ENDLESS BROWN SUPPORT FOR NSHE
Just like how one of their admins that does propaganda is a hispanic shitskin, the same can be applied for the people who are friends with its promoters.
Link
Just like how one of their admins that does propaganda is a hispanic shitskin, the same can be applied for the people who are friends with its promoters.
Link
🏆17
Any Official writings published by the NSDAP that contradicts christian dogma is always automatically dismissed as some "random pagan" insignificant member of the party. Funny how that works being that they cite Der Schulungsbrief too? Unfortunately for them they are wrong.
If we look at the original post they are referring to regarding the NSDAP Schulungsbrief 1942 „Das Reich und Europa siegen“ (Reichsorganisationsleiter der NSDAP), only scrolling back a couple pages shows that Head of the German labor front Robert Ley was the one that wrote it. Thanks for admitting that such a significant member of the NSDAP was not christian.
What this proves is that they don't care to look into what disagrees with them as this would only take a few seconds of investigation to see the article author.
[Look for yourself]
If we look at the original post they are referring to regarding the NSDAP Schulungsbrief 1942 „Das Reich und Europa siegen“ (Reichsorganisationsleiter der NSDAP), only scrolling back a couple pages shows that Head of the German labor front Robert Ley was the one that wrote it. Thanks for admitting that such a significant member of the NSDAP was not christian.
What this proves is that they don't care to look into what disagrees with them as this would only take a few seconds of investigation to see the article author.
[Look for yourself]
🏆19
What does our opposition do when they see a quote so strangely contradictory to their views? Simply call it fabricated.
According to him, the article "Volkskampf gegen die internationale Verbrecherpresse! Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung!" written by Adolf Hitler in a special edition of the Völkischer Beobachter (144a) apparently "does not match" and appears "entirely fabricated" even though there's not only full transcription of the article, but that the article (144a) was specifically mentioned by the official NSDAP published book "Geschichte des "Völkischen Beobachters" und des Zentralverlages der NSDAP., Franz Eher Nachf" on the history of the Völkischer Beobachter. It reads:
"Issue 144a is a special edition against the Jewish-Marxist press scum. Its first page contains an essay by Adolf Hitler, "Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung" as well as further contributions by Alfred Rosenberg, Hans-Jörg Maurer, and Georg Jung. The issue also includes an excerpt from the NSDAP program."
As noted in the book, it makes clear reference that it was published after August. So they are wrong on the dates and the existence of the article.
[Link to the tweet]
According to him, the article "Volkskampf gegen die internationale Verbrecherpresse! Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung!" written by Adolf Hitler in a special edition of the Völkischer Beobachter (144a) apparently "does not match" and appears "entirely fabricated" even though there's not only full transcription of the article, but that the article (144a) was specifically mentioned by the official NSDAP published book "Geschichte des "Völkischen Beobachters" und des Zentralverlages der NSDAP., Franz Eher Nachf" on the history of the Völkischer Beobachter. It reads:
"Issue 144a is a special edition against the Jewish-Marxist press scum. Its first page contains an essay by Adolf Hitler, "Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung" as well as further contributions by Alfred Rosenberg, Hans-Jörg Maurer, and Georg Jung. The issue also includes an excerpt from the NSDAP program."
As noted in the book, it makes clear reference that it was published after August. So they are wrong on the dates and the existence of the article.
[Link to the tweet]
🏆14
Unmasking "NS Heathenry Exposed"
What does our opposition do when they see a quote so strangely contradictory to their views? Simply call it fabricated. According to him, the article "Volkskampf gegen die internationale Verbrecherpresse! Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung!" written…
Geschichte_des_Völkischen_Beobachters_u.pdf
4.6 MB
The owner of NS_Heathenry_Exposed was so baffled by Hitler's speech regarding the catholic church that he immediately brushed it off as being a source-less piece despite being able to hear the original audio for himself.
Though of course, we will entertain this idea of a speech ONLY needing a textual citation since the source is so easy to find. From the official NSDAP newspaper "Völkischer Beobachter" on April 27, 1942, we are able to see the full transcription of the speech:
"Denn Europa ist zerfallen teils aus der natürlichen Uberalterung der nach dem Zusammenbruch des römischen Weltreiches führenden kontinentalen Macht, teils infolge der Unterspülung der Elemente, die diesem damaligen Zentrum des Abendlandes die volkliche und staatliche Grundlage gegeben hatten. Im Zwiespalt der antiken römischen Staatsidee einerseits und der nicht minder imperiale Ansprüche erhebenden römischen Kirche anderseits wurden die Fundamente der zentralen Staatsbildung Europas allmählich zerstört."
His appeal to the book "Adolf Hitler: Collection of Speeches" by Max Domarus shows how historically illiterate he is as he does not know that every single speech Hitler has ever gave cannot possibly be in a single book due to the fact that Hitler gave so many speeches. (including massive errors found in various parts of the book) Hence why we are able to find speeches in the bundesarchiv that are not present in his book. The original source will always be better.
Other sources for Hitler's speeches exist too.
Source: Völkischer Beobachter, 27. April 1942 "Die Rede des Führers" p.1
[Link to the tweet]
Though of course, we will entertain this idea of a speech ONLY needing a textual citation since the source is so easy to find. From the official NSDAP newspaper "Völkischer Beobachter" on April 27, 1942, we are able to see the full transcription of the speech:
"Denn Europa ist zerfallen teils aus der natürlichen Uberalterung der nach dem Zusammenbruch des römischen Weltreiches führenden kontinentalen Macht, teils infolge der Unterspülung der Elemente, die diesem damaligen Zentrum des Abendlandes die volkliche und staatliche Grundlage gegeben hatten. Im Zwiespalt der antiken römischen Staatsidee einerseits und der nicht minder imperiale Ansprüche erhebenden römischen Kirche anderseits wurden die Fundamente der zentralen Staatsbildung Europas allmählich zerstört."
His appeal to the book "Adolf Hitler: Collection of Speeches" by Max Domarus shows how historically illiterate he is as he does not know that every single speech Hitler has ever gave cannot possibly be in a single book due to the fact that Hitler gave so many speeches. (including massive errors found in various parts of the book) Hence why we are able to find speeches in the bundesarchiv that are not present in his book. The original source will always be better.
