takeover by Zionists and Organised Jewry - which is exactly what happened.

An in-depth analysis of the Hitler phenomenon can be found at the excellent website, Snippits and Snappits.   The possibility that Hitler was a Jew working for the destruction of Europe is supported by information relating to: his Jewish DNA; his penchant for Jewesses; his love of Jewish literature and music; his association with Jewish financiers; his Jewish relatives; even his use of the Jewish term National Socialist (Zionist).

Clearly there is something wrong with the official story that Hitler turned from Communism to Nationalism overnight, and set out to exterminate the Jews of Europe, but just happened to end up populating Palestine with Jews, and handing virtually all of Europe to Zionist Materialists of both the Communist and Capitalist variety.  How could he have saved Europe from the Talmudists, outlawing usury and protecting all that is good in our people, only to throw all the good work away and forever label as evil any support for the moral policies which were crushed by the Jewish victory over Europe?

There is further discussion on the subject of the Kosher Nazis here and here.  Has Hitler been defamed?  Was he really a true patriot?  Or was Europe duped by a secret Jew who led our people to slaughter with such mastery of deception which can only be attained by the leaders of the self-Chosen?

Thanks to Catweasel for highlighting this information.
http://newsfromatlantis.blogspot.de/201 ... urope.html

[GordZilla]

Good luck on this one.
 

Seriously? ...We have debated this subject to its full conclusion. This is just yet another attempt by the Jews to even further muddy the waters;  "Ok so they won't believe he was the monster we first portrayed him as,  I got an idea...let's say he was working for us all along ....stupid Goyim will never figure it out!"


Hitler did not create the state of Israel, this was done long before Hitler  - at least officially - by the signing of the Belfour Declaration.  It was a plan long since in place.


If you want to know what Hitler was really about, it is not that hard. First, stop listening to people calling themselves names like "Catweasel" ('nuff said).  Secondly, listen to his speeches and read his writings and compare to what you're told. And finally judge him by his actions; destroying international banking's foot hold in Germany, developing his own currency for the Germans to use, and giving it REAL worth. Bringing a war torn, and duped country, back on its feet in short order. etc.


Reminds me of a fellow who once tried to tell me Hitler called for the mass extermination of Jews even as far back as in his book; Mein Kampf. I invited him to show me where, he searched and searched and was dumbfounded when he could find it nowhere.


Please take this crap to Alex Jones's site, where it may be appreciated. Here it's been long since resolved. We know well that those that push the 'Hitler worked for the Jews' agenda often have an agenda of their own. Not saying you do, but I bet 'Catweasel' does.

[ada]

There is a question mark on the end of the topic isn't it?

Seriously? ...We have debated this subject to its full conclusion. This is just yet another attempt by the Jews to even further muddy the waters; "Ok so they won't believe he was the monster we first portrayed him as, I got an idea...let's say he was working for us all along ....stupid Goyim will never figure it out!"

If this is your conclusion, fine for you. Maybe you are than ahead of me and i have to learn more.
But i never will put hitler in the centre of my view.
Whether he has only been used or he willingly did it is not finally investigated at least for my opinion.

By the way, all linked sites on this essay have nothing to do with jones or the jews.

Hitler did not create the state of Israel, this was done long before Hitler - at least officially - by the signing of the Belfour Declaration. It was a plan long since in place.

Of cause not directly, but he was definitely a participant and was responsible for the outcome and for the loss of so many germans.

I gladly would learn from you and accept it if you grasp my red marked areas on the essay.

[GordZilla]

Try here, I'm sure whatever question you may have has been covered already;

https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=e ... 27&bih=907

[Michael K.]

The economic system of the Third Reich was not autarky as some say.  In fact, the Nazi central bank had a dual system, where as much gold as possible was accumulated in the hands of the bank in order to invest internationally and make interest on, while in the domestic economy paper scrip derived from percentage shares of loans was circulated in large volumes to cover domestic currency needs.  

While ingenious, the system still revolved around hoarding gold for the purpose of making interest in "Jew" fashion, which stayed in the hands of a private few, and since the scrip in the domestic loop was still based on international loans it was not real autarky.  Many people have a hazy idea about the reality of Nazi banking, sometimes using it as an example of autarky, which it was not.  If anything it was an experiment to see how much gold can be hoarded by the elite while maintaining a functioning, closed, internal national economy on scrip.

Then those who could get their hands on the physical gold stole most of it at the end of the war and fled, while the German peasants, strung out on scrip and promises, were taken slaves by the victors as payment of war debt.  The Germans were totally hosed.  Whether or not the chief actors were circumcised has little bearing in my mind on the merit of this debacle.

Real autarky begins with a rejection of gold and the establishment of a currency based on manpower and labor.  The opposite is true of the Nazi economic system, which was always based on accumulating gold to be lent at interest internationally for profit (State profit allegedly), just like every other Jew bank that ever existed.

And don't forget that the whole system of Nazi international gold lending led to the Bank of International Settlements being created in Basel Switzerland, which is today at the very epicenter of creating a one world economic system based on Jew gold and central economic planning.  It is the enemy of all real nationalist populist movements.

[ada]

Michael what does gold have to do with the thread issue and problem? I do not see any connection to it.

[pas]

Micheal K. wrote:

The economic system of the Third Reich was not autarky as some say.

True, they were never fully self sufficient and were dependant on trade but they circumvented restricing policies forced on by the Allies by barter-trade and repairation payments in Reichsmarks.

the system still revolved around hoarding gold for the purpose of making interest in "Jew" fashion, which stayed in the hands of a private few

What's ''Jew-fashion'' about establishing an economical boost for every layer of society?

and since the scrip in the domestic loop was still based on international loans it was not real autarky

The Reichsmark was not based on international loans but rather on the labour of the Germans (not gold).

