Of course Hitler was an evil plague upon Germans. And if you dig a bit you will find that many of the Hitler fanboys attacking those who say so are either Jews or are funded by Jews. That is central to the con game.

Hitler was not, however, either Bolshevik or a Zionist. He was a ‘national socialist,’ and like Karl Marx he felt that Jews as a race/ethnos were certain to ruin any socialist or nationalist movement because of never-ending, never-abating Jewish will to power and money-worship.

Hitler certainly was a toy fairly easily used, puppet-handled, by both Bolsheviks and Anglo-Zionist imperialists.

Of late I have become fascinated by WWII and Hitler, not in a Nazi larping way but because something doesn’t compute. Listen to the continual stream of propaganda, and you’ll realize WWII never ended. Right now, in 2020, old men in their nineties who served in the German army and were assigned to concentration camps as teenagers are being carted off to prison. I read that in the prison camps, people were killed in bizarre ways that don’t make sense, and these teenagers of course, knew nothing of these bizarre murders but that doesn’t matter in their supposed guilt. It makes no sense. Something is off about everything we’ve been told. Something isn’t right about this legendary, godlike figure of evil, Adolf Hitler, either. So I may need to read this book whilst cooling my heels at home.

MICHAEL COLLINS PIPER TALKS ABOUT HITLER BEING A JEWISH PUPPET. BJERKNES SHOULD LISTEN

Video Link

The truth about Hitler’s early funding:
https://www.counter-currents.com/2013/12/german-big-business-and-the-rise-of-hitler/

hahahaha. Hitler was now a “Bolshevik and Zionist.” Hitler was part “Jew.” Hitler was an “enemy of the German people” and I “think he’s onto something big” are TOTAL BULLSHIT. Wow, how fascinating let me go out and buy the book. NO.

Anyone who WRITES SHIT like this is an OBVIOUS ZIONIST SHILL OR A LYING RACIST ZIONIST. Hitler LOVED the German people and this is yet another attempt to demonize a man who has to be the MOST LIED ABOUT MAN IN HISTORY. This article is HILARIOUS and PATHETIC at the same time. Nothing but a plug for these wacko’s books.

His analysis does not even consider the fact that Hitler was just incompetent. Hitler was enlisted and surrounded by officers of which he did not always trust their advice which is well documented. Since Chris has never been a real soldier, he would not understand the experience of being ordered around by officers one day then commanding them the next. The officers were well bred and much more cultured than ours even today, so there were an open tensions as they had to take commands from a soldier they did not respect. There is wonderful English intelligence confirming this. So basically, Hitler did not know when to take good advice from his officers as the disrespect was often palpable. This made for bad decision making and incompetence. I remember addressing a Special Forces officer one day. He had been to battle numerous times, was very well educated, was West Point, and all sorts of stuff. I was a rear end enlisted soldier. I still remember the way he looked at me and addressed me to this day. It was not good. If I all of a sudden had to lead officers like that one that I knew really did not think much of me, don’t you think I might not trust his advice all of the time? Isn’t it possible for an officer like that to set up an enlisted soldier in such a way as to embarrass him to show the world that he does not really know what he is talking about if that officer did not want him in power? Interesting analysis, but in the Army you learn almost immediately that one of the greatest problems is a clusterf*ck. The vulgar term for chaos, incompetence, and mismanagement. The greatest problem soldiers can face is simply themselves. He does not even consider this.

Because of shit like this, most people are totally CLUELESS about the truth of WWII, Hitler and the holohoax. DISINFORMATION constantly. You want to read some books WORTH reading about WWII instead of this pathetic trash that is recommended. You want to read HISTORY instead of fictional fairy tales, read my two recommendations below.

The Myth Of German Villainy by Benton Bradberry
Hellstorm: The Death Of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947 by Thomas Goodrich

Hitler being a “Bolshevik and a Zionist” belongs right up there with the lampshades, the bars of soap, the “6 million” Jews being gassed, the lady living with wolves after escaping the concentration camps, the lady defecating diamonds out of her arse and saving them, the masturbation machine, etc., etc. Hey, remember when Elvis died? Remember all the books that suddenly came out on the King Of Rock & Roll? hahaha. Well, IF anyone is more famous than Elvis, it is certainly Hitler. Yes sir, Hitler hated the Germans so much that he turned that country around in a few years time and LET the Germans PROSPER. Yep, those Germans throwing roses at Hitler and cheering certainly looked real unhappy having to live under a tyrant like Hitler.

Listening to Bjerknes-Wise debate now. Wise is very difficult to listen to due to his total bluster. Whatever points may be true are totally lost on his listening audience due to his delivery and constant interruption of Bjerkness. Dennis, I believe you should stick to writing and hang up debating.

Yup.

This ‘revisionist’ death-in-June Nazism is even dumber than Trotskyite Communism. ‘Oh, Hitler was a bad Nazi who betrayed the true doctrine,’ they whine. Hitler was Nazism, fools! NS meant whatever he said it meant.

And did it ever occur to these buffoons that maybe–just maybe–Germany’s fate in WW2 had little to do with Nazism per se, and everything to do with the Anglo-Zionist need to keep Germany down and extend their hegemony over all of Europe? I mean how do these fools explain the First World War? Hitler was just a Lance Corporal during that one. And the Germans were just ordinary monarchists then–no Nazism in sight.

But hey, let’s all pretend that Röhm and the Strasser Bros. would have met with Anglo-Zionist approval and avoided a war.

Yeah, that was a shit show.
Clearly one guy far more a pos than the other and the moderator not up for it.

While you can argue that Hitler was bad for Germany it is of course over the top rhetoric to call him Bolshevik or a Zionist.

Even though there was early talk of sending the Jews to Madagascar I don’t think Hitler would have ever supported it since he viewed the Jews as an eternal enemy of the Germans.

While he certainly agreed with some of Marx’s criticisms of capitalism that is true for probably most politicians today.

I agree with the previous post that ignoring his generals was his biggest downfall.

He became extremely arrogant after the fall of Poland and France. Keep in mind that his Generals were hesitant to invade France and were wrong about the length of the war. So in Hitler’s mind he was right about everything and also had divine protection (but not Christian which makes it a bit weird).

But they were right that he needed to finish off the British before going East.

The attack on the Soviet union possibly could have worked if he focused on Moscow and disrupted their rail lines. The Generals wanted to target Moscow but Hitler wanted to find the Red army and destroy it. Either way was a huge gamble though. Interestingly the economists were against the idea because they concluded that the eastern territories would more useful as trading partners. War actually wasn’t as profitable as the Nazis had hoped since so much of the acquired economy was disrupted.

If Hitler had only stayed in his damn borders the Western world wouldn’t be such a mess. The US universities would have completely buried Bolshevik genetic lies but that was all shut down after the war. Now you can’t even hint that race and culture might be linked without having your career threatened even though establishment egalitarian theories have worked so well for Detroit and Liberia. Thanks a lot mr mustache.

Wasn’t he arrested and jail with others of the Bavarian Bolsheviks in their uprising? And wasn’t his whole idea kinda a Zionist like nationalism for Germans? Finally the term Nazi was a Jewish slur for the German National Socialist. Funny thing that the Hitler fanboys roll with the Jewish slur.

Me too. A son of an Austrian customs agent rises, who took the less demanding version of the Austrian education, somehow magically rises to the top of the German politics. Hitler has to be the greatest example of the meritocracy ever. Given his lack of education it is downright miraculous. Mindbogglingly impossible without some connections we don’t know about.

Wasn’t he arrested and jail with others of the Bavarian Bolsheviks in their uprising?

No he was arrested for an attempted coup with the NSDAP which was the early Nazi party (Beer hall putsch).

The Bolsheviks were a competing party. Basically the NSDAP was nationalist left against a pro-Russia Bolshevik left. Hitler took over the party and turned it fascist.

Something to keep in mind is that both sides wanted to end the Weimar Republic. So that encourages radicals to take risks since the other side might do it first and then imprison your side or worse. The Marxists were open about wanting Germany to be the next country for revolution which helped create support for the NSDAP. Germany was the home of Marx and the Communists didn’t want it to become an anti-Marxist power.

Well lets see. I am not a fanboy of any man made of flesh and bone, I am a bit too old and have seen too much to put my faith in anyone that is human. No doubt that the real Hitler would disappoint just like you would disappoint and I surely would be disappointing. But IF I were to choose from a list of past world leaders, lets take for example the list below:

1. FDR ( what POS this guy was, huh?)
2. Baby Nut&Yahoo
3. Golda Meier
4. Ronald Reagan
5. Winston Cuckhill
6. Dwight D. Zionheiser
7. Donald Trumpstein
8. Stalin
9. Mussolini
10. Woodrow Wilson ( see FDR)
11. Hitler

Hmm, I think I would choose to be a childlike Hitler fanboy over the other people on this list.

Thank you, Trinity, for your comments here. If Hitler was so bad for the German people, why was he nearly worshiped by those people? Why did foreign travelers to Germany in the ’30’s report that they’d never seen a happier people? Hitler made two bad mistakes, letting the British soldiers escape at Dunkirk, hoping that this gentlemanly gesture would be reciprocated by Churchill and the looming war could be called off, but Churchill was no gentleman. Second mistake, a treaty with Japan, which let the U.S. into the war “through the backdoor” as a historian called it, via Pearl Harbor, which FDR and Churchill brought about.

With each passing day, week, year, decade, WE all learn that Hitler was guilty of only trying to save his country from the Bolshevik hordes that slaughtered MILLIONS of Russian and Ukrainian Christians among others. WE have been told LIE, after LIE, after LIE. Meanwhile, WE have been indoctrinated to laud praises on and lionize evil men like Winston Cuckhill, FDR, etc. Hell, there is even a statue in Seattle, Washington U.S.A of mass murderer, Vladimir Lenin ( wasn’t Lenin about 1/4 Jewish, some state that he was 1/2 Jewish or maybe even 100% Kosher.)

