URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Colonial Era
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 6936--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: christianbethel Date: June 5, 2021, 3:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Dazhbog link=topic=40.msg4971#msg4971
       date=1616199291]
       Are you implying that Hitler should have simply looked the other
       way while Poland was slaughtering its German, Ukrainian,
       Belarusian and Lithuanian minorities, as well as training
       Zionist paramilitaries?
       [/quote]
       I wasn't implying anything. I'm just saying that Hitler was
       goaded into using military force against Poland as a result of
       failed negotiations (which he was planning to do anyway) by the
       Zionist cabal so they could have an excuse to wage war on him.
       #Post#: 7819--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: Zea_mays Date: July 31, 2021, 10:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       This is post-WWII, but you've probably heard about all kinds of
       wacky Nazi plans to sink the entire Netherlands, or Himmler
       trying to colonize the USSR with a bunch of Nordicist
       neo-feudalist fiefdoms, or any other kinds of crazy things. I
       think due to post-war propaganda, we'll never really know if
       most of these things were always considered to be far too
       impractical to ever leave the drawing board, or whether they
       were actually semi-serious.
       But here's a barbaric plan that was serious and quite frankly
       dwarfs any 'evil plans' that WWII Germany allegedly had. During
       the Korean war, General Douglas MacArthur (the highest-ranking
       General in the US Army and commander of the US forces in the
       Korean war) wanted to drop 30-50 atomic bombs on the border of
       North Korea in order to stop Chinese reinforcements. Think about
       that. 50 atomic bombs in the small Korean peninsula. By 1950,
       the Soviets had their own nuclear weapons, and MacArthur was
       also so antagonistic toward China that many believed he would
       lead to a full-on WWIII with them. For these reasons, General
       MacArthur was removed from his command in Korea.
       How many times have we heard about the "audacity" of NS Germany
       using scorched earth tactics on the Eastern front, on the
       frontlines of a total war situation? Meanwhile, MacArthur wanted
       to turn parts of China and Korea into nuclear wastelands which
       would remain impenetrable for over an entire lifetime.
       [quote]At a press conference on 30 November 1950, Truman was
       asked about the use of nuclear weapons:
       Q. Mr. President, I wonder if we could retrace that
       reference to the atom bomb? Did we understand you clearly that
       the use of the atomic bomb is under active consideration?
       Truman: Always has been. It is one of our weapons.
       Q. Does that mean, Mr. President, use against military
       objectives, or civilian—
       Truman: It's a matter that the military people will have to
       decide. I'm not a military authority that passes on those
       things.
       Q. Mr. President, perhaps it would be better if we are
       allowed to quote your remarks on that directly?
       Truman: I don't think—I don't think that is necessary.
       Q. Mr. President, you said this depends on United Nations
       action. Does that mean that we wouldn't use the atomic bomb
       except on a United Nations authorization?
       Truman: No, it doesn't mean that at all. The action against
       Communist China depends on the action of the United Nations. The
       military commander in the field will have charge of the use of
       the weapons, as he always has.[88]
       The implication was that the authority to use atomic weapons now
       rested in the hands of MacArthur.[89][90] Truman's White House
       issued a clarification, noting that "only the President can
       authorize the use of the atom bomb, and no such authorization
       has been given," yet the comment still caused a domestic and
       international stir.[88]
       [...]
       On 9 December 1950, MacArthur requested field commander's
       discretion to employ nuclear weapons; he testified that such an
       employment would only be used to prevent an ultimate fallback,
       not to recover the situation in Korea.[92] On 24 December 1950,
       MacArthur submitted a list of "retardation targets" in Korea,
       Manchuria and other parts of China, for which 34 atomic bombs
       would be required.[92][93][94][95] In June 1950, Louis Johnson
       released a study on the potential uses of radioactive agents.
       According to Major General Courtney Whitney, MacArthur
       considered the possibility of using radioactive wastes to seal
       off North Korea in December 1950, but he never submitted this to
       the Joint Chiefs. After his dismissal, Senator Albert Gore Sr.
       put a similar proposal to Truman.[96]
       [...]
       In early April 1951, the Joint Chiefs became alarmed by the
       build up of Soviet forces in the Far East, particularly bombers
       and submarines.[98] On 5 April 1951, they drafted orders for
       MacArthur authorizing attacks on Manchuria and the Shantung
       Peninsula if the Chinese launched airstrikes against his forces
       originating from there.[99] The next day Truman met with the
       chairman of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, Gordon
       Dean,[91] and arranged for the transfer of nine Mark 4 nuclear
       bombs to military control.[100]
       [...]