Many people have a hazy idea about the reality of Nazi banking, sometimes using it as an example of autarky, which it was not. If anything it was an experiment to see how much gold can be hoarded by the elite while maintaining a functioning, closed, internal national economy on scrip.

Are you saying that the ''elite Nazi's'' horded all the gold and the common people actually profitted from this ''experiment''?Talking about hazy.

Then those who could get their hands on the physical gold stole most of it at the end of the war and fled

The high ranking Nazi's that didn't go along with the Allies (read jews) were killed and I find it hard to believe they would let them keep their stolen gold.

Real autarky begins with a rejection of gold and the establishment of a currency based on manpower and labor.

au·tar·ky or au·tar·chy  (ôtärk)
n. pl. au·tar·kies or au·tar·chies
1. A policy of national self-sufficiency and nonreliance on imports or economic aid.
2. A self-sufficient region or country

Your definition of autarky comes really close to the reality of Nazi economics.

The opposite is true of the Nazi economic system, which was always based on accumulating gold to be lent at interest internationally for profit (State profit allegedly), just like every other Jew bank that ever existed.

I disagree whole heartedly.Please read this essay by Mark Weber:http://www.ihr.org/other/economyhitler2011.html

And don't forget that the whole system of Nazi international gold lending led to the Bank of International Settlements being created in Basel Switzerland, which is today at the very epicenter of creating a one world economic system based on Jew gold and central economic planning. It is the enemy of all real nationalist populist movements.

You are right about the B.I.S. today but the B.I.S. was initially founded to coordinate German repairations after WWI so the claim of Nazi gold lending to the B.I.S. makes no sense to me.http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/Bank-for-International-Settlements-BIS.html

Hitler the Zionist Jew and Enemy of Europe?

Do the following actions seem to be in favor of the jew?Make up up your own mind.

http://zioncrimefactory.com/2012/04/05/the-nazis-gave-rothschild-bankers-the-boot/

[ada]

39utijoi]

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Pas, regardless of if Hitler was a secret Rothschild agent or if he kicked bankers and Masons out of Germany, nobody can deny that Nazism was/is ideologically identical to Judaism. They are both ethnocentric, unlike historic Nordic/Western culture, which is based on individualism and altruism. And yes, the swastika is a religious symbol of the hindus. I find it ironic that nihilists are upholding the swastika as some kind of representation of nihilist nationalism. And it looks like you and your hero ZCF are full blown Nazis now...congratulations on your conversion. Now you have to ask yourself: is becoming like Judaism the answer to eliminating Judaism? Can evil overcome evil?

[ada]

3feq9ydm]

[SPECTEC]

1919: Hitler marches in memory of a Jewish communist

"Kurt Eisner, the Jew, was a prophet who fought relentlessly against the fainthearted and wretched, because he not only loved mankind, but believed in it and wanted it."   
- Eulogy at Kurt Eisner's funeral,1 Hitler marched in the procession wearing the red armband of the Soviets, and 14 years later arrested the murderer of Eisner, who also had to give up his luxury prison cell for Hitler in 1923




German leaders Kurt Eisner (nee Solomon Kosmonowski) and Adolf Hitler, plus Count
Anton Arco-Valley the man who killed Kurt Eisner, and "planned" to kill Hitler too.

February 1919 
Galician Jew Kurt Eisner, the communist revolutionist and premier of the short-lived Bavarian Republic (Nov 1918 - Jan 1919), was assassinated by the 22 year old German war hero Arco-Valley on February 21, 1919. Arco-Valley reportedly shot Eisner twice in the head—at close range—from behind, before Eisner was himself shot by Eisner's bodyguard.2 Arco-Valley, wrote in his diary of Eisner shortly before he murdered him: 
"he is a Bolshevik. He is a Jew, he is not a German. He betrays the Fatherland,"3
Arco-Valley was initially sentenced to death for the murder, but the sentence was later commuted to 10 years imprisonment of which he served just five. During the proceedings Arco-Vally said: 
"I hate Bolshevism. I love my Bavarians and hate the Jews. I am a faithful monarchist and a good Catholic. Above all, I respect and honour Bavaria. Therefore, long live the monarchy, long live Rupprecht!"4
Arco-Valley was himself halachically Jewish, his mother was a member of the Oppenheim banking dynasty, although his father was a Austrian Catholic aristocrat. It is claimed that Arco-Valley's assassination of Eisner was a result of him being rejected for membership of the Thule Society as he was a mischling, and his assassination of Eisner was an attempt to prove his Germanic patriotism. 
Count Arco-Valley became a hero of the Bavarian people for what they perceived as his patriotic actions. A speech he made in court in which he dissuaded his followers from any attempt to liberate him, and instead work for the building up of the fatherland, was meet with a storm of applause which the judges did not attempt to stop.5 The state prosecutor is even quoted as saying: 
"If only more young men were animated by such love, we would be able to view our future more hopefully."6
Arco-Valley's sentence was served in Lansberg prison, reportedly in considerable comfort, due to his status as a Bavarian anti-Bolshevik hero. German author Heinz A. Heniz, in his 1934 biography Germany's Hitler, wrote of his visit to Lansberg prison in 1933 where he interviewed Chief Warder Franz Hemmrich who had worked at the prison since 1920. Hemmrich said that Arco-Valley had been turfed-out of his large cell on November 11, 1923 so Adolf Hitler, who'd been arrested for leading the Beer Hall Putsch, could have it.7