Think about how Cuckhill is lionized. We have people going cuckoo for cuckold puffs over a fat slob of an alcoholic failure. Cuckhill and FDR = Good and Hitler = Bad. Yeah, right.

“[Hitler] whose reign was an unmitigated disaster for Germany and Europe in general”

That much no clear-thinking person could argue with.

The trouble is that the human condition includes a lot of unthinking people, a lot of ideologues, and a lot of very twisted people.

With each passing day, week, year, decade, WE all learn that Hitler was guilty of only trying to save his country from the Bolshevik hordes that slaughtered MILLIONS of Russian and Ukrainian Christians among others

Is that why he made a deal with Stalin to split Christian Poland?

Hitler knew full well what would happen to the Poles on the Eastern half.

He also knew what would happen to the Germans if he didn’t surrender to the West.

You can be anti-Communist without having to defend Hitler.

The little I know about WW2 seems Hitler’s big mistake was to turn Germany around.

Going from beggar to chief made Germany a bull’s eye for worthless Winston and the other British supremacists.

The problem: Adolph changed Germany from Eunuch to Man.

All the other explanations, albeit beyond my meager brain, sound like total bullshit.

5 dancing shlomos

Hitler lacked formal education but he was self-educated. He accumulated a personal library of more than 16,000 books. Among the world’s statesmen of the 1930s he was the most competent. No question that he was a German patriot. Criticize his disregard of his generals, fair enough, but he had some amazing successes while overriding the opinions of the generals.

Read Mein Kamph. This was no stooge or idiot. Some of his opinions are outmoded by today’s lights. The Malthusian notions that growing populations could not be fed are examples. His distrust of Jews was overwraught. He had a good grasp of economics and statecraft. German people benefitted and nearly worshipped the guy. He should be regarded as the greatest individual of the twentieth century (not necessarily a good person but highly effective).

Maybe Hitler was a tool early on, but he developed a mind of his own, and it sure backfired on those who’d backed him. Remember Jews also backed Putin before he defied the global order. And Osama began as CIA asset before he went his own way.

buddhism is occultism?….oc·cult /əˈkəlt/ supernatural, mystical, or magical beliefs, practices, or phenomena…..god himself is a supernatural being….the triune abrahamic religions of onegodhood are supernatural belief systems, therefore occult….same ole same ole….my beliefs are natural and true….your beliefs are occult and false….if thine prejudice offends thee, pluck it out

So, this guy believes that Trump is Putin’s puppet, and Putin is an agent of Globalist Jews. Sheesh. He has own quirky take on Russia Collusion Nonsense.

He believes the Communists are still around and trying to take over the world. LOL.

Hitler had Jewish ancestry
1 DNA test of the family show there is jewish background. Not conclusive as about 10% of the Austrian gentile population have the same DNA, due presumably to intermarriage.

2 Hitler ordered the destruction of his history by the SS. There is a SS report on his Jewish ancestry.

3. When Hitlers american family blackmailed Hitler in the 30’s by saying they would publish proof of his Jewish ancestry, Hitler paid a significant bribe to his american family.

Nothing absolutely conclusive, but on balance there is sufficient info to believe he had some jewish ancestry

PS the report on the Rothschild links with the Hitlers come from a secret government report that only came out after the war

Adam Green… Joo.

CJ Bjerknes… Joo.

Draw the appropriate inferences.

Gatekeepers on a shekel allowance.

Hitler would have loved to have had Poland as an ally, guarding Germany’s eastern flank, and he had tried hard to reason with Poland over Danzig, but Col. Beck–having received unconditional security guarantees from Britain–wouldn’t countenance a negotiated settlement:

https://www.unz.com/article/why-germany-invaded-poland/

Moreover, Hitler never officially conceded eastern Poland–or any territory–to the USSR. That’s another myth promoted by the Anglo-Zionists:

https://russia-insider.com/en/history/truth-about-soviet-german-non-aggression-pact-23rd-august-1939-and-its-secret-protocol

BIG PICTURE: Hitler wasn’t interested in fighting another world war. But he demanded the return of sovereign German territory/people stolen at Versailles, and he was intent on making Germany back into the dominant commercial/political power it had been in central Europe before 1918, and that’s why the Anglo-Zionists insisted on destroying Germany. Hitler had made several attempts to entice Britain and France into an anti-Bolshevik alliance, but since Germany was further east than the latter two countries and would have had to oppose the USSR anyway, Britain and France figured, ‘Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?’ Only out of desperation did Hitler accede to the idea of a non-aggression pact with Russia.

Hitler had Jewish ancestry

You know what? So does Ron Unz, so does Gilad Atzmon, so does Israel Shamir. Good is as good does. Even Hitler acknowledged that, occasionally allowing officers who were quarter-Jews or even half-Jews to continue serving in the Wehrmacht!

As one famous Jew put it: “How shall ye know the tree if not by the fruit it bears?”

Everyone who was alive at the time spoke of Hitler’s oratory prowess. He became head of a political party that had the right message, and in fact had policies that would still work today, if the world was not such a distorted mess.

There is nothing really mysterious or sinister about that.

You need to read Goebbels’ diaries. He certainly didn’t write them thinking that Germany would be defeated and so he’d write things in his private diaries to make the Germans look innocent.

Yes, Hitler supported Madagascar early on. The war disrupted these plans. Goebbels noted that any plans for moving the Jews out of Europe would have to wait for a future administration,

As to Hitler staying within his borders, that is exactly what was being done before those-of-whom-we-do-not-speak succeeded in getting countries like Britain and France to declare war on Germany. I don’t want to insult you by telling you to refer to the Versailles treaty, or the numerous peace offerings before the war, but Hitler’s Germany wanted their citizens back in the Reich. I fail to see how his position was wrong, then or now.

The original (((Communist))) are still around and they are still trying to take over the world.

Communism = Zionism = Globalism
Neoconservative = Trotskyites
Neo-liberalism ( which is has nothing to do with liberalism) = Zionism

So you see, whether you are an unwashed, emaciated, Antifa member, some ghetto rat shouting Black Lives Matter, or some dolt who tunes into Pawn Vanity and/or Fox news every night, you are in fact a Zionist shill.

Funny how we are so conditioned to automatically link “Hitler” and “Jews” as though the fate of two percent of Europe’s population was the most important aspect of the entire episode, or the most significant part of the National Socialist agenda.

After the war, Churchill told conservative MP Lord Robert Boothby, “Germany’s most unforgivable crime before the Second World War was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.”

Germany was as dedicated to breaking the international banking cartels that had come to dominate humanity as it was to eradicating totalitarian communism. Building Europe into a defensible world power was Hitler’ ambition as much to checkmate the rising power of the USA, which he perceived as great a threat to world peace as to stopping the USSR’s expansion.

Typically every new experiment is socialism is portrayed to the people of the capitalist nations as a vicious tyranny enslaving its people and fanatically plotting the destruction of the almost defenseless “free” nations. Here’s a link to the full text of Richard Tedor’s study “Hitler’s Revolution,” the best one-volume account of what National Socialism was actually about and what it accomplished:
https://archive.org/details/HitlersRevolutionByRichardTedor_383

Hitler had no Jewish ancestry. I think I read some fairy tale that Hitler use to throw tantrums and roll around on the floor as well. This is the most lied about man in history. Look at how so many documentaries or movies portray this gentle man as some foaming at the mouth, homicidal, megalomaniac. Here we have a vicious man wanting slaughter people who in real life was a vegetarian and animal lover. Pretty odd, huh.

Now even an animal and a gentle man will fight when he is backed in the corner and a man is not a man if he is not willing to lay down his life defending his family and Germany and the German people were Hitler’s extended family. The Jews had stabbed Germany in the back during WWI, they were robbing the German blind, no COHENcidence the same way they are robbing the American people, old habits are hard to break it seems. ( Goldman Sachs ain’t an Irish name, people, and it isn’t A-rabs running the Federal Reserve either) (((They))) were bringing filth and pornography to Germany, etc. Does all this sound familiar, America? My guess is they were making movies that were anti-German or movies that promoted their globalist agenda as well. Books that promoted filth, anti-German propaganda were being printed and taught to Germans as well.

Now, imagine a tribe of non-Jews invading Israel, promoting anti-Israeli propaganda, ripping off the Jewish people, teaching Jewish children to mix with Arabs, etc., etc. Oh wait, the Jews were the ones who invaded Palestine and ran the Palestinians out. Oh well, bad example.

Go figure. What a COHENcidence. AGAIN.

Hitler had no Jewish ancestry.

“Hitler had Jewish ancestry or some black ancestry” is bullshit trope coming from the same 23andMe crowd who like to “put in” some black ancestry in the ancestry reports of White Nationalists.
Besides Hitler was smart, one of the smartest goyim political leader the Zio elites ever faced in history, they cannot believe someone like that was a 100% goy. “How could a Hilter come from amongst the lowly goys?” screamed the Zios puzzled. “He must have some secret Jewish ancestry since he had a smart kopf” they screamed. After that they felt a little better and secure about the inferiority of pure goyim genes.

YOU are SPOT ON. Look for the Black Hebrew Israelites to start claiming that Hitler was Black. haha. Good post.

HoekomSA
Hitler had Jewish ancestry

No, this is a classic example of “Fake News” in action. Or black propaganda, as it used to be called. Lies spread to discredit political opponents.

HoekomSA
1 DNA test of the family show there is jewish background. Not conclusive as about 10% of the Austrian gentile population have the same DNA, due presumably to intermarriage.

Wasn’t that the same DNA test that ostensibly showed Hitler as having African ancestry? That was performed by stealing cigarette butts from a distant relative’s garbage can and testing those?

