Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00044)

Frank:

I think I understand your position now. Let me
restate it and you can say whether I have it right or
not.

You start with the well documented fact that European
antiSemitism and particularly Hitler's murderous
version of it was instrumental in promoting the
Zionist movement and leading to the foundation of a
Jewish state in Palestine. I think any well informed
person would agree with you on that.

You then make the interesting argument that if
Hitler's activities served the interests of Zionism,
then Hitler must have been their obedient pawn. He
was their employee in effect and took orders from Ben
Gurion through various intermediaries. I think this
is where you would part company with most other
students of the conflict. It is an interesting
theory, but one which would require documentary proof
for it to be generally accepted.

One problem is that even if you are right and
Rotschild money supported him in his early campaign
there is no reason to believe Rothschild continued to
control him after he came to power. Whoever wrote the
television documentary series WORLD AT WAR (which is
available on VHS) had their narrator read that when
Hitler was made chancellor the people responsible
thought he would be their puppet and that they could
control him from behind the scenes. I cite a
documentary because I have not seen this in any book I
have read. The documentary then said that they were
mistaken and that they swiftly lost control of him
after he took power, declared a state of emergency,
opened concentration camps, started the Reichstag
Fire, etc. That seems more consistent with the facts
than the theory that he was a puppet of New York
bankers.

Another problem is that if this theory depends on
documentation in the Abegg files and those files were
all destroyed there is no way to confirm the
statements of the people who say this. If everyone
who knew anything about the files was murdered by
Nazis, then how is it that conspiracy theorists have
detailed information on their contents? With no files
and no witnesses, the most anyone could truthfully say
is that they were alleged to have existed. And if he
had the entire Rothschild fortune at his disposal, how
is it that you say he was broke in 1932? That
suggests that R must have cut off his allowance. You
might want to examine some of these problems more
closely.

Also your statement that John Foster Dulles was
murdered in 1933 is hard to accept, given that he was
secretary of state twenty years later. That is a
minor point, of course, as is your statement that
Himmler made Mueller Gestapo chief. It was Goering
who did that, but minor errors of fact do not affect
your main thesis.

You are obviously a serious student of history. You
are right to study the works of serious historians,
some of whom you have cited, but you are doing
yourself a disservice IMO by taking characters like
Lyndon Larouche seriously. I do not doubt your
statement that the Grand Orient in Paris wrote a
letter to Woodrow Wilson, for example. Lots of people
wrote to Wilson, including Ho Chi Minh, who was a
student in Paris at the time. That Wilson even saw
the GO letter, let alone read it, is questionable. 
That he took orders from the Grand Orient is extremely
unlikely. The difference is that I would tend to be
more skeptical in dealing with some of this evidence.

If you can find a serious historian who thinks there
is some merit in the Hitler pawn theory, then please
let us know. I would like to know more about that.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com