DID THE jews FINANCE HITLER? (Start at 6:10)
(www.bitchute.com)
Comments (14)
sorted by:
The video maker says Sutton's book is unreliable as it relies mostly on the book by the pseudo author Sydney Warburg and that Henry Ashby Turner Jr. book: "German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler" is a far more reliable source.
My actual take on this is that Hitler was propped up before the war and he had some relations with English royalty. But he didn't realize that they were going to turn on him, hence he let them go in Dunkirk thinking that he could actually make peace with them.
Our enemies are quite flexible and will support every side to achieve whatever their goals are. And they will change and adapt their plans.
In short, he was not that complete puppet people imagine him to be, instead he was deceived just like Saddam was and if I may add that had things gone differently he could have truly defeated the jews and changed the world for the better, but he had a conflicting (moral/immoral) philosophical base which persists to this day with true white supremacists and was the cause of his downfall.
Saddam was propped up by the English and had relations with them (Jordan, Qatar and Oman are English colonies to this day).
The English told Saddam that it will be okay to invade Kuwait, he didn't understand that they were setting him up to completely destroy Iraq. He only realized it after the Americans occupied Kuwait.
Similarly, Hitler only started to realize that he had been set-up at the end of 1941
It's complicated and I don't want to type too much while probably no one will read but feel free to ask anything.
Pkease give us relevant reading material that expose this point of view. Funding of the third reich
Hitler. Hero of every dumb drugged up suburban couch potato.
British agent.
http://library.lol/main/9B9B8C52CBE79D66A3F97C98836846ED
From page 63 of the "reference" which you are using as a basis to diss out everything I've written in this post:
According to your credible source: "In Hitler's case, he was sodomized, creating a submissive distant respect for homosexuals like his bodyguards and some of his highest-placed leaders. His natural bent was developed into coprophilia (being shat on).."
If you don't see this "book" for what it is, I do not know what to say.
Hitler and the gang were gay. So what else is new.
The only I know of specifically about funding would be "German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler" by Henry Ashby Turner Jr.
But my point of view is that the zionists jews may have indeed allowed some funding to go through German big business but that it's more complicated than just initial funding and one shouldn't completely throw away what the Germans did in WW2 because of it.
After Hitler took power he had to make creative transactions without money to make things work, another book which glances on this is: Derrota Mundial by Salvador Borrego (It's only in Spanish though) But I think this is basic knowledge. He made deals without money with many countries such as Mexico.
But please consider this which are also facts: There are two types of jews, ones who wanted to assimilate or even control the world without making a national jewish state (those were against Hitler from the beginning hence the boycott in 1933).
And there are the zionists jews who wanted a homeland and to control the world from Palestine (what they later named as so called: israel and which in a way now does control the world).
The zionists jews won, most jews who did go to the camps, who were not that many if I may add, where from the good ethical jews who did not support the zionists jews.
I think the zionists jews also made agreements with Hitler that if he let the rich zionists jews out of Germany they would let him be which they DID! Until they they got out everything out of him then they turned on him.
Lastly, the problem with Nazi ideology is that in a way it is no different than zionisms, or perhaps they tried to emulate it. That's why many Nazi officials respected zionists jews more than non zionists although some of the non zionists jews were more humane and ethical.
a) what if those others represent the temptation for you to want vs not want to write for them?
b) what if this conflict of reason (want vs not want) tempts you to ignore the growth of self discernment as being choice within balance (need/want)?
c) do you need to write about perceivable reality as a suggestion (fiction) for others? Does nature write to those within? Does nature make suggestions?
d) what if your hesitation to express is being self restricted by your want for outcome (validation by readers to your writing)?
e) what if you could resist the temptation of wanting or not wanting to suggest (write) for others, by adapting to perceivable inspiration, which in return would grow your comprehension about the perceivable exponentially...without suggested financing by others (aka their validation).
f) what if utilizing implication (if/then) instead of reasoning (wanting vs not wanting) represents expression instead of repression aka balance instead of imbalance.
Without reason, can there be a conflict of interest within implication?
g) his-story vs alternative his-story, still represents ones consent to the suggested his-story by others. Consent to either side of the suggested, gives those suggesting, the power to define; redefine and contradict both sides of the conflict.
You need to choose to step out of the conflict (reason) instead of trying to fortify your position in a conflict already lost by tempting others as fodder to the front-line. A physical conflict like Verdun (meat-grinder) represents the mental conflict of reason (wanting vs not wanting suggested), while the suggesting few are watching the consenting many willingly grinding against each other until exhaustion.
Is the Pope Catholic?
Does McDonalds serve fries?
No. Only sort of.
Regardless what conclusions you come to, if there is any take from this, is that perhaps even if he had relations, it were not the simple infiltrated agent type nor a pathetic puppet one. At the very least, by the end of 1941 Hitler seems to have realized what blunder he got into and I believe he had good intentions but a mistaken ideology.
The date of Hitler meeting the Palestinian Mufti in November of 1941 is to me an important turning point, but by then one could say the Germans had lost the war and fallen into the trap.
jews were all for Germany because they fought Russia. As soon as the bolshevik jews took over Russia that flipped. Instead of Russia being the devil then it was Germany and we're right back to how it was before.
a) perceivable inspiration represents that which comes in towards each perceiving reaction, while each suggested information represents ones ignorance of perceivable.
b) RE (response to) VENIO (coming in)...not to what others suggest is already here (money)
Exponential growth (like in Germany) represents a possibility within reality, yet growing in response to suggested fiction (information) implies in ignorance of perceivable reality (inspiration). The consequences of ignorance represent self destruction, which the few direct the many at through suggestion.
Living within the process of dying implies being temporary resistance within ongoing temptation. Whatever ones builds in response to the suggestions of others, represents spend resistance (living) now lacking within temptation (dying). This in return allows others to utilize what you build as further suggestible information to tempt you to destroy yourself for.
The Germany the few tempted the many to build, represented the temptation for the consenting Germans to die for...instead of sustaining oneself; they collectively consented to die for the suggestions of others aka following (consent) a leader/Führer (suggestion).
Following (suggestion) represents the inversion of being perceiving resistance (living) within perceivable temptation (dying). Life doesn't need to follow anything; it represents the resistance within everything, hence balancing within origin until predefined outcome...back to base.