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.

 

Was Hitler that bad?

page: 14
7
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2008 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by caballero
 

The answer is Hitler lost......................




posted on May, 19 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


alright then lets discuss them, after all thats why i wrote this thread to discuss the whole gambet of bad guys and how they were just as bad as hitler.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 03:55 AM
link   
I don't feel Hu Jintao is that much of a bad guy, Hitler he was bad because he tried to take over the world as a one world dictator, if any thing China is preventing the New World Order by being such a economic power house, besides lets face it China is by no means hard line communism the way say North Korea is.


Hitler is mentioned so much because he tried to take over the world and came so close, not to mention the way he went about and did things, Stalin was bad too but because of how hard line he was and the treatment of his people, that's why Hitler is designated the worst of the worst, but we have had some bad ones.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 04:21 AM
link   
in my opinion hu jintao is bad because he isnt doing anything about his countries involvment in sudan. That should not be the price to pay to become a world leader thats absolutely sick to just sit back and let happen.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Hitler's sister confirmed bro was sent to Tavistock England, a brainwashing institute. Sis did not recognize her bro after, he was odd since then.

Hilter passed on invasion of Britian and went North east to Russia in cold winter.

Said "Blood of Englishmen to valuable to spill" (Hitler ordered retreat of ground forces that surrounded the Brits, may have been where Von Stoffenberg stepped up to bomb Hitler, the fool who killed Rommel for not conquering Africa. Would not kill Brits, or invade British.

His ethnic cleansing may have been his Tavistock programming of depopulation, eugenics is 100% NWO and the perfect ayrian may have been NWO eugenics experiment ran from Tavistock.

Who knows what England knew of the gas chambers. I do know that USA and allies did not enter war to stop ethnic cleansing or Holocaust. Doubt that would rallied USA into WW II. Some say German and Zionist Jews double crossed Polish Jews, that there was an internal cleansing from top Jews with Hitler as Proxy executioner. Hitler protected many zionist Jews that wanted return to Israel. Zionist fear that all Jews would follow, not enough room and saw many Jews as inferior, need to thin herd.

Sounds like the kind of Zionist NeoCon Jew that would take out 300% 99yr insurance policy on WTC.


Muslims screw Muslims in Iraq we can see, Protestants vs Catholics and IRA terror.

Hitler was handled early on for sure, may have went rogue, may have just carried out orders just as his own henchmen did.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by caballero
 


dood hitler wasnt that bad

ill tell you who is a godsend tho BUSH
he is the best Political Leader of are time
Barrack is a fagg



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by vanosman
 



The jewish cleansing theory sounds interesting.

From what i have read, the only Rothschild that endured the death camps was a woman that was married into the family.

I think it is funny that the secret society that would brew a large portion of todays US government body, was also the same society whos members were helping finance Hitler through Brown brothers Harriman bank in NYC.

Bushes grandfather was one of the highest ranking executives at a bank that was raided by US federal agents for financing the enemy. All the information is public, and it blows me away that none of it was ever brought up during the campaings of both president Bush's.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by vanosman
 


I would ask you for some evidence of your fantastic claims but since I already know they are fiction I will not.
Hitler never wanted war with Britain. He identified with them and even admired the British people. What he wanted was an alliance between Germany and Britain against Communist Russia, the common enemy that was first identified by Hitler and only a few years later by Churchill.

Also, Rommel wasn't killed for losing Africa. He was suspected, wrongly, to be involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler and given the chance to commit suicide . Otherwise, it would have gone badly for his family. Like the honourable warrior he was, he chose to suicide.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Codex.MK2
 


Hitler is mentioned much also because a lot of people in our generation fail to recognize or are utterly unaware of the bloody history of the Roman Catholic Church. For 1,500 years the Roman Catholic Church through the Papal System committed massacres, rape, imprisonment, torture, genocide, confiscation of property, and even confined the Jews to isolated ghettoes throughout Europe. The Papal System embarked on an unrelenting campaign of sanctioned mass murder and genocide through their crusades, inquisitions, and "holy wars" using Christ and the cross as as a justifying motive and continued their barbaric fascist policies in the New World by exterminating millions of African slaves and Native Americans. In other words, Hitler was simply keeping in line with the 1,500 year old anti-semitic policies of the Roman Church. The Church sub-humanized and demonized Jews long before the advent of the Nazis.



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 09:59 PM
link   
yes its interesting to thik of some sort of elaborate cover up or consiracy but without any kind of proof the theory falls flat.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 12:46 AM
link   
The thing with America is they always have to play world police, they have done so many shady things in the past it's not funny, but we just sweep that under the rug.


I feel you with Sudan and Hu Jintao, the mans not perfect but i do feel and bare with me for a moment, Hu has the perfect system in place for his own country, there communist but there really not(if that makes any sence), in another words there communist with capitalism, nothing like that has ever been done before, most communist countrys are like Kim Jong-il country North Korea in that there is no real capitalism, so what Hu has maintained is impressive.




