Adolph Hitler was once a Freemason

Hitler was no Mason altho i don't agree with the concept of quote un quote "secret societies" Hitler was a socialist by doctrine far from a capitalist which most Mason's are.


There's probably about a hundred or so groups you could link Hitler with in terms of ideology monologue in terms of getting his core philosophy from, but my friend i'm afraid Freemasonry isn't one of them.

Partycrasher, you're such a party crasher. Now I simply can't be a freemason anymore knowing that Hitler was one (at least in your mind).

Dork.

Originally posted by partycrasher
Appears that Hitler before banning freemasonry in nazi germany was himself once a freemason, borrowed idealogy from masonry, became disenchanted with and then persecuted the masons.

Also? Never EVER start a sentence with "appears." You know who else did that? That's right......Hitler.

Originally posted by King Seesar
Hitler was no Mason altho i don't agree with the concept of quote un quote "secret societies" Hitler was a socialist by doctrine far from a capitalist which most Mason's are.

Just for the record, Hitler was a Fascist, not a Socialist. German Socialists were persecuted by the Nazis.

Of course, the Nazis were the "National Socialist Party", but they meant "socialist" in a right-wing way, concerning social culture. As Hitler himself said, "We don't socialize banks and industries, we socialize people."

I would also mention that probably very few Masons are capitalists.

reply to post by Masonic Light


Well sementics, Hitler was indeed a fascist no one would argue that, but the solecistic pentagram is up for debate, i find the concept of socialism basically the extremist left wing radical version as communism at its inner core much the same way i find the right wing extremist version which is fascist to ultimately be from the same elk and that is communism, i guess that's why i'm more Libertarian then anything else, and one could argue that Hitler and Stalin were in complete contrast to each other but what i see is two power hungry dictators who had a appetite for blood, seems the same to me.


As far as Mason's not being capitalists i'd bet a few years ago this wouldn't have rung true for as many *sigh* we live in a time where capitalism is a bad word, hence the occupy movement, it seems more and more people each day want a society based on socialism which translates into a totalitarian and communist country were a dictator rules, besides a socialist ran country never works.

I don't disagree that the people should be speaking there mind and protesting i'm all for that, but not Wall Street i feel the visions movement is blured, they should be protesting the Federal Reserve and the corrupt politicians in Washington D.C and while there at it throw in Fort Knox we deserve to know if there's any gold in there, but this attack on Wall Street is just a attack on capitalism which is a bad thing in my opinion when there's other areas that should be addressed.

Wow one poster mentions Hitler being backed by "black royalty..the rothschilds"
Let us put the masonic Rothschild's under the microscope and drag them out into the light with Hitler as well....

Two neighbor horse farmers came together one day to talk business. The first farmer sold his horse to the second for a quarter million dollars, and then bought it back for about $20 more. He could now advertise his horse (actually worth $20), as a horse he that he had paid over a quarter of a million dollars for.

We can laugh over such schemes. And perhaps we should laugh at ourselves for having been fooled, for if there is one area in life that exceeds the religious in deception, and touches all of us it is the financial. What else can we do about it except laugh? The famous poet Lord Byron describes the archtype of our two farmers in 1823, Who keeps the world, both old and new, in pain Or pleasure? Who makes politics run glibber all? The shade of Bonaparte’s noble daring?

Jew Rothschild and his fellow-Christian, Baring. You’ll learn about some other ,,neighbor horse traders" in this chapter too.

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...


ROTHSCHILD TALKS ABOUT THEIR DYNASTY

Lord Rothschild in his book The Shadow of a Great Man quotes a letter sent from Davidson on June 24, 1814 to Nathan Rothschild, ,,As long as a house is like yours, and as long as you work together with your brothers, not a house in the world will be able to compete with you, to cause you harm or to take advantage of you, for together you can undertake and perform more than any house in the world."(1) The closeness of the Rothschild brothers is seen in a letter from Saloman (Salmon) Rothschild to his brother Nathan on Feb. 28, 1815, "We are like the mechanism of a watch: each part is essential. (2) This closeness is further seen in that of the 18 marriages made by Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s grandchildren 16 were contracted between first cousins.

VISITING THE NATION THE ROTHSCHILDS BUILT

In 1974, in the summer after the Yom Kippur War this Author toured Israel, and got the chance to personally visit many of the buildings like the Knesset that the Rothschild’s money has built. The Knesset is the Israeli equivalent to our Congress’s Capitol building. One of the Rothschilds in his will left money for ongoing building projects in Israel, and the Rothschilds are honored with a Street named after them in Jerusalem.

