It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Speaking of the Devil....

page: 9
16
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60

Wow, impressive, you have established that you are able to respond to the challenge, but your response is completely and utterly void of anything other than YOUR -eh- feelings. What literature should I read to get a little insight into the philosophy and political idea behind Fascism? Is there a «Fascism for Dummies»? Who defined fascism as a political ideology?
edit on 31-1-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: .....




posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

What literature should I read to get a little insight into the philosophy and political idea behind Fascism?
Like I said earlier, someone could start out by looking it up in Wikipedia.

Who defined fascism as a political ideology?
It was something that the Italians devised.
The important thing, as I also earlier mentioned, is to distinguish between the Germans as represented by their government plan under Hitler, and the Italians under Mussolini and their fascist controlled government.
I think the reason for the confusion is that the Italians actually had a plan that involved military conquest, and you can see this sort of idea manifesting itself in colony building in Africa by them.
So it was premeditated and spelled out, so then could be pointed to as having a bad intention connected to the ideology.
Where on the other hand, the Germans were originally only interested in unifying the land where the German people lived.
From the point of view of the victorious Allies, it would be convenient to be able to blame everything that happened subsequent to Germany being declared war against and attacked, if they could say that the Germans really had a plan to take over the world or otherwise dominate the world militarily.
The simplest way to do this is to take a term that already existed, Fascism, as defined by the Italians, and to label the Germans with it, thus making them by definition people who planned to attack and dominate their neighbors, since there was never such a plan that existed by the Germans that the Allies could point to to prove that in fact it was their plan all along to take over the world or whatever.
But the reality is something quite different, where, as I pointed out earlier, the two countries had different ideologies, as the people in power in the German government rejected Fascism as an ideology. The Italian system was more like a country run behind the scenes by a star-chamber type of board consisting of representatives of the large corporations, while the German ideology was that the state should tell the big businesses what to do, whatever was the best for the welfare of the state and the people of it in general.
edit on 31-1-2015 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60




Just someone who believes in getting history straight and not perpetuating myths that keep going on in mainstream media that Germans are naturally evil somehow.


What I took from 'mainstream' history is that the Nazi leaders and the SS were evil. The citizenry of German and the conscripted soldiers weren't. The citizenry was largely unaware and were victims of the propaganda machine, and the regular German soldiers were following orders.

But specifically, I asked you if you were a "Nazi" sympathizer. The Nazi party or the SS.




edit on 31-1-2015 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   
In an attempt at getting the thread back on track, here's some updates on my research into the subject of this thread:

To me at least, it has become very clear that the Satan resonating in the Apocalypse— is Zeus, or rather, the ancient pantheist god of thunder and the planet we call Jupiter, as he is found throughout history as king of the gods and the god of thunder and storms. To the Canaanites this god was known as Baal and we meet him in many shapes throughout the OT, and we even see his name in a pervaded form in NT, “Beelzebub the prince of the demons” (Matthew 12:24 and elsewhere), translated ‘Lord of the Flies’, pervaded from “Baal-Sebul” meaning ‘Lord of Rising’. Less known is the Canaanite storm-god Hadad (var. Haddu), another name for Baal, meaning ‘The Thunderer’.

And the LORD [Heb. יהוה “Jahveh”] raised up an adversary [Heb. שטן “satan”] against Solomon, Hadad [Heb. הדד] the Edomite. He was of the royal house in Edom. [ESV] 1 Kings 11:14

Hadad, the Prince of Edom, isn’t just any prince, he is the satan whom the Lord Jahveh raised up against Solomon to punish him because of his religious deviations and perhaps also his promiscuous activities. King Solomon had 1000 wives and concubines, and made altars to just about every god and demon around. BTW, if you read further a few lines, take notice of how the chroniclers of 1 Kings differs between Jahveh and Elohim here, treating them as two seperate deities:

God [Heb. אלהים “Elohim”] also raised up as an adversary to him, Rezon [Heb. רזון]the son of Eliada, who had fled from his master Hadadezer [Heb. הדד-עזר, Hadad again] king of Zobah. [ESV] 1 Kings 11:23

But let’s head back to the devil in question, Zeus or one of his many Roman forms, Jupiter Dolichenus (Lat. Iovi Optimo Maximo Dolicheno), who was a syncretisation or Jupiter and Baal. There were 17 temples (as in 7 heads + 10 horns?) to him in Rome alone, and was in reality a mystery cult dedicated to the Akkadian thunder god Hadad or to the Hittites, Adad, a form of the Sumerian Ishkur, all names or titles of the same god, only named by different cultures in different traditions and languages: Baal, Marduk, Hadad, Ishkur, Zeus and lastly Jupiter. He was popular among Roman legionaries stationed in today’s Germany, where he was worshipped as late as 191 AD when a centurion of Legio VIII Augusta dedicates an altar to him at Obernburg in Germania Superior (source).