[edit on 20-5-2008 by Codex.MK2]



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Codex.MK2
 


youre right the united states has done many shady things as well but i havent done those shady things and i am completely against the things the usa funds. Like terror groups, and militias in africa. Thats why i said bush because he is the current president and has failed to stop the violence but has achieved in increasing the very profitable bloodshed.

I think its disgusting that capitolism and communism is bought off with human suffering but i have no choice but to live in a world where you cant escape either one of these two very dangerous economic systems. Hu jintao can still do good for his country with out spilling innocent blood. and Bush can just go die for all i care he has done nothing but run this country into the ground with his war mongering.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 01:42 AM
link   
If the USA were smart the war in Iraq would be over by now, he went half cocked and ramparted Iraq on a whim, had he planned it out for a few more months, i feel the States would be out of there already and the new government would be implace.


It's tough watching bloodshed all over the world from Sudan to Iraq, i wish a more peaceful resolve would be reached, i do admit Bush was in office at a bad time when a war was wagged againts the states that has never been fought before aka the war on terror, some say the United States had something to do with the WTC, but i'm saying if they didn't then Bush faced something no other president has before, so i can forgive a few fopaws but his handling of Iraq has been bad, the reason a Republican wont get into office anytime soon as a mater of fact.

The war is turning more into Vietnam then i had hoped but at this point what can you do, hopefully when the Democrat gets into office it will be over real soon.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Codex.MK2
 


it is very hard to watch bloodshed. and i hope and pry that Obama gets the office, i have full confidence he will stop the senseless violence that that idiot president bush started. The people who attacked us on 9-11 werent even from iraq. the war is a joke, it illegal we should have never gone in the first place.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Hitler gets the most notice because he directly affected the lives of descendants of us readers of this Forum.

American, Europeans, Australians... he was OUR mass murderer.

Stalin and Mao, well, if you ask a person who was persecuted in the Ukraine or China, they of course would have more direct and bitter opinions of those dictators.

Just ask my Polish Grandmother.

And I'm sure if you ask some guy in Rwanda about Evil Men, Hitler wont be anywhere near the top of his list.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by emjoi
 


that is one of the most convincing points i've heard this enitre thread.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 02:48 AM
link   
No Hitler was not even as bad as Hitler. - sit and think about that for awhile.


When we create stories and labels we then can control what the masses focus on - and ironically take their attention off of our own hypocritical stories.

All one has to do is yell a buzz word, "Hitler!" or "Holocaust!", and we immediately go into mass hypnosis and dont see the Hitlers and Holocaust all around us. (i.e. Gaza - so I suppose killing innocent civilians is a casual pastime sport for some? All the while the leaders of Gaza are fat and well dressed in another country, something suspicious here...seems they are slaughtering their own people?)

Nothing is ever as bad as the mental story or label that we throw out as the 'ultimate evil' or the 'ultimate good'.

These are all mental constructs which are illusion and do not do any one justice who wants to know truth - which is beyond the polarities. We must remember there is a middle that connects north to south.

Unfortunately (well, lets not label, its is as it is...) people will not automatically get the gist of what it is that is being said here. They have to continue down their own path till they figure it out for themselves. After all its their dime - they are the ones paying to play in this story called life... in the big holographic game called the universe.


Once you begin to realize these basic concepts some things become clear - and the conspiracy side of things is one of the first things to become irrelevant.
The drama of the world really loses its grip relatively quickly, and life is no longer a struggle and you can now play with it. (life)

But until then you are stuck at polar ends...believing that somehow you are disconnected with the opposite side of the coin...making a story out of, "me, & us" vs. "you & them".

"That which you resist persist" - Eckhart Tolle.
He also mentioned that in the current way that we go about doing things true change cannot happen. You see it all the time - that is the struggle of us vs. them - and if a political party is seen as evil another one comes along to replace the evil with good, but ends up being 'twice the son of hell' (as Jesus put it) than that which preceded them.

I know, for many of you its hard to fathom - but when you realize that the winner of any battle is always the 'good guy' - and even in battle each side claims to those on their side that they are good - then you realize it is 'good' who writes history and suites it to its purposes.

Where would the world be today if Hitlers name was Adolf Smith.
So we would have the fearful term "Smith" instead of "Hitler".

Somehow Hitler goes over better for fear mongering than does a common name like "Smith". You realize most actors/actresses change their name (last names) to something extra unordinary...same goes with Hitler it would seem. Its not even a common, uncommon name.


The Holocaust...it exist as long as any innocent is killed, and continues in countries throughout the world today.
But the Holocaust, like Hitler, has been turned into a one trick pony.
Interestingly enough not only Jews were murdered in WW II.

Here is a link to 10 questions by Rabbi Weissmandl concerning the zionist role in the Holocaust.

