Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00036)

>Because his actions were those of a homicidal maniac.

That is no argument. And to be fair, who are the similar dicisions of his
cotemporaries Stalin, Churchill ond Roosevelt to be judged? Or is the moral
code divisible?

>mucks. I also helped collect much of the concentration camp photographic
>evidence used in the nuremberg trials and published in the American
>newspapers. Not being a historian, and under strict military security
>orders, I had no reason to keep any references to specific information I
read
>or overheard, some of which are still under security wraps. In any event,
I
>know what I know first hand about Hitler's anti-Semitism and
psychopathology.

Wrong. You saw only that what you were allowed to see but you did not
question whether the documents of your superiors were true or faked by US
and/or Russian sources. You never had any doubts because your superiors told
you that you are on the right side. That is not your personal mistake, that
is the ususal behavior of any soldier in any army, but it's an explanation
why you never tried to hear the other side.

>You can also go to this site and find out for yourself what Hitler thought
>about Jews in Mein Kampf. I'm sure you are also well aware of his other
>sociopathic "racist" and distorted evolutionary theories.

Yes, I am of course aware of his racist outbreaks. But it is wrong to say
that he announced the final solution of the Jews in his book, which in fact
he never wrote. I am not in the position to defend him, but I want to make
clear the difference. Hope you understand what I mean. He did not announce
it nor is a written order it to be found nor is the Wannsee conference a
proof, despite the fact that "experts" say is is so. But it is not so. One
is in danger to be called a Nazi in saying this but nevertheless it is true.

>Compared to Hitler, some of them were saints. Your obvious defense of Adolf
>Hitler's murderous pathology and anti-Semitism by making this implicative

Ah, that is exactly that what I wrote above. I never defended Hitler but the
truth. Tell not lies about Hitler and you will bring me not into a position
to defend the truth. Surely, Hitler did many crimes. But that does not mean
that Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill did not make crimes. And if my private
theory is correct that Hitler was a Trojan horse of New York bankers to
make her Holy Land a reality Hitler is a bigger monster to me as even the
Jewish propaganda attests.

>remark is a clear example of typical racist biases and prejudices, and
>exposes your use of Neo-Nazi-like propaganda techniques in your arguments.

Funny. To me it looks as it is you who uses Nazi propaganda techniques.

>Also comparing the murderous dictator Stalin with Churchill and Roosevelt
is
>another sign of your propensity to use false analogies, questionable
>references, reliance on so called "authorities," along with specious
>arguments, in defense of your ideas, beliefs and prejudices.

That shows you are still a soldier who has never begone to think for
himself.
Perhaps it is just you who has alle the false anaolgies and questionable
references.
In fact, you sources are similiar to here well known communist sources.
In the GDR school books there was also the claim that Hitler wrote in his
book that the Jews must be killed. But they where never able to present a
page, which is of course not necessary for propaganda purposes.
Last year you called me a Nazi because I qouted from a German politican
weekly and said also this weekly is a Nazi paper, although each week top
Jews are interviewed.

In the meantime I was told by German-Americans that in US the intolerance
and hate is so big that everyone who has an independent thought is called a
Nazi.

The difficutly between us is that you are true believer of the propaganda
and I limit myself to facts and logic.


>If I were an orthodox Jew you and a true believer in dead letter ideology
>I may have go to Palestine.

>metaphysics when explained logically and scientifically. Did you ever
wonder
>why the Jews who comprise only 1/500 of the human race have won about 1/5
of
>all Nobel prizes? (Is that why so many fanatical Christian chauvinist's
hate
>them so much?)

Did I ever said the Jews are stupid? Even Hitler said they are intelligent.
The present western science is in a style which helps the Jews because it is
limited to brain minded conclusions, the lower manas. Perhaps the Jews get
so much Nobel prices because there are so many Jews who decide about it. And
not all nobel prices are rightly earned. Take f.e. Einstein, who said for
himself that it was not right that he got it. He never was able to present
his students his theory and that was the reason why was attacked at the
University. Later research showed that the Einstein case was produced by
others and that it was not his own thing.

>What is an "assimilated Jew"? The Nazi's made no such distinctions when
Jews
>were sent to the slave camps.

Right, they did not made such distinctions. But I never denied that. An
assimilated Jew is someone who lives in that country in which he was born
and don't believes that the Jews are a race of its own which must go back to
a mundane Palestine.

>dyed in the wool anti-Semitic bigot -- who knows nothing of Judaism, its

OK. I am the biggest ashhole the universe, an anti-semit, a Nazi, a girl
rapper, a dugpa.

>culture or its religion -- and still thinks, like most Neo-Nazi's and
>American "skinheads" that the Jews are a "race."