The news involved a study conducted by journalist Jean-Paul Mulders and customs official Marc Vermereen, who claim to have taken DNA samples from 39 of Adolf Hitler’s relatives through such seemingly dubious sources as a discarded napkin, used cigarette butts, and envelopes from thirty-year-old letters. Several samples allegedly revealed genetic material peculiar to Ashkenazi Jews, Sephardic Jews, and African Berbers.

(…)

The test subject who appears most closely related to Hitler was an Austrian cousin named “Norbert H.,” although it was not specified whether Mr. H. was a first or a fourteenth cousin.

https://www.takimag.com/article/adolf_hitler_historys_angriest_jew/

I think we are best off treating the results of this “study” with considerable reserve.

HoekomSA
2 Hitler ordered the destruction of his history by the SS. There is a SS report on his Jewish ancestry.

No. No more than there was an SS report saying he had neurosyphilis, as is also sometimes alleged in these contexts. This is all fakery by propagandists and yellow journalists. If there were such a report, it would have been published many decades ago by every vested interest that keeps attacking Hitler every minute of every day even as we speak, almost eighty years after his death.

That they have not done so comes pretty close to proving that none exists. In any case, we have no positive evidence of any.

HoekomSA
3. When Hitlers american family blackmailed Hitler in the 30’s by saying they would publish proof of his Jewish ancestry, Hitler paid a significant bribe to his american family.

There is no substance to that story, either. It came up as part of a project by old Hitler in-laws to make a few bucks writing a sensationalist book. Another bit of “privileged” information from that one is that Hitler secretly lived a year in England. Which, of course, he never did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridget_Dowling

Hitler did have an English nephew, one William Patrick Stewart, who was apparently a sleazy character. He may well have given him some money to help him get his life back in order after he was fired from his job as a bank clerk. Hitler often did that kind of little favors for his family. In his testament, for example, while he gave most of his possessions to the German state, he also stipulated that his sister should have a pension of 1,000 Reichsmarks a month for as long as she lived. But the claims about Jewish ancestry and extortion come from when the book was being marketed.

As far as I know, other than the disgruntled in-laws’ own stories (which had obvious pecuniary motives), there is no evidence that they ever tried to blackmail Hitler, or that he paid any attention to it if they did.

HoekomSA
PS the report on the Rothschild links with the Hitlers come from a secret government report that only came out after the war

No. It comes from this book, originally published in 1940:

“Inside the Gestapo” was supposedly written by a high-ranking Gestapo defector. Actually, it was put out by the British Secret Service as part of their propaganda campaign against Germany. There were several books in similar genres published at the time, which purported to reveal that Hitler was a rapist, sadomasochist, homosexual, and basically everything bad. Most of them (including this one) are no longer quoted by historians, since the fakery is too obvious. However, conspiracy theorists now appear to be taking a liking to them instead. This character Bjerknes would seem to be a case in point.

Digital Samizdat is of course also quite right to note that even if Hitler had really been a Jew, or had some portion of Jewish ancestry, this would not change the substance of anything that he did. Even so, there is no need to entertain that notion, except perhaps as a thought experiment.

I never said Hitler was Jewish. Personally, I doubt it. The origin of that story is a couple of carpet-bagger relatives who went to Germany in 1933 looking for handouts from Hitler and didn’t get quite the royal treatment they thought they were entitled to, so that’s why they started spreading those stories. Apart from their hearsay, there’s no evidence of it.

I was just trying to argue that, even if he had been part Jewish by descent, it would still be basically irrelevant. His deeds–I mean his true deeds, not the ridiculous Jewish propaganda–showed what Hitler was really all about.

“John Johnson” is a troll who posts the same set of broken records into every thread on topics concerning World War II, Germany, or Jews, and never takes account of it when others disprove his allegations. I won’t bother refuting his claims this time, because I already did so several times before. Here is a link to the most recent one:

https://www.unz.com/gdurocher/the-nazi-plans-for-a-united-europe/#comment-3767422

If I may be forgiven the immodesty of recommending myself, my subsequent comment 129 over there may also be of interest in this context.

———————

On the topic of this article more generally, the idea that Hitler’s government ultimately presided over a disaster for Germany is true in one sense, although I’ve never seen it stated in any way that doesn’t amount to blaming the victim.

Let’s say that, in America, a man and his family are attacked by five armed thugs on drugs. He tries to put up a fight, but only manages to take down four of them before the final bad guy overpowers him and kills them all. Now, we can look at that in different ways.

For example, we can say that he is a fool who didn’t give up right away, and trust that the thugs would spare them and only rape his wife and children, but not kill them, if he didn’t fight back.

Or, we can say he’s a sissy who lost against only five bad guys. Obviously, we tough guys would have done much better.

I think, though, at least some people will think he did the right thing. That he tried his best, in a horrible situation, against bad odds. And that he did pretty well, given those odds. Even if he failed, and tragedy was the outcome. Would it really have been better if he hadn’t even tried?

Of course, to make the analogy fit better, we’d have to add that the final bad guy’s father owns the town paper. And he puts out a new editorial every week to remind us what a villain the dead man was, who attacked five peaceful youths who didn’t do nothing out of sheer racism. Thus, there are many who feel they can’t say anything good about him for that reason. Even if they know that story is a lie, or at least think it looks fishy. You wouldn’t want people to think you’re racist, now, would you?

Another preposterous column from Barrett .. no sense in arguing such idiocy .. but it does provide an opportunity to give H a little more exposure …. check out this incredible speech .. the occasion – prior to the start of the war Roosevelt sent Hilter a telegram requesting that he not invade a list of about 30 countries …. Hilter addressed the telegram in a speech to the Reichstag you can an excerpt here where Hitler mocks Roosevelt …


Video Link
Also from the speech ….

Check this out, very good. Mr. Perloff gives a lot of evidence that Hitler was rebelling against slime ball international bankers and hence he had to become “da most evul man in history”

Video Link
James Perloff: Hitler vs. the Elite Cabal of International Bankers

Mr. James Perloff is Jewish BTW.

No pattern adequately fits Hitler.

He had Jewish ancestry but was a virulent anti Semite. But during his Vienna years he said many complimentary things about Jews and also had many half jewish officers in his army…as well as indians and other nationalities.

He condemned Jewish communism for their slaughter of Slavic people and then went to do the same himself.

He persecuted the mason but many of the Nazis were deeply involved in paganism and occultism.

He tried to avoid war with the British, wanted Britain and Poland to be his allies and was constantly rebuffed on his endless peace proposals with the western allies. On the western front he fought the war mostly honourably. But he formed alliances with Stalin and the Nazi and communists got on wonderfully in Poland.

He believed Stalin was about to invade so he launched a preemptive strike that had no means of succeeding- not enough fuel and shortly before the Russian winter. Had he never heard of napoleon? The war lead to the destruction of the Slavic nations, the mass murder of Germans and Jews and ultimately now the death of the west

Was he an honourable but dictatorial man pressed into an impossible situation, a fool with no idea what he was doing, or false opposition and a Jewish shill? No pattern fully fits

That much no clear-thinking person could argue with.

What is your context? Judea declared war on Germany six weeks after Hitler was appointed Chancellor. By 1934, under Hitler, Germany had met its obligations of disarmament under the Treaty of Versailles, when no other country was close to meeting its obligations. Was that a disaster? Were his offers of peace a disaster? https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/nothanks/wwr00.html
It’s not his “reign” (total bullshit) that was a disaster, it was the ZOGs response to it, that was the disaster.

Really, it’s all about defining the commune.

There was an article on Unz discussing the leadup to Hitler invading Poland. This article below is 14 pages with cites. The basic point is because Hitler had overstepped his bounds in taking back the Sudentland, Britain, in a hissy fit, gave an unenforceable war guarantee to Poland so Poland thought they could ignore the Germans.
https://www.unz.com/article/why-germany-invaded-poland/

There are more books now revising the interpretation of WW2(and One) but lets face it, it has been 75 years of the winners telling us that Germany, the most literate country in the world at the time had decided to be led by a shrieking spittle spewing madman who led them to suicide. Somehow this does not make sense if you stop and think about it.

 In 1939 Poland was led by Beck, a bit of a megalomaniac guy himself. You never hear about that.  He used the unenforceable war guarantees from Britain and France to ignore the Germans. The Brits had no Army on the continent, what good is a war guarantee?The Germans  wanted a corridor to Danzig which had been a German city for 300 years. Beck would not negotiate at all and his spine was stiffened by the unenforceable  British and French war guarantees. History might have been different if the British had accepted Hitler’s peace proposals but FDR stiffened their spine as Herbert Hoover said FIFTY YEARS later in ‘Freedom Betrayed’. A book published by the ex-President 50 years after Hoover’s death so his immediate family would not have to deal with the revenge seekers.
JFK’s Dad was the ambassador to Britain during WW2.
Herbert Hoover p. 818 in his long history of the Second World War ‘Freedom Betrayed’ said Kennedy, the Ambassador to Great Britain, told Hoover that FDR lobbied incessantly for Britain to give a war guarantee to Poland, thus steeling the Polish resolve and causing Britain to be drawn into a war that would lose its Empire.“Kennedy said that after the Germans had occupied Prague and the great cry of appeasement had sprung up in the world and after the Germans had pressed their demands for Danzig and an passage through the Corridor, that Roosevelt and Bullitt were the major factors in the British making their guarantees to Poland and becoming involved in the war. Kennedy said that Bullitt, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the Poles not to make terms with the Germans and that he Kennedy, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the British to make guarantees to the Poles. Kennedy said he had received a cable from Roosevelt to “put a poker up Chamberlain’s back and make him stand up.” Kennedy saw Chamberlain on numerous occasions, urging him in Roosevelt’s name to do all this with the implication that the United States would give the British support. He said that after Chamberlain had given these guarantees, Chamberlain told him(Kennedy) that he hoped the Americans and the Jews would now be satisfied but that he(Chamberlain) felt that he had signed the doom of civilization.”
Keep in mind that Herbert Hoover, ex Pres waited FIFTY years to publish his book so revenge could not be taken on his family.
I think it all started with Pat Buchanan’s book the Unnecessary War. He brought up the Polish bit but really it has been 75 years of nonstop “Hitler is a raving madman who has one ball, farts uncontrollably and wanted to conquer the world…there is nothing good you can say abut him w/o losing your job or your social standing.”
After 75 years there is some revisionism going on.

