What was the deepest motivation of Nazism?

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
Yes it does. Incompetence existed at all levels. You seem to fail to appreciate the nature of the highly centralised body of politic that was nazis Germany. The objective did not meet the method required to destroy Russia. I have told you before that understanding that a 'grand plan' exists is not to know what that plan is and how that is exacted. You seem to be making the assumption that everything falls into the plan and nothing goes wrong. To err is human, remember that...the 6th army was a f-up and a object lesson in the power of intelligence.

If you do study the 6th army in more details you will know it was sabotage. It wasn't a f--- up as you say. And you are wrong to say they didn't have the method to destroy Russia, that is exactly what the 6th army was doing until Hitler sabotaged them, cut their supplies, isolated them in a totally stupid and pointless battle in Stalingrad in winter that was the equivalent of suicide.
The execution by Stalin of his best generals before WW2 was also part of the "grand plan".
You could draw parallels to the 6th armies demise, and Napolean being directed to sabotage his army when he returned from Russia, the official account of Napoleans return is also not entirely the truth. Namely when the armies had fulfilled their purpose, they were destroyed.
Take a closer look at the 6th army and you will undoubtedly realise it wasn't incompetence, it was deliberate.

Originally posted by golddragnet
Take a closer look at the 6th army and you will undoubtedly realise it wasn't incompetence, it was deliberate.

Direct me to your sources then. I have read a number of books on the topic offering a number of perspectives and in my honest opinion incompetence and the absence of Hess is tandamount to Hitler's strategic failure. Perhaps if you can answer my question as to why Hitler chose the symbolic target of Stalingrad in the first place you may aid in my enlightenment. For me this is the only ambiguity. Paulus was unable or unwilling to contradict Hitler and act on his own initiative. The very reason that the first offences worked so successfully were because his generals acted on initiative rather than taking orders literally. The entire command structure was flawed, is this sabotage? Why did Hitler sabotage the 6th Army and for what end? Answer me these questions and perhaps then I can look in the right places.

I have found plenty of evidence of why Stalin suddenly gained success. Operation Uranus is highly indicative of what changed. I cannot help but feel that you fail to understand how important the lack of Hess was and of Bormann's role. If you did you may truly start to understand just how untenable the position of Hitler was. Hitler was less of a puppet and more of a toy to be wound up and let go. Until you understand Hitler you will fail to see that his strategic incompetence could in itself be the sabotage set in motion by others. Remember the adage 'give him enough rope....'

You have quoted Schellenberg a number of times, have you read much about him? His 'story' is highly insightful into the situation in Germany from 1941 through to the end of the war.

Unless you provide me with the details that are required to change my opinion, how can I change it. My time is as finite as yours, I have found much more concrete evidence of subterfuge and sabotage elsewhere, unless you can provide me with sources that I can examine, or offer a cohesive argument yourself how can I see whether what you say is of significance?

Best wishes as always.

Don't give me this moralistic crap it makes me sick. Nazism was unsustainable and to use Germany had to use an entirely different ideal to motivate Germany. The expansion to the east was the motivation not the supremacy of Germans. Most Germans were old enough to remember when they fought in the trenches with Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Rumanians, Hungarians, and every other "untermensch" imaginable to Hitler. None of them were interested in spreading the German Race to the far corners of the world.
I agree with you, morality holds no place in the vacuum that was still in place after WWI. Morality holds no sway over survival.
Rabid nationalism whipped to a fervor by Hitler's milataristic/political machine was all the momentum most of the German population needed to arrive at this consensus: Hitler was the "mechanic" that was to fix Germany, the "son" to protect Germany, and the "father" to nurture Germany. Nationalism is a powerful, motivating force, just look at post 9/11 and the ascendancy of America's executive branch of government. At the time, most Americans welcomed it. Politically we were brought together after the Florida vote count debacle. And, as a nation, we never felt more as such. The Pheonix rising out of the ashes, whatever ashes, is a powerful driving force that can create miracles first... or monsters later.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
Incompetence and the absence of Hess is tandamount to Hitler's strategic failure

Firstly, I would say to you and to everyone, do not allow historians to draw your conclusions for you, study what you can, but many historians are used just as todays media, as a method of spin, propaganda and lies, or in other cases, they are misinformed and as a consequence they spread misinformation.

In battles things don't "suddenly" change as a general rule, and Stalins "suddenly" gained success was all manipulated, just as the Bolshevic Reds victory over the Whites was manipulated (I am guessing you already know the history of that, of how Britian aided the Reds when it appeared it wasn't in their interests to do so, and how the Reds were losing until they did intervene and the Reds "suddenly" won, all manipulated for the required result, just as Stalins "sudden" change in fortunes were engineered).

Let me give a hint as to why Stalins side was predestined to win, you mentioned the Jesuits experiments at Communism in Paraguay previously, I didn't respond to it at the time, as it would likely take me many hours of typing to go into it in details, but reflect on it, and you will be closer to discovering who the puppet masters are and what were the goals!!!

I have already told you, and you most likely know it already, both Hitler and Stalin were Jesuit-trained, Stalin even ready to become a priest, and Hitler openly admitting how much he admired and learned from the Jesuits and how he styled his SS after the Jesuit order. And if you still think the upper levels of the Jesuits are just a bunch of priests, you should take note of what Napolean wrote about the Jesuit Superior General in his memoirs (he refered to them as a military power and went alot stronger than that in his warnings to mankind)

You have done an indepth study of the victims during WW2. I first found your profile on this site in relation to jewish deaths during that period. you do know that the Jesuits hate the jews and from Spanish history you should know that one of the first things they did when they came to power was to persecute jews. Take a closer look at who were the majority of victims during WW2, how many of them were opposition to the Vaticans Roman Catholicism??? And there were "liberal" Catholic victims who weren't loyal to the Pope, Lutherans of Germany, "heretic" Orthodox people of eastern europe. In fact to take a cold look at the slaughters of WW2 it could be said that it was a continuations of the Vaticans Inquisitions. Croatia should have been a big indicator.

And lets look at the jewish situation, prior to WW2 much of europe did indeed have anti-jewish sentiments, much of it was because of the Russian revolution which was perceived to be predominantly a jewish revolution as most of the benefactors were jewish. But if the real power behind the russian revolution was in fact the jews, then why didn't they offer to save their fellow jews in Germany prior to WW2? The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Sion actually) was supposedly found in Russia. Take a close look at those protocols, and you should realise that the Jesuits and not the Jews have fulfilled those protocols. And look at who funded the Bolsheviks that were supposed to be the enemy.

Back to Germany, prior to the war what was the predominant religion in Germany and how did it change after the war? Outside of Germany who was the single biggest influence in assisting Hitler to power, it was the Pope himself. And in Germany who was most instrumental in Hitlers rise, Franz Von Papen and you should realise he was a Roman Catholic and one of the Vaticans Knights of Malta, and Hitler was funded by some others who were loyal to the Vatican, they were either Roman Catholic or Freemasons (also Jesuit-controlled).

