What Kind of Person Was Hitler?A Look at the Secondary Sources Part II
What Kind of Person Was Hitler? A Look at the Secondary Sources [Note: Some of these sources are primary]
Hitler according to Gitta Sereny’s [Jewess] Albert Speer: His Battle with Truth, Orig. Pub. Date 1995, this edition 1996
According to Sereny (1995) “Hitler had written the following proclamation for national distribution” on 11 November 1923:
Comrades! We stood in the field, shoulder to shoulder, of one mind. Nonetheless, upon orders of [traitors] the state police of Augsburg drew their guns on Germany’s leaders, Ludendorff and Hitler, and shot at the people’s liberators. The tank Hindenburg fired from a distance of thirty meters spilling the best of German blood. I, Hitler, was wounded; Ludendorff, as if protected by God, remained unhurt. But twenty of our best men were dead, and about a hundred men, women and children injured. The opponents suffered no losses. Comrades! Do you wish to be part of the murderers or will you help to liberate Germany? You will not fight for treacherous Jews. Your German loyalty brings you to our side….(p. 67).
I would like to briefly interject a couple of tidbits here because it is very important. First of all, a lot of historians, especially Jewish historians, like to try and paint Hitler as some kind of a coward because he ran from this scene of death shortly after it was all said and done; but, they always overlook the fact that very few leaders in world history willfully chose to place themselves at the very front of their marching comrades. Hitler was at the very front; furthermore, he did sustain an injury. Also, I would like to point out the fact that had Hitler not survived this Putsch attempt, then there never would have been a Nazi Germany. Hitler was the embodiment of National Socialism, and without his person and character, it simply would not have come to fruition.
That being said, it may not be the metaphysical belief of everyone, but it is my belief that everything significant in the history of mankind is the will of God. Now, the Jews like to cry and whine about this chapter of history, but the fact of the matter is, God willed their persecution. Humankind is not to question God, however, it is to accept His will and make the best of what He does choose to give. So, spare me the lamentations of the ever-persecuted Jews. If God had not willed their persecution, then it would not have happened. The Jews always bring this up in their alleged “memoirs,” and they always have the audacity to hurl hatred at God for their persecution. A fine and ludicrous example of this can be found in Filip Müller’s Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers. I have one question for the Jews: Why don’t you people ever take responsibility for your own actions and persecution at the hands of others? This appears to be an ever-repeating theme in Jewish history; the Jews are always persecuted by “evil” Gentiles. Why is that? Maybe you people ought to stop committing genocide and usury; then maybe, just maybe, so many other people won’t revile you.
Jewry has decided that there is something inherently “evil” and “flawed” in the Gentile psyche, but the truth is that there is something seriously wrong with the Jewish psyche. There are just too many incidences throughout history that serve to obliterate the Freudian clap-trap of the “evil” Gentile theory. People are getting sick and tired of that false hypothesis. Also, the Jews certainly wasted no time at all in blaming Hezbollah and the Lebanese people for the destruction of Lebanon. Excuse me, oh Jew? The only massive bombs that I saw falling were from Jewish jet-craft and tanks [funded by American dollars, I might add]; not from Hezbollah jets and tanks. Nasrallah’s boys were firing WWII-era rockets, while the rabble was dropping incendiary bombs and White Phospherous on Lebanese civilians. The bottom line is that Jewry wants to remain above scrutiny, and aloof of all responsibility for their mass murder campaigns. They utilize the Holocaust™ lie to perpetuate this “beyond scrutiny” status, just as they had utilized their hideous and heretical “Chosen race of God” lie in earlier times. Well, Gentiles of myriad ethnicities are fed up with this racism and bigotry. Just as the Nazi-Sozis and Hitler had become fed up with Jewish liberal smut and garbage, so too are a lot of decent Americans, Britons, Arabs, and Europeans fed up with modern Jewish liberalism.
Oh, and I have noticed that Jewish Nizkor likes to harp on revisionists for basing some of their arguments on logical fallacies. For instance, Nizkor will argue something like this: Just because the diesel exhaust was not the best way to mass murder Jews does not mean that the Nazis had not used diesel exhaust to mass murder them. Yet, the Jews have based their entire Holocaust thesis on the single greatest logical fallacy of all; the assumption that the Holocaust occurred. This is an assumption, and until the “Holocaust” has been proven via empirical evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, there simply is no need to argue it any further. Have you ever heard of burden of proof? One can never assume anything… let us see an assumption fly in the Jewish court of law in America. There is even reasonable doubt that the Einsatzgruppen files were subject to alteration. Seriously, who can possibly trust the ex-Soviets after their Katyn Forest cover-up? Need I mention the alleged shrunken Jew heads or Jew lampshades? Even “Holocaust expert” Deborah Lipstadt has revealed that clap-trap as nothing more than what it is… clap-trap.