March 1933 
Just six weeks after Hitler became German chancellor, Arco-Valley  who been freed in 1924, was arrested for reportedly planning to assassinate Hitler,8 a fact you will have difficulty finding mentioned in any post-war books or articles which discuss him. Douglas Reed, the legendary British exposer of Talmudic malevolence, in his 1943 book Lest We Regret, wrote of the Nazis' arrest of Arco-Valley: 
"The only plausible motive that suggests itself, for Hitler's arrest of him, is the desire to remove witnesses of Hitler's conduct in Munich in 1918."9
Reed controversially postulates that Hitler served as a foot-soldier to Eisner's communist regime in Bavaria. Evidence which backs up this claim, is mentioned by another leading critic of zhidomasonstvo; Jüri Lina, in his 2004 book Architects of Deception: The Concealed History of Freemasonry, Lina wrote: 
"In an old news-reel from this time, among a group of officers, you can see Corporal Adolf Hitler walking with a red communist badge in the funeral procession to honour the Jewish socialist Eisner."10   

Hitler marches in memory of a Jewish socialist, wearing the red armband of the Soviets. 
This is the footage to which Lina referred, although the anti-fascist who uploaded the footage has put his own unsourced spin into the title of the video, and claims that this footage was captured from Australian television. The fact Hitler attended the funeral and is the man pictured in this footage, has been confirmed by several historians.11
[youtube:266fho1x]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dem2pvU4AjY[/youtube]266fho1x]

http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blog ... h.html?m=0

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

For some reason, this Jim Condit  propaganda gets repainted every few months and resold with a new sticker.  Read the fine print on the back of the price tag:

1. Hitler was not a Jew.
2. Hitler was a Nationalist.
3. Hitler did read Communist propaganda and watched events first hand -- only to learn of his enemies. He wasn't active in Berlin Jewish coffee houses -- he was active in German ex-soldier Beer Halls.
4. Hitler wanted to unite Germans in various countries across Europe. He particularly wanted to unite Germans from Austria with Germany.
5. Hitler was not a Zionist.
6. Hitler was not a Rothschild nor was he a secret love child of a Rothschild.
7. Hitler bravely fought in WWI.
8. Hitler was not part of a Jew conspiracy.
9. Hitler was against Communism and Jewish rule.
10. Hitler was against International Jewry and International Capitalism.
11. Hitler had Soviet spies in his command. Many secrets were lost to Stalin during the war.
12. Hitler joined the Nazis not as a founding member. There were several National Socialist parties similar to Nazis between 1918-1933.  Under Hitler, the Nazis prevailed in winning votes and organizing successfully.
13. Hitler was an effective public speaker and could work the crowd.
14. Hitler was not allied in a "Secret" manner with Masons, Crypto-Jews, Zionists, Bankers, NWO, etc.
15. Hitler came from a very humble background and lived in poverty for some time during his young adult years. There was nothing in his youth that would suggest he would become the man he eventually became. He went to a Catholic school in a small town-- hardly Jewish.  He never was known to associate or celebrate "Jewish" traditions.   He did not have secret Jews backing him or some other B.S. suggesting this.  Again, for those that cannot get it straight -- Hitler was not a Jew.
 



Of all people Jim Marrs below has a pretty good take on things after he read Suvorov's book. Crazy but true. Looks like he's beginning to see the light:

-------

Did Adolf Hitler Save Europe From Communism?
By Jim Marrs
Excerpted from his book The Rise of the Fourth Reich
11-28-11
 

By 1941, the international order had turned against AdolfHitler. Germany's Blitzkrieg had shocked the ruling elite as first Poland then the rest of Europe came under Nazi control. Britain was helpless to stop Hitler, who was already making preparations for a pre-emptive attack on the Soviet Union. Hitler was getting out of hand. German inventiveness and efficiency ­ as well as financial support from western financiers -- had brought Hitler's Germany to the zenith of its power.
 
Germany was preparing to strike Russia and Hitler did not want a two-front war, the very situation which caused Germany's defeat in World War I. Hitler wanted England as an ally against communism. "With England alone [as an ally], one's back being covered, could one begin the new Germanic invasion [of Russia]," Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf. In other words, Hitler needed peace with Britain before undertaking an attack on Russia.
 
Securing peace on the West Front may have become an urgent priority for Hitler. According to former Soviet military intelligence officer Vladimir Rezun (writing under the pen name Viktor Suvorov) Hitler was forced to launch a pre-emptive assault against the Soviet Union in June, 1941, to forestall an attack on Western Europe by Stalin in July.
 
Suvorov's work has been published in 87 editions in 18 languages, yet has received virtually no mention in the U.S. corporate mass media despite the fact that his assertions turn conventional history upside down. Most people have been taught that Stalin naively trusted Hitler and was totally surprised by Hitler's attack.
 
Admiral N. G. Kuznetsov, who in 1941 was the Soviet Navy minister and a member of the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist Party, was quoted by Suvorov as stating in his postwar memoirs, "For me there is one thing beyond all argument -- J. V. Stalin not only did not exclude the possibility of war with Hitler's Germany, on the contrary, he considered such a war ... inevitable ... J. V. Stalin made preparations for war ... wide and varied preparations -- beginning on dates ... which he himself had selected. Hitler upset his calculations."
 
While Suvorov's conclusions grate against the conventional view of Hitler's attack on Russia, he has provided a compelling argument. Suvorov pointed out that by June, 1941, Stalin had massed vast numbers of troops and equipment along Russia's European frontier, not to defend the Motherland but in preparation for an attack westward. Stalin's motive was to bring communism to Europe by force, a plan he expressed in a 1939 speech. "The experience of the last 20 years has shown that in peacetime the Communist movement is never strong enough to seize power. The dictatorship of such a party will only become possible as the result of a major war," stated Stalin.
 