You want me to provide you proof, but I prefer you to find them yourself, you have all the info you need to go on.

I have not failed to understand Hess or Hitlers position, but it seems to me you have. It seems you accept Hitler (and all politicains) are puppets, controlled by the puppet masters, but at the same time when you are studying battles you entirely forget they are puppets or that the puppet-masters are pulling the strings. To understand things which don't add up, such as in this case Germanys war in eastern europe when things "suddenly" went wrong for Germany as a result of their own "self-destructing" to make sense of it or reason the motives behind it, you need to realise how it affects the puppet-masters rather than Germany or Hitler (it is worth highlighting that the best "manipulators" will control both sides creating the appearance of an "opposition")

I could also suggest that the destruction of Germany was planned many years earlier as a revenge for an event in 1872 at the hands of Bismark (Bismark was anti-Pope, Hitler was pro-Papacy and he signed a concoradt in 1933). The results of WW2 could lead you to speculate who benefitted, and don't let the significance of the example of Croatia and Pavelic and their so-called "religious" affiliations be overlooked when discovering who the puppet masters are, for it is very clear in the Croatian Holocaust, but was concealed as best they could. It was the same puppet-masters controlling Nazi-Germany. Hitlers book Mein Kampf was written by a jesuit priest. Hitler was Roman Catholic. The fall of germany and the "cold war" were all planned long before WW2. Sorry I can't go into more details at the minute, for it is late here, if i get a chance over the next few days I may return to this thread and may attempt a more satisfactory reply, I am too tired just at the minute
Best Regards

[edit on 4-8-2007 by golddragnet]

Golddragnet

Thank you - and I am sorry if this sounds patronising, but when you put the effort in I really do enjoy your posts.

We have different ways of looking at things and different ways of doing things, but on so many levels we agree.

As you correctly point out, Father Bernard Stempfle (I think that is his name - I will have to check my notes later to confirm) was involved in the writing of Mein Kampf. So were Hess and Karl Haushofer (whose son Albrecht became important later in the war). Stempfle of course was murdered on the Night of the Long Knives, which was engineered by Goering, Geobbels and Himmler. Hitler in many ways was innocent of the NOTLKs and it took considerable subterfuge to convince him of the 'necessity' of this action. I doubt very much that he was ever aware of the full extent of this action.

This is a highly important episode in the history of the Reich as I sure that you are aware. In short it represents the point at which Himmler gained absolute control of policing/security matters and the infliction of racial ideals once expansion occurred. It is no coincidence that Himmler used Austrian Catholics to exact his plans in the East. Goering and Goebbels are largely inconsequential, other than that they had been exposed to the 'brainwashing' of anti-Semitism, Goering inadequately so - hence his eventual side-lining. Goebbels though served his purpose perfectly but nothing beyond that.

As you rightly point out and as I discovered in my reading of the history of the Jesuits - the Jesuits invented Communism. There is absolutely no question of this. Paraguay wholly supports this fact. Additionally there is little doubt in my mind that the Bavarian Illuminati was a Jesuit led organisation and that Pacelli/Pope Pius XII was the head of this group.

You make an excellent point regarding the persecution of Catholics by the Nazis. I mentioned Austria. I am sure that you know the way in which the Anchluss was ‘encouraged’ using Nazis partisans, led by Hitler/Himmler's greatest mass murderer Odilo Globocnik. When the Anchluss was complete Globocnik set about annihilating those that opposed Nazism, he was particularly virulent against the Catholic clergy.

For his work in Austria Globocnik was rewarded with the personal protection of Himmler when he repeatedly came under criticism from the Party. It is in these actions that the gulf between the SS and the Nazi Party becomes obvious. In the history books Globocnik is a mere footnote in comparison to Hoess, commandant of Auschwitz, but his service to the destruction of the Jews and Slavs is without comparison not only in WWII but anywhere in history.

As a side note - his companion in the east was Reinhold von Mohrenschildt, whose responsibility it was to Germanise the East. I am sure that you have heard the name, his nephew George de Mohrenschildt, befriended Lee Harvey Oswald on his return from Russia. Following the war, Reinhold did not face any prosecution and later his daughter married into the Hapsburgs. I will leave you to reach your own conclusions there.

Franz von Papen and similarly Seyss-Inquart, were not, in my opinion, Jesuits supporters - they were old-school papists. Whether they were duped or strong-armed I do not know. They were simply useful in gaining the confidence and votes of the 'old school' Catholics. Their subsequent side-lining and eventual obscurity seems to me to support this.

I have not found any evidence that Hitler was trained by Jesuits (this is not to say it does not exist – just that I haven’t found it), Stalin did enter a seminary and I agree with your assessment of him entirely. I believe that the murder of Stempfle reflects the point at which the Jesuits lost control of Hitler and that that control was not regained until the appointment of Bormann as his personal Secretary. Bormann had of course prior to that time been Hess’ assistant, but following Hess’ flight to Britain (with Hitler’s complete sanction) Bormann was able to make his move and he did so aggressively despite widespread opposition.

It was Himmler, not Hitler who designed the SS and it was through Bormann not Hitler that he received his commands. Though, unlike Irving, I do not seek to exonerate Hitler I do think that there is sufficient reason to believe that he was largely unaware of some of the activities of the SS.

Bormann controlled all access to Hitler and from the end of May 1941 almost no-one was able to get to see Hitler alone without Bormann being physically present. Himmler, Goering and Geobbels included.

I am sure that you have heard of the Red Orchestra and the Lucy network. Throughout Barbarossa Stalin was receiving information directly from the German High Command. Stalin knew in advance of every movement that Germany was making. Lucy’s contact in the High Command was code-named Werther. The identity of Werther has never been revealed but the possibilities are limited. Often the information supplied by Werther was received prior to the orders reaching Hitler’s own Generals which indicates that it was not acquired via intercepts of signals or messages.

It is probable that Britain knew that there was a ‘Soviet Spy’ in the German High Command. They were after all intercepting Russian and German communiqués via Iran by this point but these records (like the Hess dossier) remain closed under the 75 and 100 year rule. It is doubtful that Britain ever knew who Werther was, but they must have intercepted the Lucy reports and used this information to plan their own actions.

Indeed it is likely that Stalin never knew Werther’s identity. It is possible that Hitler was Werther, it is more likely, in my opinion, that it was Bormann, although there are other possibilities. For example it cannot be discounted that Werther could have been Canaris’ MI6 handler and was feeding his information first to the Soviets. It is unlikely that Canaris would have dealt with the Soviets knowingly.

Walter Schellenberg took over from Canaris as head of the Abwehr in 1944 and by this action Himmler now had complete control of all but Hitler and the military. Have you had the opportunity to review Schellenberg as I suggested? His story post-war sheds some light on just how hard the British sought to cover their tracks and how these actions were supported by those within Switzerland. I am sure too that you have heard of Liddle Hart and how busy he kept himself not only in the closing days of the war but for several years afterwards maintaining Britain’s secrets.

