Archive for nazi

The Occult History of the Third Reich

Posted in Great Films, WWII with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 22, 2008 by Tweak Jones

 

If you dont believe Hitler was a satanist I only ask you to watch this video and still believe that.

 

Hitler And The Spear of Destiny

Posted in WWII with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 15, 2008 by Tweak Jones

 

 

Today there exist several historic spears claimed to be the “holy lance” of the biblical story

The one with perhaps the best claim, or at least the oldest provenance is in the Hofburg Museum in Vienna, Austria. This spear, said to be the lance of the Roman soldier Gaius Cassius can be traced back through history to Constantine the Great, the Roman Emperor who first adopted Christianity in the early 4th century. This spear is made of iron.  The long tapering point is supported by a wide base with metal flanges depicting the wings of a dove.  Within a central aperture in the blade, a hammer-headed nail (thought to be from the cross) has been secured by a cuff threaded with metal wire.  According to legend the spear passed from the possession of Gais Cassius, the Roman centurion.  

According to Ravencroft the lance was possessed by a series of successful military leaders including Theodosius, Alaric (who was responsible for the sacking of Rome), Charles Martel (who defeated the Moslems in 733 AD), Charlemagne and Frederick Barbarossa.

A legend grew around the lance that whoever possessed it would be able to conquer the world. Napoleon attempted to obtain the lance after the battle of Austerlitz, but it had been smuggled out of the city prior to the start of the fight and he never got a hold of it. According to the legend, Charlemagne carried the spear through 47 successful battles, but died when he accidentally dropped it. Barbarossa met the same fate only a few minutes after it slipped out of his hands while he was crossing a stream.

Napoleon attempted to take the Holy Lance following the Battle of Austerlitz, but, unfortunately for him, it had already been smuggled out of Vienna just prior to the battle, and he never secured it.

The spear finally wound up in the possession of the House of the Habsburgs and by 1912 was part of the treasure collection stored in Hofburg Museum. According to Ravenscroft it was in September of that year, while living in Vienna and working as a watercolor painter, that a young Adolf Hitler visited the Museum and learned of the lance and its reputation. Dr. Walter Stein, who accompanied Hitler on that visit, remembered, “when we first stood side by side in front of the Spear of Destiny it appeared to me that Hitler was in so deep a condition of trance that he was suffering almost complete sense-denudation and a total lack of self-consciousness.”

Hitler later said, “I stood there quietly gazing upon it for several minutes quite oblivious to the scene around me. It seemed to carry some hidden inner meaning which evaded me, a meaning which I felt I inwardly knew yet could not bring to consciousness…I felt as though I myself had held it before in some earlier century of history. That I myself had once claimed it as my talisman of power and held the destiny of the world in my hands…”

Hitler saw the lance as his mystical connection with generations of conquering Germanic leaders that had come before him. On March 14, 1938, after he had risen to power as the chancellor of Germany, Hitler annexed the state of Austria and ordered that the spear, along with the rest of the Habsburg collection, be sent to the city of Nuremberg, heart of the Nazi movement.

Ravenscroft reveals much of the absolute Satanism which physically possessed Hitler. If you want to get an idea of how the real Antichrist is going to think, act, and plan, you need to read this “inside” account of Ravenscroft. Much of Hitler’s actions during World War II make sense only when you realize how his occultist mind set caused him to act the way he did. Secular historians miss much of the point of Hitler’s more bizarre actions.

After having declared Austria to be a part of the Third Reich the Austrian born Adolf Hitler had the lance loaded on to an armored SS train and taken to Nuremberg on October 13, 1938. There it remained in St. Catherine’s Church for the next 6 years until it was removed to a safer, protective underground vault where Lt. Walter William Horn, army serial number 01326328, of the United States Army took possession of it in the name of the US government at 2:10 PM on April 30, 1945; the same day Adolph Hitler and a woman named Eva Braun were reported to have committed suicide in a bunker outside Berlin. It is also the same day that Munich was captured by Patch’s 7th Army unit. Also, on April 30th, 1945, Germany surrendered ending the Third Reich.

With the fall the Soviet Union, and the opening up of Soviet archives in addition to recent testimony by former Soviet soldiers who actually captured Hitler’s Bunker in Berlin, we have finally been able to confirm that at approximately 3:30 PM, just 80 minutes after the United States took possession of the Spear, that Hitler committed suicide by shooting himself in the head.

Today the Holy Lance has been returned to the Hofburg Museum. Is it authentic? General George S. Patton thought so. He became fascinated by the spear after the war and had its history traced.

Did Hitler really think possessing the spear would help him win the war? Other historians have found Ravenscroft’s research suspicious and his book remains controversial. Alan Baker, author of Invisible Eagle, The History of Nazi Occultism, thinks Hitler was more interested in getting a hold of the Hofburg treasures for financial reasons, not occult reasons.  A later book entitled; “Adolf Hitler and the Secrets of the Holy Lance” (by Buechner & Bernhart) claims that a replica of the was returned to the Vienna Museum, while the real lance may have been squirrel-away with other secret Nazi plundered treasure by Himmler and the SS to South America or Antarctica.