A central symbol connecting the different Zeus-Jupiter denominees is the «thunderbolt», a symbol often found in Assyro-Babylonian art, and often referred to as the «Staff of Hadad» and it’s found in Greek, Egyptian and Roman art also, even in ancient India and Christian era France also, in one of many forms, like in the coin below:


The coin above shows the “Eagle of Zeus holding a thunderbolt”, pic found on en.wikipedia.org... Compare with the obverse of the Great Seal of the United States.

The «thunderbolt» is a mystery, used to link the different versions of the thunder-god together. As its name reveals, it symbolises thunder and lightning, but also the astrological constellation/age Pisces, and some of you may see the likeness with the French Lily and Indra’s thunderbolt weapon called the Vajra, also the symbol of Neptune, both the planet and the god in the shape of a (double) trident. This shows the direct relationship to the astrological sign Pisces, which is ruled by Neptune (water) and Jupiter (fire).

To the alchemists the symbol of the «thunderbolt» meant either quick-lime or mixture. The symbol is is also seen in the hands of the war/sun-god Ninurta or Nin-Ur:


edit on 31-1-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Congrats on the smackdown, well-written and simple enough for even a dumbass to understand.

I can't believe a holocaust-denying fascist d.....s is being allowed to post on ATS!


Has anyone reported this nonsense to the mods?



I thought about it; alerting someone!. But for me it would create a precedence (in this case someone wouldn't have been 'crying wolf'). I, as well cant believe the fascist comments on this thread either.Thanks for positive comment.
edit on 31-1-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Congrats on the smackdown, well-written and simple enough for even a dumbass to understand.
Hmm. OK.

I can't believe a holocaust-denying fascist d.....s is being allowed to post on ATS!
There were fascists who supported the Hitler era German government, but that does not make them fascists.
It was the National Socialist Workers Party (sometimes shortened to NAZI, by its enemies to make it a derogatory term) that would be naturally adverse to the capitalistic aspects of fascism. Many of the highest ranking and lower level party leaders were openly critical of the ideas of fascism.

The National Socialist Party was disguised as the "LETS MAKE EVERYONE FEEL GOOD ABOUT THIS MOVEMENT" and give it a friendly name. In this way were the 'feel good socialists' (equality for all) party. Does anyone even think to read Hitler's manifesto "Mien Kampf"? Hitler and Stalin colluded in this way; to take Marxism and warp it. Why did Hitler chose "red" as the background color to his flag; to tie it to Stalin's new cycle/hammer workers flag as 'workers communally living together sharing the bounties of the/OUR work ethic equality'. Both blatant lies perpetrated on the their own citizens (first we have to exterminate all of the undesirables without anyone realizing what we are doing). Many of the highest ranking and regular army were openly critical to the ideas of fascism. No moderates non members survived to tell this; Hitler murdered all of the (Regular German Army Generals) that did not join the NAZI party; those opposing him (they thought he was an out of control Fascist Lunatic). These were the officers that attempted to assassinate him. Not all German soldiers were NAZI's, a simple for instance; German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel was NOT a NAZI. The best tank commander that ever lived was murdered by Hitler, gestapo visited one day (when home on leave) and injected him with something (wife found him dead in the yard), should have worked for the allies instead (might have lived to write some awesome memoirs; Julius Caesar's battle strategies a favorite read of his).
edit on 31-1-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment
Damn, the Fenrir is furious, getting all frantic and red-eyed here, can't hold him back much longer I'm afraid, and I don't know for how much longer we can keep our ouroboros sucking his tail-- And now an oath?!? Oh dear. Better buy another sixpack and toss the Wolf another ox.


You have no idea how this incredulous statement of yours burns an impression; as an over the top tongue lashing that is completely uncalled for; but then you said yourself you have no gift for social manners.
edit on 31-1-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

. . . but Mussolini and Hitler were . . .
OK, then by the same logic, Roosevelt and Churchill were both Communist since they were allies with Stalin.