Other sources for Hitler's speeches exist too.
Source: Völkischer Beobachter, 27. April 1942 "Die Rede des Führers" p.1
[Link to the tweet]
🏆16
The illiteracy surrounding Mein Kampf from the owner of NS_Heathenry_Exposed is concerning
Ｐａｒｔ （１／２）
His standard for proving that things were somehow changed/removed/added into the Dalton translation is not based upon using the original German for which he was pressed to do, but based on another English translation. This is like seeing which Bible verse is more reliable based on comparing different translations rather than using the original text. It's simply retarded.
After one user showed the full original German of the passage about Christianity in Mein Kampf along with another user pressing him to do a comparison with the original German, he simply ignored it and still went on about using the Stalag translation for the basis of his claims. That is because when comparing the original German to what Dalton's modern translation, there isn't anything wrong with it in the first place.
Onto the issues with the Stalag edition, it originated from the James Murphy translation to which an unknown NSDAP member used Murphy's first draft of the translations upon he was at first denied access to after leaving Germany. Months later he made new translations based off of new revisions of his lost original manuscript which lead to the actual publication of the James Murphy translation (Hurst and Blackett).
"The solution to this mystery becomes relatively apparent when one becomes aware that in 1936, when Murphy was working in Berlin for the Nazi Propaganda Ministry, Goebbels commissioned him to produce an English language translation of the full text of Mein Kampf, a task he completed before leaving Germany in 1938. Once Murphy returned to England and Hurst & Blackett learned of his translation they expressed an interest in it, but Murphy had not even kept a copy of his text. It had been left in a locked file at the Ministry in Berlin, and since he was by then persona non grata with the Nazis, Murphy was denied access to it. At great risk, his wife returned alone to Berlin to try to persuade party officials to release it, but she failed. Nevertheless, she persisted and eventually was able to locate his former typist who relinquished to her the handwritten draft. During the next three months Murphy revised his original version and the resulting text was printed by Hurst & Blackett in March 1939. Why the Nazis decided to reprint Murphy's draft version is far from clear. They could not hope to distribute it in the major English-language markets, since British and American publishers claimed the right to do so under contract with the Zentralverlag. Although the Germans momentarily contemplated challenging such claims in foreign courts, they thought better of it, and allowed these English-language translations to persist. Yet in Germany there was no demand for another English version, such as that produced by the Zentralverlag."
[Link to the tweet]
Ｐａｒｔ （１／２）
His standard for proving that things were somehow changed/removed/added into the Dalton translation is not based upon using the original German for which he was pressed to do, but based on another English translation. This is like seeing which Bible verse is more reliable based on comparing different translations rather than using the original text. It's simply retarded.
After one user showed the full original German of the passage about Christianity in Mein Kampf along with another user pressing him to do a comparison with the original German, he simply ignored it and still went on about using the Stalag translation for the basis of his claims. That is because when comparing the original German to what Dalton's modern translation, there isn't anything wrong with it in the first place.
Onto the issues with the Stalag edition, it originated from the James Murphy translation to which an unknown NSDAP member used Murphy's first draft of the translations upon he was at first denied access to after leaving Germany. Months later he made new translations based off of new revisions of his lost original manuscript which lead to the actual publication of the James Murphy translation (Hurst and Blackett).
"The solution to this mystery becomes relatively apparent when one becomes aware that in 1936, when Murphy was working in Berlin for the Nazi Propaganda Ministry, Goebbels commissioned him to produce an English language translation of the full text of Mein Kampf, a task he completed before leaving Germany in 1938. Once Murphy returned to England and Hurst & Blackett learned of his translation they expressed an interest in it, but Murphy had not even kept a copy of his text. It had been left in a locked file at the Ministry in Berlin, and since he was by then persona non grata with the Nazis, Murphy was denied access to it. At great risk, his wife returned alone to Berlin to try to persuade party officials to release it, but she failed. Nevertheless, she persisted and eventually was able to locate his former typist who relinquished to her the handwritten draft. During the next three months Murphy revised his original version and the resulting text was printed by Hurst & Blackett in March 1939. Why the Nazis decided to reprint Murphy's draft version is far from clear. They could not hope to distribute it in the major English-language markets, since British and American publishers claimed the right to do so under contract with the Zentralverlag. Although the Germans momentarily contemplated challenging such claims in foreign courts, they thought better of it, and allowed these English-language translations to persist. Yet in Germany there was no demand for another English version, such as that produced by the Zentralverlag."
[Link to the tweet]
🏆12
Unmasking "NS Heathenry Exposed"
The illiteracy surrounding Mein Kampf from the owner of NS_Heathenry_Exposed is concerning
Ｐａｒｔ （１／２）
Ｐａｒｔ （１／２）
The illiteracy surrounding Mein Kampf from the owner of NS_Heathenry_Exposed is concerning
Ｐａｒｔ （２／２）
As for the translation itself (see image), its noted again that:
"A closer analysis, based on a larger sample of text, revealed the translation to be that of James Murphy for Hurst & Blackett. At times it proved to be identical, raising the further question as to why the apparent plagiarists made any changes at all, since it would have been simpler to reprint Murphy's text verbatim. More understandable, perhaps, was the use of a different table of contents and index and the omission of Murphy's introduction, but then why change the chapter titles? Why entitle the opening chapter "My Home," while Murphy called it "In the Home of My Parents"? Similarly, chapter 2 was changed from "Years of Study and Suffering in Vienna" to "Learning and Suffering in Vienna," and chapter 3 became "Vienna Days-General Reflections," from "Political Reflections Arising out of my Sojourn in Vienna," while chapters 4-9 retained identical titles. Perusal of the text revealed that ninety percent of it was identical to the Hurst & Blackett version, but some parts had significant variations. [...] The fact that the sections that are similar do not merely resemble one another but are duplicates leaves little doubt that the Zentralverlag must have had access to Murphy's translation."