Talking of Switzerland. Thank you for understanding that Zion is merely a disambiguation of Sion, it is nice to know that I am not the only one who has noted this, it is VERY important. It is no coincidence that many Hapsburgs chose Switzerland for their war time retreat and Allen Dulles as his base of operations. The Lucy network was also based there.

When looking at the Hitler-Hess relationship and particularly Hess’ flight to Scotland, it is unbelievable that Britain would not have accepted the terms being offered by Hitler. They were highly favourable to Britain, instead Britain chose to back the Soviets and aid them in the absolute destruction of Germany. It will come as no surprise to you that Churchill’s close friend and Head of the Political Warfare Executive, Brendan Brachen too was educated by Jesuits!!!!

Quite a long post there, and I congratulate you with the effort you put in, and it does appear to me that you have made great progress in recent times (however I don't know what you did or didn't already know previously).

As time is against me writing a very detailed reply I will just make a few brief points.

Franz Von Papen was a Knight of Malta, and you know they are the Vaticans Knights of Malta, the most successful merchants on earth. Well you say Papen wasn't a Jesuit supporter but was a Vatican supporter. You should understand it adds to the same thing, the Jesuits control the Vatican since 1870. So when I mentioned Franz Von Papen it was understood that he was an agent for the puppet masters. Franz Von Papen said this about Hitlers Germany "The Third Reich is the first world power which not only acknowledges but also puts into practice the high principles of the papacy" (you can assume the "putting into practice" refers to was the concentration camps which eliminated the "heretics", the Holocausts were a continuation of the vaticans Inquisitions) Perhaps you don't give Franz Von Papen enough credit and it wasn't a surprise he was aqcuited, he was SMOM.

Stalin will have known that Hitler was under the control of the Jesuits, in fact Hitlers Germany was very open about its links to the Vatican.

Hitler compared Himmler to Loyola. When covering various subjects (and I do type much on history) especially one as wide-ranging as WW2 it isn't possible to go into great details about everything, or expanding every point, and I don't wish to either, if I point someone in a certain direction that is interesting for them to research, then that is enough for me. It shouldn't be necessary for me to go into Himmler any further, the comparison with Loyola should be enough to understand its meaning, and if anyone wishes to research it further they will find much info on both those characters elsewhere. I am sure you know Loyola created the Jesuits. As an aside do you know the Jesuits are known as the Company of Sion in France. Here is one remark Hitler said about Himmler
"The S.S. organization had been constituted, by Himmler, according to the principles of the Jesuits' Order. Their regulations and the Spiritual Exercises prescribed by Ignatius of Loyola were the model Himmler tried to copy exactly... The "Reichsfuhrer SS"-Himmler's title as supreme chief of the SS-was to be the equivalent of the Jesuits' "General" and the whole structure of the direction was a close imitation of the Catholic Church's hierarchical order", as told by Walter Schellenberg.
Himmlers Jesuit uncle could give another insight into who was directing things.
Edmund Paris asked this most penetrating
question concerning Himmler: Was it not his uncle, the Jesuit father,
who had been promoted to a high-ranking officer of the SS And was
not the latter the very eye and arm of Halke von Ledochowski, General
of the Order (jesuit superior general) who then was sending so many million deportees to death?
Was it Heinrich Himmler or his uncle, the Jesuit canon. The most disturbing
charge is that, to populate the new Israel, the Jesuits stirred up
the pogroms and Holocaust of Europe to drive Jews to their safe haven
in the Middle East.
Hitler, when in power, patterned his SS after the Jesuit Order. He used Roman Catholic Bavarian Himmler with his Jesuit uncle to carry out the plan. Hitler declared: I have learnt most of all from the Jesuit Order. A good part of that organization I have transported direct to my own party. I will tell you a secret, I am founding an Order. In Himmler I see our Ignatius de Loyola.


The leaders of Britain are also ruled by the same puppet-masters, so yes they knew about Soviet-German spys.

Switzerland is important to the Vatican and the SMOM, which is why it was neutral and why it isn't in the EU. Switzerland is the centre of worlds banking control. I am sure you know the origins of Switzerland, its connections to the Knights Templars, how the Vatican destroyed the Templars but gave their powers to the Vaticans Knights Of Malta (SMOM) and effectively the Templars merged with the SMOM, the Templars cross appearing in Switzerland etc. Switzerland is the Jesuits most important financial district.

It seems you realise that Communism was a jesuit creation, using the loyal zionist jews as frontmen (also covering themselves as any backlash from the public would be directed at jews rather than the real controllers, the jesuits always wish to remain in the background. Fascism was also a Jesuit creation, controlled opposition.

If you want more of an insight into what was really behind the Holocausts and nazi Germany, you could spend time studying the movements and details of Hitler, Himmler the rest of the leaders of nazi germany, you could go through the various battles and so on, or you could first to decide to concentrate on the Puppet-masters first, if you really want to understand it. In fact it is a necessity to arrive at the puppet-masters to understand why, reading about Hitler and the other puppets only tells you "How" and not "why". The answers to "why" and how they got so powerful in the first place and why Nazi Germany wasn't stopped previously, you really do need to look at those who are controlling everything. You need to understand the motivations of the jesuits and the Papacy, you need to read about the Code of Canon law, you need to read the oaths of the jesuits and also to read about the Roman Catholics clergys position and what they really mean when they talk about heretics and heretics deserving of death, what the Inquistions are all about, and WW2 was a continuation of those Inquisitions. The Pope during WW2 was also anti-jewish and played a major role in the shaping of events.

By the way Allen Dulles has a nephew who is today a powerful Jesuit Cardinal, Avery Dulles, who studied in Rome for a while and is now at the Jesuit Fordham University in New York.
The name Dulles reminds me of something I posted recently, I have added it here, I am sure won't be news to you but might be of interest to some:
If you want to know more of who funded Hitlers rise you should also look at the other investors:
IG Farben - controlled by Jesuits (A U.S. War Department investigation revealed that without Farben’s support:
"Germany’s prosecution of the war would have been unthinkable and impossible.")
Rockefellars National City Bank - SMOM
Krupp - SMOM
Tengelmann - SMOM
Ford (whose father Henry Ford (33rd Degree Freemason) was a supporter of Hitler)
Scacht - High Level Freemason (all freemasons are subordinate to the world leader of freemasonry, the Jesuit Superior General)
Rothschilds (SMOM) also gave indirect support as did Kennedys (SMOM).
Other names of interest include
Dulles (for whome Dulles airport is named), who son is today a powerful Jesuit Cardinal, Avery Dulles, who studied in Rome for a while and is now at the Jesuit Fordham University in New York) and his brother Allan Dulles, both on the jesuit controlled CFR (which created the UN), they are cousins of the Rockefellars.
Warburg banking family, Freemasons and Paul Warburg helped start the US Federal Reserve (jesuit controlled US Federal Reserve) banskters. Max Warburg was one of the founders of IG Farben, Warburgs are German-Jewish, which shows the hypocrisy of the jewish "zionist" leaders who were involved in funding Hitler and cared nothing for the plight of the ordinary jewish people
JP Morgan, whose companies were really mostly controlled by Rothschilds, Morgan being an agent for Rothschilds (SMOM)


