The Ultimate Truth: Hitler was a Revolution against the 'System'?

On April 9 [1940] he froze all Norwegian and Danish assets [in the United States] on the lying pretext of wanting to keep them from falling into German hands, even though he knew full well, for example, that Germany has not interfered with, much less taken control of, the Danish government's administration of its financial affairs. Along with the other governments in exile, Roosevelt now recognized one for Norway. On May 15, 1940, Dutch and Belgian governments in exile were also recognized, and at the same time Dutch and Belgian assets [in the USA ] were frozen.

This man revealed his true attitude in a telegram of June 15 [1940] to French premier [Paul] Reynaud. Roosevelt told him that the American government would double its aid to France, on the condition that France continue the war against Germany. In order to give special emphasis to his desire that the war continue, he declared that the American government would not recognize acquisitions brought about by conquest, which included, for example, the retaking of territories that had been stolen from Germany. I do not need to emphasize that now and in the future, the German government will not be concerned about whether or not the President of the United States recognizes a border in Europe. I mention this case because it is characteristic of the systematic incitement of this man, who hypocritically talks about peace while at the same time he incites to war.

And now he feared that if peace were to come about in Europe, the billions he had squandered on military spending would soon be recognized as an obvious case of fraud, because no one would attack America unless America itself provoked the attack. On June 17, 1940, the President of the United States froze French assets [in the USA] in order, so he said, to keep them from being seized by Germany, but in reality to get hold of the gold that was being brought from Casablanca on an American cruiser.

In July 1940 Roosevelt began to take many new measures toward war, such as permitting the service of American citizens in the British air force and the training of British air force personnel in the United States. In August 1940 a joint military policy for the United States and Canada was established. In order to make the establishment of a joint American-Canadian defense committee plausible to at least the stupidest people, Roosevelt periodically invented crises and acted as if America was threatened by immediate attack. He would suddenly cancel trips and quickly return to Washington and do similar things in order to emphasize the seriousness of the situation to his followers, who really deserve pity.

He moved still closer to war in September 1940 when he transferred fifty American naval destroyers to the British fleet, and in return took control of military bases on British possessions in North and Central America. Future generations will determine the extent to which, along with all this hatred against socialist Germany, the desire to easily and safely take control of the British empire in its hour of disintegration may have also played a role.

After Britain was no longer able to pay cash for American deliveries he imposed the Lend-Lease Act on the American people [in March 1941]. As President, he thereby obtained the authority to furnish lend-lease military aid to countries that he, Roosevelt, decided it was in America's vital interests to defend. After it became clear that Germany would not respond under any circumstances to his continued boorish behavior, this man took another step forward in March 1941.

I hope that all copy/pasted alright

Originally posted by novemberecho
sure thing. I posted it on my Facebook. I'm pretty sure it's part of his "declaration of war on the US" speech, or something of the like.

Ah - got it - here is the full text

Your extract starts quite a long way into it so you are missing a good 50-60% of it.

Not sure why you or anyone else thinks we're "not allowed to know about it" though - it is readily available.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


agreed. the part that I posted is just the part that the film shows.
and perhaps it's just the speech that 'they' don't want the AMERICAN PEOPLE to know. perhaps they still hope that we think they aren't as corrupt as they truly are.
having Hitler being painted in such a light where he would be showing the American people that the US was 'playing dirty' so to speak, would be devastating to the American public.
but again, like you said. It's readily available to anyone.
but then again, it's not like the average person watches Hitler speeches in their spare time.

Well,

You have found out what ATS is all about.

I will not go into detail because even though politics(popular opinion) has taken over ATS, I still like this place.

Good job on the information and don't take it too personal, about the hoax bin.

reply to post by novemberecho


Well let's face it - it is Hitler painting himself in "that light" - what did yo expect him to say - "Ich bin ein ruthless f-wit megalomaniac with delusions of adequacy"??

And he is justifying a fairly stupid (as it turned out) declaration of war on the USA - so what nice things did you expect him to say about the US administration of the time??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


correct, I have also taken this into consideration.
and alas, we shall never know the truth because every politician does that xD

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by novemberecho

 

Well let's face it - it is Hitler painting himself in "that light" - what did yo expect him to say - "Ich bin ein ruthless f-wit megalomaniac with delusions of adequacy"??

And he is justifying a fairly stupid (as it turned out) declaration of war on the USA - so what nice things did you expect him to say about the US administration of the time??

You kind of got it backwards there didn't you?

Look at how many common denominators there are between the 30-40s and the last 20 years.
Declaration of war through words is an old fashioned thing, and the way the American stooge governments both back then and now acts, they don't really need to "declare" war.... it's there in plain sight that they wanted it and still want it.
Hitler was right in that speech, pretty much about every single thing he said.