How can the man be that bad, if it’s the USA with a above 2% infection today, while Germany has a rate of 1:850.
I talk jews.

Hitler’s rise and fall was the necessary condition for the creation of a “Jewish state” in Occupied Palestine.

stopped reading there.

The “Jewish state” traces its origins to at least a decade before Hitler was born.

Its zionist Jewish leaders had been supported by Germany — by 1910, zionists led by German Jew Arthur Ruppin had built TelAviv on a model calculated to appeal to W European, esp. Berlin, Jews.

Herzl tried to get full support from the Kaiser, but that was not forthcoming, so he switched away, first making overtures to Ottomans. When that failed, Herzl passed the ball to Chaim Weizmann to get the British to provide support, which he gained from Lord Balfour using tactic of guilt over antisemitism.

und so wieder.

und so weiter …

In Auschwitz this division is already present. There use to be boards stating the nationalities of people who died there. This broads, before 75 anniversary of liberation of the camp, was replaced with board saying “Here died Jews and non-Jews”. People, and specially former prisoners, were upset about it. They were saying “so this is how we divide people now?”.

Hitler would have loved to have had Poland as an ally, guarding Germany’s eastern flank, and he had tried hard to reason with Poland over Danzig

He gave Poland the offer to be a German protectorate which means giving up state autonomy. That’s not reasoning, it is bullying. Hitler never needed Poland to attack the Soviet Union. He could have opened multiple fronts through Prussia, Finland and Romania.

BIG PICTURE: Hitler wasn’t interested in fighting another world war. But he demanded the return of sovereign German territory/people stolen at Versailles

How do you explain Hitler writing that he wanted territory in the East? How you do think he planned on taking it? He was not only given back territory but took all of Czechoslovakia even though the allies had given him Sudentenland. Depicting Hitler as anything but the aggressor is ridiculous.

Only out of desperation did Hitler accede to the idea of a non-aggression pact with Russia.

Desperate how? He could have just launched a war with the Soviets instead of Poland. He would have kept the Soviets to a single front and won. But what he wanted first was revenge against the West and didn’t think Poland should exist. The Nazis even talked about turning Warsaw into a man made lake.

His greed made the mess we are in today. All he had to do was focus on the Soviets and leave Christian countries like Poland alone.

He believed Stalin was about to invade so he launched a preemptive strike that had no means of succeeding- not enough fuel and shortly before the Russian winter.

I see to no reason to believe that he thought Stalin was about to invade. Soviet troops were completely unprepared for the attack and in fact Stalin thought the Allies were trying to trick him with reports of the planned invasion. The early Luftwaffe attacks were so devastating that the Germans thought their own numbers were exaggerated. This is because they were able to attack so many planes on the ground.

What Hitler did believe (as he stated) that the Soviet system would collapse if you kicked it hard enough. He was not alone in his opinion and in fact military experts around the world expected the Soviets to lose. This opinion was largely based on the Soviet war with Finland and it was assumed their officer corp hadn’t recovered from Stalin’s executions.

I think it would have been possible to win if he listened to his Generals and went after Moscow. But it was a huge gamble regardless. In his mind he probably assumed the economic system would collapse but the Soviets just moved their factories east and Stalin didn’t care if people starved.

Had he never heard of napoleon?

Yes and he had even talked about Napolean’s mistake of invading Russia and how two fronts would be disastrous. He was well read and probably knew the history of every single war in Europe.

So he not only gambled on the Soviet system collapsing but also on defeating the Soviets before the winter kicked in or at least getting somewhere they could winter and take supplies.

What makes you think Hitler backfired on those who’d backed him?

UK went easy on Hitler in the early yrs, but Hitler’s war led to demise of British Empire.

There was no guarantee that Hitler would fail. He almost had all of Europe.

I think he invaded Russia to win, not to lose. You mean all that rage and hair-pulling as Germany began to lose the war was just Hitler putting on an act?

Was WWII necessary for Palestine to become Israel? I don’t think so. Even without WWII, Jews would have found some way to claim it and take it. After all, Jews found some way to have US invade Iraq, destroy Libya, pull a coup in Ukraine, rape the Russian economy, and etc.

WWII wasn’t all that necessary for Jews to grab Palestine. Whites grabbed South Africa without some major crisis. Post-colonial politics really took hold in the 50s and 60s. Until then, the West pretty did as it pleased in the Non-West. Of course, Jews used WWII as an excuse to MORALLY justify the creation of Israel, but this never made any sense. (1) Palestinians had nothing to do with WWII and Shoah. (2) If Jews needed a safe homeland, founding a nation surrounded by hostile Arabs was hardly the safest option.

Hitler’s defeat paved the way for communism. But I don’t buy that he invaded Russia just to LOSE. Hitler was really driven mad with defeat.
Also, that line of argument is like saying Japan invaded China just to make Mao come to power. Correlation ain’t causation. If Japan hadn’t invaded China, it wouldn’t have destroyed KMT. And if US hadn’t then destroyed Japan, there would have been no vacuum to be filled by Mao and commujnists. So, did Japan and US engineer all that just to make Mao win?

It’s been said Islam spread like a wild fire because Byzantines and Persians weakened each other with constant conflict. This gave an opening to the Arabs. So, was it all just a big conspiracy to spread Islam?

History is filled with unforeseen consequences, and people take advantage. Stalin took advantage of Hitler’s defeat. The idea that Hitler did all that to secretly aid Stalin seems absurd.

By aiding the Revolutionary War in the Americas, the French Monarchy bankrupted itself and paved the way for the French Revolution. Does this mean that the king was secretly master-minding the revolution? No.

That Hitler was on the Left in his youth means nothing. People change over time. I once supported the Neocons and Iraq War. Now, I loathe the Neocons.

Until now, I have read Kevin Barrett with an open mind. I have wondered at the mindset of a ‘Western’ man who converts to Islam, but on the other hand, have given him the benefit of the doubt because I have respect for a belief-system that upholds traditional values and that (rightly) pours scorn on what the decadent and degenerate West has become. I have also viewed his almost knee-jerk acceptance of each and every ‘conspiracy theory’ with suspicion, despite agreeing that the ‘official’ views of so many contemporary events – and those from the fairly recent past – are more often than not questionable at best. But with this facile endorsement of the demonstrably absurd and ridiculous work of ‘research’ that Bjerknes offers, I have no option other than that of concluding that Barrett it either a credulous fool or something far more sinister and unpleasant.

As good a résumé as any of why the part-Jewish Bjerknes is deliberately misleading his readers (I give him credit for not being quite stupid enough actually to believe what he writes) is contained in this article (which saves me the trouble of enumerating them myself here):

http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-lies-of-christopher-bjerknes/

Thanks for the link.
Well written refutation of Bjerknes’s claims; highly recommended.

“Until now, I have read Kevin Barrett with an open mind. I have wondered at the mindset of a ‘Western’ man who converts to Islam, but on the other hand, have given him the benefit of the doubt because I have respect for a belief-system that upholds traditional values and that (rightly) pours scorn on what the decadent and degenerate West has become.”

If Islam and its true believers were able to accept that virtually the entire Islamic world is and has been for almost all time as decadent as the West has become post-Christian, then they might be able to do some good ‘at home.’ But Moslems, like Rabbinic Jews, practice a Semitic religion that always promotes Semitic culture. And Semitic culture always features hordes desperate to blind multitudes of ‘other people’ in order to save them from motes in their eyes while ignoring the beams protruding from their own Semitic eyes.

The great difference between Moslems and Jews in that regard is that the vast majority of such Moslems itching to blind Western man in order to remove the motes does do sincerely from religious belief, while the average Jew wh0 acts the same in blinding non-Jews while tearing motes from their eyes does so from a desire to get rich.

When you discern that difference, you will know why truly devout Moslems have a very long history, back to no more than a century after the death of Mohammad, of denouncing almost all powerful Moslem warlords/royal families as being as bad as Jews.

QUOTE Whites grabbed South Africa without some major crisis. Post-colonial politics really took hold in the 50s and 60s. END QUOTE

What?

Seriously?

A litany of insanities

Was WWII necessary for Palestine to become Israel?

It would have been a hell of a lot easier if the imperial powers had remained in control of the world….

Until national liberation movements took hold all over the world, white nations pretty much grabbed whatever they could.

India was one of the first to win independence. 1948. Indonesia followed in 49.

But most other Third World colonies gained independence in the 50s and 60s. French left Vietnam in 54 and left Algeria in 1961.

Kenya gained independence in 1963.

Even before WWII, Jews were rapidly gaining in power and demographics in Palestine. It was a done deal.

As for South Africa, whites took it over like they took over other parts of Africa. They did it because they could. There was no one to stop them.

So, the idea that Jews needed WWII to get Israel is such a sorry joke.

The powerful get what they want. Jews grabbed Sinai and W. Bank in 67. Jews also took Golan. Why? Because they could. It didn’t require WWIV and WWV.

I’m afraid it is a little bit more complicated. Yes, Hitler turned out to be Germany’s greatest enemy in the long run, putting ideology above strategy, leading to German nationalists like Rommel to act but too late. But Hitler was not a false flag. He was not an agent of Bolsheviks or Freemasons. He was a German nationalist. His mistake was to reject the Christian traditions of the Holy Roman Empire in favor of German paganism. Had he tempered Germany’s grievances with Christian virtue and morality, he would have been successful in saving Germany and Europe from Freemasonry and Zionism. But Hitler made a deal with the Devil and, as the old saying goes, when you make a deal with the devil you always get burned.