[edit on 5-8-2007 by golddragnet]

It is a shame that you do not see the point in going into details. I have to say I was very disappointed by your post. Why keep repeating the same thing over and over again. The same Himmer as Loyola quote, same Schellenberg quote - it must be at least three times now in various threads. Your sources seem limited. It is a shame that you have not expanded upon that reading and have not been able to develop an opinion. You are obviously intelligent but your understanding of this period is sadly lacking, as your unwillingness to expand upon any point demonstrates.

You rely very heavily on Phelps. He touches on some truth, but as he carries out no further research they fall very short of the mark. He is baised and prejudiced, therefore his sources are loaded to that bias, none of which, as he claims, were ever suppressed by the RCC!!! Have you checked his sources, contrary to his spin some are still in print or available on on-line archives. Most are from the anti-catholic movement in the US from 1830 to 1860 and include works disseminated by the "Know Nothings". A couple can be confirmed to be works of fiction.

You obviously have fallen into the trap that all history book are lies and part of a cover up. Some are, some aren't - not until you have read widely will you learn to distinguish, read between the lines and learn to recognise when something is conspicuous by its absence. Instead of quoting Schellenberg read about him, especially what happened to his memoirs!

Best wishes

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
It is a shame that you do not see the point in going into details.
Why keep repeating the same thing.
Your understanding of this period is sadly lacking, as your unwillingness to expand upon any point demonstrates.

You rely very heavily on Phelps.

You obviously have fallen into the trap that all history book are lies

I have already explained why I don't go into details here, on a forum, time being the main factor. I would apologise for repeating the same post, but I write alot of things to alot of people and don't keep track of what I have posted to whom. The Himmler-Loyola quote is significant, especially to anyone who didn't previously realise the Jesuit influence over the nazis.

I spend many, many hours typing many different historical subjects, and only visit this forum for brief periods. It is impossible for me to go into great details on any subject as it would certainly take far too much time, which is why I limit myself to pointing people in a certain direction.

I have read about Schellenberg. If you want to post great details about him then you are free to do so, so rather than being disappointed I haven't written an essay on Schellenberg, why don't you do it first.

Eric Phelps has gone into alot of details, so you are just plain wrong there, your knowledge of his work is obviously limited. I agree that he puts spin and he is biased and prejudiced, personally I don't like Phelps, however he has done alot of good work, he has gone into ALOT of details about many subjects, most of those details don't appear on his website.

I don't rely heavily on Phelps, in fact I don't reply on him at all. But I see he is correct in certain things. There are many other authors who write about the Vatican-Nazi connections besides Phelps. Maybe you have fallen into the trap of dismissing Phelps because you don't like some of the things he wrote. And before you get the wrong idea, I have challenged Phelps writings on numerous occassions. He has very often jumped to certain conclusions that I don't agree with, and he has expressed many views that I would deem ridiculous. I do not wish to defend him, but I wish to tell you that you are mistaken in thinking I rely heavily on him, or in thinking that he hasn't gone into details on various topics. Much as I dislike Phelps I must awknowledge he has gone into details when asked for further details.

And before you make any accusations of not going into any details, you would do well to remember that it was only a few weeks ago that you first learned details of Ante Pavelic and Cardinal Stepinac, after I informed you of them!!! Which in itself is very surprising and I could say how it reflects on your knowledge. What traps did you fall into that you studied the WW2 deaths but was steered away from Croatia or the Vatican!!! I could also discuss your knowledge (or in this case lack of knowlegde) of the conflicts in eastern europe during WW2, probably the most famous battle of all was in Stalingrad, you admit yourself your knowledge of it is very limited, so how can someone claim to know great details of WW2 and not know about Stalingrad or the 6th army???
None of my info there comes from Phelps, despite what you want to imagine. You have done indepth study of WW2 and didn't know about the Croatian holocaust or its Vatican links, and it was I who informed you, which had nothing to do with Phelps. Which should indicate to you that you are not in a position to accuse people of not having done indepth research or not having an understanding of the period, or of having fallen into traps.
And the approach I take has been useful to adding to your knowledge, not only relating to Croatia and Israel and the Zionists but also Stalingrad (if you decide to follow-up on my suggestion there). And also bear in mind that not long ago you previously considered the Jesuit-Vatican conspiracy to be incorrect, but after researching Croatia you had to admit you were wrong, and not for the first time. If you reflect on it fairly you will realise my understanding is larger than average to say the very least, maybe because I don't go into great details here you have fallen into the trap of not recognising it and have fallen into the trap of forgetting that you have admitted to me more than once previously that I pointed you into the right direction, which in itself displayed that I understood enough.

I could go into greater details on many historical topics. But not only would it take many, many hours, but I also consider the vast majority of such details to be wasted on a forum, as merely summing it up very briefly and providing links has been shown to work alot better in getting the average person interested, rather than presenting a very long text. It may seem to be a shame, but nonetheless it is true, that a brief summary of the important points and links get more hits than a long text. I know you are not the average person, but why would I spend many hours typing long texts of information that you probably know already, and my posts aren't merely for you, but for any other readers of this forum also, I have told you previously I am happy if I point people in a certain direction which is interesting for them, but I am not going to spend many, many hours writing details, and I have already outlined why I wouldn't go into great details on a forum.

So, before you draw assumptions about me, my knowledge or my sources, or even about other authors you could reflect on your own knowledge. I came across your profile on a WW2 thread and you know almost nothing of what happened in eastern europe during that period. On the other hand I could go into great details of what happened. You also seemed to be concentrating on jewish deaths but seemed to know very little of Zionism or even of the formation of Israel until I pointed in a certain direction. But just because I haven't gone into great details on this forum doesn't mean you should jump to conclusions about me. I would have thought you were above that.
Despite your belief to the contrary, I am more than sure my understanding of that period outweighs yours.

[edit on 6-8-2007 by golddragnet]

Originally posted by golddragnet
I have already explained why I don't go into details here, on a forum, time being the main factor. I would apologise for repeating the same post, but I write alot of things to alot of people and don't keep track of what I have posted to whom. The Himmler-Loyola quote is significant, especially to anyone who didn't previously realise the Jesuit influence over the nazis.

Despite your belief to the contrary, I am more than sure my understanding of that period outweighs yours.