So not only is the Stalag based off of an already inconsistent translation, but the slight changes made to it does not help it. Thus the "Stalag" edition is not the work of the NSDAP's homemade translation. So it must not be used an infallible translation of Mein Kampf. Thomas Dalton notes that:
"As it happens, every one of the previous translations has major problems and disadvantages, for a modern English reader. The two primary versions—Murphy and Manheim—are written in the style of early-20th-century British writers. They use a wide array of archaic ‘British-isms’ and British spellings that make reading awkward, particularly for Americans in the present day. Worse, they attempt to follow too closely Hitler’s original style. Like most Germans of the time, Hitler wrote long sentences, fashioned into long, complex paragraphs. Manheim follows this style scrupulously, to the detriment of the reader; Murphy at least occasionally breaks up long sentences into more readable segments. Worst of all, both major translations are simply poor efforts. They do not read well. One repeatedly encounters passages that are awkward, incoherent, or incomprehensible. There is little of the fluidity and lyrical power of the German original. For his part, Murphy takes a considerable amount of ‘translator’s license,’ interjecting unwarranted terminology and wording, or simply leaving things out. Manheim is more literal, but in the end is scarcely more readable. The reader simply needs to scan a sampling of either text to understand the situation."
The Thomas Dalton translation relies directly on the original German of Mein Kampf, whereas the formation of what we know as the "Stalag" was not. Though this is of course not out of deceptiveness, but for consumption. The Stalag edition was used for the Stalag concentration camp in Germany. (see the Ostara Publications forward)
Source:
[1] “An English Translation of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ Printed in Germany, ca. 1940.” The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, vol. 80, no. 3, 1986, pp. 374–77.
[2] Rethinking “Mein Kampf” By Thomas Dalton ∙ February 18, 2016
[3] Mein Kampf: The Stalag Edition: The Only Complete and Officially Authorised English Translation Ever Issued (Ostara Publications)
Ｐａｒｔ （２／２）
As for the translation itself (see image), its noted again that:
"A closer analysis, based on a larger sample of text, revealed the translation to be that of James Murphy for Hurst & Blackett. At times it proved to be identical, raising the further question as to why the apparent plagiarists made any changes at all, since it would have been simpler to reprint Murphy's text verbatim. More understandable, perhaps, was the use of a different table of contents and index and the omission of Murphy's introduction, but then why change the chapter titles? Why entitle the opening chapter "My Home," while Murphy called it "In the Home of My Parents"? Similarly, chapter 2 was changed from "Years of Study and Suffering in Vienna" to "Learning and Suffering in Vienna," and chapter 3 became "Vienna Days-General Reflections," from "Political Reflections Arising out of my Sojourn in Vienna," while chapters 4-9 retained identical titles. Perusal of the text revealed that ninety percent of it was identical to the Hurst & Blackett version, but some parts had significant variations. [...] The fact that the sections that are similar do not merely resemble one another but are duplicates leaves little doubt that the Zentralverlag must have had access to Murphy's translation."
So not only is the Stalag based off of an already inconsistent translation, but the slight changes made to it does not help it. Thus the "Stalag" edition is not the work of the NSDAP's homemade translation. So it must not be used an infallible translation of Mein Kampf. Thomas Dalton notes that:
"As it happens, every one of the previous translations has major problems and disadvantages, for a modern English reader. The two primary versions—Murphy and Manheim—are written in the style of early-20th-century British writers. They use a wide array of archaic ‘British-isms’ and British spellings that make reading awkward, particularly for Americans in the present day. Worse, they attempt to follow too closely Hitler’s original style. Like most Germans of the time, Hitler wrote long sentences, fashioned into long, complex paragraphs. Manheim follows this style scrupulously, to the detriment of the reader; Murphy at least occasionally breaks up long sentences into more readable segments. Worst of all, both major translations are simply poor efforts. They do not read well. One repeatedly encounters passages that are awkward, incoherent, or incomprehensible. There is little of the fluidity and lyrical power of the German original. For his part, Murphy takes a considerable amount of ‘translator’s license,’ interjecting unwarranted terminology and wording, or simply leaving things out. Manheim is more literal, but in the end is scarcely more readable. The reader simply needs to scan a sampling of either text to understand the situation."
The Thomas Dalton translation relies directly on the original German of Mein Kampf, whereas the formation of what we know as the "Stalag" was not. Though this is of course not out of deceptiveness, but for consumption. The Stalag edition was used for the Stalag concentration camp in Germany. (see the Ostara Publications forward)
Source:
[1] “An English Translation of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ Printed in Germany, ca. 1940.” The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, vol. 80, no. 3, 1986, pp. 374–77.
[2] Rethinking “Mein Kampf” By Thomas Dalton ∙ February 18, 2016
[3] Mein Kampf: The Stalag Edition: The Only Complete and Officially Authorised English Translation Ever Issued (Ostara Publications)
🏆10
Forwarded from Heydrich PFP Guy
On June 9th of 1944, Hans Frank the head of the German government in German-occupied Poland wrote in his diary that
“in order to fight the Jews it was essential that we (Germany) took Poland because here in Poland the natural fertility of the Jewish people lived (thrived) to a degree found nowhere else. Since the extermination of the Jews in Poland, the Jewish future is completely over, purely in terms of blood, because it was only here where Jews were having (many) children.”
“in order to fight the Jews it was essential that we (Germany) took Poland because here in Poland the natural fertility of the Jewish people lived (thrived) to a degree found nowhere else. Since the extermination of the Jews in Poland, the Jewish future is completely over, purely in terms of blood, because it was only here where Jews were having (many) children.”
Forwarded from Heydrich PFP Guy
Unmasking "NS Heathenry Exposed"
the extermination of the Jews in Poland
according to the same diary you quoted, he says that the Holocaust really happened
Forwarded from ᛉ Dominik ᛣ
Unmasking "NS Heathenry Exposed"
On June 9th of 1944, Hans Frank the head of the German government in German-occupied Poland wrote in his diary that “in order to fight the Jews it was essential that we (Germany) took Poland because here in Poland the natural fertility of the Jewish people…
Again ausrottung meant something completely different at that time than it does today
Forwarded from Heydrich PFP Guy
ᛉ Dominik ᛣ
Again ausrottung meant something completely different at that time than it does today
For anyone questioning the meaning of “auszurotten", here’s a 1943 German Foreign Office document in which “auszurotten" (the verbal-noun form: “Ausrottung”) is used to translate the term "annihilate" in an English statement made by the American rabbi Stephen Samuel Wise into German. This showcases that the term was used in this precise way by the regime in this period.