Let us move on at this point. Notice, too, that the above letter serves to confirm Hitler’s belief in God?
Sereny (1995) has also pointed out the fact that millions of Germans bought Mein Kampf after Hitler had assumed power (p. 67). The book was actually a bestseller, and just about everything Hitler had put forth in that little tract came to pass. He never tried to deceive anyone, and for any historian to act as though Hitler was this ultra secretive madman is ludicrous, at best. The man wore his heart on his sleeve; all one needs to do to verify this point is sit down and read his book. He had disclosed everything in that book, including the impending persecution of Europe’s Jews. In all honesty, I do not see how anyone could have read that book and not thought that Jews were going to be dealt with quite harshly, or possibly thrown out of Germany. In fact, Kurt Ludecke (1938) had described Hitler’s book as, “… one of the most revealing documents ever written” (p. 57).
Sereny has also addressed the fact that Hitler was quite well-known, and very popular, well before he came into power. She has said, “Hitler was by no means a sudden phenomenon, arriving on the scene unannounced, unknown or, as has often been claimed, ridiculed. His picture, on the contrary, was on every front page for months and years, and his name on all lips” (p. 68).
Furthermore, Hitler had called for the “storming of the universities.” Sereny has noted, “In Berlin there were so many street battles between Nazi and Communist students that the university repeatedly had to shut down. In the student elections of 1929 and 1930, the National Socialists won 38 percent of the votes, receiving the highest percentage at the Institute of Technology, where Speer worked. In 1931 [just two years before Hitler became Chancellor] this rose to 66 percent” (p. 70).
In other words, a good majority of the German people really had voluntarily supported Hitler and National Socialism. So, why did the United States and Great Britain fail to recognize this as a legitimate democratic election? Well, because the Jews did not like Hitler. He believed in the precept of Nationalism and human labor, and that was not conducive to Jewish megacorporate interests who willed the New World Order. Hitler stood in the way of the internationalism that was so ardently being sought by the empire of Antichrist at the time, and the international Jews mobilized against him. Need I remind you that international Jewry declared war on Germany? Do you think those Jews gave a damned about the Germans who were going to suffer, due to their selfish and greed-ridden boycott against Germany? All they care about is Jewish interests, and this is becoming ever more obvious in America today, as we are seeing the consolidation of our government via the Bilderberg Trilateral Commission, illegal slave labor for slave wages, and the Jewish blood-thirsty AIPAC “lobby.” What other ethnic or religious group has such a “lobby?” The answer is “none.” It would be labeled “racist” or “fanatical” by American Jewry. Keep this in mind as the Jews on the Fox Propaganda Machine Jew News Channel tell you that Ahmadinejad was not elected. Well, if that’s the case… neither was Bush. 79 million Americans did not even vote in G.W. Lenin’s last mock election. Now, who’s a democracy again? Certainly not America, as this would not qualify as a legitimate election—that is, had Jewry disliked Bush. The fact of the matter is, the duplicitous American Jews want Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad dead because they are not playing the game of international chess. Well, the Jews can just get off it, because no one is going to die for their oil consolidation and free pipeline from Haifa this time. Hopefully, the Arabs and Lebanese are not as foolhardy as the Germans had proved to be nearly 70 years ago. Is it Jewmany or Germany?
Speer had stated, “What was decisive for me was a speech made to students, and which my students finally persuaded me to attend. From what I had read in the opposition press, I expected to find a screaming, gesticulating fanatic in uniform, instead of which we were confronted with a quiet man in a dark suit who addressed us in the measured tones of an academic. I’m determined one day to look up newspapers of that time to see just what it was he said that so impressed me. But I don’t think he attacked the Jews….(p. 79).
The German-American Nazi-Sozi, Kurt Ludecke, had been as equally impressed with Hitler the first time he had heard him speak. Ludecke had vividly recollected:
… Presently my critical faculty was swept away. Leaning from the tribune as if he were trying to impel his inner self into the consciousness of all these thousands, he was holding the masses, and me with them, under a hypnotic spell by the sheer force of his conviction. He urged the revival of German honor and manhood with a blast of words that seemed to cleanse. ‘Bavaria is now the most German land in Germany!’ he shouted, to roaring applause. Then, plunging into sarcasm, he indicted the leaders in Berlin as “November Criminals,” daring to put into words thoughts that Germans were now almost afraid to think and certainly to voice. … I do not know how to describe the emotions that swept over me as I heard this man. His words were like a scourge. When he spoke of the disgrace of Germany, I felt ready to spring on any enemy. His appeal to German manhood was like a call to arms, the gospel he preached a sacred truth. He seemed another Luther. I forgot everything but the man; then, glancing round, I saw that his magnetism was holding these thousands as one… ” (p. 13-14).