I appear to have hit a nerve. I apologise it was not my intention to insult you merely to point out that there was no point in pursuing the discussion if you had nothing to add. I wasn’t going to discuss it on my own….!!!???

I have never claimed to know everything, I generally admit when I don’t know something, otherwise I’d never learn anything new!

This is a discussion forum, I come here to discuss. Often I have nothing to add to a thread, but when I think I do – I do. I do not have a great deal of time, therefore ATS is the only forum that I am a member of. I chose it for its diversity of subjects and people. Your previous assessment was bang on the head, I‘m quite intelligent and I read a lot. I am nothing special, but then I don’t claim to me. There are lots of people on ATS who also read a lot, they know things that I don’t and I learn from them, you included.

In terms of your knowledge of WWII in comparison to mine. It was my understanding that we both had detailed knowledge of different aspects. If you do not wish to discuss and merely want to repeat the same thing over and over then I don’t really see the point in bothering. In my opinion, you open some interesting topics but you then shy away from questions or more in depth analysis. As I said when you put the effort in I do enjoy your posts.

If you want to continue with this discussion then tell me how Hitler was controlled by the Jesuits? Don’t just say he was, you need to support your argument to give it credibility. I have told you that I don’t believe that he was and explained why I think that. Either you counter that with an argument of your own, concede that I may be correct or agree to disagree – do not just recycle the same unsourced, third person quote.

I do respect your knowledge and opinions but surely you can see that by making sweeping statements and refusing to support them you do yourself no justice. It is not up to me to validate your argument. Direction is not what is required unless that is what is being asked for, thanks all the same.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
If you want to continue with this discussion then tell me how Hitler was controlled by the Jesuits? Don’t just say he was, you need to support your argument to give it credibility.

I can see your point entirely. I have explained previously why I rarely go into details on forums, I get asked questions alot, and have seen many times that detailed posts in reply to questions are more often than not a waste of time, as most users of the worldwide web have a very short attention span and are only interested in very brief summaries with links provided so they can read further if they wish and only if they have time between visiting porn, reading "celebrity" gossip and watching inane attempts at humourous clips on youtube.
I recognise that you are much more educated and intelligent than the "average" internet users.
In recent weeks I am suffering from sleep deprivation and have had very limited time for this site so I have been reading very few of the threads. I have repeated myself in replies without concentrating at all about what I was typing or to whom.
I realise my posts weren't inducive of discussion. I need get more sleep (I expect to have more free time from this weekend onwards) and I will attempt to concentrate if I do give a reply. However 1 thing I don't apoligise for on any forum, how do you expect someone to actually "prove" a point on the internet, and another point, how long would it take to compose a reply that would be as close to "proving" a point as possible (documenting evidence). There are a few reasons why I point in a particular direction rather than attempt to "prove" a point on a forum: there are a number of ways of interpreting some stories and people will interpret as they wish, so quite often it is like banging your head against a wall to assist some people to see the obvious, you must have come across this yourself on many issues. Also I am not attempting to teach or influence anyone to see things in a certain way, if I point in a certain direction they can research themselves and draw their own conclusions.

However, you get my meaning, and I apologise for repitition and lack of concentration. Even now I am feeling tired, a few hours sleep and early mornings are not good for concentration.

Ok, to Hitler and Nazi-germany Roman Catholicism connections.
You know it might be interesting to go back a bit farther first, to Bismark, the unification of Germany and Bismarks relationship with the Vatican compared to Hitlers Germanys relationship with the Vatican. Very many people are studying an event in history and they begin at the point they are interested in and don't look at the preceding shape of things. Some people seem to imagine that if something happened a long time ago that it is irrelevant!!!
Anyhow, what should be as interesting is "why" Hitlers fascist regime was brought to power as much as how, and most answers given in the classroom are unbelievably oversimplistic and lacking details. The open Roman Catholic connections of fascist dictators of europe doesn't get attention in the schoolbooks. Also the parallels to the jewish persecutions during the Inquisitions aren't mentioned, in fact in school teachings the Inquisitions and jewish persecutions get very little attention or coverage.

You mentioned the jesuits connections to communism yourself. Needless to say I won't be asking you to "prove" your point there, but some users might, so I would be interested to read your reply. From my memory it shows a marked change in your position regarding communism and Paraguay, if I understood you correctly. Now it shouldn't be necessary to point out that Roman Catholic connections to Hitler/Franco/Mussolini/Pavelic were "overt", while communist connections to Jesuits were "covert". And you know the Vatican is jesuit-controlled.

Now to learn more about the Jesuit influence over Europe prior to and during the WW2 period, learning more about the Jesuit Superior General of the time would be useful.

I am sure you know who he was but I can't guess if you have read up on him, and I can't be sure I haven't wrote this already so apologies if I repeat. His name was Wlodimir Ledochowski and he is considered a very successful Superior General of the order, and indeed he did achieve alot for the order. It is worth looking him up and what he achieved for the order (and keeping in mind that the Pope is under the Jesuit Superior Generals influence). He was superior general from 1915-42. That was a very productive time for the jesuit order and the vatican. Ledochowski was SG during the 1917 new code of canon law, during the lateran treaty and the Concordat with Germany, also other projects, you can look them up yourself, my time really is limited.
Now very briefly (I may type more on this at a later stage when I really should have much more time) back to Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, he led Prussia/Germany to military victories over Jesuit-controlled countries Austria in 1866 and France in 1870. Bismarck also outlawed the Jesuit order with the Kulturkampf law in 1872. This was obviously a hugely signficant event for the jesuits and not surprisingly the jesuits lusted for revenge.
Bismarks Prussia/Germany was predominantly Protestant Lutheran and anti-Vatican. Obviously the Roman Catholic clergy despised the Lutherans at the time, and the Jesuit Order itself was started partially to destroy the Protestant Reformation. Thus, the Jesuits considered the Lutherans an enemy.
Poland didn't exist as a state when Ledochowski was born, he was born in Austria, his father was Polish. His uncle, Mieczysaaw Ledochowski, the Polish Primate Archbishop of Poznan, a province that was then a part of predominantly Protestant Prussia/Germany was jailed for 12 months by Otto von Bismarck’s anti-Vatican government of Prussia in 1874.
I advised to start with Ledochowski, but maybe Bismark would be a better place to begin studying, to get a fuller picture of what shaped Europe in the 20th century, of course you could continue going back in time, but Bismark made such an impression and he was such an exceptional character and he achieved so much that it is worth reading up on him and what he did to Prussia/Germany and his relationship with the Roman Catholic institution and the jesuits, and why he outlawed the Jesuits
in 1872 with his Kulturkampf law, it was obviously a very drastic step which he obviously had motivation to do (it chould make people wonder what Bismark knew about the jesuits that most people don't know today).