It would appear that the zionist role in WWII was not as innocent as they would like us to believe, and indeed this would explain why they are so quick in crying 'wolf' (anti-semite) to anyone and everything but themselves - who appear to be the true anti-semites. (Also the fact that they - zionist - try to tie their label to Judaism so tightly as to look like one and the same.)

Anyway, they have yet (from what I have seen) come out against what this rabbi has said. Again, for obvious reasons...they hope most people just ignore it - which seems to be the case.

The article well implies that the zionist hands are pretty bloody in regards to the deaths of the innocent Jews in WWII. Its an interesting read...and its not from some anti-semite sight. (Written by a rabbi, published on a site by Jews who are not zionist.)

But then again, in the modern day in age, the zionist have pretty much succeeded and having the term zionist & Jew being viewed as one and the same. What is a Jew? Its a lot more complicated then saying, "zionist".

Here is an excerpt from the article: And then you can keep pondering the Hitler question - or start to move beyond all the silly games that are being played to see the clearer picture.



Ten Questions to the zionist. - Rabbi Michael Dov Weissmandl

#3.
IS IT TRUE that the answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments:

a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees.

b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war.

c) No ransom will be paid

#4.
IS IT TRUE that this response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.

#10.
IS IT TRUE that during the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weitzman, the first "Jewish statesman" stated: "The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important". Weitzman's cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe".


The above was taken from the jews against zionism website - link above.
There is also the Neturei Karta website (Also Jews against zionism) with info showing that indeed zionism is not necessarily Jewish. (There are quite a few Christian Zionist.)


-------------------------------------
In the end, its time to go past all of these stories.
They tend to polarize.
Much like religion has the truth, but we are blinded by the dogma which pulls us down like mud sucking at our boots...its time to extract the light and shake off the rest which no longer serves us.

Suffering, as Eastern (and even Western) thought has shown us, can lead to enlightenment...but how much more suffering do we need? How much more division do we need until like a cancer we destroy ourselves?

The universe will move on... evolve...(look past the word and to where its pointing if the word bothers you.)

The question is, do we want to be part of the ride - a part of the growth? Or will we simply be a by product of the universe?

I believe M. Kaku put it this way: humanity has a 50/50 chance of either destroying itself or moving on to a type 1 civilization.

Personally, Im voting for the Type 1 civilization. - Hope to see you there.


Peace

dAlen

[edit on 20-5-2008 by dAlen]



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 02:58 AM
link   
I haven't the time, nor patience to review every reply this topic has had, but to supply direct response to what I've read thus far.. Adolph Hitler, as stated by many others, was one of the cruelest, most vilest men to ever live. His own actions and the Nazi persuasion alone represent some of the most horrid acts upon human beings anyone could ever, at this point, read about.

Is he really that bad? Yes. But something I can't deny is your emphasis on other 'leaders' like him. Growing up, I can honestly say Hitler is one man that always appeared in text books and stood as a prominent figure throughout History class. Why that is can be based off several things; for one, also stated by others, his rule sparked an entire world war. And the fact so many nations took part in the War itself is a given, as well.

And something that I feel should be said is that that's all he was - a man. Nothing more. What drove him to commit the kind of things he did and took part in could never really be answered. It just goes to show how much evil one man is truly capable of.

If you wish to look at it like such..



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Devilock
Adolph Hitler, as stated by many others, was one of the cruelest, most vilest men to ever live.


There are different definitions for "cruel and vile". That description brings up images of Vlad the Impaler in my mind. Hitler may have had an enormous global impact, and managed to come up with a plan that caused an amazing amount of horrible deaths, but still your comment seems a bit harsh.

There are people that have tortured their own children/friends etc... as easily as they tortured strangers. There are complete pscyhopaths that are a danger and a worry to virtually everyone in their daily environment. There are those that have no empathy for anyone/anything and a taste for sadism to boot.

Hitler was not nearly so extreme. He was considered to be very polite and gentile to those that saw him on a daily basis. He was not a monster on a personal/social level. He loved his dogs, he was protective towards the women in his daily life, he was polite and well spoken, he was certainly NOT a raving sadistic nut that tortured/killed those close to him for amusement and made them quake with fear on a continual basis.




[edit on 20-5-2008 by Sonya610]



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Hitler is the "lightning rod" who gets the attention from the West. Understandable enough. The problem is, that after awhile it comes to look like he was just some crackpot - an exception to the norm. This disguises another reality that has been alluded to several times in this thread.
He was not so exceptional. It is relatively ingrained in the nature of mankind to be capable of atrocity given the right circumstances - especially the circumstance of "power".
We should indeed keep turning the spotlight round and round to shine on all of the bad guys, lest we forget how many there are/have been, so as to be vigilant for the next guy just around the corner, or perhaps, already in our midst.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by wayno]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join