So what options did he really have? Had he not "declared" war on America, he would in time have to face the same problems of deals under the table and destabilization which has become the American (Zionist) way of dealing with countries / governments they don't like.

We face the same enemy today that Hitler faced back then. However we must learn from him that every so-called statesman lies through his teeth. Set our goal and walk not away from that path. Focus is the key word. At the same time, maintain justice and equality amongst men.
I tell you now, the ones who are behind the curtains do not see us all as equals, they see slaves, they see a means to obtaining more wealth at the cost of innocent lives.
Look how the American Zionist government back then sent money and weapons to Europe... look what they are doing in the middle east now. They are inciting violence and war amongst people who dont want to fight each other in the first place (look up "Israel Loves Iran")...

To keep this thread on course... let's once again theorize what Hitler's intentions were, so we can avoid being slandered with labels like nazi and racist. I have no beef with any specific race or religion, except I dislike the concept of idolatry.

Hitler could very well have been a revolutionary in the way that he saw what the Zionists were about to do to the people of the world and the German people.
He couldn't save the entire world, because as he said himself in that speech: just as America has NO business deciding anything in regards to European internal affairs, neither does Germany have any business telling any other country how to act.
In other words, Hitler could only inspire and try to protect what was nearest to him.... Germany. Therefore you will inevitably hear him talk a lot about Germany and the German people.
I think he saw an enemy to the entire world to be honest.

reply to post by flice


beautiful, my friend. I could not have said it better myself.
I've always had that thought in the back of my mind: "what if Hitler was actually a HERO, and KNEW what was going on, and tried to save us all?"

and again, I'm not a Neo-Nazi, racist, Anti-semitist, etc.

but wouldn't that be a shock to the world and a HUGE slap in the face if it were true?
I'd love to see people's reactions. It would basically be the end of the world for most people.

Originally posted by novemberecho
"what if Hitler was actually a HERO, and KNEW what was going on, and tried to save us all?"

I strongly disagree and i don't think he could ever be a hero to anyone.
In my book the late colonel Khaddafi was a hero of some sort. He stood by his beliefs, he tried to bring down the evil system but in the end he didn't sacrifice the people because of it. He could have, he had the money and the resources - but he didn't, even though he must have known he was losing the battle.

Back to Hitler, he could have ordered all those people to go away for example. He had the power at the time to do so but he chose to put them behind the fence, he didn't feed them, he treated them like livestock, he killed them because of an ideology, he broke every possible 'moral law' in the world not to mention the code of war conduct etc. Not a hero, no way. I'd call him a pathetic leader who went for the weak and defenseless.

Originally posted by Exitt

Originally posted by novemberecho
"what if Hitler was actually a HERO, and KNEW what was going on, and tried to save us all?"

I strongly disagree and i don't think he could ever be a hero to anyone.
In my book the late colonel Khaddafi was a hero of some sort. He stood by his beliefs, he tried to bring down the evil system but in the end he didn't sacrifice the people because of it. He could have, he had the money and the resources - but he didn't, even though he must have known he was losing the battle.

Back to Hitler, he could have ordered all those people to go away for example. He had the power at the time to do so but he chose to put them behind the fence, he didn't feed them, he treated them like livestock, he killed them because of an ideology, he broke every possible 'moral law' in the world not to mention the code of war conduct etc. Not a hero, no way. I'd call him a pathetic leader who went for the weak and defenseless.

edit on 12-4-2012 by Exitt because: .

Yes... that was him in the end! But you have to look past that and see who he was in the beginning and what he was facing.
He might not have been the definition of a hero, but he was definitely not a monster by definiton either.
If anything he was a revolutionary turned bad.

And again... who wouldn't reach that point some way along the trials of being deceived while trying to free a people from the clutches of money hungry zionists?

I am in NO WAY defending the killings of millions of civilian jews and soldiers (BY EITHER SIDE!), but I am defending the initial ideology of resisting global enslavement through monetary control.

History books are so busy telling us about the holocaust, makes me sick of hearing it being repeated again and again. Mind you, Danish schools are very thorough in delivering "accurate" and substantial history. Not just local history, world history.
But the history books fail to lecture us on the mechanics of deception and destabilization carried out by the likes of Roosevelt and other henchmen of that time.

Maybe you should start questioning who it is that validates what is being put in those history books???

So in short... don't look alone on the worst thing a man does. Look at the entirety of his "career" AND those he oppose. You'll find that the jewish masters behind Zionism are not all that innocent as they like to see themselves.

Heck, just look at them now. They are pretty much all lying greedy bastards who almost entirely controls all media that the sheep population considers to give them "facts".
To be honest I'm amazed we not yet have a revolutionary and charismatic figure to lead us towards another showdown with the people who are trying to create war between religions.