The Admin of NS_Heathenry_Exposed uses holocaust believer arguments to deny real authentic documents
In attempts to disregard historical documents such as Hans Frank's diary (relating to religion), he pulls up a quote from his diary in which is says "Seit der Ausrottung der Juden in Polen"
Now, you would expect that the admin "Heydrich PFP Guy" is writing down his own original thoughts on this matter? Answer: No. Not only does he shamelessly copy and paste word for word what this holocaust believer wrote on his substack, but he doesn't seem to fully understand its arguments. |Ausrottung, from aus+rotten, lit. ‘to root out.’ Notably, people (like animals, plants, etc.) can be “rooted out” without killing them; they are simply picked up and displaced. |By the implications of this argument, that means according to him we should believe in the legitimacy of the Holocaust.
Heydrich PFP Guy's argument completely falls apart when we look at Adolf Hitler using the word "Ausrottung" in a 1944 speech in relation to all of Jewry:
"Daß das jüdische Ziel der Vernichtung Europas am Ende die sichere Ausrottung des Judentums in Europa bringen wird, ist daber außer jedem Zweifel, und daß der Versuch der Engländer und Amerikaner, Europa und Deutschland durch den Bolschewismus zu vernichten und das deutsche Volk durch die moskowitischen Würger zu züchtigen, d. h. ausrotten zu lassen, nur das Gegenteil erreicht, d. b. die Bolschewisierung der angelsächsischen Welt selbst, ist ebenso sicher."
In accordance to Heydrich PFP Guy's argument on the word "Ausrottung", that must mean that Adolf Hitler proved the holocaust to be true because he himself proclaimed the "Ausrottung des Judentums". It simply makes no sense. No one should take this guy seriously.
Source: BArch NS 22/1240 Der Führer am 1. Januar 1944 p.26 | Official transcription of the speech can also be found in the "Völkischer Beobachter" 1/2. Januar 1944 Seite 2
In attempts to disregard historical documents such as Hans Frank's diary (relating to religion), he pulls up a quote from his diary in which is says "Seit der Ausrottung der Juden in Polen"
Now, you would expect that the admin "Heydrich PFP Guy" is writing down his own original thoughts on this matter? Answer: No. Not only does he shamelessly copy and paste word for word what this holocaust believer wrote on his substack, but he doesn't seem to fully understand its arguments. |Ausrottung, from aus+rotten, lit. ‘to root out.’ Notably, people (like animals, plants, etc.) can be “rooted out” without killing them; they are simply picked up and displaced. |By the implications of this argument, that means according to him we should believe in the legitimacy of the Holocaust.
Heydrich PFP Guy's argument completely falls apart when we look at Adolf Hitler using the word "Ausrottung" in a 1944 speech in relation to all of Jewry:
"Daß das jüdische Ziel der Vernichtung Europas am Ende die sichere Ausrottung des Judentums in Europa bringen wird, ist daber außer jedem Zweifel, und daß der Versuch der Engländer und Amerikaner, Europa und Deutschland durch den Bolschewismus zu vernichten und das deutsche Volk durch die moskowitischen Würger zu züchtigen, d. h. ausrotten zu lassen, nur das Gegenteil erreicht, d. b. die Bolschewisierung der angelsächsischen Welt selbst, ist ebenso sicher."
In accordance to Heydrich PFP Guy's argument on the word "Ausrottung", that must mean that Adolf Hitler proved the holocaust to be true because he himself proclaimed the "Ausrottung des Judentums". It simply makes no sense. No one should take this guy seriously.
Source: BArch NS 22/1240 Der Führer am 1. Januar 1944 p.26 | Official transcription of the speech can also be found in the "Völkischer Beobachter" 1/2. Januar 1944 Seite 2
🏆15
NS_Heathenry_Exposed removing context to manipulate the meaning of Hitler's words
When NSHE was confronted on the idea that "the NSDAP recognized that Jews and Israelites were two opposite peoples", he was shown Hitler's 1920 speech in which Hitler said Abraham pimped his wife and Jews after Abraham’s time have followed his immoral example,
Instead of actually responding to that quote where Hitler is clearly denouncing Abraham, NSHE sends another excerpt of the same speech to which his meaning isn't found in the text. He only shows one half of it where at the end says in NSHE's own interpretation that the conflicts between the "Jews of the tribe of Judah (and Caleb)" were immense. So what comes after that, you may ask?
"first of all, at that time the gulf between the jews of the tribes of judah and calab and the northern israelite tribes was still unprecedented, and it was only david who managed to bridge this gulf and gradually create a connection through the unified cult of the god yahweh. we know very well that this cult [of jews] only chose jerusalem as its sole seat very late, and that it was only from that moment on that the jewish people were given a headquarters, but just as today, for example, berlin or new york or warsaw, etc"
[Source]
So after the conflict between these Jewish/Israelite tribes, it was solved by using the cult of the God Yahweh to break that conflict. Even in this same source Hitler is calling the tribe of Judah jewish. How can you be this stupid as to quote that while saying the NSDAP believed the Jews/Israelites are opposites?
In this same exact speech, NSHE intentionally ignores all of the sections where Hitler says:
1.) The Bible was written by Jews + was not written by an Anti-Semite
2.) The Jews were the greatest propagators of Christianity to promote it against the Roman empire
Other sources on Hitler's thoughts on the Israelites/Yahweh: HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE
NSDAP Literature on the Old Testament: Der Schulungsbrief 1937 #03, Der Schulungsbrief 1935 #12, Der Schulungsbrief 1936 #11, Völkischer Beobachter, June 8, 1944
When NSHE was confronted on the idea that "the NSDAP recognized that Jews and Israelites were two opposite peoples", he was shown Hitler's 1920 speech in which Hitler said Abraham pimped his wife and Jews after Abraham’s time have followed his immoral example,
Instead of actually responding to that quote where Hitler is clearly denouncing Abraham, NSHE sends another excerpt of the same speech to which his meaning isn't found in the text. He only shows one half of it where at the end says in NSHE's own interpretation that the conflicts between the "Jews of the tribe of Judah (and Caleb)" were immense. So what comes after that, you may ask?