Poland regained independance from Prussia/Germany after WW1. Poland is predominantly Catholic today, some of this due to the effects of the Jesuit-lead holocausts and world wars, you will probably have the figures and can add to that here. Polands borders with Germany changed after WW2.
You could contrast Bismarks outlawing of Jesuits with Hitlers Germany signing a Concordat with the Jesuit vatican.
I really need to run now, my good wife is calling. Obviously Bismark, Jesuits in europe and Poland, Prussia are all very detailed subjects, but you have something that may be of interest there.
I also wanted to mention Russia, the russian monarch supporting the orthodox church, and their relations with the Jesuits, and the fall of the russian monarch and ledochowski's leadership during this time, etc,etc
I think it is necessary to have some knowledge of the events that sheped europe before Hitler arose, and the Vaticans manipulation of Hitler. I hope to return to this thread at a later time. When analysing who may have been behind the shaping of certain events it is always worth checking who gained from it. I am sure you will be able to add much yourself.
I must run, have a good evening

[edit on 11-8-2007 by golddragnet]

Originally posted by golddragnet
how do you expect someone to actually "prove" a point on the internet, and another point, how long would it take to compose a reply that would be as close to "proving" a point as possible (documenting evidence).

I don’t expect you to prove your opinion, merely to explain why you have come to that opinion. Quotes I would like a source for if possible, but I’m not going to force the issue.

Originally posted by golddragnet
Very many people are studying an event in history and they begin at the point they are interested in and don't look at the preceding shape of things. Some people seem to imagine that if something happened a long time ago that it is irrelevant!!!

Absolutely. I am tired of hearing that we are being lied to about history as though education stops with the one they are provided. Too much emphasis is placed n specialization and the humanities are becoming marginalized. There is very little good old fashioned book learning going on.

Originally posted by golddragnet
You mentioned the jesuits connections to communism yourself. Needless to say I won't be asking you to "prove" your point there, but some users might, so I would be interested to read your reply. From my memory it shows a marked change in your position regarding communism and Paraguay, if I understood you correctly.

I am still vacillitating on this one – too many considerations, so I am being objective. This article provides some background I am sure that it listed on Wikipedia though, my main source was the “Power and Secrets of the Jesuits” by Rene Fulop-Miller (first published 1929).

www.vqronline.org...

The difficulty is that the accounts by most observers are pretty favourable and saw the Jesuit role as a positive one, they were a Benevolent Dictatorship. All those who comment were though westerners and would have seen the Jesuits as civilisers and protectors. Which indeed they were. They actively protected the people from the influence of the traders and the mameluke slavers, but if the Indians had not been concentrated in one area by the Jesuits they would have been harder to find.

The Jesuits on arriving in South America in 1550, learnt the languages and then made forays into the Jungles, they travelled further into these areas than any westerner before or for some time after them. The natives would disappear as soon as they spotted the priests, but the Jesuits found that the Indians were attracted to music, in this way they eventually made contact.

The settlements were egalitarian, with the Jesuits as overseerer. Each family was given their own home and field which they must work 3 days a week, 3 days would be worked on “God’s field” and the seventh day would be spent on Roman Catholic teaching, musically presented for greater appeal. The people were not allowed to handle money or drink alcohol. By all accounts the people were content under the Jesuits but the system relied on total dependence and keeping the natives ‘innocent’.

This is basically the communist model. Service to god rather than service to state, but in reality the same thing. Not too radical for the time, it is after all nothing more than adapted feudalism. But the Jesuits in my opinion can be credited with inventing the closed economy and the communist society.

The Jesuits found that the natives were highly dextrous and could copy anything from clocks to candlesticks, a manufacturing industry soon developed, that led to trade with outsiders and eventually to problems. Initially traders would be housed very comfortably just outside the village perimeter and not permitted any contact with the people inside, but curiousity got the better of both sides and these laws were violated and punished.

This ‘Paradise’ soon drew avarice and rumours of hidden gold (which appear to be unfounded). The Pope repeatedly received reports of the Jesuits interfering with slave traders and for preventing any encroachment into Paraguay. The Pope concerned about his cut if he didn’t support the traders bowed to pressure and ordered the Jesuits to co-operate, refusing them the support they requested. The Jesuits formed a capable army from the natives to defend their land and continued to resist right up to their expulsion in 1767.

The Jesuit history is fascinating, but it is also enigmatic. It is hard to get a firm grasp on it, as it is so enveloped in rumour and sectarianism. The same can be said about Freemasonry though to a lesser extent. The fact that the Jesuits were most fervently opposed by other Roman Catholics confuses the issue somewhat. I’m still making my mind up, trying for objectivity….still looking for the clincher.

Originally posted by golddragnet
Hitler/Franco/Mussolini/Pavelic were "overt", while communist connections to Jesuits were "covert". And you know the Vatican is jesuit-controlled.

This is where we see things from a different perspective. I do not disagree with you, I don’t possess your knowledge. I do though see certain elements that don’t fit, and until I explain these worries I can’t commit to the entire argument.

I agree entirely with you regarding Pavelic as the Catholic involvement was highly overt and has been largely suppressed. It clearly demonstrates their motivations and intentions for the Balkans at least.

I am not too sure of the others, Franco I do not enough about to comment at all or Mussolini for that matter, not in the detail I would require. Looking at Italy from the SS perspective may offer some insight on the wider picture though. Operation Crossword, whereby Karl Wolff surrendered Italy to the US representative Allen Dulles gives us a clue as to territorial priorities that some of the Allies held. The Russians were refused entry to the negotiations. Wolff’s record was ‘cleansed’ enough for him to receive a light sentence of week he is said to have served a week!! He drew attention to himself when he published his memoirs during the Eichmann trial. I suspect that the timing here is a little too convenient. Extreme arrogance, stupidity or fit up? I am sure that they are his memoirs but who willingly shoots themselves in the foot like that. Of course he could have simply felt it best to have justice served on home soil than on Israel.

I’ve wittered on and must go now. I’m looking at the dynastic aspects of Europe and the Holy Roman Empire, especially in correlation with Russia and Britain. Much of the latter half of your post ties in with that. The geo-theological-politics are an absolute nightmare! When you mesh that with trade and economics you see the accident that was inevitably going to happen in Europe. Takes a bit more thinking about though. I’ll compare your notes with mine and see if anything interesting crops up. I’ve gone on enough for now, I don’t want to keep you from your sleep.

Originally posted by DerVaterlandsFreund
What was the deepest motivation of Nazism?

To frighten millions of "Jews" into re-locating to Palestine to populate the future state of Israel of course.

The purpose? To take over the world.

Germany was going through one of the worst depressions the world had ever seen, and so this guy named Hitler came along and needed something to unite the German people into one focused group. He had basically two directions he could go to do that. One was with corrupted version of a religion (as we see in the Middle East today) and the other with Nationalism that is geared towards his goals.

Well since Hitler was a rather creepy guy, the religious thing was not going to work so he went the way of a National Nazis movement. He needed a bad guy and so decided to go the ethnic way to create a bad group while creating a super human race that should control the world.