A few of Ludecke’s anecdotal tidbits that I think everyone will enjoy, are as follows:
“I can still see Frau Bruckmann’s eyes shining as she described Hitler’s truly touching dismay before an artichoke. “But madam,” he had said in his softest voice, “you must tell me how to eat this thing. I never saw one before.” In those days that naivety was sincere and genuine. Indeed, it was a little too genuine. Hitler loved beauty and appreciated good taste, but it never occurred to him to consider himself as an object that people might examine with curious eyes. I soon gave up my futile efforts to give more heed to his person and dress, though it might have been advantageous for the leader of the Party to appear less like a refugee” (p. 96).
Ludecke could not convince Hitler do ditch the extremely stiff-necked starched collars either. How the man wore those stiff collars all day is beyond me. Also, there are only a few photos of Hitler in a shirt, as he almost always wore his jacket, even when it was quite hot out.
“It was a pity for the Party, eventually, that Hitler had his typical Austrian “Schlamperei,” this lackadaisical casualness. Aside from his many ingratiating qualities, and of course his political genius, he suffered from an all-embracing disorderliness. Naturally, this grew less with time; but in the beginning it was apparent in everything. It showed even in his disregard for his personal safety, on which so much depended” (p. 96).
I think it would be an entirely honest assessment to assert that Hitler never did overcome this disorderliness, and as a matter of fact, Traudl Junge and Christa Schröder had both commented on how late Hitler had regularly stayed up and slept in. Whether or not this had truly interfered with the conduct of his war, I would guess more than likely not, but it may have a played a very minor role in his final loss.
“On the way home [one day] I pointed out to Hitler that he could no longer consider himself safe from personal attack. Yet he walked through the streets sometimes alone; at the Monday meeting-place it would be easy to shoot him through the window at which he was frequently visible” (Ludecke, p. 97).
What is interesting is that even during the war, and while out of his comfort and safety zone, Hitler really did not take his personal safety overly seriously. Donald Day (2002) had commented that Hitler stood up in an open car without any protection, other than the bullet-proof windshield glass [of his car], while he toured in Memel, Lithuania (p. 139). He had stood up in an open car even in light of the fact that Memel had a significant Jewish and Communist population at the time.
“I will live as long as I must live to do my work,” he said. Indeed, he had.
“I protested that Heaven protects only drunkards and fools, and laughing he said he was doing all he reasonably could to guard himself. He was, to be sure, secretive in his movements, and made a point of never being photographed [he changed his mind upon the urging of Heinrich Hoffmann later on]; the first picture ever to be published did not appear until about a year later.
“… If a man is careless about his life [as Hitler had been], however, it would be silly to ask that he should be scrupulous about lesser matters. Hitler was a terrible manager, and an even worse micromanager, which helps explain, at least in part, how and why so many of his Gauleiters and adjutants had exercised such power under him; and, how they were able to abuse that power.
“Hitler was always on the go, but rarely on time, and we were always asking each other: “What in the hell is he doing?” All the clerical work was discharged by others, but his attitude shaped theirs; so the Party machine, none too well handled at best, more than once was in jeopardy through sheer inefficiency” (p. 97). Again, we see more proof of Hitler’s inability to really manage and direct his underlings with any measurable amount of success. It would be best to describe Hitler as the ideologue and inspiration, and his underlings as the actual “doers.” This was the case described by most of his adjutants, all the way until the end of the war.
“He shone in print, and positively dazzled on the lecture platform” (p. 97).
Back to Speer’s recollections of Hitler: “In Inside the Third Reich, in fact, he specifically remarked on Hitler’s “great gift” for adapting himself—consciously or intuitively—to his audience” (Sereny, p. 80). Any intelligent politician will always adapt him or herself to his or her audience. The question of sincerity and honesty runs much deeper than that, and Hitler had proven himself time and time again to be true to his words and deeds.
“… was first his unexpected shyness and then the restraint he displayed, both in what he said and how he said it. Later I often noticed this tendency of shyness in Hitler when he found himself in the company of highly educated people who were superior to him in knowledge. In the second half of the speech, the shyness disappeared and he spoke with urgency and conviction… of the need for young Germans to find pride” (p. 81).
Hitler himself had stated, “When nations abandon the old and traditional concepts of honor and heroism in the mistaken belief that they are old-fashioned and outdated, it leads to a slow weakening of the people’s [moral] fiber…. Heroic ideas attract heroic elements. Cowardly ideas rally cowards…. Examine our times, examine what you feel gives life and verve to our time. Then you make up your minds and make your choice. You need to find a way that allows you to become part of—to absorb you into—the life and future of this nation” (p. 83).