“As for South Africa, whites took it over like they took over other parts of Africa. They did it because they could. There was no one to stop them.”

There was no one there, period.

Do you understand what the African continent looked like before we fed them? Pick up a national Geographic from even the last century, let alone going back to when white people settled a more or less empty part of the earth.

I see to no reason to believe that he thought Stalin was about to invade.

This is the English translation of the speech given by the Fuhrer of the Third Reich Adolf Hitler in Berlin, October 3rd, 1941.

Adolf Hitler speaks:

Correct.

Whites in what is today South Africa met the blacks (Bantus, not the reddish and much smaller Bushmen who had been there for at least a few millennia) who had arrived at almost the same time.

White charity then made it possible for blacks to reproduce like rabbits.

That’s a propaganda speech for the people.

He also claimed that the invasion of Poland was in self-defense when in fact the Nazis had created a false flag operation.

The cape wasn’t occupied by anyone as the locals thought it was too cold and worthless. They weren’t fishing so they had no idea it was a major potential source of food.

But that of course isn’t something you will learn in White guilt history 101.

Also, that line of argument is like saying Japan invaded China just to make Mao come to power. Correlation ain’t causation. If Japan hadn’t invaded China, it wouldn’t have destroyed KMT.

The Chinese Communists (& Soviets & the USA) wanted the KMT and the Imperial Japanese to fight out each other so that eventually the Commies would win.

That’s a propaganda speech for the people.

Rubbish. That speech is in complete agreement with Hitler’s private conversation with Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim. It was no propaganda speech, it was facts.

Video Link

Fuhrer of the Third Reich, Adolf Hitler talking in his everyday voice to Finnish military commander Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim in 1942. Thor Damen, an engineer for the Finnish broadcasting company Yle, recorded the first 11 minutes of Hitler and Mannerheim’s private conversation.

Adolf Hitler to Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim : This all was inevitable, you see. I had a conversation with Motolov [Soviet Minister] at that time, and it was absolutely certain at that time, and it was absolutely certain that Motolov departed with the decision to begin a war, and I dismissed the decision to have a war, and I dismissed him with the decision to – impossible, to forestall him. There was – this was the only – because the demands that man brought up was clearly aimed to rule Europe in the end. (Practically whispering here.) Then I have him – not publicly… (fades out).
Already in the fall of 1940 we continuously faced the question, uh: shall we, consider a break up [in relations with the USSR]? At that time, I advised the Finnish government, to negotiate and, to gain time and, to act dilatory in this matter – because I always feared – that Russia suddenly would attack Romania in the late fall – and occupy the petroleum wells, and we would have not been ready in the late fall of 1940. If Russia indeed had taken Romanian petroleum wells, then Germany would have been lost. It would have required – just 60 Russian divisions to handle that matter.

…snip….

Adolf Hitler to Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim : till we would be strong enough to, counter those extortive demands [from Moscow] because – those demands were simply naked extortion’s. They were extortion’s. The Russians knew we were tied up in the west. They could really extort everything from us.

Correct. Whites did not meet the blacks (Bantu) in the Cape but well inland.

Thank you. This is why I come to the Unz commentariat

The Chinese Communists (& Soviets & the USA) wanted the KMT and the Imperial Japanese to fight out each other so that eventually the Commies would win.

Mao wanted that surely, but he didn’t force Japan to advance further into China. Japanese did that.

Stalin didn’t like Mao and, in some ways, preferred Chiang to Mao. He was surprised when the Chinese communists gained the upper hand. There was no single US policy toward China. US leaders wanted KMT to win and rule China, but there were many in the State Department, the China Hands, who were secretly pro-Mao and pro-communist, insisting that the commies were moderate ‘Agrarian Reformers’. Granted, these China Hands were naive do-gooders unlike the Machiavellian monsters who called terrorists in Syria the ‘moderate rebels’.

Anyway, there is no single mastermind in history. Jewish Power comes closest to such, but the notion pushed by Bjerknes(aka Berserkness) that Jews masterminded the rise of Hitler and WWII to create Israel… that is too ROTFL. And that idea that Hitler was just playacting to aid Zionists and spread communism. I mean it’s total LOL.

A more likely conspiracy theory would be that Berserkness is secretly working with Zionists to make anti-Jewish-supremacist voices sound totally cuckoo.

I hear you, brother! Those stupid inconsistencies made me absolutely hate history as a school kid. As I was contemplating the issue as part of the blah-blah 75-year “liberation of Auschwitz” I suddenly had two questions: One: Liberated from whom? The Germans were running for their lives, why try defend a wire camp? The second question is rather relevant to your comment. I don’t like inserting myself into other people’s websites, but maybe you will be somewhat entertained by the following little piece on the subject:
https://greenpets.co.za/index.php/en/truthers/12-paranoid-goy/257-heilhitler
I will pretend it’s tongue-in-cheek, if anyone asks.

…and the Yanks were using commercial and passenger liners to smuggle heavy weaponry over to the commy Bolshies! Adolph expressly states his desire to prevent Russia from attaining enough force to attack Europe. Not to defend only Germany, not for occupying Russia, just keeping the communists out of Europe.
Have they not found weaponry in the Lucitania wreck, or was it that the Yanks sank her, or sent her into known enemy waters, or something scaly like that? Remember, history is propaganda written by the victor, or as Churchill said: “History shall be kind to me, for I shall write the history.” I dislike historians as a species, but the more I learn from people like the ones on Unz’s, the more I wish my school teachers had actual brains, I could have enjoyed the lessons.

What makes you think Hitler backfired on those who’d backed him? Hitler’s rise and fall was the necessary condition for the creation of a “Jewish state” in Occupied Palestine. He also paved the way for a huge expansion of Communism, as well as for a huge expansion of centralized bankster-run government in non-Communist countries.

While I’m not quite prepared to say as some do that Hitler was from the beginning in effect an artificially created and wholly controlled automoton (ie a Frankenstein like ‘Golem’ figure) to do others bidding, I wouldn’t wholly rule it out.

For the time being, I lean more to the idea that both Preparata in Conjuring Hitler and Suvorov in Icebreaker were correct in their respective paralleling thesis, ie that both the Capitalist US/UK and Communist Soviet Union had hopes of building up (though not creating) National Socialist Germany as a deadly pawn with which to bludgeon the other with, as part of their own respective dreams of accomplishing all encompassing global empire as their Capitalist and Communist ideologies marched across Europe, and the world.

In that struggle, Stalin’s Soviet Union had little chance against the US/UK, and decidedly got the short end of the stick, ie huge wartime people and property losses, and a largely agricultural/non-industrial low population Eastern Europe to occupy.

Most people simply don’t realize the almost overwhelming historic power of the United States and United Kingdom the past one hundred plus years. Having said that, the US/UK certainly had all the ingredients and power within it to do what you indicate, and then some, if it desired to do so.

W T Stead, a close associate of Cecil Rhodes of British Empire fame, in his circa 1900 book The Americanization of the World calculated on pg 10, 11, and 12, that the US/UK had three times the wealth and economic resources of the combined French, Russian, and German Empire’s. He described the US/UK as ‘world conquerors’ and the ‘supreme power’.

He summed it up with:

Washington and London

‘The lion’s share of the world is ours..’

The Americanization of the World (1902) – pg 8

The lion’s share of the world is ours, not only in bulk, but in tid-bits also. The light land of the Sahara is not worth a centime an acre. The vast area of German South Africa would hardly provide a livelihood for the population of a middle-sized German village. With the exception of the Rhine, the Danube, the Amoor, the Volga, the Platte and the Amazon, nearly all the great navigable rivers of the world enter the sea under the Union Jack or the Stars and Stripes.

The valley of the Yang-tse-Kiang is earmarked as the sphere of our influence. The whole of the North American Continent,’ from the North Pole to the frontier of Mexico, is within the ring fence of the English-speaking race, and from the whole of Central and Southern America all trespassers have been emphatically warned off by the proclamation of the Monroe Doctrine.

https://archive.org/details/americanizationo01stea/page/n6/mode/2up

This endless obsession with Hitler pretty much proves that he was the last real leader in all of the Western (White) world. Every day his name is still spoken and the cucks like Churchill and FDR are gradually forgotten.

Hitler’s Germany was the only serious obstacle to prevailing power structures that still rule over us today. That is why you have to been engineered to hate him. That is why his name will be spoken after you’re dead.

The apocalypse already occurred, you’re just living in the afterglow.

A more likely conspiracy theory would be that Berserkness is secretly working with Zionists to make anti-Jewish-supremacist voices sound totally cuckoo.

Yes, much more likely.

I have had thoughts along these lines as well.

It has been now just 30 years that the Cold War with the Soviet Union came to an end and with it the immediate danger of a global nuclear war, yet it has become boring history, younger people don’t even know what it was all about and they have no sense of the dread one could feel of living under the dark cloud of a possible 15 minute window to say good-bye to everything. The late insights of Churchill or other people from the Second War about “newer, and even greater dangers” to be faced after the defeat of Germany are also forgotten, it is only Hitler who is remembered, not these “newer, and even greater dangers”, or even insights that the war against Germany was an entirely unnecessary, aimless and wrong endeavor. And this eternal remembering of Hitler and the fading away of his adversaries proves that he was made of a wholly different cloth. We never hear that he was immensely popular in the subject populations of the large colonial powers, we can hear and read his words only after being strained through the sieves of ordained opinion leaders in positions on the public dole in one way or another, judicial codes and basic human requirements such as free speech are bent to satisfy the need to not hear his words and not look at his life and deeds with a free and open mind.
He is clearly of a category few, if any humans in the whole history are counted into.
In the distant future of the world, I imagine him to attain either the status of a god or a devil, while his adversaries will either triumph or pass into oblivion.