He wasn’t dumb, just crazy… The sad thing for him (but good for us) was if he did embrace the Jewish people and others we would all be speaking German today.


[edit on 12-8-2007 by Xtrozero]

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
the Jesuits in my opinion can be credited with inventing the closed economy and the communist society.

I agree entirely with you regarding Pavelic as the Catholic involvement was highly overt and has been largely suppressed.

I’ve wittered on and must go now. I’m looking at the dynastic aspects of Europe and the Holy Roman Empire, especially in correlation with Russia and Britain. Much of the latter half of your post ties in with that. The geo-theological-politics are an absolute nightmare! When you mesh that with trade and economics you see the accident that was inevitably going to happen in Europe. Takes a bit more thinking about though. I’ll compare your notes with mine and see if anything interesting crops up. I’ve gone on enough for now, I don’t want to keep you from your sleep.

I have barely time to type this, must run.
When I refered to your "Jesuit links to Communism" previously I assumed you weren't just refering to the Paraguay experiment but also communism in europe.

Franco is a very interesting subject and there are very, very many books written on the Spanish civil war, and if you research it you will again find many Vatican and Roman Catholic connections.
Mussolini you will also find likewise and I am sure you already know about the lateran treaty. Hitler, Franco and Mussolini were in effect Roman Catholic puppets.
Also worth checking up on Roosevelt-Cardinal Spellman connections during WW2. Obviously Spellmans first allegiance was to the Vaticans agenda, and he was used as an agent for Roosevelt. Spellman was instrumental in the setting of Israel, but what I was going to mention first was operation keelhaul, in which Roosevelt sent hundreds of thousands (some put the figure in the millions) of men women and children to their deaths, most of these were Orthodox, the Vatican hate the Orthodox (as you will have seen demonstrated in Serbia). So in Operation Keelhaul you have a demonstration of the Allies handing over enemies of the Vatican to be slaughtered by Stalins regime. Now you have seen Roman Catholic links to the axis powers in WW2, you can and should research them further, you will also find allied links to the Roman Catholic church, Spellman being an example, and if you have studied the Inquisitions you will realise that the RC Church has a history of torturing and murdering non-RC peoples. Well in Operation Keelhaul you have a demonstration of the allies handing over non-RC people to be slaughtered by Stalins regime (remember what you said about Jesuit-Communism, you can research Stalins jesuit links). here is a link relating to Keelhaul, but even that link puts a spin on the story and doesn't tell the full truth, and unlike what that article states, not all victims of Keelhaul were russians being forcibly returned to russia, and the numbers of victims has been estimated as much higher than this links estimates. Also worth considering the thought that Churchill and Roosevelt sent anti-communist individuals to Communist Russia to be slaughtered!!! If anyone imagined Churchill and Roosevelt were any kind of "good guys" they simply don't know their history. You can ponder were the allies and the axis powers assisting in the slaughering of Orthodox Christians (who are hated by the Vatican), you can come to your own conclusions about people like Spellman, Himmlers Jesuit uncle and all the Vaticans links to events in europe.

us.altermedia.info...

The Holy Roman Empire is another very interesting subject and worth huge chapters in its own right, you will be familiar with the Borgia name, Cesar Borgia's story and so on, a Borgia was one of the co-founders of the jesuit order.
Somone sent me this clip on the Inquisitions, details the Roman Catholic churchs instruments of torture, quite disgusting methods they devised, you might be interested, even though it is off-topic though not unrelated to WW2.
www.youtube.com...

I must go, haven't time to re-read what I have typed, hope it is understandable,
Regards

So a secret order, the Jesuits, are the real reason behind most of the major conflicts in our past?

What about the Illuminati and all the other secret orders, were do they fit in? Seems to me if you look hard enough you can find a connection between anything and a secret order.

The Pope supported Hitler because he hated the communist's atheist beliefs, but yet the Reds were brought into power by the Pope's secret order.

Originally posted by BostonOrange
So a secret order, the Jesuits, are the real reason behind most of the major conflicts in our past?

What about the Illuminati and all the other secret orders, were do they fit in? Seems to me if you look hard enough you can find a connection between anything and a secret order.

The Pope supported Hitler because he hated the communist's atheist beliefs, but yet the Reds were brought into power by the Pope's secret order.

the jesuit order are a sort of secret order, they have many secrets within the order, even such as the oaths they take. But the order itself isn't exactly a secret, I am sure you have heard of the jesuit schools and the Jesuits influence in the Vatican.

The Illuminati was a creation of the Jesuits. Other secret orders are mostly under jesuit control if you follow the chains of command.

What exactly do you mean you can find a connection between anything and a secret order?

The existance of the jesuit order isn't any kind of secret. The influence they have had over some of the major world events isn't widely known, but they connections can be found if you look for it, it is up to you to decide if you want to learn more about the jesuits.

[edit on 15-8-2007 by golddragnet]

I think there were two main reasons for Hitlers Nazism. First of it is usually left out that Hitler didn't only kill jews but Christians and Catholics as well as others. why?? Hitler and many of his head men were part of the occult and had a hatred for foreign religions. If i remember Hitler wanted a German church were instead of a bible you got a copy of mein kampf.

Also Hitler wanted to purify Germany and wanted more land. If the U.K. and the rest of Europe didn't embolden him by giving him entire countries to avoid war he probably would not have gone as far IMO.

Originally posted by golddragnet
Now you have seen Roman Catholic links to the axis powers in WW2, you can and should research them further, you will also find allied links to the Roman Catholic church, Spellman being an example, and if you have studied the Inquisitions you will realise that the RC Church has a history of torturing and murdering non-RC peoples. Well in Operation Keelhaul you have a demonstration of the allies handing over non-RC people to be slaughtered by Stalins regime

Austria which is essentially a white Catholic country did want rid of these people and the Russians wanted them back. The British soldiers who very forceably repatriated them were led to believe that the Cossacks had fought against them alongside the Nazis. This is not true they fought only on the Eastern front against the Russians. The British and US did nothing to investigate the role of the Cossacks they simply believed Stalin, probably because he was such a nice guy!!!

The Cossacks were promised a part of Austria in which to permanently settle after the war by Hitler. How genuine this offer may have been was never tested, but given their slavic origin I doubt Hitler would have kept them about once their usefullness had been exhausted. Hitler wanted them because they were fervent anti-communists, they fought fiercely in the revolution against the Bolsheviks before being pushed out and exiled. They willingly joined the German forces in the war against Russia. This is why Stalin wanted them back so he could execute them as enemies and prevent their further use against him.

Their slavic origin would have influenced the West also as the subsequent war trials show, there is little sympathy or justice for any of those not considered European in origin. Britain and the US, like the Nazis did not consider slavs to be European, but rather a mixture of races. Eugenics was afterall not isolated to Germany. The Allies did not want any more refugess ending up on the doorstep, not if they weren't white christians or white affluent jews anyway.