This speech really relates to political culture and the concept of the Volk. Nations and peoples should never be asked to give away their heritage in favor of something new or different. However, this does not mean that a successful synthesis of old and new cannot come about, or that multicultural syntheses cannot successfully occur. Hitler was one of very few leaders of the Twentieth Century who was able to synthesize [Germanic] traditionalism and technological progress with measurable success.
In a harsher tone, Hitler had condemned the German people for proving themselves to be too weak-willed. He said, “If the war is lost… the people will be lost too; it is not necessary to worry about what they will need for… survival. On the contrary, it is best … to destroy even these things. For the nation has shown itself to be the weaker, and the future belongs solely to the stronger Eastern nation [Russia]. The garbage left over after this struggle will anyway be only the inferiors, because the good ones will be dead” (p. 83).
Hitler was angry and upset, obviously, and he had every right to be. In retrospect, he was absolutely right about the state of the future, as Russia has proven its immeasurable strength, in light of so much struggle, death, oppression, and hardship. Furthermore, the Germans had almost immediately resumed placating to the Jews as soon as their loss was sealed.
On a related note, what really reeks of duplicity is when lazy, soft, cowardly Americans and Britons scream and cry about “terrorists” when they are so quick to pounce in bloodthirsty aggressiveness over entire nation-states. What do they think? The peoples of the Middle East don’t have shit! They have had to resort to terrorism as a survival tactic, and yet, the little whining babies in America and Britain continue to condemn these people who have been forced to live in tents for years and years because the disgusting and selfish Jewish genocidal maniacs have obliterated the weak-willed German psyche, in order to fulfill their Satanic prophecy of the “domination of the Promised Land” [see Deuteronomy]. And the United States has the audacity to support this genocide campaign, no matter how dastardly and demonic its inhuman deeds. Is it really any wonder as to why so many people are becoming more and more attracted to “terrorism”? For a lot of people—you lazy, ignorant, spoiled Americans and Britons—it is all they have. Do you honestly believe that these people want to commit suicide bombings? Do you really not know that they are trying to secure a future for their people? They are sacrificing their lives for the future of their people, ignoramus…they are not doing it for any other reason than for survival itself.
I feel much better now… so, let’s get back to Speer’s recollections of Hitler. Speer had said, upon witnessing Hitler bravely confronting the wild Social Democrats and Communists head-on, “I admired his courage then and I do now” (p. 95). He also said of Hitler, “His words are greeted with indescribable ovations…” (Ibid.). It is really mind-boggling to see how a man who was once so loved and admired, just utterly fall from his people’s hearts and grace. Germans should be so ashamed…
“Just that morning, climbing about on the site, I’d got some plaster on my suit and Hitler noticed me looking doubtfully at my dirty sleeve. ‘Don’t worry about that,’ he said. ‘We’ll fix it upstairs.’ And upstairs he took me into his private quarters and told his valet to get his dark blue jacket. And before I knew it, there I was, walking back into the drawing room behind Hitler, wearing his own jacket” (p. 103). Speer was so overly excited about this moment, and why wouldn’t he be? He got to wear the Fuehrer’s jacket, which was apparently a very special thing for him. Speer’s adoration for Hitler just rings out in this passage, and it is such a shame that he had to placate to the Satanic “Allies” upon war’s end. He’s a very difficult source to rely upon for this very reason. He absolutely adored Hitler, but he had to be sorry for it. Yes, sickening indeed. Very, very sickening.
Sereny (1995) has noted that, “Hilde… had told me about, when Hitler dropped in, drank cocoa and played with the small Speers. She cannot accept that there were times when he acted like a kind and normal man [because she had been so thoroughly brainwashed by the endless Jewish lies about Hitler], and when—perhaps—she even liked him” (p. 123). The indoctrination that the Germans had to undergo after the death of Hitler is simply too sickening and weird to discuss. I haven’t the words. All the Jews ever do is complain, whine, and scream like babies over every little thing. A fine recent example of Jewish idiocy and whininess was their inane collective reaction to Mel Gibson’s comments.
“ ‘I was sitting across the table from him, with a lot of other people, and suddenly he fixed me with his eyes, quite obviously to ‘give in or hold out’—you know that game, don’t you, that children play?’ Speer said he quite deliberately accepted the challenge. ‘I realize now,’ he said, ‘that the relationship must already have developed a great deal to have this happen. Well, I accepted his stare, returned it and made myself hold on. … I don’t know how long it lasted—it felt like a long time, many minutes. I could hear the buzz of voices around us while I felt this charged silence between him and me. It was he who looked away first. I had won’” (p. 139). So, Hitler had a very human and playful side, but most of his adjutants have had to either play this down immensely, or suppressed it all together. Fortunately, Speer was not so ashamed of his role as a Nazi-Sozi that he chose to ignore all of the happy moments of his and Hitler’s lives together.