Stalin was smart, knew Hitler was going down in '45(even though they were best of friends in '38). This deal was an allied deal (fingers crossed between the backs and holding their noses) with an Axis power Russia and you know it (Stalin was NOT A COMMUNIST, he just promised Marxism; but was really a died in the red wool fascist). When Stalin got a good look at the Japanese war machine, and the unscrupulous nature of it (his country was just invaded by his 'ally' Hitler whom he signed an non-aggression pact with) he had no choice. Hirohito and Hitler as my best friends to trust to divide fairly the world after conquering? I'm fairly certain both Roosevelt and Churchill felt they had no choice at the time; but the positive is they would eventually destroy Stalin's Soviet Union in time, well that and the natural positive progression (GROWTH of all systems) will eventually crush such antiquated backward thinking repressive regimes (entropy is a powerful thing). Some think Chaos and destruction is the key to change social systems and they can control outcomes; well that would be the tiny self inflated idiot human talking (one that does not believe another higher being with a great sense of humor created them and anticipated all of this infantile behavior never allowing it as it is not a natural progression toward FOR the main objective: growth).
edit on 31-1-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

But specifically, I asked you if you were a "Nazi" sympathizer. The Nazi party or the SS.
The answer should be obvious, and is No.
All this stuff was things that happened before I was born, so I was not around to be for it or against it.
Like I said in my earlier post, I am interested in real history as opposed to propaganda that creates a fantasy history that is bought into by people who get their view of reality from TV and movies.
I do sympathize with the idea that the Germans had, which was just because a person is super rich, that does not mean that they should have undue influence on the running of the country's government, especially if that person does not even live in the same country.
The global elite did not like that, so got together to crush that idea, that countries should handle their own business, before it was able to spread to other countries who would join in kicking out parasitical capitalism.



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Many of the highest ranking and regular army were openly critical to the ideas of fascism.
And the members of the party, too, including Joseph Goebbels.
I said that already, so what is your point?



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I'm fairly certain both Roosevelt and Churchill felt they had no choice at the time . . .
I was being rhetorical, the point being that you cannot label people just by their associations.



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 05:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment
Damn, the Fenrir is furious, getting all frantic and red-eyed here, can't hold him back much longer I'm afraid, and I don't know for how much longer we can keep our ouroboros sucking his tail-- And now an oath?!? Oh dear. Better buy another sixpack and toss the Wolf another ox.


You have no idea how this incredulous statement of yours burns an impression; as an over the top tongue lashing that is completely uncalled for; but then you said yourself you have no gift for social manners.


I was referring to major signs of Ragnarok, the release of Fenrir and the Midgard Serpent -- and you call it an "incredulous statement" and take it personal? Why am I not surprised. I wasn't even talking to you, stalker.
edit on 1-2-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: ......



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60




The answer should be obvious, and is No.


Okay, it was just a question. Because you seem to be trying to re-write the history of what the Nazi Party and the SS did in the late 30's and early 40's. That's why I asked if you were a Nazi sympathizer.




All this stuff was things that happened before I was born, so I was not around to be for it or against it.


That's an absurd claim, Jesus died 2,000 years ago and you are for Him are you not?


edit on 1-2-2015 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

That's an absurd claim, Jesus died 2,000 years ago and you are for Him are you not?
I didn't change topics in the middle of my post. If I had, I would have given some sort of indication that I was switching back to talking about Old Testament prophecy.



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: NOTurTypical

That's an absurd claim, Jesus died 2,000 years ago and you are for Him are you not?
I didn't change topics in the middle of my post. If I had, I would have given some sort of indication that I was switching back to talking about Old Testament prophecy.



I have no clue what you're talking about. I made the point that you simply cannot make the argument that you cannot be for or against something that happened before you were born because you were not around at that time.



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
enlil = storm god (old testament god who is frequently pissed off at the jews)
enki-ea = creator god and the god of life (in old and new testament)
anu = father of the gods and angels

enki-ea is born in a human body as jesus. jesus' real name is not jesus. it's joshua in english, translation of the hebrew yeshuah. so unless you're prepared to say that joshua is son of zeus, we gots ourselves a wee bit of etymological conundrum



edit on 1-2-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

Jesus is a translation of Greek to Latin to English, not a transliteration from Hebrew. We know what His Hebrew Name is.



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: undo

Jesus is a translation of Greek to Latin to English, not a transliteration from Hebrew. We know what His Hebrew Name is.



i know this, but he's trying to make the case that zeus (and therefore jesus (son of zeus)), is the devil and his offspring

and i'm saying that since the english translation is actually joshua and is from the hebrew, yeshuah, that means that he's saying that joshua was the son of zeus.


edit on 1-2-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: undo


Ahh. Carry on then.



posted on Feb, 1 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
it's an object lesson about the usage of the word for "god" in any given culture. for example, baal was the word for god or lord in phoenicia. zeus was the word for god in rome. in other words, there are generic god words applied to gods of the past that don't necessarily mean they are connected to any "evil" god with the same generic god word.

for example, enlil's name is broken down into 2 parts: en.lil which means lord air or more properly, lord of the air. the last 3 letters "lil" became the generic god word in mesopotamia, and is applied to all gods of that part of the world for quite a long time.




top topics



 
16
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join