While I can see the Churches hand in the operation I do not think that it was the sole reason and cause. I would also presume that any control that the Church may have had in the immediate aftermath of the war would have been limited in the general mop up and vying for territory that took place.

Originally posted by golddragnet
The Holy Roman Empire is another very interesting subject and worth huge chapters in its own right, you will be familiar with the Borgia name, Cesar Borgia's story and so on, a Borgia was one of the co-founders of the jesuit order.

I'm struggling with this a little bit and don't see how it is possible - surely the dates don't add up?

Similarly many of the inquistions were conducted before the Jesuits were founded. The Spanish Inquisition was obviously in operation for 400 years, but they cannot be held responsible for the motivations that drove it. It is not really the Jesuits style either, they have historically, shown a pattern of behaviour which on the whole seems to have prevented their own hands from getting that dirty.

The Vatican on a whole used them in an emissary capacity. They were used to this effect in Poland and Russia in the Popes many attempts to gain the unity of the two nations to raise a crusade against the Turks. That the Jesuits often found themselves on the wrong side of the Pope is due to their unswerving dedication to their task.

Upon gaining admittance to a country, usually directly from the ruler, the jesuits would establish hospitals and schools. They did not try to convert the people they merely offered them free education and charity. The people naturally came to them, especially the poor and disaffected, of which in feudalistic times there were many. At the same time, the Superior would seek to become the confessor/moral advisor of the rulers. The Pope was able to use the Jesuits to great effect as they were a pious front for a morally corrupt organisation.

The Jesuits presented this front quite possibly because they were indeed pious. They came into conflict with the Church because they often appeared to advise monarchs to disagree with Papal suggestions, because they interferred with the Churches profiteering. Their expulsion by monarchs was largely due to the fact that in some Jesuit handbooks the use of tyrannicide was suggested. Tyrants were therefore quite fearful of the Jesuits, and for good reason. The Jesuits used propaganda and sermons to ignite the people to question their role in society. They sought to educate those kept in ignorance.

When the Jesuits were moved out, the Vatican would move in more loyal Catholics and the conditions for the poor would eventually degenerate to their pre-Jesuit state.

I am not suggesting that this is the entire story. They were known to use devious means to infiltrate some countries, Britain included, but I do not see them at this time as the enemy which is why I am unable to commit to the notion that theirs was the major influence on the holocaust. There are too many other factors to take into consideration.

There are quite clearly two factions in operation within Nazi Germany. The genocides that comprise the holocaust were all directed by differing forces.

The role of the Catholics cannot be denied, too many of the senior SS directly responsible for Action Reinhard were Catholic. They seemingly held a common ideological predisposition that enabled them to murder 1.5 million jews in less than a year.

That several hundred million pounds was also generated by this action can also be considered motivation. Some of these 'profits' ending up in the Reichs Bank, some was syphoned off to the SS bank and the remainder funded the very lavish lifestyles that compensated the men asigned the task of mass murder.

I've run out of time so I'll end here. In summary I am still struggling to see the Jesuits as a wholly negative influence or how they exerted control over Hitler. Any details you can add would be very helpful.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
I'm struggling with this a little bit and don't see how it is possible - surely the dates don't add up?

The role of the Catholics cannot be denied

Good post.
I don't fully understand why you say the dates don't add up, not being clear which dates you are refering to.
I know when the Inquisitions were started and I didn't say the Jesuits started the Inquisitions, but they had a role to play in it. The Inquisitions lasted 600 years. There was conflict between the Jesuits and the Papacy which continued until the Jesuits gained control of the Vatican in 1870. I did say the Jesuits were started partially to destroy the Protestant Reformation, which began in 1517, the jesuits were created in 1534. The 30 years war started in 1618-1648 (many interesting conflicts arose during this time such as Frances role in the war, and it resulted in further conflicts), which began as a religous war between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestants, mostly Lutheran, Martin Luther having started the Protestant Reformation in 1517. The Peasants War 1524 will be of interest. You likely know much about the Church of Englands separation from Rome during this period.
The Counter-Reformation resulted in massive scale destruction in Germany, not only of the German male population but also so many German towns, villages and castles were destroyed (can you see parallels with WW2?), Germany was the centre of "heretical" Lutheranism. I guess you have heard of the Council Of Trent, the first major step in the Counter Reformation, and likely you have heard the famous "anathema to all heretics".
In 1540 the Society of Jesus became an officail Roman Catholic Order, and they had 3 activities which they carried out zealously, founding schools, converting people to Catholicism, and stopping the spread of Protestantism. The Jesuits were working for the Papacy and Loyola made the stupid remark "I will believe that the white that I see is black if the hierarchical Church so defines it." However, somewhat hypocritically the Jesuits who were serving the RC Church did realise the church needed serious reform and they saw the corruption of the church. Loyola saw the very poor education of many of the so-called Catholic clergy and he insisted on a very high level of education for his Jesuits. This is where some of the conflicts first arise between Jesuits and the Papacy. However the Jesuits schools played an important part in winning people back to Catholicism in Europe. The Jesuits were an important force in the Counter-Revolution and Jesuit priests gained positions of high influence. There was a strange relationship between the Jesuits and the Vatican which ultimately amounted to a struggle for each one to control the other. You already know much of the suppression of Jesuits by Spain, Portugal, France and later by the Pope leading the Society to Poland and Russia as they were protected from the papal decree by Catherine the Great. The suppression of the Society of Jesus being reversed in 1814.

The Cossacks are of interest to me, not only had eastern european history interested me, but my wife is from that region. You have attempted to give details about Operation Keehaul, but if you take a look at it again, not in the context of any officail accounts or attempts to explain why it happened, just look at what did happen, you will realise my previous brief summary of it was accurate. Whatever way you want to put it, it still happened that the Allies handed over Non-Roman Catholics (and anti-communists) to be slaughtered by Stalin. Maybe you could think about it more from the perspective of the victims, how would they explain what happened in a brief summary?

You also admit you can see they churches hand in it, but you seem to dismiss it as not so significant. If you were one of the victims you would probably have a very different view of it, and if you felt the church had a hand in it you would want the world to know that the church was partly responsible for their slaughter. The Church that is supposed to represent the word of God/Jesus played a part in their slaugher.

Now I never said anything was black and white or not complex, and there isn't just one reason for many such events, afterall many people have to be involved in shaping almost any largescale event, it has to be for the benefit of those involved. However you can pinpoint the main manipulators.
I am sure if you were at the receiving end of the slaughter during WW2 you certainly wouldn't downplay the churches involvement if you felt they had an involvement, you would want the world to know the churches involvement rather than simply having Hitler or "the Germans" blamed for everything without a critical look at all others who were involved. The Vaticans role in the slaugher during WW2 period has been largely ignored

[edit on 18-8-2007 by golddragnet]

Yeah fair enough.

True.