Noting that when the German attack began on June 22, 1941, they could field a mere 3,350 tanks, mostly lightly armored and gunned, as compared to the Russians 24,000 tanks, many of superior armor and armament, retired U.S. Department of Defense official Daniel W. Michaels wrote, "Stalin elected to strike at a time and place of his choosing. To this end, Soviet development of the most advanced offensive weapons systems, primarily tanks, aircraft, and airborne forces, had already begun in the early 1930sThe German 'Barbarossa' attack shattered Stalin's well-laid plan to 'liberate' all of Europe."
 
Suvorov supported his contention by pointing to the fact that Russian troops were prepared to attack, not defend, which led to the early German victories; that Russian troops had been issued maps only of Eastern European cities, not for the defense of Russia; that Russian troops had been issued Russian-German phrase books with such expressions as "Stop transmitting or I'll shoot;" and that none of Stalins top commanders were ever held accountable for the "Barbarossa" debacle since they had all merely followed Stalin's orders.
 
Suvorov concludes, "Stalin became the absolute ruler of a vast empire hostile to the West, which had been created with the help of the West. For all that, Stalin was able to preserve his reputation as naive and trusting, while Hitler went down in history as the ultimate aggressor. A multitude of books have been published in the West based on the idea that Stalin was not ready for war while Hitler was."
 
He also said the resources of Stalin's war machine have been underestimated. "Despite its grievous losses, it had enough strength to withdraw and gather new strength to reach Berlin. How far would it have gone had it not sustained that massive blow on 22 June, if hundreds of aircraft and thousands of tanks had not been lost, had it been the Red Army and not the Wehrmacht which struck the first blow? Did the German Army have the territorial expanse behind it for withdrawal? Did it have the inexhaustible human resources, and the time, to restore its army after the first Soviet surprise attack?"
 
Perhaps the best support for Suvorov's claims came from Hitler himself. "Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed incapable of defense ... I may say this today: If the wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion against the Reich, Europe would have been lost," the Fuehrer stated in his speech on December 11, 1941, when he declared war against the United States.
 
Of course, the victors always write history, so whether Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union was sheer aggression or a necessary pre-emptive strike will probably be argued for many years. But, if it proves true that Hitler was merely forestalling an imminent attack by the Soviet Union, it places the history of World War II in an entirely different context. It would certainly go far in explaining Hitler's otherwise inexplicable actions in starting a two-front war, the very situation he had warned against in Mein Kampf. It also would help explain why Franklin Roosevelt, at the bidding of the globalists, was arming the Soviet Union in blatant violation of the Neutrality Acts of 1935, 1936 and 1937. By the end of 1940 with all Europe under German control and Britain threatened, they may have determined to stop Hitler.
 
Hitler clearly indicated what he saw as the machinations undertaken to prevent any negotiated end to hostilities in 1941. In a speech to the Reichstag less than week before Hess's arrival in Scotland, he declared, "All my endeavors to come to an understanding with Britain were wrecked by the determination of a small clique which, whether from motives of hate or for the sake of material gain, rejected every German proposal for an understanding due to their resolve, which they never concealed, to resort to war, whatever happened."
 
Some researchers have even argued that Seelowe or Sea Lion, the code name for the proposed German invasion of England, was a "sham right from the beginning", an effort by Hitler to distract Stalin by feinting west when he actually planned to strike to the east. It was merely a cover for the mobilization of men and equipment needed for the invasion of the Soviet Union. One clue that this tactic was in play can be seen in the fact that Hitler, who was known for constantly interfering with his generals on the smallest of details, never showed any real interest in the plans for an invasion of England, according to German military historian Egbert Kieser. These authors, along with other historians, explain Hitler's strange order to halt the German advance at Dunkirk allowed the British Army to escape the continent. Hitler wanted his future ally intact.  

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

I see what you are saying CSR, but the whole thing reeks of externalization of hierarchy. People are looking for something to believe in. If all of your points are proven, should we revive national socialism? And if successful, then what, we become like the Jews: an ethnocentric ruling elite? Better us than them? This does not solve the problem; it merely replaces the problem with another.

The Condit stuff is just a side issue. There is a much more fundamental problem with propping up Nazism (defending Nazism against Judeo-inspired revisionism is fine, however). Debating Hitler's allegiances is meaningless.

[ada]

CSR cause you brought me somehow to the orthodox nationalist ..
Did you listen to Matt's Johnsosns The Orthodox Nationalist: Listener Questions, Part 2 ?
I highly recommend it to us all..Links below the picture. I love you all!



http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120223/ ... ons-part-2

http://reasonradionetwork.com/downloads ... 120223.mp3

[GordZilla]

CSR cause you brought me somehow to the orthodox nationalist ..
Did you listen to Matt's Johnsosns The Orthodox Nationalist: Listener Questions, Part 2 ?
I highly recommend it to us all..Links below the picture. I love you all!



http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120223/ ... ons-part-2

http://reasonradionetwork.com/downloads ... 120223.mp3

Yes I second that;  Matt's Johnsosns The Orthodox Nationalist is a great show, probably one of the best there is out there to listen to... at least for like minded people such as ourselves.

[blueocean]

[youtube:2r3z6pax]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pzhP4fRGDI[/youtube]2r3z6pax]





For all you fans  


you fans do you also like Goebbels?  ( the guy that looks like a jew   :lol: )

[pas]

Timothy Fitzpatrick wrote:

Pas, regardless of if Hitler was a secret Rothschild agent or if he kicked bankers and Masons out of Germany, nobody can deny that Nazism was/is ideologically identical to Judaism

The main point about jewish ideology is to parasite off Gentiles and high up in their arsenal is talmudic banking and the use of orginazations like the masons.This is opposite of the Nazi way of building up their country through hard, honest work.
And the seemingly similarity between Judeo and Nazi etnocentrism is also very different as the ''chosen people'' think they rightfully own the world and see the rest as their appointed slaves, as for the Nazi's; they were not out to rule the world (or even Europe) and eventhough they had race-laws they did not see different races as slaves or cattle.