History Channel Admits U.S. Banks Funded The Third Reich

Posted in Great Films, WWII with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 12, 2008 by Tweak Jones

It should be noted that this clip doesn’t mention Prescott Bush,George W’s grandfather,who was an American banker that loaned money to the Nazis.

 

Transhumanism-The New Eugenics?

Posted in eugenics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 9, 2008 by Tweak Jones

(Unfortunately I am putting the blog “The Elites cult of Death” on hold.Theres just so much data to go through.Anyway enjoy this article from: counciloftruth.com)

 

 

What is it to be human? With the advent of modern technology, humanity as we know it may be on the road to extinction. We ask, just how long do we have left?

 

There was a time when humanity was considered the pinnacle of creation. We were made in God’s image and the Earth was considered to be the centre of the universe. That all changed after the Enlightenment period. Humanity was no longer perceived to be apex of all creation, but rather, an unintentional glitch in the vastness of the universe.
 The Enlightenment ideal that humanity could build a better future for itself through the use of scientific endeavour and discovery has now led to the rise of the transhumanism philosophical framework.

What is Transhumanism?

Julian Huxley first coined the term, “transhumanism”, in the 1950’s. Huxley was the first director of UNESCO and brother of author Aldous, who wrote the science fiction novel, “A Brave New World”

Julian Huxley was also a keen proponent of eugenics and it is fitting that that he was the first to use the term “transhumanism” as it is merely a variant of eugenics doctrine that he so heavily endorsed.

But what exactly is transhumanism? Transhumanism can loosely be described as physical and mental enhancement of humanity through technology. Transhumanist thinkers want to eradicate what they consider to be undesirable aspects of human nature, such as, aging, suffering, disease and even death. From the transhumanism.org website:

“The enhancement options being discussed include radical extension of human health-span, eradication of disease, elimination of unnecessary suffering, and augmentation of human intellectual, physical, and emotional capacities.”

{mosregread}Transhumanism and the link to eugenics

While on the surface, transhumanism appears to have noble motives, on closer inspection, one begins to understand just how closely aligned it is to eugenics. A simple definition of eugenics is “selective breeding”. Instead of using technology, proponents of eugenics want to eradicate what they consider to be the undesirable aspects of humanity through selective breeding. From the Eugenics Archive site:

“Eugenics was, quite literally, an effort to breed better human beings – by encouraging the reproduction of people with “good” genes and discouraging those with “bad” genes. Eugenicists effectively lobbied for social legislation to keep racial and ethnic groups separate, to restrict immigration from southern and eastern Europe, and to sterilize people considered “genetically unfit.”

Now consider the similarities between the passage above and the Transhumanist values written by Nick Bostrom:

“Transhumanists view human nature as a work-in-progress, a half-baked beginning that we can learn to remold in desirable ways. Current humanity need not be the endpoint of evolution. Transhumanists hope that by responsible use of science, technology, and other rational means we shall eventually manage to become posthuman, beings with vastly greater capacities than present human beings have.”

Both the transhumanist and eugenics movements see humanity as imperfect and as a work-in-progress. The Enlightenment notion of perfecting humanity through science is prevalent in both movements. While humanity has certainly benefited from technological and scientific advancements since the Enlightenment, the most worrying aspect of transhumanism, like eugenics before it, is that “undesirable” traits of humanity must be exterminated before humanity can be considered as perfect. Who decides what are undesirable traits? Well, like eugenics, a scientific “elite” will be the ones to decide what is “undesirable”. From the transhumanism.org FAQ:

“Initially, however, the greatest advantages will go to those who have the resources, the skills, and the willingness to learn to use new tools. One can speculate that some technologies may cause social inequalities to widen. For example, if some form of intelligence amplification becomes available, it may at first be so expensive that only the wealthiest can afford it. The same could happen when we learn how to genetically enhance our children. Those who are already well off would become smarter and make even more money. This phenomenon is not new. Rich parents send their kids to better schools and provide them with resources such as personal connections and information technology that may not be available to the less privileged. Such advantages lead to greater earnings later in life and serve to increase social inequalities.”

So here the transhumanists readily admit that their movement will exacerbate social inequalities and, once again, the fate of humanity will be left in the hands of a small elite. And yes, while the new technology that is invented will see the price of older technology eventually fall, who can say for certain that the once the elite have access to the technology they will even allow this technology to be used by anybody else? From the transhumanism.org website:

“What about the hypothetical case in which someone intends to create, or turn themselves into, a being of so radically enhanced capacities that a single one or a small group of such individuals would be capable of taking over the planet? This is clearly not a situation that is likely to arise in the imminent future, but one can imagine that, perhaps in a few decades, the prospective creation of superintelligent machines could raise this kind of concern. The would-be creator of a new life form with such surpassing capabilities would have an obligation to ensure that the proposed being is free from psychopathic tendencies and, more generally, that it has humane inclinations. For example, a superintelligence should be built with a clear goal structure that has friendliness to humans as its top goal. Before running such a program, the builders of a superintelligence should be required to make a strong case that launching it would be safer than alternative courses of action.”