Once again for clarity. I'm not nazi, racist or anti-semetic. I dislike idolatry and I honestly believe all religions and races in the world should ban together and force these terrible terrible "leaders" off their thrones.

Oh... Ahmedjenidad as the Hitler of our time?! Come on... that's bull# and you bloody well know it. He's a silly man yes, but he doesn't posses the insanity to ever commit a first strike on anyone. Lots of others in the west do though.

But don't let the leaders' actions reflect on the people who live in those countries. By now you should all be so well "educated" that you know populations don't elect officials, they are either bought or placed in office.

Originally posted by flice
1. Yes... that was him in the end! But you have to look past that and see who he was in the beginning and what he was facing.

2. And again... who wouldn't reach that point some way along the trials of being deceived while trying to free a people from the clutches of money hungry zionists?

3. Maybe you should start questioning who it is that validates what is being put in those history books???

4. You'll find that the jewish masters behind Zionism are not all that innocent as they like to see themselves.

5. Oh... Ahmedjenidad as the Hitler of our time?! Come on... that's bull# and you bloody well know it. He's a silly man yes, but he doesn't posses the insanity to ever commit a first strike on anyone. Lots of others in the west do though.

1. I am with you on so many points - we definitely think alike. Except i cannot look past those dead innocent people, i am biased in a way for being through a war for no fault of my own. I do try however, very hard to form opinions as objective as possible.

2. In addition i have known a leader who in very similar circumstances did not kill the innocent and instead he offered them a way out. Later on he was accused for ethnic cleansing (which is technically true, i admit) but still i was never afraid to say he was an honorable warrior respecting the old 'laws of the jungle'. That is why i know not everybody would act the same way as Hitler.

3. Believe me i know and i have spent many hours explaining to people the difference between the objective truth, political truth and people's truth. They never ever match. History books are full with political truth's, a few people's truths and none of the objective ones. But you know that

4. Definitely true, biggest giveaway would be their decision at the time to refuse the American desert as a safe heaven and take away other people's land instead. That's an agenda right there, not to mention they should have compassion based on their own experience in Europe. Evil people, evil.

5. I would even say Ahmadinejad has no intention whatsoever to attack anybody because all he wants is to be left alone. For years his actions are clear about him not wanting to be involved with the western society. I say we should let him be.

Well....it seems that this thread may have been placed in the "hoax" forum simply to take eyes away from it....
(Something ATS has ALWAYS done....no bewilderment, no surprise as to why from me)

Anyways....this is something I have discussed in length with the few around me in the "real" world who are open enough to have such a discussion without it instantly turning into a "you are racist/nazi/anti-semite" blah blah blah...

I really don't care to give my opinion here...as it is lengthy and complex (simplifying it to "was Hitler good or bad"? Or "Was Hitler a evil maniac or revolutionary" is to simplify it too much)
I leave my opinion at "somewhere in between the two" or..."a combination of both"...

Since this thread cannot be flagged I am not sure that I will be "subscribed" when I post....(hopefully I am.....I am interested to see where it goes as a discussion, but I can speculate...and I will say it will probably end up where it always does...."racist/nazi/anti-semite" blah blah blah)
Not even sure if my commenting will bump the thread in the "most recent" threads list....given that it is in the hoax bin.

But I am giving it a shot....
Kudos to the OP for having the guts to bring this to ATS for discussion......just keep in mind, some of us ARE "awake" and "open" enough for this discussion....not ALL here are as narrow-minded as some who have already posted.........I was glad to see that many WERE open enough and replied very rationally....even if their opinions disagree or don't align with mine......

reply to post by flice

Yes, indeed. I would like to know why this is in the hoax section? How can an opinion be considered a hoax? Maybe a mod can respond.

Also, I recently did a thread about history, and how history as we know it, is in most cases not the full truth, merely a reflection of what the ones in power wants, juxtaposed onto a canvas to fill in the rest of that history with however they want us to see it.

I thought the OP was great and raised quite a few interesting topics for discussion.

vvv

I think the mods try pretty hard and who knows who sets their rules. I have seen a heap of Hitler threads in the last two days. This one must be the best one since its been put in Hoax. I think the OP should take it as a compliment.

And the mod that put it here could have easily trashed the thread altogether. I think Hoax is code for "good job" in certain cases.

And I agree. Awesome OP. Awesome posters. Im dissapointed in the opposition though.

And I had never seen that awesome speech that was posted. Thanks to that guy

This was/is an awesome awesome thread and I thank ATS for allowing it to continue.

And the OP of course.

I've done quite a bit of research on Hitler over the years.
His early, formulative years, the beginnings of the NDSP and their development fascinate me.

I've enjoyed reading this thread and though I have some considered theories and opinions of my own for various reasons I have chosen not to contribute to the discussion at present.