According to Annemarie Kempf (Sereny, 1995), ‘He [Speer] said to me once how amazingly personal Hitler could be. I asked him what he meant, because of course I never knew Hitler that way—socially, you know. And he went on to describe how often people, sitting next to Hitler at table, would come away feeling he had really wanted to know about them—cared about them. ‘I’m really not good at that am I?’ he [Speer] said, and I [Annemarie] said, ‘No. you aren’t’ (p. 153). She went on to say, ‘I had heard [Hitler] say to Speer, ‘We must end this war quickly. We don’t want war; we want to build’ (p. 153). The “Allies” wanted war then, just as they do now.
According to Sereny, too, “None of this happened without the knowledge and, to an appalling degree, the active cooperation of the rest of the Western world. The exodus of Jews, originally seen by the Nazis as a solution, declined as more and more countries—with the United States and Switzerland in the lead—closed their borders” (p. 177).
So, the Jewish historian, Gitta Sereny, would like to use this scurrilous little passage as a means to indict the entire Western world—an inherently “evil” world that hates Jews for no good reason—as guilty of aiding and abetting Hitler’s alleged Final Solution. I find it interesting that Sereny has so succinctly stated, “In a country where immorality and violence had been legitimized, with its Fuehrer totally obsessed with Jewry, his secret order for the physical extermination of Europe’s Jews, who were unwanted by anyone else and thus now entirely at his disposal, became an obvious final solution” (p. 177). [Emphasis added]
This entire passage contains no citations as to her source(s) for this information. Also, she has given Jews far too much importance, as they were only one aspect of Hitler’s thinking, with regards to Germany's future. Secondly, how can we possibly be expected to assume that “the physical extermination of Europe’s Jews… became an obvious final solution?” We cannot assume anything, as this would qualify as a logical fallacy. Furthermore, Sereny has no evidence to confirm an alleged “secret order.”
The Jews have this distorted idea in their sick and egomaniacal heads that Hitler constantly had them, and only them, on his mind. I think his war was a little more important to him than the Jewish Problem, and that’s why he had ordered that the Final Solution [read: Final Deportation] of Jewry be left for him to resolve after the war had commenced, as documented by Irving (2002, p. xxvi). He got to the point to where he wanted to dump them off in the Eastern portion of Russia, because the Madagascar Plan had become utterly out of the question under the circumstances. Although, it may have come back up for reconsideration if Hitler had won.
Additionally, according to Bryan Mark Rigg (2002) and Richard Steigmann-Gall (2003), not only was Nazi-Sozi Germany a predominantly moral and Christian nation, with a highly refined and rigorous ethical code, but even more significantly, Hitler himself had become quite the lenient Fuehrer, when it came to what to do with Jewry. Let us not overlook the fact, too, that Sereny cleverly sidesteps the fact that powerful Jewish groups had tried to urge New York and London to bomb-blast their brethren in Auschwitz concentration camp in a massive mass-murder campaign (Lewis, p. 351). Apparently, they [American Jews] had no problem with not only supporting the turning away of Jewish refugees, as they [American Jewry], too, were Americans, but had also wished to mass-murder their own people at Auschwitz. Notice, also, how she tries to resurrect the sob story again by stating that Jews were “unwanted by anyone else.” Yeah? Well, if the Jews are so knowledgeable about being unwanted, and know what it is like to suffer so much, then why did they ride rough-shod over the Palestinian Arabs shortly after the end of WWII; and in the process, mass-murder approximately 200,000 innocent people, while driving millions more from their rightful homes? This just isn’t cute any more. Not only that, the Jews just recently fire-bombed the hell out of Lebanon for no reason, other than complete genocide and destruction. The capture of two Jewish soldiers is not a legitimate reason to bomb-blast an entire nation-state.
I think that they view Lebanon as a serious economic and tourism rival, so they decided to annihilate it for almost purely economic reasons; and, had the audacity to try and fool the world that it was because of Hezbollah and their WWII-era rockets. Two Jewish soldiers are not worthy of the decimation of an entire people.