So according to the transhumanists, we should trust them, as they have an “obligation to ensure that the proposed being is free from psychopathic tendencies”. But who has the access to this technology? The future of humanity could be left to the whim of a scientific and rich elite. Maybe scientists like, Dr Pianka, who according to reports, advocated the killing of 90% of world’s populationthrough the ebola virus would be left to decide the fate of humanity. 

Transhumanists disguise the fact that their philosophy is based on eugenics by using terms such as “liberal eugenics” and “Reprogenetics”. These are both types of voluntary eugenics with the individual choosing whether to use the techniques and technology. In the transhumanist’s claim that their “liberal eugenics” will lead to a better society, one can clearly see the collectivist core at the heart of their movement.

“Some disability activists would call these policies eugenic, but society may have a legitimate interest in whether children are born healthy or disabled, leading it to subsidize the birth of healthy children, without actually outlawing or imposing particular genetic modifications.”

Now according to transhumanists, “society” has an interest in whether children are born healthy. The feelings of a mother who still loves her child despite him/her being disabled or unhealthy doesn’t matter as “society has a legitimate interest” in her child.

Transhumanists are prepared to disregard the individual’s thoughts and wishes for the “greater good” of society. While their “liberal eugenics” might not force people to become transhumanists, the fact is that any non-transhumanist will be so disadvantaged in this “technotopia” that they will either have to join them to exist in any meaningful way in society or they will simply become prey to a predatory technology elite.Malthusian Ideology

If the parallels with eugenics wasn’t bad enough, Transhumanist ideals also have parallels with Malthusian ideology. Transhumanist websites advocate the notion Malthusian notion of population control. From transtopia.org

“Choosing to remain childfree is both a rational, pragmatic decision and a powerful moral statement. This is especially true for women, whom evolution has disproportionately burdened with pregnancy, childbirth, and the bulk of the childrearing process. By saying ‘no’ to procreation, one rejects being just another link in life’s endless chain of births and deaths, just another runner in a mindless relay race. It is, in effect, a personal declaration of independence; a confirmation that one isn’t a means to an end, but an end in itself.”

From transhumanism.org

“The only long-term method of assuring continued growth of average income is some form of population control, whether spontaneous or imposed, limiting the number of new persons created per year.”

Yes, just say, “no” to procreation, then perhaps elitists like Henry Kissinger will deem the population control in your country of a high enough standard to not use food as a weapon against you. Maybe the transhumanists will find their own Margaret Sanger and introduce birth control centres for the “genetically inferior”. From an article on eugenics:

“ Sanger is known as a crusader for contraceptive rights; but few know that her concern for contraception was based firmly on concern for racial control. Her early work in impoverished environments led her to the belief that ‘genetically inferior’ persons should have less children, and that centers for birth control should be ‘wisely’ placed in neighborhoods which were impoverished, which also frequently happened to be in minority settings.”

Post-Humanism

The final realisation of transhumanism is “post-humanism”. Post humanism, according to the World Transhumanist Association is defined as, “possible future beings whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”

Ray Kurzweil, a leading figure in the transhumanist movement believes that the technology to produce everlasting life isn’t far off.  Kurzweil claims that a technology singularityin the near future will mean that AI or computer intelligence will vastly exceed the capabilities of human beings and that these technological advancements will see the beginning of everlasting life and the end of suffering for transhumanists.
Transhumanists believe that once post-humanism is reached they will become gods, impervious to disease and with the ability to live eternally. They are under the deluded assumption that once they become “post-human” they will achieve godhood.

“We are very fortunate to live in these technologically advanced times, for science may soon give us the means to actually fulfill this imperative; to take hedonism to its logical conclusion and create what so far has only been a desperate fantasy — heaven. A mechanized heaven where we ourselves will be the gods, masters of our own minds, bodies, and environment. Pain will be optional, and pleasure guaranteed.”

The scientific arrogance of transhumanist thought is compounded by sentences such as, “The flesh, like man, is something to be overcome.” Ironically, despite lambasting religion, they essentially use the same ideas as traditional religion to appeal to “new followers”. The idea of eternal life has been the cornerstone of Christianity and Islam since their inception. Also, it seems that if you want to everlasting life then the best way to do so is donate cash. “There are myriad ways to contribute-…making a financial contribution”. Sounds like they have even taken their ideas from corrupt televangelists.

It cannot be argued that Enlightenment ideals have helped to prolong life expectancy and that many of the scientific endeavours undertaken since the Enlightenment have been of great value to humanity, however, one must question where technology and technology thinking is heading if human beings are to be considered obsolete in future. Even Bill Joy of SunMicrosystems has questioned if future technological advancements will signal the end of humanity

While undoubtedly, many of us enjoy aspects of scientific and technological advancement in our everyday lives, we must question a philosophical movement that has its roots so firmly entrenched in eugenics and population control. Although transhumanists may be operating under the delusion that advanced technology will make them gods, if a small scientific or wealthy elite who are proponents for population control get their hands on such technology, the rest of us will become all too aware of just how mortal we are.

What do you think of this article? Leave your opinions in the comment box below.