Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00146)

Frank,

First, I'd like to set the record straight... That I have never directly 
"accused" you of being a "Nazi"... Nor, have I made any comments on your 
character that were not reflected in whatever you were saying that either 
directly or indirectly accused me and others associated with ULT as being 
"like communists," or "liars" -- in addition to your uncalled for remarks 
about "Jews" and "neurotics" with reference to ULT and its associates. 

Leaving all that behind -- since I, too, do not wish to get further embroiled 
in fruitless arguments based on personal opinions, prejudicial remarks, or 
character assassination -- all I can say is that I stand by my comments about 
Adolph Hitler and his Nazi party activities, as well as his connection with 
occultism, and his active instigation and participation of the "final 
solution" (to his vicious anti-Semitism obvious in his early writings). This 
knowledge is based on first hand information gathered while I was assigned to 
the U.S. military intelligence (under "Top Secret" clearance) during the 
latter part of the war and during the occupation of Germany (under the 
"cover" of "Historical Photographer"). At that time, the various US military 
intelligence organizations were examining the occult records of the SS, the 
SA, the Nazi's advanced weapons groups, the Gestapo, and other secret, and 
semi secret organizations set up by Hitler, as well as his and his cronies' 
personal historical records... Much of which (with reference to Hitler's 
links to Rosenberg, Crowley, the O.T.O., B.O.G.D, and other "occult" 
organizations, as well as some of his own personal history which I was privy 
to) were later, either similarly observed first hand, or passed on to others, 
and versions of this information included in the various books written by 
some of the writers you mention, as well as several other quite reputable 
"reporters."

I might add that many of these original documents were intentionally 
destroyed, classified, replaced, forged, or altered for various reasons by 
the several conflicting Allied intelligence groups that first sifted through 
them. So, as far as I can determine, based on my personal observations and 
discussions with some of the German translators I worked with, there is very 
little "nonsense" in much of this later reportage (your, so called, "serious 
historical researcher's" opinions, some possibly based on doctored or 
spurious documents, notwithstanding). It should also be noted that most 
"reporters," who might eventually write a novel or nonfiction book about 
their reportage, do not consider themselves as "historians," and while some 
artistic liberties may be taken, the underlying facts were usually fairly 
accurate -- since there were others that also knew these thing and could call 
them to account. It's also a fact that much of this information that we were 
privy to before their redaction or classification, were withheld from the 
postwar German people and their authorities for various political reasons 
which I can't go into here.

In addition, as for my own credibility along these lines... After the war, I 
was instrumental in raising private funds for the liberation of the Jewish 
refugees on Cypress -- as I was the first to publish in America the -- 
"forbidden (by my wartime superiors) to be brought into the US" -- 
photographs of the concentration camps taken privately by liberating front 
line combat soldiers that were processed (and censored by me under orders)... 
But, also, secretly blown up and printed at my photo lab in the 
Technicalishe Hochschule von Darmstadt (which was under my sole occupancy and 
guardianship during the final months of the war while its voluminous 
historical and scientific records were being examined). After the defeat of 
Japan, I brought copies of many of these pictures back to America where, 
after their private publication for fundraising purposes, they became 
circulated to Newspapers throughout the world to "prove" the Nazi horrors -- 
(deniers of the Holocaust, who also can come up with fraudulant, "documented 
proof" of their position, notwithstanding). 

Since there are no available declassified "documents" that I can refer to 
that could refute your mostly opinionated arguments about Adolph Hitler's 
occult connections (he was actually a Reagan like stooge of the Black 
"Dugpas" in the various occult organizations that were the actual "powers" 
behind the Nazi party) -- it would be pointless to continue this discussion 
(in which "my remarks" are based solely on my own personal observations, 
knowledge and experience). It's interesting that after the capture of Berlin, 
several of my intelligence colleagues reported that a few hundred Tibetan 
monks (Dugpas?) were found as suicides in the devastated city. I was told it 
was evident that they had been working with the Nazi's under Hitler's 
command. Make of this whatever you will.

As an added comment that I hope won't bend you or other hard nosed believers 
in "professional Historians" (who very often base their opinions on second 
hand twisted or "doctored" information given them by the established 
"powers") too far out of line... You, and others of your ilk, apparently, can 
be easily misled by such so called "experts" who never can see beyond the 
layers of "cover ups," "redacts," and other "disinformation" that potentially 
incriminating or "dangerous" documents are subject to when "captured" by the 
"established powers" with "axes to grind" (such as the many Nazi [or fascist, 
if you will] anti-Communist, anti-theosophical and anti-Semitic sympathizers 
and supporters that inundated the American and British power structures then, 
and even up until today) that first get a first crack at such documents, and 
who change, forge, or "doctor" these records to suit their own purposes 
before they are "released" to the so called "professional Historians." It's 
no secret that many of these Nazi sympathizers and "sanitized" ex-Nazi's are 
still hovering around positions of power within high governmental circles and 
in both national and international (globalized) organizations throughout the 
world. Since I only know of them, secondhand, through my intelligence 
community connections, I have no documented "proof" of their existence -- 
which, for my own safety, is all well and good as far as I'm concerned.