I never said that I believe the Jews are a race. Many Jewish writers claim
that the Jews are a race. Benjamin Israeli said it and many German Jewish
writers. Should I go to my shelve and quote them?
To me it is high questionalbe whether the Jews now in Palestine are the same
as the old Jews, the Hebrews. Most of the Jews in Palestine are Khasars from
Russia.

>assimilated and became Christians during the Inquisition (and whose
ancestors

The inquisition originated from Jews, "Loyola" and the SJ, that's why Martin
Luther wrote so harshly against the Jews.

>to the Palestinians (as a result of the long standing German anti-Semitism
>leading to the Nazi forced mass relocation of Jewish concentration camp
>survivors to Palestine).

Purely propaganda. In no country the Jews had so many rights as in Germany,
that's the reason why the Nazis were installed in that country because no
single German Jews would have been willing to leave his country for a
sentimental desert idea as Richard Harte of T.P.S. wrote correct in his
introduction.
What you wrote is purely anti-Germanism.

>So, why blame that problem solely on all Jews in general, many of whom had
no
>choice as to where they were forced to live by the German Nazi government
>supported by the sanction of many of its so called "Aryan" citizens who

Again that old Chuzpee trick. I never denied that. On the contrary I several
wrote that the average Jew was a victim, too of the cooperation between
Zionists and Nazis. That is the same what Rudolf Steiner said about the 1897
Herzle Congress: The Jews are the frist victims because their religious
misunderstandings are used by dark powers for their wordly ends.

>We might also look a bit deeper into the role of the British and their Nazi
>sympathizing Royal Family, along with their followers, who tried to keep
the

King Edward and the Prince of Wales were supporters of Hitler. But not the
British government who were very jealousy about the high sicial standards in
Germany. The German worker had (since Bismarck) health insurance, pension,
holidays, protection against firing and the KdF steamers (Kraft durch Freude
= Power through pleasure) were bringing masses of German workers to the
English coast were they spent their holidays at a time when a worker in any
European country could only dream of it to make once in his life time
holidays in a foreign country. It was not possible. And now the Nazis came
to power and Hitler fulfilled one social point after the other. These social
standards became after 1945 common in West Europe, even to the anti nazis
:-)


>I have no reason to regret my contribution in 1945 (using my concentration
>camp photo records) in helping the Jewish friends of my father obtain
>contributions of over $15 million to purchase ships and guns used to defeat
>the British and transport the concentration camp refugees into Palestine.

Right. But you should give this idiotic Yad Vashem center in Tel Aviv copies
of it and demand publishing of it.
That British parashooters and ships blocked the Nazi SS steamers of Adolf
Eichmann to Palestine is covered up by them.
You should fight for the truth even if Jewish organizations don't want to
hear it. There reason is that otherwise they had to explain the Menachim
Begin gang and the Stern gang and other Holocaust things they did in
Palestine.


>If you were an knowledgeable Red Indian in USA during the 18.th and 19.th
>Century and knew of the Yankee attitude to eliminate the aboriginales what
>would you have done?
>Frank

>That's like comparing apples to oranges. The historical precedents are
>entirely different. The scattered and separately wandering or nomadic
Native
>American tribes were not a coherent group of people and knew nothing of
land
>ownership, industry, or property rights that came here with the Europeans
>(most of whom were of Christian Anglo Saxon descent). Besides, there was
no
>generalized "Yankee attitude to eliminate the aborigines" (as there is no
>general Jewish attitude to "eliminate the Palestinians" that you imply).

That's anti-Indianism.
And never heard about Samuel Huntington and Sharon? Even Sharon's education
secretary said that his policy is the same as what the Nazi did in the
Warsaw ghetto.


>practical, if not wise Native Americans did. (From a theosophical point of
>view, the wise ones would have recognized that their evolutionary cycle as
a
>race was ending and that they were destined to live out their lives until
>their reincarnation in their next sub-racial cycle, as their karma
dictated.)

Interesting thought. Does that also count for the Jews?
Why so much Holocaust propaganda? Why not say their circle was ending in
Auschwitz and they should reincarnate as the next sub-race? Or is the moral
code decidable and flexible to any directions I personally prefer?


>Unfortunately, there are no simple answers as to where the blame lies for
the
>inadvertent clashes of disparate civilizations that for various reasons --
>from man's inhumanity to man, pogroms, and persecutions, to the vagaries of
>Natural disasters and evolutionary processes -- are forced to migrate from
>one land to another from time to time. What they have to face and respond
to
>from their own group karma is not for us to decide nor to place any
blame...

Agreed.

>(Although, there's nothing wrong with impartially examining the causes and
>effects for the sake of pure knowledge -- without prejudice or reliance on
>second hand hearsay opinions -- especially from those with political or
>philosophical axes to grind.)

Agreed. But examing the causes and effects is a hard job when others blame
the researcher as Nazi etc.
Or is a researcher only a good researcher as long he has your opinion - to
paraphrase Mark Twain?
Frank