What I found to be quite interesting was Sereny’s statement indicating that, “At the same time, activists such as Oswald Mosley in Britain, Charles Maurras in France, Léon Degrelle in Belgium and Chiang Kai-shek in China set up organizations along the lines of the Hitler Youth” (p. 179). Hitler’s socialist doctrine transcended cultural lines, and all of these peoples should be very, very proud that their incredible nationalist leaders modeled much of their own socialist programs after Hitler’s. As a matter of fact, the story of America’s lack of support for Chiang Kai-shek is one of the greatest shames in American history. What fools and disappointments the Americans had proved themselves to be in allowing Mao to triumph over Chiang. What bastards and fools we Americans were, and still are.
Lastly, Speer had said, “I vaguely recall Hitler describing mentally ill patients and talking about the horror of their lives and how merely vegetating, they were suffering. On the basis of that, I have to say I wouldn’t have been against the euthanasia measures” (p. 202). Hitler implemented the euthanasia program as a program of mercy, not murder. Wagener (1985) had indicated, on numerous occasions, that Hitler never did anything out of malevolence or hatred (pp. 175-177). He said, “The diabolical involves intention, and a satanic mentality or a satanic will. Both were entirely missing from Hitler’s makeup” (p. 180).
Sereny has also addressed the fact that Rudolf Wolters, who had taken care of Speer’s family while he was interned at Spandau prison for twenty years of his life, had had a Jewess lover. Nevertheless, Wolters parted ways with Speer, “partly over his [Speer’s] criticisms of Hitler” (p. 331). So, Wolters supported Hitler after the end of the war, and refused to “sell out” as Speer had done, and he had even had a Jewish mistress. How interesting.
Sereny cleverly tries to interject a brief historical tidbit indicting the Nazi-Sozis for experimenting on children and then hanging them afterwards, however, she fails to produce a citation, once again. Furthermore, the only footnote she could provide states the following: “… this incident was never brought up at the principal Nuremberg trial , nor were the relevant British trials in Hamburg publicized by the Allied controlled German press. It is in fact a crime that remained virtually unknown until 1988, well after Speer’s death…” (p. 515). Not until 1988 did this information come to light? And it was not put forth as incriminating evidence of crimes against humanity during the Nuremberg trial? And a Jewess named Lea Rosh suddenly produces a documentary film about it? One can never assume anything unless there is significant empirical evidence to prove that the assumption has merit. This whole proposition is based on an assumption, and therefore, more than likely, none of these child atrocities ever happened. No citations and evidence… no case.
Hitler according to Dietrich Eckart’s Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin, orig. pub. Date 1923, this edition 1999
“Christ,” Hitler continued with a raised voice, “was never other than perfectly straightforward and frank. God, not to feel the fact that their two fundamentally different worlds were opposed to one another! [In] Palestine after the Babylonian captivity there was a great lower stratum of non-Jews ruled over by Jewish moneylenders, powerful through their usury. One can read that in the Book of Nehemiah. Sombart says that it leaves absolutely nothing to be desired in the way of clarity. The outstanding point is that the real population, composed of oppressed peasants, was of an entirely different race than the Hebrews. Gradually, the Jews forced their religion on them. Christ Himself growled about that: ‘Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye encompass sea and land to make one proselyte….’ The New Testament expressly states: ‘Jesus departed from Galilee and came into the coasts of Judaea.’ To the Jews, Galilee was the land of the Gentiles, whose population ‘sat in darkness,’ as they impudently imagined. They said: ‘Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?’ and ‘Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.’ The Hebrews were so firmly convinced of the non-Jewish ancestry of Christ that they counted Him among the especially hated Samaritans. Just read up on it! There are many more such examples” (pp. 33-34). Jesus came to eventually revile Jewry, and the Jews hated and murdered Jesus. Christians and Jews can never be friends, and Martin Luther had driven this point home in his greatest and last work, On the Jews and their Lies (2004).
“To let each man find salvation in his own fashion is a policy that should never have been recommended,” I [Dietrich] stressed. “The tacit assumption in that policy is that each man’s fashion should involve some sort of decent sentiment, some genuine belief, and not just contemptible Phariseeism. This distinction should have been expressly emphasized long ago. It wasn’t, and the religion of the moneychanger [capitalism] has received the benefit of this misguided tolerance. Christ was not so tolerant. With a whip He put a stop to the business of the ‘children of the devil,’ even though he had said, ‘Love your enemy’ (p. 35). Hitler really loathed capitalism, even more so than Communism.
He had told Wagener:
“It is not for nothing that time and again the Jews have been driven out of countries where they settled—from Babylonia, from Egypt, from Rome, from England, from the Rhineland and elsewhere. In each of these a gardener was at work who was incorruptible and loved his people.
“You look to France, to England, to America, to Russia! What do I care about these nations and their people! Let them cast themselves as fodder before Jewry” (p. 64)!