I won't respond to the rest, I haven't got the time for silly argueing.

Spectec, I understand the point.But if we put all the facts next to each other on a scale it would be crystal clear that all the heaviest points are for Hitler.
-He kicked the jews out of power peacefully.
-Introduced labour based currency.
-Fought against the nations we know are jew-run.
-Was almost shot by Communists.
-Banned kosher slaughter.
Etc.
Also the footage you posted is from 1919 which is a long time before he got into power a lot can change in that time frame.The Communists even tried to kill him later but someone saved his life taking the bullit.
Would the Communists kill a Rothschild agent?

Ada, Eustace Mullins is one of my heroes but he not without flaws, as anyone is and he has put a little mis-information out concerning the Nazi's.

Blueocean wrote:

you fans do you also like Goebbels? ( the guy that looks like a jew :lol: )

If you would do some research you'd find out that that funny looking man SHOULD have some more fans, comedian.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Modern Occultism is on the one hand practical Cabala and on the other, Indian Yogism, both of which have always had their adepts more or less openly. The Cabala is Occult Science itself. It is the secret theology of the initiates, theology essentially Satanic. In a word the counter-theology. Our God, the God of the Christians, is the power of evil in the eyes of the Cabalists ; and for them the power of good, the real God, is Lucifer. The Cabala teaches magic or the art of intercourse with spirits and supernatural beings. One cannot be a convinced Cabalist without soon becoming a magician and devoting oneself to the practices of occultism. Not that our Cabalists or contemporary magicians practise all the different branches of occultism. Some of these have been abandoned and others are only used by charlatans for the exploitation of superstitious persons, but a great many, precisely the most criminal and perverse, are observed in the hidden dens of our modern Luciferians." —Edith Starr Miller - Occult Theocrasy

Pas, did it ever occur to you that your hero ZCF has multiple personality disorder and is an Illuminati mind-controlled slave?

[blueocean]

Pas wrote:

the Nazi way of building up their country through hard, honest work.

Texts like these make me wanna puke lol.  This is fairy tail talk.   (yup tail and not tale :lol: )    Making a case about how the nazis might have posed a threat to zionist rule is fine and dandy but stop idolising please.


regarding Goebbels, how jewish must a man look before you call him a jew?     :lol:

[GordZilla]

Pas wrote:

the Nazi way of building up their country through hard, honest work.

Texts like these make me wanna puke lol.  This is fairy tail talk.   (yup tail and not tale :lol: )    Making a case about how the nazis might have posed a threat to zionist rule is fine and dandy but stop idolising please.


regarding Goebbels, how jewish must a man look before you call him a jew?     :lol:

I'm not sure that statement is "fairy tail" (or tale   ) talk at all.

That's exactly what Hitler's regime did for Germany, and easily argued; by honest hard work.
That's not idolizing at all, just historical fact.

[blueocean]

The term `honest hard work´  sounds very plastic and fony to me, like an american presidential campaign slogan  :lol:


But hey I live in communistic Holland and we never use honest and hard work in the same sentence anyway so................ :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Pas wrote:

the Nazi way of building up their country through hard, honest work.

Texts like these make me wanna puke lol.  This is fairy tail talk.   (yup tail and not tale :lol: )    Making a case about how the nazis might have posed a threat to zionist rule is fine and dandy but stop idolising please.


regarding Goebbels, how jewish must a man look before you call him a jew?     :lol:

I'm not sure that statement is "fairy tail" (or tale   ) talk at all.

That's exactly what Hitler's regime did for Germany, and easily argued; by honest hard work.
That's not idolizing at all, just historical fact.

But would it have continued? Likely not. Hitler was becoming more and more entranced by theosophy as he reached his eventual demise. And we know from history that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The notion that Hitler would have brought the world into a utopia is indeed a fairy tale. While there are many good things that the Nazis did, that shouldn't be used to justify everything they did as being good for humanity, nor should they be elevated to the God-like status that some give them.

[Roy Hobs]

Get Educated --

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_ ... Caps%2C214

http://www.carolynyeager.com/

http://codoh.com/


"If anyone with an opinion on Hitler has not read Mein Kampf -- then you shouldn't have an opinion."

[pas]

Blueocean wrote:

Texts like these make me wanna puke lol. This is fairy tail talk. (yup tail and not tale :lol: ) Making a case about how the nazis might have posed a threat to zionist rule is fine and dandy but stop idolising please.


regarding Goebbels, how jewish must a man look before you call him a jew? :lol:

Gordzilla wrote:

I'm not sure that statement is "fairy tail" (or tale ) talk at all.

That's exactly what Hitler's regime did for Germany, and easily argued; by honest hard work.
That's not idolizing at all, just historical fact.

I couldn't have said it better.Thanks Gord.

Blueocean wrote:

The term `honest hard work´ sounds very plastic and fony to me, like an american presidential campaign slogan

Yeah, that's because jews always use good principles too fool the masses that doesn't mean the principle itself is wrong.And I'm not trying to sell any thing.This knowlegde is almost for free.

But hey I live in communistic Holland and we never use honest and hard work in the same sentence anyway so................