"first of all, at that time the gulf between the jews of the tribes of judah and calab and the northern israelite tribes was still unprecedented, and it was only david who managed to bridge this gulf and gradually create a connection through the unified cult of the god yahweh. we know very well that this cult [of jews] only chose jerusalem as its sole seat very late, and that it was only from that moment on that the jewish people were given a headquarters, but just as today, for example, berlin or new york or warsaw, etc"
[Source]
So after the conflict between these Jewish/Israelite tribes, it was solved by using the cult of the God Yahweh to break that conflict. Even in this same source Hitler is calling the tribe of Judah jewish. How can you be this stupid as to quote that while saying the NSDAP believed the Jews/Israelites are opposites?
In this same exact speech, NSHE intentionally ignores all of the sections where Hitler says:
1.) The Bible was written by Jews + was not written by an Anti-Semite
2.) The Jews were the greatest propagators of Christianity to promote it against the Roman empire
Other sources on Hitler's thoughts on the Israelites/Yahweh: HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE
NSDAP Literature on the Old Testament: Der Schulungsbrief 1937 #03, Der Schulungsbrief 1935 #12, Der Schulungsbrief 1936 #11, Völkischer Beobachter, June 8, 1944
🏆18
NS_Heathenry_Exposed changes up his incoherent translation of Hitler's speech in Platterhof
First, NSHE publishes a meme to which they portray Hitler to say "I do not defend an anti-christian principle." as a complete sentence when it is in fact a context bound clause. The context and words of this matters as it shows how incoherent this translation is. As NSHeathenry already addressed, this statement does not say "I do not" but rather "This is not" (Das ist kein). So Hitler is describing the nature of the principle in itself rather than expressing a direct personal denial. The word used in the original transcript says "unchristlicher".
Now why is this relevant? The entire context surrounding this quote explains it:
"I have therefore introduced this principle [of intolerance] into German political life—not a new one, for communism had long since possessed this insight. BUT CHRISTIANITY ALSO POSSESSED THIS INSIGHT. I must point out to you, gentlemen: This is not an UNCHRISTIAN principle that I advocate. Christianity has destroyed others who did not want to think as prescribed, only not as easily and quickly as we do, but more slowly. We do it with a bullet, and there they did it with fire, they burned them."
Now all of a sudden, NSHE publishes a new translation (see image) to which it says "This is not an anti-Christian principle that I support". The meaning of "This is" and "I do not" changes the central context massively. Unchristian ≠ Anti-christian
Here is why NSHE's translation is incoherent: It shows that Hitler is saying that his introduction of intolerance is nothing new, saying both communism and christianity had this same insight/understanding. Because of this fact that christianity is "intolerant", it is therefore NOT ("ist kein") an UNCHRISTIAN ("unchristlicher") principle. The entire context of the passage is incoherent to their first translation that they push.
Therefore this quote is not at all a pro-christian quote. It's simply a historical example used for justification to be intolerant towards enemies of the war and rightly so.
In this same exact speech, Hitler says: Tolerance is a human concept, During WW1 he carried Schopenhauer's books instead of the Bible
SEE: Hitler affirming Christianity's intolerance embodied the Jewish mentality in Mein Kampf
First, NSHE publishes a meme to which they portray Hitler to say "I do not defend an anti-christian principle." as a complete sentence when it is in fact a context bound clause. The context and words of this matters as it shows how incoherent this translation is. As NSHeathenry already addressed, this statement does not say "I do not" but rather "This is not" (Das ist kein). So Hitler is describing the nature of the principle in itself rather than expressing a direct personal denial. The word used in the original transcript says "unchristlicher".
Now why is this relevant? The entire context surrounding this quote explains it:
"I have therefore introduced this principle [of intolerance] into German political life—not a new one, for communism had long since possessed this insight. BUT CHRISTIANITY ALSO POSSESSED THIS INSIGHT. I must point out to you, gentlemen: This is not an UNCHRISTIAN principle that I advocate. Christianity has destroyed others who did not want to think as prescribed, only not as easily and quickly as we do, but more slowly. We do it with a bullet, and there they did it with fire, they burned them."
Now all of a sudden, NSHE publishes a new translation (see image) to which it says "This is not an anti-Christian principle that I support". The meaning of "This is" and "I do not" changes the central context massively. Unchristian ≠ Anti-christian
Here is why NSHE's translation is incoherent: It shows that Hitler is saying that his introduction of intolerance is nothing new, saying both communism and christianity had this same insight/understanding. Because of this fact that christianity is "intolerant", it is therefore NOT ("ist kein") an UNCHRISTIAN ("unchristlicher") principle. The entire context of the passage is incoherent to their first translation that they push.
Therefore this quote is not at all a pro-christian quote. It's simply a historical example used for justification to be intolerant towards enemies of the war and rightly so.
In this same exact speech, Hitler says: Tolerance is a human concept, During WW1 he carried Schopenhauer's books instead of the Bible
SEE: Hitler affirming Christianity's intolerance embodied the Jewish mentality in Mein Kampf
🏆14
𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐄𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐍𝐑𝐘 𝐄𝐗𝐏𝐎𝐒𝐄𝐃 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐂𝐄𝐃𝐄𝐒 𝐎𝐍 𝐇𝐈𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐑'𝐒 𝐑𝐄𝐉𝐄𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐎𝐅 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐀𝐏𝐎𝐒𝐓𝐋𝐄 𝐏𝐀𝐔𝐋—
In yet another failed attempt to refute NS Heathenry, Heydrich, the owner of NSHE, has either intentionally or accidentally admitted that Hitler despised the father of institutional Christianity—Paul of Tarsus, the author of the 13 Epistles and missionary to the gentiles.
“Hitler repeatedly argued that Christ had opposed what he described as Jewish domination and was crucified for it, while PAUL LATER DISTORTED HIS TEACHINGS—just as Marx, in his view, had distorted the original communal idea behind Socialism.”