“The strategic objective of our work is the replacement of the egotistical spirit of profits of the individual with a communal striving directed to the interests of the entire community. I have mentioned more than once that in this I see the revival of Christ’s basic idea, the social community of all people, brotherly love, tolerance, humility.
“What the businessmen want is something quite different; they want to earn money, nothing but money, filthy money—and don’t even realize that they are chasing a satanic phantom” (p. 238) [Emphasis added].
“Yes,” [Hitler] replied, “but we must understand what Christ meant by ‘enemy,’ We can love an enemy, even a brutal one, who is frank and forthright in his enmity. And at the same time we can beware of him. But Christ never dreamed that He should love men whom no love whatever could dissuade from their implacable determination to poison us, body and soul. Indeed, He himself did not do that. On the contrary, he struck with His whip as hard as He could. And the words that He flung with indignation into the faces of the rabble breathed of irreconcilability itself. To me, He acted very properly in the founding of His religion: there was no contradiction between His sermons and His deeds! Why, then, have the ‘pious’ never followed His example? They least of all. They mercilessly persecute even their decent adversaries. Their eyes remain closed to the most cunning bunch of swindlers in existence” (pp. 35-36). The Jews denounce Jesus as a hypocrite in their Satanic Talmud, but Jesus practiced what He preached. The truth is, He was finally driven over the edge by the Satanic Jewish ethos, just as Luther and Hitler after Him.
“We don’t care to govern. But we want Germanism, we want genuine Christianity, we want order and propriety, and we want these things so firmly entrenched that not even our children and grandchildren could change them” (pp. 36-37). Eckart was an ardent Christian, and he served as Hitler’s father-figure for many years. He had also financed Hitler in the early days.
Indeed, this is exactly what Hitler had so ardently tried to impart unto his people. He tried to unite the fractious German churches who had allowed themselves to be undermined by their own ludicrously petty rivalries. He had established Christian and Christian-secular schools in an effort to educate the German youth in a Christian moral-ethical doctrine. He had encouraged the SS to remain church-goers, even though he came up against such staunch anti-church personalities as those of Bormann, Rosenberg, Heydrich, and Himmler. In retrospect, Hitler did a fine job with improving and maintaining the Christianness of Germany. Hitler’s Nazi Germany was far more Christian than modern America. In fact, ardent American Catholics like Donald Day had actually chosen to defect to the side of Nazi Germany over that of “godless” America, during WWII. Donald Day actually volunteered to fight on the German front lines, and chose to live a subsequent life of exile—after being a Chicago Tribune reporter for the U.S. for some 20 years—as opposed to remain a U.S. citizen. He believed that Germany was fighting on the side of God and goodness, and that the Allies and Jews were the true evil ones. He literally perceived the Second World War as an epochal battle between Satan and God. According to this thesis, Satan had/has triumphed, but according to Revelation, only temporarily.
“‘One finds a whole series of such pleasantries in this magnificent example of a religious book,’ [Hitler] said disgustedly. ‘The real clincher, however, is that non-Jewish girls ‘who are less than three years and one day old, are considered ‘suitable’ for rabbis, since Moses had written: ‘But all the female children that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves,’ namely for the rabbis’” (pp. 60-61).
‘The most abominable perversity and the most tedious syllable-thrashing in the same breath. What goes on with Jewish heads must really be frightful’” (p. 61). It might be worthy to note here that Jews were slithering all over the Weimar pornography and prostitution industries, and Hitler really came to resent them for this. They are swarming in modern American pornography, smut, and prostitution, as well.
“I really doubt that there is any sort of medical encyclopaedia that contains terms suitable for describing the Jewish megalomania,” [Hitler] said, “but what an incredible talent they have for disguising it” (p. 61)! Hitler had made this comment after listening to Eckart talk about how Jews believe that when a Jew is slapped across the face, it is to be equated to God Himself being slapped across the face. In fact, the blasphemous Talmud proclaims the Satanic lie that God is more pleased with Jews than angels. Luther had actually sarcastically written, in On the Jews and their Lies, that, “When a Jew farts, all the angels in Heaven sing.”
“And with such an abominable moral doctrine on his conscience,” he fumed, “that marvel of modern Jewry Moses Mendelssohn, had the impudence to assert that ‘dominion over the earth belongs by right to Jewry.’ Because of their religion! As a trained Talmudist he certainly knew his way around in the whole, vile thing—those extracts we have just quoted are only a tiny fraction—but he still… oh, this lying, this utterly mendacious pack, the very essence of the lie” (p. 62)!