But what concerns me at present, as voiced by several other posters, is why this has been labelled HOAX and why no moderator has even attempted to offer an explanation.

Regardless of right or wrong, the OP has merely expressed a considered and reasoned opinion, has not deliberately mislead or misrepresented anything and has not attempted to spread any hate or discontent.

In the interests of clarity and openness I sincerely hope a moderator can offer an explanation and offer some clarity on ATS policy of what exactly defines a HOAX here nowadays.
Hopefully it will not be a suppression of what some may regard as an unsavoury topic or theory.

btw....a reply does bump the thread on the recent posts lists

forgot to thank the people that brought all the great videos that I have never seen before about the speeches and all-

thanks

At first I thought the OP had put it in the hoax bin just to make us curious, but it seems not to be the case. That bothers me a bit.
Springer, I know you and the mods have had quite a job fending off hard language, but honestly, we have to take the gloves of this overly sensitive subject of Hitler and the Holocaust. No one here is denying that millions were killed, nor that that act was terrible. We're not being disrespectful to the average jew or gentile.
We are merely questioning how much sense there is to keep the idea of the holocaust alive, how much of taught history is true to the word and wether the acts of WWII can be viewed upon solely as a holocaust.
The world is not black and white, however much the Zionists would like us to think it is.

But I guarantee you, you (Zionists) will never succeed in your quest.

Thanks for the opportunity to bump this fine thread.

Ok....so all of this came as basically new news to me, even though I have looked into some of the words that have been discussed like Zionist ect...I never was able to hook everything together.

Im angry and at the same time...it has put me in a very defensive mind set-but all the while my mind is not surprised at such a thought and idea about a power being behind all the wars all along. I have always, even as a child, saw the dangers of the book called the bible that spoke of holy land and a chosen people....I knew of the dangers of a people believing that they are gods chosen and that all the things they do are OK in the eyes of their god....its a dangerous book and all the abrahamic religions can not, in no way, get away from the fact that the book leads to war and blood shed in the name of a god.

Im convinced now more then ever, the bible has caused many men to be confused from what their true heart would due over their molded mind.

I today-stand against any people that believe in a chosen people or a holy land because I will not back any such idea that leads to killing and greed for a god.

Even Christians will want to say that they are for peace-they are fooling themselves-there is no peace with a certain piece of land being special-the Christians just wait for jesus or god to come due the dirty work, unlike the other religions of this book....they want to do the dirty work for themselves.

If this is truth, even if only parts is truth, its sicker then the truth I thought was truth. That is bad. I have looked at the whole world different today...I have gained a new passion for my human right to be here! OR should I say, my god given right to be here!

It is all still growing on me, still reading alot of stuff, listening to alot of things....but really, this has made me rethink pretty much everything I have known in some way or another. Even if I dont see all this being absolute truth-Im glad I can be open enough to stand back and consider, that I have been heavily lied to. To just consider it, its hard, it hurts a bit, its sad, but damn, if its truth, then holy freaking hell yall-its sick! I dont so much blame man....because it all started with that freaking book! And even the men that wrote it, they wrote it according to their specific situations for their people, their problems, trying to bring resolve or even create conflict with their already enemies, they had their reasons for what they wrote and it pertains to them in that TIME and in that land....but surely, surely, man is not fooled to still believe that there is a chosen land and people, please tell me that man is not so foolish. Damn, this thread makes me face things I dont want to see. I always try to look at earth and our species with optimism....now I have thoughts that are ugly and unsure of where they even come from...it makes me very defensive of Earth and the rest of mankind that is not on the 'chosen' list....that is where I will stand, with the 'others'. To think that so many could be diluted this bad about the thigns that book speaks of..its just scary.

bump





edit to add...please bring forth anything that can help sway me one way or the other...both sides, bring it forth if you got goods!! I cant sit on the fence with this thought for long-you can send me in private message things as well-Ive also shared this with one other person in my life who is a very level headed person...and something that comes to my mind today is that I have a 15 year old who could be drafted in a few years if we keep in this war business....Ill be damned if any of us will fight for anything to do with any land claimed by any people, to be holy and of gods. Now dont get me wrong, Im not against 'god' per say....I just dont support a holy land or chosen people and no matter how we flip this coin, that is the root and crux of this here problem.


Let me be clear-no matter which way is the truth, the root of the issue is of the same place-beliefs-even if what we were taught in schools was truth, the root is still the belief of a chosen people, and if that is not the truth and this other is, the root is still about the belief of a chosen people.

So either way, we can thank religions and beliefs, either way-that led to pride and greed-so here is a chance for everyone that reads this to weigh and measure something of very high importance-do you back a god that stands for things that leads to pride and greed, material things like a land or prideful things like being chosen-where will you stand? That is the next question that comes to my mind-