1924 French Police File Card for "Adolphe Jacob Hitler" ?

November 17, 2012

hitleridentity.jpg

1924 French Police File Card for "Adolphe Jacob Hitler" ?


"Instrument of high powers?"  "Jacob? "



This appears in a magazine "Science et Avenir" March 2009

Fiche signalétique établie par les Services de Renseignements Généraux (RG) en 1924. Né en 1880 à Passau Hitler Adolphe, Jacob, le Mussolini allemand Profession: journaliste Ne serait que l'instrument de puissances supérieures: n'est pas un imbécile mais un très adroit démagogue. Aurait Ludendorf derrière lui. Organise des Sturmtruppen genre fasciste. Tentative de coup d'Etat de novembre 1923: Condamné à 5 ans de forteresse avec possibilité de sursis après 6 mois de détention. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Translation

Descriptive card established by the French Police in 1924 Born in 1880 in Passau Hitler Adolphe, Jacob, the German Mussolini Profession: journalist

Appears to only be the instrument of higher powers: is not a dumb but a very skillful demagogue. Seems to be backed up by Ludendorf.  Organizes Sturmtruppen fascist style Attempt of a Coup d' Etat in November the 23rd: Convicted to 5 years of fortress with a possible suspension after 6 months of detention.

Source: http://www.39-45.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=20155&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&sid=8c9c6183e679d6ac636a5b016c58d32b

See my "Was Hitler an Illuminati Agent?"      for Hitler's Jewish Antecedents and how he was an instrument of "higher powers"

For Ludendorf connection, my "Was Hitler a Pawn?"

Meet the real AH   (For your scrutiny.)

Thanks to Allen

Comments for "1924 French Police File Card for "Adolphe Jacob Hitler" ?"

Dan said (March 27, 2009):

I think this man [in photo] is a double or 'doppleganger' of the fellow who made the speeches and is in all that official footage of the Hitler persona.
What an enigma that character is - Hitler. I've always wondered, what's the fascination so many people have had for this one entity. There is a sense that whomever he was seems out of proportion to a more subtle sense that this was someone vacant. Something like our impression of an actor in some blockbuster film in which the cinematography and budget created a character the actual actor could never even begin to live up to in candid interviews.

A lot of people who actually met Hitler in his heyday have later remarked all along how incongruous their impression was meeting him face to face. I remember Orson Welles told Dick Cavette he was a few yards away from Hitler at the 36 Olymics, and described his surpise that "he had no presence at all. It was as if there was nobody there. I wasn't impressed".

Leni Reifenstall, who is now considered one of the most important cinemagraphic directors of the genre of propaganda film who's techniques are still standard (as in the DNC's Obama apotheosis at the Democrat Convention in 2008), remarked essentially the same impression as Welles. Nobody home. She said she had fully expected to be overwhelmed by Hitler's presence. (She wasn't impressed by Goebbels either, but these were the guys with deep pockets checkbook at that time). Other notable female celebrities of the period consistantly remark the same thing. No attraction. They seemed to also feel intuitively something was 'off' with that, but they don't detail it. I mean, here you have who was considered the most dynamic male figure since Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, whom the most dynamic and beautiful women in Germany were dying to meet, expecting to get weak in the knees in his presence, feeling the shock and let down meeting what they don't exactly know how to say, but from their impression entirely lacked charisma enough to make an impression upon them at all.

Another thing about this French document - Hitler was born in 1889, not 1880.


Howard said (March 27, 2009):

Hitler was most definitely an agent with a defined role. He became aware of it in May 1940 when he was ordered to stand down for 2 days rather than take out the British Army at Dunkirk.

His role was to falsely fill the role of 3rd Reich and the 3rd Beast "Leopard" of Dan 7:6. He never achieved "Dominion" so he was obviously a shill ordered to end his reign on Beltane 1945 just exactly as Albert Pike said would happen in 1871. The real "Leopard" is in the White House now and his "Dominion" is certain. It's that "Little Horn" that I worry about coming right after him.


Drew said (March 27, 2009):

The cited French document states that this 'Hitler' was born in 1880 in 'Passen,' which would have made him 44 at the time of the photograph. All credible sources state that the real Hitler was born in 1889 in Braunau, Austria. Note that the document doesn't state in what country 'Passen' is found--very strange for a 'french' document. And why isn't this government document dated in any place? When was the last time you saw a police document that didn't have a current date on it somewhere?

Notice also that nothing appears after the heading 'domicile' or 'residence'. Why doesn't it state that he was imprisoned and where he was currently imprisoned? Notice also that under 'profession', the document states 'journalist' in a different ink shade. Even the photograph is crudely cropped, and there appears to be a shadow behind it at the top, making it appear to be glue residue from a previous photograph that had been removed.

The idea that this 'important' document just turned up 60 years after the fact should raise red flags for you. Who found this document, and how did it end up being published in a french journal without prior knowledge leaked to the public beforehand? Is the journal 'Science et Avenir' under Zionist control?

If you really think about it, doesn't it serve the satanic Kabbalist-Bankers' interests to put out the theory that Hitler was yet another one of their puppets? Such information would only serve to demoralize anyone who believes that there has ever been a legitimate opposition to their plans of world domination: "All opposition is futile." "We control both sides of the argument at all times." This forged document, it seems to me, only serves to prove those cliches.

--

Drew,

This is exactly the point--there never has been any genuine opposition.

-H


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at