— NS Heathenry Exposed
Of course, rejecting the apostle Paul and the Old Testament as well as the immaculate conception of Christ isn't just heresy, it's the outright apostasy from God per Can. 751 § 1 of the Catholic Church. To add insult to injury, Hitler also believed Mary was a harlot who slept with a Roman legionnaire, likely tapping into the story peddled by Celsus.
"There were probably many descendants of Roman legionaries (Gauls) living in Galilee, and JESUS WAS ONE OF THEM. It is possible that his mother was Jewish."
— Adolf Hitler [Werner Jochmann Notes, p.354]
HITLER ON POST-CONSTANTINIAN CHRISTIANITY:
"Christianity was all-destroying Bolshevism. Yet ... Christ, wanted something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ... The decisive falsification of Jesus' teaching came through [Saint] Paul." [1]
"At that time and into the Middle Ages, the most terrible tortures, maltreatments and burnings in the name of Christianity, and today the same in the name of Bolshevism. SAUL BECAME [SAINT] PAUL AND MORDECAI BECAME KARL MARX." [2]
@Christmutt
In yet another failed attempt to refute NS Heathenry, Heydrich, the owner of NSHE, has either intentionally or accidentally admitted that Hitler despised the father of institutional Christianity—Paul of Tarsus, the author of the 13 Epistles and missionary to the gentiles.
“Hitler repeatedly argued that Christ had opposed what he described as Jewish domination and was crucified for it, while PAUL LATER DISTORTED HIS TEACHINGS—just as Marx, in his view, had distorted the original communal idea behind Socialism.”
— NS Heathenry Exposed
Of course, rejecting the apostle Paul and the Old Testament as well as the immaculate conception of Christ isn't just heresy, it's the outright apostasy from God per Can. 751 § 1 of the Catholic Church. To add insult to injury, Hitler also believed Mary was a harlot who slept with a Roman legionnaire, likely tapping into the story peddled by Celsus.
"There were probably many descendants of Roman legionaries (Gauls) living in Galilee, and JESUS WAS ONE OF THEM. It is possible that his mother was Jewish."
— Adolf Hitler [Werner Jochmann Notes, p.354]
HITLER ON POST-CONSTANTINIAN CHRISTIANITY:
"Christianity was all-destroying Bolshevism. Yet ... Christ, wanted something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ... The decisive falsification of Jesus' teaching came through [Saint] Paul." [1]
"At that time and into the Middle Ages, the most terrible tortures, maltreatments and burnings in the name of Christianity, and today the same in the name of Bolshevism. SAUL BECAME [SAINT] PAUL AND MORDECAI BECAME KARL MARX." [2]
@Christmutt
🏆9
REFUTATION FAILED
When "Hitler LOVED Christ" was confronted on the fact that he LIED that the 144a issue of the "Völkischer beobachter" is fabricated, he doubled down using Artificial intelligence as his only source to proudly claim it was not written by Hitler and the original does not mention him as the author.
Except when we look at the actual original, it says 'Volkskampf gegen die internationale Verbrecherpresse! Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung!" von Adolf Hitler'. It quite literally says its written BY ("von") Adolf Hitler.
On top of the fact that we have the original Völkischer beobachter article to see who wrote it, the NSDAP also affirmed that it was "an essay by Adolf Hitler". What type of cope is this?
[Refuting Hitler LOVED Christ on the idea that VB article 144a does not exist]
When "Hitler LOVED Christ" was confronted on the fact that he LIED that the 144a issue of the "Völkischer beobachter" is fabricated, he doubled down using Artificial intelligence as his only source to proudly claim it was not written by Hitler and the original does not mention him as the author.
Except when we look at the actual original, it says 'Volkskampf gegen die internationale Verbrecherpresse! Gegen die jüdische Weltpressevergiftung!" von Adolf Hitler'. It quite literally says its written BY ("von") Adolf Hitler.
On top of the fact that we have the original Völkischer beobachter article to see who wrote it, the NSDAP also affirmed that it was "an essay by Adolf Hitler". What type of cope is this?
[Refuting Hitler LOVED Christ on the idea that VB article 144a does not exist]
🏆12
NS_Heathenry_Exposed claims this passage was taken out of context when it was still in context
The first passage of the quote is a different context than the second passage within the paragraph. Anyone whos read it can see that. Talking about Christianity as a slogan against itself is not on topic with Hitler's distinction between Christ/Christianity
"we must declare ourselves as the only true Christians. But then with the full force of the party against the saboteurs. Christianity is the slogan for the destruction of the priests, just as socialism was once the slogan for the destruction of the Marxist bigwigs."
The extra lines of text on there is not listed is because its already been addressed. So if we take the sources into account, Hitler was anti-christian because he viewed Christianity as bolshevism to destroy the roman empire which had nothing to do with Christ as a figure. Which means this argument easily falls flat on itself.
Proof:
https://t.me/NSHeathenry/984
https://t.me/NSHeathenry/985
If we look at later entries of the original handwritten notes, we can see a much greater context explaining this line of thinking:
"The Führer passionately refuses to play the role of a religious founder. He does not want to become a Buddha later on. He is solely and exclusively a politician. The best way to deal with the churches is to present oneself as a more positive Christian. So, it is necessary, for the time being, to remain reserved on these matters and to ruthlessly suppress the churches wherever they become impudent and interfere in state affairs. And we will strive to ensure this to the best of our ability."
[Source]
We should not forget Goebbels also recording that Hitler was: Anti-Christian, Agreed with Nietzsche on Christianity, rejected the Christian doctrine of salvation, etc
The first passage of the quote is a different context than the second passage within the paragraph. Anyone whos read it can see that. Talking about Christianity as a slogan against itself is not on topic with Hitler's distinction between Christ/Christianity
"we must declare ourselves as the only true Christians. But then with the full force of the party against the saboteurs. Christianity is the slogan for the destruction of the priests, just as socialism was once the slogan for the destruction of the Marxist bigwigs."
The extra lines of text on there is not listed is because its already been addressed. So if we take the sources into account, Hitler was anti-christian because he viewed Christianity as bolshevism to destroy the roman empire which had nothing to do with Christ as a figure. Which means this argument easily falls flat on itself.