Most people understand

– why Hitler ‘annexed’ Austria: Austrian and Germans are the same people (the Austrian parliament itself voted to join Germany in 1919, but this was prohibited by the Allies, champions of self-determination),

– why he incorporated the Sudeten: 3.5 million Germans left by Versailles in a country officially speaking Slav languages,

– why he tried to get back Danzig (97% German) and a corridor to east Prussia separated from the Reich (2.5 million Germans left under pressure in Poland)

But few understand why he attacked poor, peace-loving Stalin.

Hitlers private conversations with Mannerheim are an interesting document in this respect, and – contrary to other “private conversations” (Rauschnigg et al.) – there is a physical record of it, it cannot be disputed.

But it proves one point sometimes argued against the ‘Preemptive Strike’ thesis:
the Germans did not fully estimate the danger of the military build-up at their borders. It was hugely more dangerous than they thought.

BTW it was not only Germany which invaded the Soviet Union. Six nations in total including Romaina and Finland took part in it. They all felt that the Soviets were a threat. Also 20,000-30,000 Spaniards volunteered to fight on the side of the Third Reich, probably those Spaniards who had seen the horrors committed by Communists in the Spanish Civil War.

You know, I have shown some of Hitler’s speech videos (with accurate translations in English) to some of my friends here in India. A few of them even know a little German as learning German (along with French & Japanese) as a foreign language is quite popular among educated Middle Class folks here, so they know that the translations are accurate.
And all of them, all of them, each & every one of them, after seeing the videos have jumped up exclaiming, in cafes and restaurants, “We have been lied to, we have been lied to about this man, that is it, we have been lied” (in Hindi or English) or in some cases they have a stunned look on their faces. Friends of both genders, friends who are MD doctors, Software Engineers, Accountants etc… One attractive female friend of mine, who is a MD doctor even told me, after seeing the videos, “Whatever Hitler says is all so logical and so full of sense”, she had never heard a leader speak so much sense before.

I had a live stream with Dennis Wise, Dennis Fetcho, The Fascifist and myself about the debate moderated by Adam Green between Dennis Wise and Christopher Bjerknes. We took clips of what CJB stated and debunked everything he claims. The video can be found on Bitchute under the channel The Citizen Reporter

Yep. But having said that, I actually take heart every time I read garbage like this. This sort of shilling shows how desperate they are becoming now that the truth is getting out.

I myself believed the conventional historical narrative about an evil genocidal maniac until just a few years ago. Back then I could not have imagined myself ever becoming a ‘Nazi’. Now I know the truth, and I am not alone – I’ve seen many friends of mine make the same intellectual journey as the mask has slipped and revealed the extent of Jewish subversion in Western societies, and the sinister intent behind it.

We can expect ever more bizarre and hysterical attempts to muddy the waters as awareness continues to spread. They will be just as ineffectual as this one.

You done spoke a parable, brother!

Is it recorded?
Got a link?

—
Les Miserables is still a great read. (Entire text on Gutenberg)

Volume III Book Seven, Chapters One and Two:
Ch. One, Mines and Miners, is an historically dense chronology of thinkers who have changed religion/philosophy, from Caesar, the catacombs, to the Encyclopaedists; from John Hus to and how they built upon – or distorted each the others ideas or errors.
It would take me however long this lockdown is going to be to begin to understand fully what Hugo is recounting.

He contrasts “The starry-eyed [philosopher]” with the “shadowy-eyed philosopher.”

(No tee vee in Hugo’s day; many words needed to paint the scene . . .
In bold are the parts that struck home:)

The shadowy eye is the other sign.
With it, evil commences. Reflect and tremble in the presence of any one who has no glance at all. The social order has its black miners.
There is a point where depth is tantamount to burial, and where light becomes extinct.
Below all these mines which we have just mentioned, below all these galleries, below this whole immense, subterranean, venous system of progress and utopia, much further on in the earth, much lower than Marat, lower than Babeuf, lower, much lower, and without any connection with the upper levels, there lies the last mine. A formidable spot. This is what we have designated as the le troisième dessous. It is the grave of shadows. It is the cellar of the blind. Inferi.
This communicates with the abyss.

CHAPTER II—THE LOWEST DEPTHS

There disinterestedness vanishes. The demon is vaguely outlined; each one is for himself. The I in the eyes howls, seeks, fumbles, and gnaws. The social Ugolino is in this gulf.

The wild spectres who roam in this grave, almost beasts, almost phantoms, are not occupied with universal progress; they are ignorant both of the idea and of the word; they take no thought for anything but the satisfaction of their individual desires. They are almost unconscious, and there exists within them a sort of terrible obliteration. They have two mothers, both step-mothers, ignorance and misery.

They have a guide, necessity; and for all forms of satisfaction, appetite. They are brutally voracious, that is to say, ferocious, not after the fashion of the tyrant, but after the fashion of the tiger. From suffering these spectres pass to crime; fatal affiliation, dizzy creation, logic of darkness.
That which crawls in the social third lower level is no longer complaint stifled by the absolute; it is the protest of matter. Man there becomes a dragon. To be hungry, to be thirsty—that is the point of departure; to be Satan—that is the point reached. From that vault Lacenaire emerges.

We have just seen, in Book Fourth, one of the compartments of the upper mine, of the great political, revolutionary, and philosophical excavation. There, as we have just said, all is pure, noble, dignified, honest. There, assuredly, one might be misled; but error is worthy of veneration there, so thoroughly does it imply heroism. The work there effected, taken as a whole has a name: Progress.

The moment has now come when we must take a look at other depths, hideous depths. There exists beneath society, we insist upon this point, and there will exist, until that day when ignorance shall be dissipated, the great cavern of evil.

This cavern is below all, and is the foe of all. It is hatred, without exception. This cavern knows no philosophers; its dagger has never cut a pen. Its blackness has no connection with the sublime blackness of the inkstand. Never have the fingers of night which contract beneath this stifling ceiling, turned the leaves of a book nor unfolded a newspaper. Babeuf is a speculator to Cartouche; Marat is an aristocrat to Schinderhannes. This cavern has for its object the destruction of everything.

Of everything. Including the upper superior mines, which it execrates.
It not only undermines, in its hideous swarming, the actual social order;
it undermines philosophy,
it undermines human thought,
it undermines civilization,
it undermines revolution,
it undermines progress.
Its name is simply theft, prostitution, murder, assassination.
It is darkness, and it desires chaos. Its vault is formed of ignorance.

All the others, those above it, have but one object—to suppress it. It is to this point that philosophy and progress tend, with all their organs simultaneously, by their amelioration of the real, as well as by their contemplation of the absolute. Destroy the cavern Ignorance and you destroy the lair Crime.
Let us condense, in a few words, a part of what we have just written.

The only social peril is darkness.

Humanity is identity. All men are made of the same clay. There is no difference, here below, at least, in predestination. The same shadow in front, the same flesh in the present, the same ashes afterwards. But ignorance, mingled with the human paste, blackens it. This incurable blackness takes possession of the interior of a man and is there converted into evil.

Compare Hugo’s lengthy expostulation about the destructive power of Hate with the first entry in a google search for USHMM, and its unspoken determination to keep men ignorant of larger truths in favor of self-serving lies:

US Holocaust Memorial Museum | Donate Today‎
Ad·

donate.ushmm.org/
‎Teaching millions about the dangers of unchecked hatred & the need to prevent genocide. Your tax-deductible donation helps confront hatred and prevent genocide. Remember Survivors. Make a Direct Impact. Stop Antisemitism. Confront Genocide.

Unchecked hatred.
Free-floating hatred, directed at Jews, defined by Jews, located in non-Jews.

Donate Today
There’s big money in hatred.

Yes here is the link

Video Link

The link to the video where myself, Dennis Wise, Dennis “The Fetch” Fetcho and The Fascifist debunked Christopher Bjerknes lies and propaganda.

Video Link

Here read this from AH’s June 22 1941 – proclamation to the German folk:

Thank you for your reply. What you describe with your friends, acquaintances and colleagues is a reaction most people would have if they were not under duress to dismiss anything relating to Hitler. In a country like India it is then possible hear the man himself and not his political, juridical, intellectual or editorial impostors and detractors. On TV, youtube, and other renditions of his speeches his voice is usually distorted to make him sound like a shouting, unbalanced madman.These are tricks applied by weak men to make their point, and they really don’t seem to have a point other than making it forbidden territory to understand him.
I have heard several of his speeches as well, also read some, and it has always struck me that they were very well worked out and delivered; they were always substantial and show a lively, incisive intelligence at work. They make sense and convey a passion in his subject. He wrote all of them himself, which is also a substantial difference to today’s politicians who have people who do that for them.

Here read this from AH’s June 22 1941 – proclamation to the German folk: http://www.der-fuehrer.org/reden/english/41-06-22.htm

Thanks for that useful link and a speech that I wasn’t aware of. It sums up Hitler’s POV circa 1941.

Alas, for over two decades, the Jewish-Bolshevik rulers have labored from Moscow to set afire not only Germany, but also all of Europe. Never has Germany attempted to carry its National Socialist ideology into Russia.

True, but Hitler’s version of National Socialism had a strong element of ethnic German racial superiority (particularly with regard to Slavs), and once the decision was made to invade Russia, it was 100% clear that Germans were not going there to liberate anyone – they were planning to stay, promote German ethnic settlement, and enforce a racial colonial exploitative system of the worst kind.

In contrast to that, I strove in the past two decades to achieve a new socialist order in Germany with a minimum of intervention and without destroying our production, a new socialist order that not only eliminated unemployment, but also increasingly let the profit from the work go to the working man.
The successes of this policy of a new economic and social order for our Volk, the systematic overcoming of social differences and class distinctions, are unequaled in the world.