The people of Germany and Turkey have been very close. I can recall meeting Turkish ,,Gastarbeiter" (guestworkers) in Germany. The reader will remember that Turkey fought on Germany’s side in W.W. I. A few powerful Jews, including the Rothschilds were responsible for the wording of the Treaty imposed on Germany that ended W.W. I (3) The treaty gave the Rothschilds the German owned railway rights in Palestine (which had been part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire), thus paving the way for the Rothschilds to have a sure leverage to dictate policy concerning Palestine. The Rothschilds had made loans to Turkey which amounted to almost one hundred million pounds. When the Turkish government collapsed after W.W. I because they were on the losing side, the Rothschilds had a claim on Palestine because of those unpaid Turkish loans.4 The British government followed the dictates of the Rothschilds. The British were given a mandate over Palestine, and the Rothschilds were able to through their proxies in the British government, to create the steps that led to the nation of Israel.(5)

THE ROTHSCHILDS AS "PROPHETS"

One item stands out as a person listens to the International Bankers and reads their books. They believe money is what makes the world go round. If you have money, you can do anything. Money is "God", and it is worshipped and served. Even after these families accumulate more than can be spent, these devotees continue selling their souls for this false but powerful god. The great poet-philosopher Heinrich Heine (a Banker’s son) said, "Money is the god of our time, and Rothschild is his prophet."6 Following the cue of the Rothschilds, Heinrich Heme, a Jew, signed his name by drawing a Seal of Solomon.7 Amsel Rothschild is reported to have said, "Give me control of the economics of a country; and I care not who makes her laws. (8) Today his descendents meet twice daily in London to dictate to the world what the world price of gold will be. They also dictate what the "Federal Reserve System" will do with America’s finances.

ANOTHER GOD TOO

According to eye-witnesses, who were prominent enough to visit one of the British Rothschild homes, the Rothschilds worship yet another god too, Satan. They set a place for him at their table.(8a) The Rothschilds have been Satanists for many generations. The Rothschilds are an important part of the history of the Seal of Solomon (also known as hexagram, Magen David, six-pointed star, Star of David.) The Seal of Solomon, the hexagram, was not considered a Jewish symbol before the Rothschilds began using it.9 Throughout the

IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS

MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

DMCA: Digital Millennium Copyright Act

Originally posted by partycrasher
from freemasonrywatch.org...

freemasonrywatch is not a credible and never will be a credible source for any kind of articles.

Originally posted by partycrasher
Jew Rothschild...

Stop hating on the Rothchilds, they make tasty wine. I personally recommend the 2000 Lafite-Rothschild and the 2005 Mouton-Rothschild. Notes of graphite, plum and cassis on the nose with a hint of ground up hundred dollar bills of the downtrodden on the palate.

Originally posted by King Seesar

Well sementics, Hitler was indeed a fascist no one would argue that, but the solecistic pentagram is up for debate, i find the concept of socialism basically the extremist left wing radical version as communism at its inner core much the same way i find the right wing extremist version which is fascist to ultimately be from the same elk and that is communism, i guess that's why i'm more Libertarian then anything else, and one could argue that Hitler and Stalin were in complete contrast to each other but what i see is two power hungry dictators who had a appetite for blood, seems the same to me.

I pretty much agree. Although Soviet style "communism" and German / Italian fascism were very different ideologically, they were very similar in actual practice.

As far as Mason's not being capitalists i'd bet a few years ago this wouldn't have rung true for as many *sigh* we live in a time where capitalism is a bad word, hence the occupy movement, it seems more and more people each day want a society based on socialism which translates into a totalitarian and communist country were a dictator rules, besides a socialist ran country never works.

I have to disagree on this one. All socialism really means is economic democracy, where the workers are in control of their own labor. It has been pointed out that trying to combine capitalism with democracy is sort of odd, since capitalism is, by definition, a small percentage of society dictating economic activity. In true socialism, there are no dictators. That's why most socialists in non-communist countries have described themselves as "democratic socialists": they oppose both communist *and* capitalist dictatorships.

I don't disagree that the people should be speaking there mind and protesting i'm all for that, but not Wall Street i feel the visions movement is blured, they should be protesting the Federal Reserve and the corrupt politicians in Washington D.C and while there at it throw in Fort Knox we deserve to know if there's any gold in there, but this attack on Wall Street is just a attack on capitalism which is a bad thing in my opinion when there's other areas that should be addressed.