AAHH!
Now it makes a little more sense.The ferocious defence of the WWII narrative is an important aspect of Dutch culture which I myself have also been subjected too so I understand your reaction somewhat better now I think.
Hey landgenoot, please consider Mr. Hobbs advice below.

by Roy Hobs » Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:28 pm
Get Educated --

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_ ... Caps%2C214

http://www.carolynyeager.com/

http://codoh.com/


"If anyone with an opinion on Hitler has not read Mein Kampf -- then you shouldn't have an opinion."

  Mr. Hobbs.

[blueocean]

Pas wrote:

AAHH!
Now it makes a little more sense.The ferocious defence of the WWII narrative is an important aspect of Dutch culture which I myself have also been subjected too so I understand your reaction somewhat better now I think.

Nah ya didn't  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[Michael K.]

ada wrote:

Michael what does gold have to do with the thread issue and problem? I do not see any connection to it.

Because if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...or banks like a Jew...

Pas wrote:

The Reichsmark was not based on international loans but rather on the labour of the Germans (not gold).

http://www.ppsis.cam.ac.uk/pol_sawyer/d ... _may07.pdf

Finally, what Macdonald ignores is that though the Third Reich did indeed prefer silent finance during World War II, between 1935 and 1938 it sold a series of bonds that altogether raised the considerable sum of 9.1 billion Reichsmarks. This was in fact a larger sum of money than ever previously raised by the German state in peacetime. Far more also than was raised for most of the postwar period by the Federal Republic...

Unfortunately, due to the incomplete nature of the Reichsbank files – the surviving material consists almost exclusively of the copious records of the economic research division rather than operational files or Board minutes – and the fact that the records of the Reich‟s Finance Ministry have not as yet been fully catalogued, a full archivally based study is not possible at this point...

Furthermore, when Hitler came to power, though he promised dramatic measures of work-creation and secretly committed himself to even larger scale rearmament, he also loudly proclaimed that any hint of monetary experimentalism should be abandoned. And he was strongly seconded in this by Hjalmar Schacht the man who returned as President of the Reichsbank. This could not be taken for granted. The original 1920s programme of the Nazi party had favoured inflation and in 1932 the leading advocate of Nazi work-creation Gregor Strasser had come out in favour of abandoning the gold standard. Following first Britain‟s abandonment of gold in September 1931 and then America‟s in April 1933 for Germany to have abandoned the gold parity would no longer have been an outrageous step. One could in fact easily present it as the natural complement to Nazi work-creation. Instead, Hitler tied himself to the gold parity of the Reichsmark. Hitler‟s very public commitment to monetary conservatism has been frequently noted by historians. It can be attributed to Hitler‟s instinctive economic conservatism or some vague notion of "prestige". In political terms it may be seen as symptomatic of the compromise with conservative nationalist forces that was necessary to establish the Hitler coalition of 30 January 1933. However, it is precisely from the novel angle raised by this conference that we can appreciate its true functional significance. Hitler‟s commitment to gold gave the Reichsbank the chance to begin the process of restoring the Reich‟s credit. In the protracted process of nursing the German bond market back to health, the issue of the stability of the currency was in fact of utmost importance. And the Fuehrer‟s repeated undertakings not to devalue the Reichsmark, despite both domestic and international pressures, were a mainstay of this effort....

And conversely the restoration of the Reich‟s ability to borrow was the overriding practical pay-off from Hitler‟s otherwise perplexing loyalty to this vestige of the gold standard...

Nowhere was the bond holder more safe than in the Nazi dictatorship. Not only were they protected against uncertainty in the short-run, but the dynamic expansion of the Third Reich would provide an increased flow of tax revenue in future with which to service the bonds.

But again, those who hoped for a conservative nationalist consolidation in the wake of the Sudeten crisis were to be disappointed. Quite apart from Hitler‟s renewed foreign policy aggression, the financial hangover from the Sudeten crisis was forcing the Reichsbank‟s hand. Despite the fact that the Reich had already raised a quite unprecedented 4.8 billion with the first three bond issues in 1938, in November 1938 the Reichsbank announced a fourth loan. There was not even time, given the proximity to the previous loan, for the Reichsbank to obtain advanced orders from major financial institutions.34 The result was the most serious setback to the Nazi bond finance programme. Demand fell well short of the quantity of bonds on offer. Private subscribers fell from over 95,000 to only 58,000. The combined contribution of both private individuals and business was barely more than 350 million Reichsmarks. If we compare in detail classes of contributors and the different sizes of allocations then we find that between the second bond issue of 1938 and the fourth small subscribers remained relatively loyal whereas the decline was larger for the larger classes. From the point of view of the consortium there is no doubt that it was a disaster, forcing them to absorb hundreds of Reichsmarks of unwanted bonds...

The remaining deficit of 300-400 million Reichsmarks had been filled by printing new bank notes. Given the situation of the Reich and the mood of the financial markets, the Ministry would have to accept that ,, the execution of those tasks for which it has special responsibility in the area of general economic rearmament and the Four Year Plan would not be possible on the scale intended." If an attempt was made to force more loans onto the market, the effect could be disastrous. ,,A reduction in bond prices that would be the natural outcome of any such measure would automatically conjur up the danger that the entire block of Reich,,s debt could be set in motion. Such a development would mean the end of any Reich,,s financing by means of loans." The only real alternative was a decision ,,ruthlessly to cut expenditure in the civilian and military sector...".