Proof:
https://t.me/NSHeathenry/984
https://t.me/NSHeathenry/985
If we look at later entries of the original handwritten notes, we can see a much greater context explaining this line of thinking:
"The Führer passionately refuses to play the role of a religious founder. He does not want to become a Buddha later on. He is solely and exclusively a politician. The best way to deal with the churches is to present oneself as a more positive Christian. So, it is necessary, for the time being, to remain reserved on these matters and to ruthlessly suppress the churches wherever they become impudent and interfere in state affairs. And we will strive to ensure this to the best of our ability."
[Source]
We should not forget Goebbels also recording that Hitler was: Anti-Christian, Agreed with Nietzsche on Christianity, rejected the Christian doctrine of salvation, etc
🏆17
𝐇𝐔𝐃𝐀𝐋 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐁𝐎𝐎𝐊 𝐖𝐀𝐒 𝐀 𝐅𝐀𝐈𝐋𝐔𝐑𝐄
NS_Heathenry_Exposed seems to enjoy posting from Alois Hudal's book even though its neither a concrete establishment of National Socialism and the fact that it was CENSORED. The end goal of his book was not merely for the sake of National Socialism, but for establishing Christianity itself and its attempts to make both ideas sync to his own reasoning. Hudal himself has written that National Socialism requires a Christian "injection" to avoid ultimately ending in unrestrained barbarity implying its principles in itself would become increasingly opposed to that of Christian ethics.
As expected, Hudal's book "The foundations of National Socialism" is not an authoritative source on NS as he at times contradicts its core principle. For example, Hudal writes:
"According to Christian worldview, unconditional superordination and primacy belong not to blood but to spirit. Where human will shows weaknesses and inhibitions, the deepest root lies, however much climate, landscape, and race may also play a part, in a spiritual sphere, in original sin and not in blood. THEREFORE RACE CAN NEVER ALONE AND IN ITSELF BE ELEVATED TO A MORAL CONCEPT OF VALUE, without our wishing to deny that the individual races distinguish themselves through certain dispositions peculiar only to them. [...] The task of science is to investigate to what extent climate, landscape, environment, and blood co-form and shape the intellectual-moral attitude of a nation. But whoever wishes to write a history of nations determined by blood and race is no less a materialist than the disciples of Marxism when they wish to explain the development of peoples only according to economic and class determined oppositions. [...] The importing of the racial into the essence of Christianity, however, leads with compelling necessity to the abandonment of the absolute, to becoming stuck in the natural, to the loss of all unconditional values, to the relativism of knowledge and morality."
According to Hudal's logic, Hitler would be "no less a materialist than the disciples of Marxism" as Hitler himself says that History instruction must lead to the original factors of race and that racial-mixing is the only true original sin of this world as it brings the end of nations. (Race > Religion). Hudal then writes:
"The dogmatic edifice of National Socialism rests upon two concepts: nation and race. From both foundations, which are closely interrelated, there emerge—as soon as they are thought through consistently—important practical demands of uncompromising clarity. The overemphasis on the concepts of race and hereditary substance harbors within itself the danger of a distancing from Christianity for the Germanic people, BECAUSE THIS RELIGION ORIGINATED FROM FOREIGN RACES AND CULTURAL SPHERES. On the hygienicsocial level, however, there appears as a consequence the elimination of the hereditarily diseased mass through marriage prohibitions and sterilization. If one does not give the concepts of nation and race a narrower interpretation, it is difficult to avoid these two conclusions. With complete clarity, therefore, the demand for sterilization appears throughout the entire leading National Socialist literature as a selfevident matter, for which the radical representatives would prefer not to admit any further justification or evaluation from the realm of morality."
National Socialism is a worldview based on biology. The implications of this means that its adherents ought to profess their allegiance to the laws of race and blood as is it race that gives us meaning and purpose to our existence. Without this underlying principle, it simply wouldn't be National Socialism.
Finally, we shall not forget that Hudal's thorough rejection of Alfred Rosenberg is in strike contradiction to Hitler's personal and private defense of him being the NSDAP's leading intellectual architects. Hudal ultimately came to the conclusion himself that a strong tie of Christianity and National Socialism together isn't realistic and broke away from that idea.
NS_Heathenry_Exposed seems to enjoy posting from Alois Hudal's book even though its neither a concrete establishment of National Socialism and the fact that it was CENSORED. The end goal of his book was not merely for the sake of National Socialism, but for establishing Christianity itself and its attempts to make both ideas sync to his own reasoning. Hudal himself has written that National Socialism requires a Christian "injection" to avoid ultimately ending in unrestrained barbarity implying its principles in itself would become increasingly opposed to that of Christian ethics.
As expected, Hudal's book "The foundations of National Socialism" is not an authoritative source on NS as he at times contradicts its core principle. For example, Hudal writes:
"According to Christian worldview, unconditional superordination and primacy belong not to blood but to spirit. Where human will shows weaknesses and inhibitions, the deepest root lies, however much climate, landscape, and race may also play a part, in a spiritual sphere, in original sin and not in blood. THEREFORE RACE CAN NEVER ALONE AND IN ITSELF BE ELEVATED TO A MORAL CONCEPT OF VALUE, without our wishing to deny that the individual races distinguish themselves through certain dispositions peculiar only to them. [...] The task of science is to investigate to what extent climate, landscape, environment, and blood co-form and shape the intellectual-moral attitude of a nation. But whoever wishes to write a history of nations determined by blood and race is no less a materialist than the disciples of Marxism when they wish to explain the development of peoples only according to economic and class determined oppositions. [...] The importing of the racial into the essence of Christianity, however, leads with compelling necessity to the abandonment of the absolute, to becoming stuck in the natural, to the loss of all unconditional values, to the relativism of knowledge and morality."
According to Hudal's logic, Hitler would be "no less a materialist than the disciples of Marxism" as Hitler himself says that History instruction must lead to the original factors of race and that racial-mixing is the only true original sin of this world as it brings the end of nations. (Race > Religion). Hudal then writes:
"The dogmatic edifice of National Socialism rests upon two concepts: nation and race. From both foundations, which are closely interrelated, there emerge—as soon as they are thought through consistently—important practical demands of uncompromising clarity. The overemphasis on the concepts of race and hereditary substance harbors within itself the danger of a distancing from Christianity for the Germanic people, BECAUSE THIS RELIGION ORIGINATED FROM FOREIGN RACES AND CULTURAL SPHERES. On the hygienicsocial level, however, there appears as a consequence the elimination of the hereditarily diseased mass through marriage prohibitions and sterilization. If one does not give the concepts of nation and race a narrower interpretation, it is difficult to avoid these two conclusions. With complete clarity, therefore, the demand for sterilization appears throughout the entire leading National Socialist literature as a selfevident matter, for which the radical representatives would prefer not to admit any further justification or evaluation from the realm of morality."