I'm in basic agreement with OWS because Washington itself is controlled by Wall Street. The wealthy elite special interests fund campaigns, and when their people win, they send lobbyists to make sure the legislation they want is passed. Basically, most politicians are Wall Street puppets.

reply to post by Masonic Light


We pretty much agree on most points except i see the socialistic doctrine as a gateway to communism when all is said and done and like i said most countries have tried this philosophy before and it's failed such as modern day Europe and China to a lesser extent, to me true freedom is democracy with free open ended capitalism if done correctly its the best way for a country to thrive such as America in the 1950's and Japan in the 1990's, what happen to those too was they shipped there jobs over seas had they not done that they would still be economic power houses today.

In terms of the Occupy movement it dosen't seem to have real direction, to me the Fed Reserve and being right in D.C in a million man march type deal would be better off, i think the people on wall street are just the scape goats to a certin degree.

Originally posted by King Seesar

We pretty much agree on most points except i see the socialistic doctrine as a gateway to communism when all is said and done and like i said most countries have tried this philosophy before and it's failed such as modern day Europe and China to a lesser extent, to me true freedom is democracy with free open ended capitalism if done correctly its the best way for a country to thrive such as America in the 1950's and Japan in the 1990's, what happen to those too was they shipped there jobs over seas had they not done that they would still be economic power houses today.

I agree to a point, but there is a big difference between classical Marxism and Soviet communism. Marx saw how feudalism was overthrown by capitalist revolution, and believed that capitalism would be overthrown by proletarian revolution.

In Marx's day, capitalism was a lot different than it is today. Workers usually worked 15 hour shifts per day with no benefits, in hazardous conditions, with not even a minimum wage. 4 or 5 working families would share 3 room apartments. There was no public education, and working class kids were forced into the factory at age 9 or 10. It was practically all slave labor.

Marx called for the workers to rise up and establish themselves as the ruling class. At this point, cooperation would replace competition, and democracy would be introduced. This is what Marx called "communism". He would not have considered the Soviet Union or its satellite states to be communist at all.

Socialism is just a society deciding for itself what to do, in contrast to capitalism, where only the wealthy elite have any real power in making decisions. Because they want to keep their power, they've spent a lot of money on anti-socialist propaganda, which is rampant in the United States. Not so much for Europe, where Socialist political parties tend to be large, have the full support of the working class, and are sometimes the ruling party (as in Spain and France, for example).

reply to post by Masonic Light


Yea you and me had a theological dabte a while ago on the merits and understandings of Aleister Crowley at the end of it we had come to the conclusion that we were both debating the same side in a sense just using different words and dichotomies.

I think it's the same thing with this topic, basically we have different meanings on what constitutes Socialism, to me it means communism in a sense with the end result either said country being in ruin or said country being controlled by a dictator and in most cases it usually means both, where i think your coming from is the aspect that Socialism is nothing like that but it's what our forefathers wanted and had in mine when they created America, to which i say i think we both want the same thing and that's the constitution to be recognized and implemented the way it was supposed to be.

So i'd say were basically in agreement.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by JoshNorton
Hitler was a theosophist, but was never a Mason.

It's true that Hitler was never a Mason, but he wasn't a Theosophist either. Himmler and several of the earlier party members (although not Hitler) had belonged to the Thule Society, which mixed theosophy up with nationalistic and anti-Semitic ideology.

it ended up a game in there mind, they had been steered to begin with by occult forces, but in the end for hitler and his friends was a game, they ended up going against freemasons, this has been shown and proven, that they went against freemasons in the world which also sealed there doom, in the end the game was for a total collapse of there regime, it was programmed this way in advance from what i have seen through research.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by King Seesar

We pretty much agree on most points except i see the socialistic doctrine as a gateway to communism when all is said and done and like i said most countries have tried this philosophy before and it's failed such as modern day Europe and China to a lesser extent, to me true freedom is democracy with free open ended capitalism if done correctly its the best way for a country to thrive such as America in the 1950's and Japan in the 1990's, what happen to those too was they shipped there jobs over seas had they not done that they would still be economic power houses today.

I agree to a point, but there is a big difference between classical Marxism and Soviet communism. Marx saw how feudalism was overthrown by capitalist revolution, and believed that capitalism would be overthrown by proletarian revolution.

In Marx's day, capitalism was a lot different than it is today. Workers usually worked 15 hour shifts per day with no benefits, in hazardous conditions, with not even a minimum wage. 4 or 5 working families would share 3 room apartments. There was no public education, and working class kids were forced into the factory at age 9 or 10. It was practically all slave labor.