The Jewish Talmud and Torah are both full of absolute devilry, and for any Christian to seriously believe that God, and not Satan, is the Lord of the Jews, well, have fun burning in Hell with the rabble when your time is up, oh fool. Jesus reviled Jews, as even He could not bear to love that enemy. In fact, I had discussed this very strange historical occurrence with one of my World History instructors while attending CSU circa 2003-04. The question arose, Why were the Old and New Testaments conjoined? Well, Constantine had converted to Christianity—one of the most famous conversions in history—hence, Roman Jewry found itself in a potentially dangerous and perilous predicament. They had not only advocated the murder of Jesus Christ, but also, the mass murder of approximately 200,000 of His followers. The Jews, being the clever pieces of shit they are, decided to claim Christ as their own; thus, deceiving the Christians, as well as Constantine himself; essentially, that because Jesus had been a Jew [one of their own], they [the Jews] had actually fulfilled God’s Messianic prophecy [as put forth in the Jewish Torah, i.e., the Messiah they await] by having Him murdered. Jesus was not sent by God to die, but rather, Jewry murdered Him and then covered their assets as usual. Jesus was not the predicted Messiah of the Jewish Torah; this is yet another deception and great Jewish lie to undermine Christians. That is why Jesus rejected the Jews and denounced them as “children of the devil.” Jesus meant everything He said. This statement was not simply empty rhetoric.
People often ask me, well, how can you prove that Jesus was not a Jew? Well, the Jews themselves have written in their Satanic Talmud that Jesus was the son of a Roman soldier and a whore. Furthermore, the Jews proclaimed Galilee to be the land of filthy Gentiles; Jesus was from Galilee, and He was only ever referred to as a Judean, Nazarene, or Galilean. Judeans were not Jews (Mohr, pp. 37-46; Eckart, pp. 57-71). Also, lest we forget, Jesus rejected Judaism and donned the Jews, “the children of the devil.” In fact, Jesus, in essence, erased Jewish law when He proclaimed, “I have come to fulfill the law.” The Jews retorted by wailing, “He has a demon.”
Furthermore, (St.) Rabbi Paul was the proto-Bolshevist, selfish, undermining Jew who had secretly defied Christ after His death; he had unwittingly Judaized and Bolshevised Christ’s socialist doctrine. This was one reason why Thomas Jefferson (1989) rewrote the Bible, and renamed it, The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. The Nazis had also de-Jewified the Bible, upon Hitler’s direction and inspiration.
“Anti-Semitism, however, has never really been inimical [showing hostility] to the Jewish religion, but has been indifferent to it. So! We now have an admission that their ‘religion’ serves as a very useful diversionary purpose. Anyone, however, who has become acquainted with it has found that what the Jews call their religion coincides exactly with their character” (p. 63).
References
Day, D. (2002). Onward Christian Soldiers. Newport Beach: Noontide Press. (Original work published 1943)
Eckart, D. (1999). Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin: A Dialogue Between Adolf Hitler and Me. (W. Pierce, Trans.). West Virginia: National Vanguard Books. (Original work published 1923)
Irving, D. (2002). Hitler’s War. London: Focal Point Publications.
Jefferson, T. (1989). The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. Newport Beach: Noontide Press. (Original work published circa 1818)
Junge, T. (2004). Until the Final Hour: Hitler’s Last Secretary. (Melissa Müller, Ed.). (Anthea Bell, Trans.). New York: Arcade Publishing, Inc. (Original work published 2002)
Lewis, B. (1997). The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years. New York: Simon and Schuster. (Original work published 1995)
Ludecke, K.G.W. (1938). I Knew Hitler. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. (Original work published 1937)
Luther, M. (2004). On the Jews and their Lies. York: Liberty Bell Publications. (Original work published 1543)
MacDonald, K. (2002). Culture of Critique. United States: First Books. (Original work published 1998)
Mohr, Lt. Col. G. (n.d.) Thank God! My Savior Was Not a Jew! Boring, Oregon: CPA Book Publisher. (Original work published circa 1960)
Müller, F. (1999). Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers. (Susanne Flatauer, Trans.). Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, Publisher. (Original work published 1979)
Rigg, B.M. (2002). Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers: The Untold Story of Nazi Racial Laws and Men of Jewish Descent in the German Armed Forces. Kansas: University Press of Kansas.
Sereny, G. (1996). Albert Speer: His Battle with Truth. New York: Vintage Books. (Original work published 1995)
Speer, A. (1971). Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs by Albert Speer. (Richard & Clara Winston, Trans.). New York: The Macmillan Company. (Original work published 1969)
Steigmann-Gall, R. (2003). The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Wagener, O. (1985). Hitler—Memoirs of a Confidant (Henry Ashby Turner, Jr. Ed.). (Ruth Hein, Trans.). London: Yale University Press. (Original work published 1978)
|