Some of us, however, are willing and capable of looking beyond mere written 
"history" for the real truth of such matters -- both occult and overt. 
Observe the lack of "documentary proof" of the fundamental principles of 
theosophy as presented by HPB, or of her unproved statements about certain 
historical Adepts. Using the methods that you and other historical 
muckrakers are apparently basing your beliefs on, her students might as well 
have asked HPB to show documentary proof of ALL the "occult" statements she 
had made, before accepting them as "facts." 

As for all this historical muckraking of the various theosophical 
organizations that has led up to this discussion, there's already enough 
anti-theosophists around who have criticized the past personal actions, 
disagreements, and infighting's of theosophical leaders in order to discredit 
the teachings of theosophy itself... So, why must we publicly add to this 
battery of negative information for future historians to latch onto, draw 
false inferences from, and misinterpret?

So, let's end this nonsensical farce of trying to nit pick to death theosophy 
and its political history during the last century, and get on with its study 
and practice of the applications of universal brotherhood based on a 
thorough, self determined knowledge of the "psychical [and cyclical] powers 
latent in Man" -- before the whole world's systems and structures come 
crashing down around our ears... As HPB warned us might happen in her 
"Messages to American Theosophists" -- should we not "shape up" and "spread 
broadcast" the unadulterated original teachings of theosophy ("in the 
language of [this] age") before the end of THIS century. 

All that a knowledge of theosophical history can do is teach us the 
organizational errors of the past so that we will not repeat them in the 
future -- as we get on with our individual study and true "companion's" group 
work in the present. 

There's much to be done whenever we can end this pointless bickering over the 
past -- which has to be simply observed, absorbed, and "forgotten" (as 
memories of our past lives have been) in order to enable us to function 
effectively in the present. So called "theosophists" who can't see this, and 
think that a knowledge of history (which must always, depending on the 
"historian," remain vague, misinterpreted, opinionated, biased, exaggerated, 
or lied about, and controversial) will make us free -- are "the blind leading 
the blind." 

As the Masters have pointed out, there is no "succession" of leadership in 
theosophy. And, each theosophist must become his own guiding master by his 
own individual, self devised and self determined efforts. As a group, they 
will know what to do to forward the Theosophical Movement by mutual assent -- 
without need of guidance by self elected "leaders." 

LHM


In a message dated 08/13/01 12:01:25 PM, ringding@blinx.de writes:

>Leon:
>What accusations? That reference was only used as a metaphorical example
>-- since it is well known that Hitler was a student of occultism before he
>wrote Mein Kampf, and that he twisted the teachings in the Secret Doctrine
>(which, there is evidence he studied while a student in Munich) with 
reference
>to the Aryans as well as the Hebrews, to justify much of his nazi "master
>Race" philosophy, as well as the extermination of the Jews.
>
>
>Frank:
>I simply ignore your comments on my character which I snipped as that stuff
>is not of my interest. Sometimes I am puzzled with your emails.
>Your new assertions about Hitler and HPB are pure nonsense. What kind of
>books are you reading? Obviously you are a true believer of your Hollywood
>and establishment propaganda (I mention only the lies in the recent Pearl
>Harbour movie). Note that I am not a Nazi (aside from the definition of the
>"liberals", gays, Jews, Communists and work-shy people who accuse others
>as Nazi even if he/she is a Vegetarian or drinks no or too few alcohol) or
>a spokesmen of them, but fact is:
>
>(1) In the serious historical research there is not a single proof or even
>a hint that Hitler was interested in occultism and there is no single hint
>that he knew about the existence of HPB's book, nor that he ever read it.
>Read the major reseachers like Fest or Maser who clearly say that all this
>phantasies of creative writers have no reality. OTOH, there are many
>quotations from Hitler that he believed in God, read the bible and condemned
>basic theosophical teachings like karma and reincarnation. Why then is
>Hitler known to quote frequently in his lectures (which he wrote for
>himself) from the bible and not in a single instance from the SD or any
>other common occult book?
>
>(2) Most books about Hitler are tales from creative writers and have no
>truth in it. Sources like Hermann Rauschning, the so-called "Anne Frank
>diaries", Trevor-Roper, Ravenscroft, Henry Picker, Pauwels/Bergier, Dietrich
>Bronder etc. etc. are regarded and proofed by serious historians (and not
>only by revisionist historians) as nonsense. From this imaginary stories
>(for which never sources were given and for which are no sources in
>existence) hundreds other creative writers were writing off.
>
>(3) There is no source proofing that Hitler wanted to exterminate the
>Jews, therefor he could not have used the SD as justification.
>
>(4) It is obvious that the churches are furious that Theosophy still exists
>and as they have learned that the old slanders of forgery on HPB didn't work
>anyone they invented in collaboration with the left politicians the racism
>slanders as the priesthood denounces everyone who believes in evolution
>and not in God's creation.
>As it turns out now that at least in Germany not many in this untrue and
>silly propaganda they have a new pet accusation which is that the
>Theosophists are satanists because they speak friendly about Lucifer. It
>is for sure that for intelligent people both the old and the new chuzpee
>slanders will not work.
>
>(5) It is sad that Theosophists support and take over this transparent
>maneuver without necessity and inquiry.
>If you contradict the above then please show your sources and we go on.
>