Marx called for the workers to rise up and establish themselves as the ruling class. At this point, cooperation would replace competition, and democracy would be introduced. This is what Marx called "communism". He would not have considered the Soviet Union or its satellite states to be communist at all.

Socialism is just a society deciding for itself what to do, in contrast to capitalism, where only the wealthy elite have any real power in making decisions. Because they want to keep their power, they've spent a lot of money on anti-socialist propaganda, which is rampant in the United States. Not so much for Europe, where Socialist political parties tend to be large, have the full support of the working class, and are sometimes the ruling party (as in Spain and France, for example).

when you look at communism what would you like to see?, in western society it has been show to be bad, and made to look bad, do you think with the correct leadership it can work or it works really well?.

at the moment the governments in the west are moving around there strategies, a lot trying to be controlled by the so called wealthy as they like to think they are in control of what is called "the game".

how would you like to see things shaped?.

at the moment there is some kind of what could be called "power plays" at work, and what they want to see.

but how do you think the future should be shaped?.

even though there are i guess what could be called esoteric or occult powers trying to shape the future, they do not have full control, but they 'might' be making some of the policy all the same.

this policy is open for debate it can be moved in any direction wanted, because the masonic cult ultimately controls this world, but, what should they be told to do?.

what would you tell them to do?, they control what is ultimately going to happen in the world, what would you tell them to do?.

what is your take on the future?.

if it is to go to the at the moment as designed "game" it is to play like world war 2.

in this case world war 3.

but, it does not necessarily have to be that way or such a horrible "game", to then to come to the outcome which is planned for afterwards.

how in your mind would you like to see the coming years be?.

i would not like to see "the game" as it is called, but this is the program that is on the "table" like it was, 65 years ago, that is a horror.

what would be your idea of the game? if you had a choice on shaping the coming future?.

Germany has a very old tradition of operative stone masonry, and is arguably the country where the first stone mason guilds were established.

There was also a strong Masonic tradition in the 19th century Prussian Lodge, which was a nationalistic one. It would have been political suicide for Adolf Hitler to oppose all Freemasonry.

His objections were toward the humanistic Masonic lodges that allowed Jews to join, and to eventually infiltrate its ranks. Hermann Goering once considered joining, but had cold feet.

Discussions about Hitler and the occult on this forum never explore the role of the Armanenschaft, and its modern incarnation as the Guido von List Society.

Helena Blavatsky was named an honorary Freemason even though she was a woman. Albert Pike is said to have been a member of the Theosophical Society. Foster Bailey is known to have been both a 32 Mason and a member of the Theosophical Society at the turn of the 20th century, when the Prussian Lodge was still in operation.

Originally posted by ThePunisher

when you look at communism what would you like to see?, in western society it has been show to be bad, and made to look bad, do you think with the correct leadership it can work or it works really well?.

In actual communism, the leadership is held by the people. The so-called "communist" nations actually didn't practice communism at all, they practiced Stalinism, which is a form of state capitalism.

but how do you think the future should be shaped?

Link

The first working mason guilds were not from Germany! Have you forgotton what an egyption pyramid looks like?

Originally posted by czqjtohypmdu
There was also a strong Masonic tradition in the 19th century Prussian Lodge, which was a nationalistic one. It would have been political suicide for Adolf Hitler to oppose all Freemasonry.

Yet he did, and did so openly and utterly.

His objections were toward the humanistic Masonic lodges that allowed Jews to join, and to eventually infiltrate its ranks.

Jews have been admitted to Freemasonry since 1724. This is why the religious requirement was changed from belief in the "Most Holy Trinity" to belief in a Supreme Being.

Hermann Goering once considered joining, but had cold feet.

Link

Helena Blavatsky was named an honorary Freemason even though she was a woman.

Blavatsky was a member of an irregular lodge that admitted both men and women. She was not recognized as anything by orthodox Freemasonry.

Albert Pike is said to have been a member of the Theosophical Society.

Pike was a vocal critic of the Theosophical Society, and in his book "Esoterika" described Blavatsky as a fraud.

Foster Bailey is known to have been both a 32 Mason and a member of the Theosophical Society at the turn of the 20th century, when the Prussian Lodge was still in operation.

Prussian Lodges are still in operation today. That has nothing to do with the Theosophical Society or Foster Bailey, who was a member of a Lodge in New York.

Originally posted by subtopia
The first working mason guilds were not from Germany! Have you forgotton what an egyption pyramid looks like?

Nor have I forgotten what the pyramids at Chichen Itza look like.