True. It was a remarkable success – but helped by the fact that the public had firsthand experience of the depraved “financialized” swamp of Weimar.

And then, after Germany solemnly declared in Moscow that the aforementioned areas and countries were outside the German sphere of interest-with the exception of Lithuania-a special agreement was made in case England succeeded in driving Poland to war against Germany. Here, too, the German demands were limited and stood in no relation to the accomplishments of the German arms.

Poland hardly made war against Germany. Poland was simultaneously invaded and destroyed in September 1939 by Germany and Soviet Russia following a secret agreement between the two of them.

The mission of this front, therefore, is no longer the protection of individual countries, but the securing of Europe and, hence, the salvation of all.

Today, I have therefore determined to lay the fate and the future of the German Reich and of our Volk again into the hands of our soldiers.

Hitler claimed to be securing Europe, but if anyone had asked the people of Belgium, France, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Great Britain whether they wanted to be “secured” by German invasions in WW2 they would say no. They wanted to be free and independent and didn’t need or want German “help”.

I am reposting this as many people are not aware of the extent of the fraud that is the so-called jewish “holocaust™” Permission is granted to reproduce this in any form with attribution.

Apologies to those who have previously read this:

There was no jewish “holocaust™ ” and I can prove it…

Hitler claimed to be securing Europe, but if anyone had asked the people of Belgium, France, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Great Britain whether they wanted to be “secured” by German invasions in WW2 they would say no. They wanted to be free and independent and didn’t need or want German “help”.

Didn’t want? Sure. After all, the entire mainstream media had been telling them ever since 1933 that Hitler was Orange Man Bad levels of bad, before the Orange Man was even born. Who would want such a bad thing?

Didn’t need, though? The historical record unambiguously proves that none of these countries has managed to remain free after their regimes rejected German help. Without a single exception, they are all now colonies to world plutocracy and “Globo-Homo” anarchotyranny, suffering systematic looting of national wealth, destruction of native culture, settler colonization and slow genocide. And anyone who even speaks out against this in public is sentenced to long prison sentences for so-called hate speech. Or even murdered, like Theo van Gogh, ironically named for a “heroic” relative who fought for the “freedom” of the Netherlands during World War II as a “resistance” terrorist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_%28film_director%29

Literally, even the worst horror stories of the anti-German propaganda during the war are not as bad as what has actually happened in reality under the democratic regime. Even the Hollywood propagandists weren’t crazy enough to think anyone would believe it if they claimed Hitler wanted to settle millions of non-whites in Holland and Belgium and force Drag Queen Story Hour on them.

Indeed, while the globalist tyranny was much less obvious back then, it’s very arguably whether these countries were “free” in any significant way even in 1939. Neville Chamberlain himself notably didn’t want war with Germany, but was forced to declare it by the globalists in Washington and New York. Or at least, that was what he said to Joseph Kennedy, the US ambassador, according to James Forrestal, US Secretary of Defense:

He [Kennedy] said Chamberlain’s position in 1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she could not risk going to war with Hitler. Kennedy’s view: That Hitler would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it had not been for Bullitt’s urging on Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had not been for the constant needling from Washington. Bullitt, he said, kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn’t fight, Kennedy that they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war.

http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/cikkek/forrestal.html

If a Prime Minister in a supposedly democratic country is forced into a ruinous war by foreign financial interests, is his country truly free?

As is usual in these rehashings of old men’s tales, you disregard the sequence of events, and thereby necessarily the motive forces.

Didn’t want? Sure. After all, the entire mainstream media had been telling them ever since 1933 that Hitler was Orange Man Bad levels of bad, before the Orange Man was even born. Who would want such a bad thing?

You make an interesting point and comparison.

As stated, I’m not quite prepared to say Hitler was some sort of controlled ‘Golem’ from the beginning, but, with Trump it’s another story.

Though I wish I could say differently, Trump I very much suspect to be controlled, perhaps via a combination of his ego, bribery, and ultimately blackmail should it prove neccessary.

Same with his Russian counterpart Putin, and Hungary’s Orban, etc.

Amongst other things, Trump’s role is to give false hopes to the Euro population of the US while simultaneously acting as a lightning rod to those who delusionally believe Trump to literally be ‘the second coming’ of Hitler.

Trump’s presidency is also being utilized to lay the groundwork for a Red October 2.0 type of event in the United States, likely followed by a vicious Russian style ‘civil war’, perhaps far worse than the one a hundred years before it.

This is all part of creating a legend that it was ‘the rise of nationalism’ that led to WWIII, which they will write in the future history books.

They’re too close imo to achieving their world state/empire objective to risk any ‘loose cannons’ amongst these present world leaders to take any serious chances.

Plans don’t always work out to fruition though, the best laid plans of mice and men and all that.

The historical record unambiguously proves that none of these countries has managed to remain free after their regimes rejected German help. Without a single exception, they are all now colonies to world plutocracy and “Globo-Homo” anarchotyranny, suffering systematic looting of national wealth, destruction of native culture, settler colonization and slow genocide. And anyone who even speaks out against this in public is sentenced to long prison sentences for so-called hate speech.

This is mostly true, but there are different time frames here. For instance, it’s important to realize that post-WW2 Great Britain was nothing at all like the way it is today.

I was there ( in state schools), and remember reciting the Lord’s Prayer every morning in school Assembly, with the whole school receiving a scripture reading from the headmaster with a selected uplifting ethical message. This was quite normal. RI (religious education) lessons were compulsory although we thought they were a joke. It seems impossible, but this was the way the UK was in the 1950’s and early 1960’s. Also, on religious holidays everyone went to church.

It all disappeared with the late 1960’s (Jewish led) Counter Cultural Hippy revolution ushering in Globo-Homo multiculturalism, but the British didn’t need Hitler to fix this problem. They could have done it perfectly well themselves by respecting their own historical traditions.

but the British didn’t need Hitler to fix this problem. They could have done it perfectly well themselves by respecting their own historical traditions.

But the British did not, whereas Hitler did, until Churchill’s Britain, allied with FDR, Jews, and Stalin crushed the brief German Risorgimento.

If the British had had a Hitlerian Brit rather than a Churchill, England might be British.

” …the British didn’t need Hitler to fix this problem.”

No, of course not. They just could have left the Germans alone, Hitler was never threatening the Empire, quite the contrary.

What you dont understand is, that the current situation is due to actively destroying Germany and empowering a (((hostile elite))) in every western country.

I admit, living in the 1930ies in the UK paradise you describe, I would not have understood why the Germans wanted to divorce from their Jewish minority and encourage their emigration.

Living in the 2020ies in the Western mess, I understand.

Do you honestly think fake news is a modern concoction? It is true even then that fake news propaganda was hard at work to convince the unsuspecting public that Hitler and his “Nazi goons” were simply out to conquer all of Europe.

When one begins to peel back the propaganda layers, now, just as equally applied to the past, something altogether different emerges from this midst. You see, just like Germany had powerful internal goyim traitors (like Ernst Rohm, Gergor and Otto Strasser, Schleicher, Wilhelm Liebknecht, et al) so did the rest of Europe …. Case in point Scandinavia:

The text of a top-secret document, written by then-Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill, detailed a plan for first entangling Germany in the Scandinavian theater, thus drawing Sweden and Norway to Britain’s side.

The document is reproduced below.

As planned, Churchill’s Scandinavian scheme draws Germany into invading (to protect its iron ore shipments and preserve the neutrality of the Scandinavian countries). But notice the anti-German spin from the Fake News of the day — which makes no mention of Churchill’s plot, nor of the German Foreign Ministry’s immediate and logical explanation for its justified actions. Because Germany was able to convince Norway and Denmark of their peaceful intentions, resistance quickly faded away and Scandinavia remained peaceful, until the allies dislodged the Germans in 1944-45.

https://www.realhistorychannel.org/why-did-hitler-invade-norway-denmark

I never said that your piece was ‘a column’ but I consider my interpretation of the ‘post’ (if that term is acceptable to you as a description of the piece that carries your by-line) as an endorsement by you of Bjerknes’ farrago of deceit and ommission as more or less accurate.

You say that you think Bjerknes’s interpretation is not implausible? Thanks at least for removing all doubt from my mind. (And I cannot for the life of me discern any trace of a ‘straw man’ in the RT article).

> “this legendary, godlike figure of evil, Adolf Hitler”

Why is gassing Jews evil? Aren’t Jews foreigners? Aren’t foreigners deserving of death?

^ These are the questions nobody ever asks. The questions of axiology. Why is our morality so Christian to the core? Did Darwin not write The Origin of Species?

Instead, all you are saying is “Hitler did not gas those Jews”. Because you subscribe to the same axiology as your enemies. Murder bad – peace good. Straight bad – gay good. Nature bad – Jesus good.

Nope. Nice to see butthurt neo-Nazis, however.

> “MOST LIED ABOUT MAN IN HISTORY”

What is lied about Hitler? That he had a harem of sluts? That he ate dogs? – Those would be such lies, and nobody is telling them.

That he started WW2? That he attacked the USSR and murdered 27 mil. Russians? That his reckless, criminal behavior led to the ruin of Europe? That he colluded with Christians, including the Pope? That he was trying to further the interests of Germany and the expense of Poland and Little Russia, when Europe was threatened by the non-White races of Africa and Asia?

Those would be the truths, and even normies can see them. Hitler was a failure – sadly.

> “He gave Poland the offer to be a German protectorate which means giving up state autonomy. That’s not reasoning, it is bullying.”

Yes, this part is good. But neo-Nazis deny all non-Hitlerian states the right to defend themselves.

> “Hitler never needed Poland to attack the Soviet Union. He could have opened multiple fronts through Prussia, Finland and Romania.”

No, this part is ridiculous. You can’t conquer Russia from Azerbaijan. And Prussia? Prussia doesn’t even border the USSR.