In light of the depletion of Germany‟s foreign exchange reserves and the prospects for its exports in 1939 Hitler started his economic discussion with this crucial point, which he announced in the most dramatic terms: "deutsches Volk lebe d.h. exportiere, oder stirb". "the German people must live i.e. export, or die!" As I have shown in Wages of Destruction this pronouncement had the immediate consequence that steel allocations for armaments were reallocated to exports. In the long run this was clearly unacceptable. Rearmament needed to be restored to top priority as soon as possible. But if armaments were to be sustained alongside exports what was needed was an increase in overall economic output. And with this Hitler made his next major announcement. What was required was a "new departure in German economic policy".36 The labour force would have to be sifted according to ability, organized as efficiently as possible and rationalized throughout. Greater output however would also require investment. And this brought Hitler to the point that is crucial for our purposes: "This obliges us to free up the capital market for the technical improvement of our firms by unburdening it of state demands. And this in turn requires a concerted unification of economic and monetary matters. It is my decision, to complete the process begun on 30 January 1937 of converting the German Reichsbank from an internationally influenced banking business into the bank of issue of the German Reich."37

So, big surprise, tying the Reichsmark to gold served the Jews who invested in bonds, but ultimately destroyed the domestic economy which resulted in all kinds of repression and essentially forced labor.  This is supposed to be autarky  :crazy:

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Gandhi on Jews and Hitler

[youtube:cy0dv5b2]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJlUAyYi4s4[/youtube]cy0dv5b2]

[Michael K.]

The gold-parity of the Reichsmark is the opposite of the labor-parity of an autarky token dollar.  

The Nazi government was financed with huge deficit spending (9.1 billion Rm) financed by interest-paying bonds, which in turn promised to pay interest in gold.

After a while, interest payments drained the physical gold reserves of the Reich to zero, at which point they just printed money anyway, which they could have done in the first place.  But the difference is that Germany is "legally" plundered of its gold hoard by the payment of massive bond-debt in gold.  

This, again, is the opposite of the strategy of autarky, which aims to shift the power of making money into the hands of the populist citizens and out of the hands of European goldsmith banking.

Then, the Reich squeezed its workers ruthlessly to enable the export of war materials for debt payments while running an armament program for their own fight with the Communists.

How could it be true that Germany must "export or perish" unless we take this to mean that Germany was dependent upon imports.  Dependency upon imports is the opposite of the strategy of autarky, which would have focused on feeding Germany with German-produced food first.  

But even if we take this imbalance as situational and not the product of a policy, what part of making bond-interest payments to creditors in order to grow is called autarky?

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

The following is an excerpt from Bloodlines of the Illuminati by Fritz Springmeier:

After creating international socialism (communism), a temporary antithesis was created called National Socialism (nazism). Similar to International Socialism, National Socialism was created by Masonic Lodges and other esoteric secret societies. Secret esoteric Gnostic and Satanic societies along with the Iluminati helped create "the Thule Gesellshaft" (in English "the Thule Society"). Adolf Hitler was some type of member of this occult Thule Society, along with many other men who later became leading Nazis, such as Rudolf Hess. The Thule Society used the Masonic/Hindu symbol, the swastika, which the Nazi party then borrowed as its symbol. In other words, the grandmother of the Nazi Party was the Masonic Lodges in Germany. Hitler also was a member of the Theosophical Society, which has strong Satanic and Masonic ties. Both Bailey and Hitler studied from Tibetans, Hindus, occultists, and black magicians. They also both studied the Gnostics, and every major Pagan/Occult religious system.

An example of how valued the Swastika was for Freemasons before Hitler ruined its image, is a quote from high ranking Freemason Joseph Fort Newton, "The...volumes also contain an essay...by Thomas Carr, with a list of the Lodges, and a study of their history, customs, and emblems—especially the Swastika Speculative Masons are now said to be joining...seeking more light on what are called the Lost Symbols of Masonry." After Hitler, the Masons quit promoting the use of the Swastika.

The Holy Book of Hitler explains why the Theosophical Society worked so hard to destroy the British Empire. At first, it mystified me why the Theosophical Society presidents who were connected to the Satanic hierarchy would want to ruin the British Empire. The reason it seemed strange is that the mother country of Satanism and Witchcraft is Great Britain. The centre of secret political power is geographically in England. And further, one of the largest and most power secret fronts for Satanism is British-Israelism. The reason why the British Empire was destroyed was that Satan had determined prior to 1870 that the steps to world government would include setting up around 9 or 10 Continental blocs. The Union of Europe into one country (or bloc) could not be accomplished while Great Britain had most of her focus on her empire. As long as Great Britain had an empire, she'd never want to join up with Europe. In fact, all the European nations would have to be convinced to give up their colonies. This is why the World Power got everyone they could to help fight Portugal in Angola including the large Masonic-controlled Christian denominations who donated millions to the NCC and WCC, which then funneled these millions of dollars to the guerrillas to buy weapons and ammo. Some of their targets were churches and Christians.

The Theosophical Society is mostly to blame for India's independence from Britain. First, the Theosophical Society managed to change British policy so that the British became unpopular. Next, Theosophical president Besant, who published the largest English paper in India, strongly criticized British rule in her newspapers and eventually was arrested. Gandhi and other Indian leaders were involved in Besant being made the president of the Indian Congress Party. The Congress party still rules Indian politics. Theosophist Mahatma Gandhi, following in the steps of Theosophical Pres. Annie Besant, led the Indian people against British Rule.

But the final blow to the British Empire was done by another Theosophist—Adolf Hitler. It is common knowledge that the powerful blows of the Axis attacks in WWII struck the death blow to the British Empire, or so we are told. The truth is that the elite wanted the Empire to die, and pulled every string to convince the British public and indigenous natives that the Empire was too weak after WWII to save the empire and prevent her colonies from independence. N. Rockefeller also weakened British influence in South America and replaced it with his own during WWII. However, the Illuminati felt comfortable enough with their financial and their secret control in the third world countries to allow the visible political control to crumble. For instance, key members in communist Vietnam are Illuminati insiders. Illuminati control over these key men is so complete that they participate fully with Illuminati plans. A minor clue to this fact, is that Ho Chi Minh had ties to both Russian and American intelligence.

