Another subject in
which the position of Hitler was superior to that of the Bushites lies
in the treatment of Palestinians by Zionists and their underwriters.
Unlike the Bushites, Hitler condemned the Zionists for their behavior and
treatment of others.
In a speech in Wilhelmshaven
on 1 April 1939:
What
right, for example, has England to shoot down Arabs in Palestine just because
they defend their homeland; who gives them this right?
MY NEW ORDER
by Adolf Hitler, Edited by de Sales, 1941, page 622
These
very important facts have been largely overlooked in Britain because the
country is ruled not by men of intelligence but by Jews, as one must realize
when one sees how the intrigues of the Jews in Palestine are accepted in
Britain without comment or demur.
HITLER'S TABLE TALK,
1941-1944, Translated by Cameron & Stevens, 2000, page 563
On 8 November 1938:
Nonetheless,
I believe it would be for the better if these gentlemen [Churchill and
Duff] applied their enormous expertise and their infallible wisdom for
which they are so well known, if they applied these, let us say, for instance
or rather especially to the case of Palestine. They might do great
good there. Because, after all, damn it, what is happening there
reeks of brute force rather than democracy!
HITLER, [Speeches
and Proclamations], by Max Domarus, Vol. 2, page 1239
Having covered issues in which Hitler’s behavior can be judged superior to that of the Bushites in general and GWB in particular, attention can now be focused on those topics in which their views and acts are essentially the same, as one would expect from those holding similar philosophies.
Although Hitler expounds
what appears to be a restrained line with respect to assassinations, his
alleged limited application thereof is highly suspect in light of Ernst
Roehm’s fate.
Who can believe Hitler when
he says:
For
my part, I've never allowed anyone to resort to assassination in our political
struggles. The method is generally inopportune, and to be recommended
only in exceptional cases. In fact, it cannot lead to any important
success, unless it enables one to eliminate the man on whose shoulders
rest the whole organization and power of the enemy. But, even in
such a case, I'd have refused to use this weapon.
HITLER'S TABLE TALK,
1941-1944, Translated by Cameron & Stevens, 2000, page 390
Were this truly his
policy could Bush say the same in light of the fact that Bush’s closest
ally in the Middle East, Israel, definitely can not.
Hitler does not have
much faith in preventing assassinations in any event:
The
confessions of this Swiss interested me insofar as they confirmed my conviction
that not a soul could cope with an assassin who, for idealistic reasons,
was prepared quite ruthlessly to hazard his own life in the execution of
his object. I quite understand why 90 percent of the historic assassinations
have been successful. The only preventive measure one can take is
to live irregularly--to walk, to drive and to travel at irregular times
and unexpectedly. But that, after all, is merely normal caution,
and not prevention.
Police protection is of great importance only on those occasions when the
date, time, and place had been precisely fixed.
HITLER'S TABLE TALK,
1941-1944, Translated by Cameron & Stevens, 2000, page 452-53
And he has limited
patience with underlings who fail to protect themselves or don’t have enough
sense to realize they are probably being stalked:
That
a man as irreplaceable as Heydrich should expose himself to unnecessary
danger, I can only condemn as stupid and idiotic. Men of importance
like Heydrich should know that they are eternally being stalked like game,
and that there are any number of people just waiting for the chance to
kill them.
HITLER'S TABLE TALK,
1941-1944, Translated by Cameron & Stevens, 2000, page 512
Nothing like having a sympathetic, compassionate leader!