> “He was not only given back territory but took all of Czechoslovakia even though the allies had given him Sudentenland. Depicting Hitler as anything but the aggressor is ridiculous.”

Doubly ridiculous! Why are neo-Nazis so keen at using the old trite Christian axiology? Why are they trying to portray Hitler as some moron trying to follow international law?

> “His greed made the mess we are in today. All he had to do was focus on the Soviets and leave Christian countries like Poland alone.”

No, Hitler should have united with Stalin’s Russia against the degenerate Christian capitalists of England and Poland. Christianity is a Jewish disease.

> “He was not alone in his opinion and in fact military experts around the world expected the Soviets to lose.”

Also because of WW1. Also did not happen again because Hitler was trying to genocide Russians. And because Stalin actually united the country and brought it out of poverty.

Kevin:

You are simply out of your realm here. There is NO CONCEIVABLE explaination that Bjerknes can be correct (if historical truth is an en devour one seeks). Period! The German peoples, under Hitler, enjoyed the HIGHEST standard of living in the world at that time–coming out from some of the most hard-hit, misery imposed–vis-a-vis the Wiemar “republic”–previous entanglements. That is the foremost reason Hitler had to be destroyed by the “occidental” REST OF THE WORLD!

You’ve been lied to on an industrial scale. Think that over and do re-research what you’ve previously held as the “settled truth” much like you claim to challenge the official narrative on your False Flag weekly news stream.

There is not doubt the internet is filled with psy-ops narratives and operators galore. Having said that, one can still gleam bits and pieces of relevant info to put together into a mosaic of a discerning jig saw puzzle–if one has the determinations to do so. No doubt, you are free to believe what you’d like, but you’re not free to pass it off as the “truth”.

You can never have a person such as myself on your ff weekly news because you may be in a shock quite different than what you are willing to accept at the moment. (I can provide you with historical original sources material and you would still dismiss it as some sort of fairy tale….)

Hitler DID more for his people than any other “politician” in the 20th century–bar NONE! Why he was made example of THE MOST concentrated and hideous propaganda lies to disparage his goals is all but apparent. If one seeks the truth of the matter one only has to examine this fake news, propaganda effort that have its roots in the wholly sensationalized holohoax campaign.

Did you ever once see what the British and then the Americans did to Dresden (along with other cities in Germany) and in Japan? Do examine the matter, if you are truly interested in the truth, as you claim:

Here are just some simple pieces to examine:

Video Link


Video Link
Listen to the British soldier and ex-prisoner–who was there in Dresden on the night of the bombing and helped search for survivors–tell a harrowing tale of the carnage he witnessed and the horrific scenes. The next the the allies came back to bomb the rescue workers, firemen, police and others to commit more atrocities.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7999149/Dresden-bombing-survivor-Victor-Gregg-100-Good-Morning-Britain-75th-anniversary.html

‘That he started WW2? That he attacked the USSR and murdered 27 mil. Russians? That his reckless, criminal behavior led to the ruin of Europe?’

Might I suggest that you look to the man whom Revilo P Oliver called ‘The Great War Criminal’ as the figure who, more so than any other, brought about the ruin of Europe, by fomenting the despicable and unnecessary exercise in ‘regime change’ that we know as World War II? To quote Oliver (from a secret speech he made at the Lorelei Club in Hamburg, NY, in 1963, the transcript of which only became available a generation later):

“When I left the mephitic atmosphere of Washington late in 1945 I felt certain that its secrets would quickly become known, and that our nation would be swept with moral indignation and revulsion, when Americans saw exposed to the light of day even a small part of the foul record of the diseased creature that had squatted in the White House for so many years, surrounded by his appalling gang of degenerates, traitors, and alien subversives. I thought that the secret of Pearl Harbour would be quickly disclosed, and that Americans would soon know how the Japanese had been manoeuvred and tricked into destroying our fleet and killing so many of our men, and also of Roosevelt’s persistent efforts from 1936 to 1939 to get started in Europe the insanely fratricidal war that devastated that continent and destroyed so much of what is the most precious and irreplaceable treasure of any race. And I was sure that a thousand other infamies, unsurpassed and only rarely equalled in recorded history, would be disclosed, with the result that all the steamships outward bound from our shores would, within a few years, be crowded to their very rails with hordes of vermin desperately fleeing from the wrath of an aroused and angry nation. In 1945 I really believed that by the year 1952 no American could hear the name of Roosevelt without a shudder or utter it without a curse.”

As he went on to lament, he was woefully wrong in thinking that the American people would soon come to know the truth about their nation and its leaders. Thanks to an unending tsunami of propaganda, most now believe in the WWII mythology. That Hitler was an evil maniac. That he wanted to conquer the world. That he destroyed Europe. This is no more than the well-known tactic employed by many psychotic criminals, known as ‘projection’. If one were to replace ‘Hitler’ with ‘Roosevelt’ in my previous sentence, then the truth would appear at last.

Oliver would later remark that “in 1950, I still believed that there was a significant intellectual difference between the American public and those beasts one sees peering from betweent the slats in high-sided vehicles, contentedly munching hay on their way to the abbattoir”.

Revilo Oliver was a man of keen insight while in the midst of events.
I believe that he wrote something similar to what you quote in his book written in the late 1970s “America’s Decline”.
It is well worth reading such older literature, as one can recognize that the development to the present catastrophic state of the world was foreseeable to people willing not to fit in for the sake of social conformity, but enunciated what they had come to see.

I think the current system is working overtime to keep people in this mode of fear of “not fitting in” n order to prevent such enunciations as made by Oliver. Conformity is easier in times of prosperity, full shelves in the market and a retirement plan that seems to foretell a comfortable time after quitting the rat race. Oliver has passed away nearly 30 years ago, but his words are still active and alive, as alive as they were when he first conceived them, perhaps 80 years ago.

Quite so. We happy few etc…

As I’ve pointed out many times on this very site the importance of one of America’s great treasures, one Revilo P. Oliver. Here is one of my most recent comments on him on this very site:

DR. REVILO Pendleton Oliver, Professor of the Classics at the University of Illinois for 32 years and one of the leading philologists of his time, read eleven languages, including Sanskrit, and for more than half a century wrote scholarly articles in four languages for academic publications in the United States and Europe.

Oliver was the possessor of a penetrating intellect — and a scintillating wit unequaled by few if any writers. He has been aptly compared with the great H.L. Mencken.
[…]
During World War II, he was Director of Research in a highly secret cryptographic agency of the War Department in Washington, DC, and was cited for outstanding service to his country. It was during his time in Washington that Dr. Oliver first became aware of the degree to which Communism — and, more importantly, the forces behind Communism — had penetrated the American establishment and had precipitated the fratricidal slaughter of 1939-1945. In the immediate postwar years he believed that the treasonous acts of these subversives would be quickly brought to light and that an awakened public would sweep an American administration into office. Confident in his nation’s future, he continued his pursuit of the scholarship which was, next to his wife Grace, his greatest love in life.
[…]
Upon his return home in 1954, Dr. Oliver was alarmed at the progress made by the subversive forces in the United States, who had infiltrated both major political parties and the business establishment there — especially the media of information and entertainment. He made a fateful decision in that year, 1954, to devote all his available energies to what was then called anti-Communism or Americanism or conservatism, and which is today called by its adherents Racial Nationalism. For the next 40 years, until his death in 1994, he was a major figure in that movement, though in many ways an anomalous one.

http://www.revilo-oliver.com/news/about/

Some of Oliver’s books:

The Origins of Christianity

The Jewish Strategy

The Enemy of out Enemies

Tell again why you are calling yourself >Adunai<. You provided a link in another thread, but it leads nowhere.

He was indeed a great man and a very quotable one at that. I was pleased to note that Ron Unz has ‘discovered’ him, and devoted a couple of paragraphs (if I recall aright) to him in a recent article about WWII. He is sadly missed.

Being the greatest man born in the last 1000 years helps. You clearly know nothing about his difficult rise to power. The man was a bona fide genius.

True, but Hitler’s version of National Socialism had a strong element of ethnic German racial superiority (particularly with regard to Slavs), and once the decision was made to invade Russia, it was 100% clear that Germans were not going there to liberate anyone – they were planning to stay, promote German ethnic settlement, and enforce a racial colonial exploitative system of the worst kind.

Slavs would be better off being ruled by Germans than by their current corrupt elites. 80 years on and Russia is still a third world country in terms of economy. In any case it was unacceptable for Germany and Europe to accept a hostile Bolshevist military state on their border, and counterforce was the only way to remedy that.

Poland hardly made war against Germany. Poland was simultaneously invaded and destroyed in September 1939 by Germany and Soviet Russia following a secret agreement between the two of them.

Poland forced war against Germany because they were foolish enough to think they would conquer Berlin. These acts included open mobilization, which is a declaration of war, murder and terror on German citizens and diplomatic rebuffs of the worst kind. It was the geopolitical version of trashing your neighbors lawn then telling him repeatedly to go fuck himself when he wants an explanation.

Hitler claimed to be securing Europe, but if anyone had asked the people of Belgium, France, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Great Britain whether they wanted to be “secured” by German invasions in WW2 they would say no. They wanted to be free and independent and didn’t need or want German “help”.

The old song and dance. France and Britain declared war on Germany. They enlisted Belgium and Holland to take part in it. Britain was in the process of invading Norway and had made a deal with their government to that end. Germany was reacting to these incidents, not provoking them. If they wanted to remain free and independent they perhaps should not go to war against other countries.

PODCAST: Christopher Bjerknes: Hitler Was a False Flag, by Kevin Barrett / Truth Jihad – The Unz Review
anbttvhxdi
[url=http://www.g7925hd37is4b3kkv0k324jlb8c6u3q5s.org/]unbttvhxdi[/url]
nbttvhxdi http://www.g7925hd37is4b3kkv0k324jlb8c6u3q5s.org/