National Socialism is a worldview based on biology. The implications of this means that its adherents ought to profess their allegiance to the laws of race and blood as is it race that gives us meaning and purpose to our existence. Without this underlying principle, it simply wouldn't be National Socialism.
Finally, we shall not forget that Hudal's thorough rejection of Alfred Rosenberg is in strike contradiction to Hitler's personal and private defense of him being the NSDAP's leading intellectual architects. Hudal ultimately came to the conclusion himself that a strong tie of Christianity and National Socialism together isn't realistic and broke away from that idea.
🏆18
NS_Heathenry_Exposed is SCARED to address the anti-Christian basis of Heinrich Himmler's theology.
Instead of beating around the bush implicating that Himmler was somehow a pro-Christian in his service as Reichsführer-SS such as showing a document where he releases preists or simply helping preserve history by requesting a centuries years old Bible to be stored away, why not actually show statements from Himmler where fundamentally supports Christianity and not him just portraying a historical example of the church embedding Germanic values?
The reality is: Himmler condemned Christianity as 2,000 year old Bolshevism, Removed Christian clergy from the SS, and wanted to awaken a worldview based on our pre-christian ancestors for the SS [etc]
No amount of religious stats of regular SS men will negate the fact that the SS-leadership wished to intentionally get rid of the influence of Christianity. That is where the focus truly is.
What is the evidence for this?
• The SS-Hauptamt explicitly talked about plans to overcome Christianity by means of SS literature and reinterpretation of the current idea of what God is [1] [2]
• The SS training programs recommended anti-Christian literature for its ideological training [3]
• Discouraged people who followed Christianity from participating in the SS leadership training course [4]
• Official Sicherheitsdienst training document condemning Christianity [5]
• The SS publishing house Nordland-Verlag on engaging in ideological confrontation with Christianity + receiving approval from the Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda to publish anti-Christian children's books [6] [7]
We can see the manifestations of this plan throughout the SS in the following literature on the topic of Christianity/God:
• Waffen-SS
• Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler
• SS-Hitlerjugend
• SS-Götz von Berlichingen
• SS-Das Reich
• SS-Totenkopf
• Sicherheitsdienst
• Reichssicherheitshauptamt
No one in NS_Heathenry_Exposed will address any of these SS documents on Christianity since it ultimately crumbles what they push. Hitler was aware of this anti-Christian push in the SS and supported it.
HIMMLER WAS NOT CHRISTIAN
Instead of beating around the bush implicating that Himmler was somehow a pro-Christian in his service as Reichsführer-SS such as showing a document where he releases preists or simply helping preserve history by requesting a centuries years old Bible to be stored away, why not actually show statements from Himmler where fundamentally supports Christianity and not him just portraying a historical example of the church embedding Germanic values?
The reality is: Himmler condemned Christianity as 2,000 year old Bolshevism, Removed Christian clergy from the SS, and wanted to awaken a worldview based on our pre-christian ancestors for the SS [etc]
No amount of religious stats of regular SS men will negate the fact that the SS-leadership wished to intentionally get rid of the influence of Christianity. That is where the focus truly is.
What is the evidence for this?
• The SS-Hauptamt explicitly talked about plans to overcome Christianity by means of SS literature and reinterpretation of the current idea of what God is [1] [2]
• The SS training programs recommended anti-Christian literature for its ideological training [3]
• Discouraged people who followed Christianity from participating in the SS leadership training course [4]
• Official Sicherheitsdienst training document condemning Christianity [5]
• The SS publishing house Nordland-Verlag on engaging in ideological confrontation with Christianity + receiving approval from the Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda to publish anti-Christian children's books [6] [7]
We can see the manifestations of this plan throughout the SS in the following literature on the topic of Christianity/God:
• Waffen-SS
• Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler
• SS-Hitlerjugend
• SS-Götz von Berlichingen
• SS-Das Reich
• SS-Totenkopf
• Sicherheitsdienst
• Reichssicherheitshauptamt
No one in NS_Heathenry_Exposed will address any of these SS documents on Christianity since it ultimately crumbles what they push. Hitler was aware of this anti-Christian push in the SS and supported it.
HIMMLER WAS NOT CHRISTIAN
🏆21
More source denial from NS_Heathenry_Exposed
In their 2024 era channel, NSHE has claimed that the quote "a christian era can only possess a christian art, a national socialist era only a national socialist art.” from Hitler's speech in 1936 is "clearly a forgery" in which the source of the quote was "already dubious enough" even though the source is so clear cut in what it is in the original image that they present.
So when we investigate the validity of such claims, the quote is in fact a real quote from Hitler in 1936. On page 67 of 'Der Parteitag der Ehre vom 8. bis 14. September 1936 offizieller Bericht über den Verlauf des Reichsparteitages mit sämtlichen Kongressreden' it displays said quote.
How interesting that they say "It doesn't match up with the firsthand evidence we have". This appears to be a recurring in their way of thinking.
[See for yourself]
In their 2024 era channel, NSHE has claimed that the quote "a christian era can only possess a christian art, a national socialist era only a national socialist art.” from Hitler's speech in 1936 is "clearly a forgery" in which the source of the quote was "already dubious enough" even though the source is so clear cut in what it is in the original image that they present.
So when we investigate the validity of such claims, the quote is in fact a real quote from Hitler in 1936. On page 67 of 'Der Parteitag der Ehre vom 8. bis 14. September 1936 offizieller Bericht über den Verlauf des Reichsparteitages mit sämtlichen Kongressreden' it displays said quote.
How interesting that they say "It doesn't match up with the firsthand evidence we have". This appears to be a recurring in their way of thinking.
[See for yourself]
🏆18