It's hard for people to grasp that the Illuminati controlled Germany, Russia, Great Britain, and France during WWII, but they did. Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin were all Masons. DeGaulle of France was closely linked with several esoteric groups, and the Priere de Sion and Grant Orient Masons helped him to power in the '50s. Churchill was a Zionist and pro-Fabian Socialist....

pages 302-303

[ada]

Interesting overview!
Which one of these statements are true, which are false.

If Hitler Won World War II We'd Have A Better, More Just World Today
.
Legendary U.S. General George S. Patton realized late in the war that the United States fought the wrong country. Patton felt the U.S. should have sided with Germany to destroy Jewish Bolshevik/Communist USSR. This information comes from Patton's diary entries, letters he wrote to his wife, and comments he made to military officers and staff.

If Hitler had won World War II (and he would have had the U.S. and Britain allied with Germany against the USSR) we'd have a more just, fair, and moral Western World today. The rest of the world would have similarly benefited had the Germans been victorious.

Had Hitler won World War II, what would be different in the post war world? Here are a few examples:

1 - No USSR (the Soviet government murdered millions of its own people during its 70 year reign - to study this topic read the writings of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn; Hitler would have liberated the USSR, though taking large parts of its Western region for lebensraum, "living space")

2 - No cold war (because there would be no USSR)

3 - No Communist Eastern Europe/Iron Curtain (when WWII ended, Eastern Europe fell to Communism - this was part of Stalin's spoils of war)

4 - No Red China and Mao's subsequent killing of 40 - 60 million Chinese (the USSR created favorable conditions for Mao's Communists which ultimately led to Mao's victory over Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalists in 1949, thus if no USSR, no Mao victory)

5 - No Communist North Vietnam (both the Soviet Union and Red China aided Ho Chi Minh)

6 - No Communist Cambodia and Pol Pot's slaughter of 2 million Cambodians (Red China aided Pol Pot)

7 - No dividing Korea into North Korea & South Korea (the allies split Korea after WWII ended, with North Korea becoming Communist... another of Stalin's spoils of war)

8 - No Communist Cuba (given the previous, what support would Castro have had in the 1950's?)

9 - No Communism anywhere (Hitler was the world's most fervent anti-Communist)

10 - Liberalism & multiculturalism wouldn't dominate Western ethos (both are Jewish creations and both have always been heavily promoted/advanced by Jews; thus if no Jewish influence, then no liberalism and no multiculturalism... at least certainly nowhere near the degree we see today)

11 - No Cultural Marxism and no political correctness (these are social engineering "tools" which came out of the Jewish think tank known as the Frankfurt School)

12 - No third world immigration into Western nations (Jews wouldn't be in power positions to craft and force through liberal immigration laws; Jews are responsible for each Western nation's liberal immigration policy, as most were orchestrated by the World Jewish Congress)

13 - No depraved filth on TV, in movies, etc. (because Jews wouldn't run Hollywood)

14 - No widespread pornography (Jewish lawyers and Jewish activists were the main challengers of anti-obscenity laws, under the guise of "Freedom of Speech")

15 - There would still be prayer in public schools (Jewish lawyers were instrumental in banning prayer in public schools under the guise of so-called "separation of church and state," something that appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution)

16 - No man-hating radical feminist movement (Jews such as Betty Friedan, Sonia Pressman, and Gloria Steinem, among others, were the key drivers of radical feminism)

17 - No Israel and all the problems it has brought the USA and the immeasurable misery it has wrought on the Palestinians

18 - Jews would be living in Madagascar (perhaps) and would be carefully monitored (Madagascar was one place Hitler considered as a Jewish homeland)

Many reading this will ask, "But what about the Holocaust?" The Holocaust has been grossly exaggerated by organized Jewry in order to create sympathy for Jews worldwide and thus help advance the Jewish agenda (i.e., people seen as victims tend to get their way). It is also used as a political weapon to justify Israeli militarism against the Palestinians. Hitler's Final Solution (rebranded in the early 1970's as the "Holocaust") was a plan to remove Jews from Europe, not to kill them. During WWII, just as the U.S. couldn't trust Japanese Americans, thus causing FDR to round many of them up and place them in concentration camps, Hitler couldn't trust Jews since many were partisans sympathetic to the USSR and hence they aided the USSR in various subversive, anti-German activities. Therefore the Nazis rounded up Jews and placed them in concentration camps. Somewhere around one million Jews died during WWII (not six million) mostly due to disease and starvation in the final months of the war. Allied bombing of German occupied Europe destroyed many roads, rail lines, and bridges making it impossible for Germany to adequately supply the camps with food and medicine. The result is that many Jews died of starvation and disease; and of course many non-Jews also died of starvation and disease (again, due to a massive Allied bombing campaign and its destruction of German transportation infrastructure). Lastly, there were no "gas chambers." Much has been written about this. To study this subject, read the research papers published by Germar Rudolf & Carlo Mattogno (there are many others as well).

It should also be noted that Hitler never wanted to "conquer the world." He simply wanted to safeguard Europe from nefarious Jewish influence and safeguard the world from usurious Jewish banking.

Sadly, FDR and Churchill were puppets of International Jewry; each sold his soul for power and prestige. World War II was a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism -vs- Jewish Bolshevik Internationalism/globalism -- and unfortunately International Jewry won.

Was World War II "the good war?" No, it was exactly the opposite. The Allied victory marked the beginning of the end of Western Civilization.

http://immigration-globalization.blogsp ... would.html