It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
1. To plan together secretly to commit an illegal or wrongful act or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
2. To join or act together; combine:
Now, the 31-year-old professor of history at the online American Military University, who recently received a Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge, has just published a book on Nazi Germany that some historians are calling pathbreaking. This month, the University Press of Kansas releases Hitler's Jewish Soldiers: The Untold Story of Nazi Racial Laws and Men of Jewish Descent in the German Military
What surfaces in those papers, and in Mr. Rigg's in-depth interviews, is a glimpse into how the several thousand men of partial Jewish origin who served in Hitler's army saw themselves -- how they felt about their Germanness, their Jewishness, the war, the Holocaust, and their own participation therein. Mr. Rigg estimates that there were upwards of 100,000 such "Mischlinge" -- German for mixed-blood or half-breed -- as they were known in Nazi parlance, and possibly as many as 150,000
German Jews, unlike many of their Eastern European counterparts, tended to be highly assimilated. Most of them were educated, professional, and urban. They saw themselves -- and, until the National Socialist takeover, were largely seen -- as German, as part of the national culture. Indeed, many of them had served in the German military in World War I. They were patriotic. Some were even antagonistic toward the Eastern European Jews who began to migrate to Germany after the war, seeing them as backward, parochial, and insular.
While in Germany in 1992, studying language at the Goethe Institute and doing research into his family origins, Mr. Rigg happened upon some records indicating that his mother's ancestry included Jews
Therefore, Hitler was in fact a Jew if you use Nazi thinking.
So explain your circular logic on how you conclude that he wasn't.
IN fact, the E1B1B1 gene is relatively common in Europe. Here's the incidence in major European countries:
France - 8%,
Italy 11% (Northern Italy 24%)
[note: at the tip of Southern Greece E1B1B1 reaches up to 40%, incidence and there's a 40% pocket around Montenegro too.]
It is difficult to see how much of the hype is due to the original geneticists or to the "journalists" who report on the work.
These "Jewish and African" roots are supposedly due to the fact that Hitler belonged to haplogroup E1b1b1. But, without further information about the subclade in which Hitler belonged to, there is no reason to think that he was of Jewish or African ancestry. He could just as well be of Greek or Albanian patrilineal ancestry. But, I guess that "Hitler's Greek or Albanian roots" doesn't have the same zing that his "Jewish and African roots" does.
What do we know? That Hitler may have had distant Y-chromosome E1b1b1 cousins that wouldn't be considered Aryan in Nazi Germany. But, this would be true no matter what haplogroup he had
Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
I don't believe man originated from Africa and there's no real proof that we did. I don't believe in the evolution of man from an ape like ancestor..
My blood is of Scots Irish, Dutch and Swedish. There is no African or Jewish blood in my bloodline. My ancestor's came to north America in the mid 1700's from Ulster Ireland.
Rigg interviewed over four hundred former soldiers and documented more, finding people and documents that were previously unknown, to come to the conclusion that perhaps up to 150,000 Mischlinge served in the Wehrmacht during Hitler's reign. This is important because it "tells us how Jewish identity was viewed, constructed, and contested by German citizens, Nazi leaders, military commanders, and the Jewish community within German borders, and for what it tells us about how these perceptions saved some while condemning others to the death camps (1).
Correction of a blunder that I made yesterday
I have a correction to make to an earlier post I made. Seems I have been confusing Werner Maser with Franz Jetzinger.
Maser is of course the guy who disspelled the Frankenberger/Frankenreiter myth - an effort that has been reproduced by Ian Kershaw for his Hitler Biography.
Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
The truth is that the source of the allegations that it was Baron Rothschild who was Hitler's Grandfather, comes from the Austrian Secret Police that were very anti-Hitler.
Now the questions one might want to ask, is was this a pure invention of the Austrian Secret Police that would slander in essence the scion of the world's wealthiest and most powerful family along with Hitler, or was this a desperately made revelation and admission through their own investigative work as an arm of the Austrian Government with presumably far better access to Austrian records before Germany ever annexed it and destroyed many of them?
The truth is that most historians that specialize in Hitler have long operated as a rather rigid clique that in large part pays lip service to Jewish and Zionist politics which is why it is so hard for someone like Riggs to investigate and uncover things like Hitler's Jewish Soldiers, because the academic community all of which have basically.....
Yet the most credible historians while they all have their own favorite theories as to who Hitler's Grandfather was, admit readily that there is just not enough surviving information to know conclusively.
So you are in reality attempting to argue a case, that none of your sources have ever been able to difinitively prove.
Since you yourself don't actually have the source documents either, you can not prove or disprove who Hitler's grandfather was either.
All you can do is pretend, likely for the sake of some political agenda, and frankly there is no virtue in anything less than the truth, no matter how well someone imagines a lie will serve them.
There is no way to disprove Baron Rothschild and there is no way to prove it was Baron Rothschild.
So it is purely a matter of speculation and conjecture which is what makes it a very attractive thing for conspiracy theorists and truth hunters of all stripes.
That's a straw-man; I've made clear that I'm arguing against the bold assertion that he was Jewish or a scion of the Rothschilds. I'm not promoting any specific of the (more plausible) other versions.
Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
So in reality all you have done is expose a political agenda, one where you will argue incessantly to deny any possibility that Hitler could have Jewish Blood or be a Rothschild.
Why you are doing this is likely a conspiracy in and of itself.
The difference is while I am engaged in the process as a puzzle purely for the sake of working out a puzzle, you are engaged in a process that would deny people pieces to the puzzle through your misrepresentation of your sources, and your own credentials as being qualified to speak in regards to these matters.
Credible historians concede that there is not enough surviving documentation to rule anyone in or out.
The Austrian Secret Police who speculated either correctly or incorrectly that Hitler may have been a illegitimate descendent of the Baron Rothschild are the actual source of that, not the first author who identified them as being the source of that after the war.
This is where your argument fails and is disingenuous as you are basically claiming that the Austrian Secret Police never made the claim that the claim itself originates with a historian.
Which is like saying the Holocaust is not the responsiblity of Hitler or the Nazis but the first post war author writing about the Holocaust,
as I have pointed out time and time again there is not enough surviving documentation for either you or I or anyone else to prove or disprove whether Baron Rothschild was Hitler’s grandfather,
however the difference is your motive for denying that possibility in disingenuous ways is political in nature, and relies on emotional exploitation and manipulation to support it, where as my interest in piecing a conspiracy theory together has no political agenda and doesn’t need emotional manipulation to bolster, or discredit.
All in all you have failed to make your arguments because your argument can’t be made by you or anyone else.
Which is why I readily admit my argument is a theory, one that might never be able to be proved but tantalizing none the less because it would explain so many other facets of a very enigmatic figure that being Hitler, and a very troubling portion of our past World War II and the Holocaust.
Originally posted by zerbot565
reply to post by TruthSeeker8300
as i recall there where about 8 arch types of females on this planet with its wast gene pool so its an 1/8 chance im correct to some degree
„With Koehler/Orb the historian is torn between the almost certainly accurate inside information, the obviously fictional accounts, and much that has yet to be tested.