       In interview with Jim G. Lucas and Bob Considine on 25 January
       1954, posthumously published in 1964, MacArthur said,
       Of all the campaigns of my life, 20 major ones to be exact,
       [Korea was] the one I felt most sure of was the one I was
       deprived of waging. I could have won the war in Korea in a
       maximum of 10 days.... I would have dropped between 30 and 50
       atomic bombs on his air bases and other depots strung across the
       neck of Manchuria.... It was my plan as our amphibious forces
       moved south to spread behind us—from the Sea of Japan to the
       Yellow Sea—a belt of radioactive cobalt. It could have been
       spread from wagons, carts, trucks and planes.... For at least 60
       years there could have been no land invasion of Korea from the
       north. The enemy could not have marched across that radiated
       belt."[110][/quote]
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relief_of_Douglas_MacArthur#Nuclear_weapons
       Oh, and another thing:
       [quote]There were numerous atrocities and massacres of civilians
       throughout the Korean War committed by both sides, starting in
       the war's first days. On 28 June, North Korean troops committed
       the Seoul National University Hospital massacre.[393] On the
       same day, South Korean President Syngman Rhee ordered the Bodo
       League massacre,[150][394][395] beginning mass killings of
       suspected leftist sympathizers and their families by South
       Korean officials and right-wing groups.[396][397] Estimates of
       those killed during the Bodo League massacre range from at least
       60,000–110,000 (Kim Dong-choon) to 200,000 (Park
       Myung-lim).[398] The British protested to their allies about
       later South Korean mass executions and saved some
       citizens.[396][397]
       In 2005–2010, a South Korean Truth and Reconciliation Commission
       investigated atrocities and other human rights violations
       through much of the 20th century, from the Japanese colonial
       period through the Korean War and beyond. It excavated some mass
       graves from the Bodo League massacres and confirmed the general
       outlines of those political executions. Of the Korean War-era
       massacres the commission was petitioned to investigate, 82% were
       perpetrated by South Korean forces, with 18% perpetrated by
       North Korean forces.[399][400][398]
       [...]
       In the most notorious U.S. massacre, investigated separately,
       not by the commission, American troops killed an estimated
       250–300 refugees, mostly women and children, at No Gun Ri in
       central South Korea (26–29 July 1950).[401][402] U.S.
       commanders, fearing enemy infiltrators among refugee columns,
       had adopted a policy of stopping civilian groups approaching
       U.S. lines, including by gunfire.[403] After years of rejecting
       survivors’ accounts, the U.S. Army investigated and in 2001
       acknowledged the No Gun Ri killings, but claimed they were not
       ordered and "not a deliberate killing".[404]:x South Korean
       officials, after a parallel investigation, said they believed
       there were orders to shoot. The survivors’ representatives
       denounced what they described as a U.S. "whitewash".[405][406]
       [...]
       In December 1950, the South Korean National Defense Corps was
       founded; the soldiers were 406,000 drafted citizens.[436] In the
       winter of 1951, 50,000[437][438] to 90,000[439][440] South
       Korean National Defense Corps soldiers starved to death while
       marching southward under the PVA offensive when their commanding
       officers embezzled funds earmarked for their
       food.[437][439][441][442] This event is called the National
       Defense Corps Incident.[437][439] There is no evidence that
       Syngman Rhee was personally involved in or benefited from the
       corruption.[443]
       [...]
       Throughout the Korean War, "comfort stations" were operated by
       South Korean officials for UN soldiers.[445][/quote]
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War#War_crimes
       If you changed the names to make it seem like it happened at the
       hands of Germany or Japan in WWII, no one would have batted an
       eye. But since it happened by a different nation in a different
       war, it's never in regular history books. If the point of the
       history books was to simply teach certain actions and principles
       were bad in a sincere and unbiased manner, there wouldn't be
       such an extreme double standard focusing on the (alleged)
       actions of a single regime during a single time period, while
       ignoring all the comparable (and often worse) things that
       happened at the hands of other regimes (in more recent time
       periods!).
       #Post#: 7822--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: Zea_mays Date: July 31, 2021, 11:37 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The present-day historiography of the capital-h 'Holocaust' as a
       sacred thing everyone needed to talk about seems to have started
       in the late 1970s:
  HTML https://images.newrepublic.com/f4f636791aa06ac92655e25b31892047d96073bc.png
       This image is from the Google Ngram Viewer, which analyzes how
       frequently words have been used in digitized books, etc., and
       was produced for the article below.
       [quote]In the course of reporting "A Liberator, But Never Free,"
       about the recent discovery of the late Dr. David Wilsey’s
       letters home from the liberation of the Dachau concentration
       camp, one intriguing semantic anomaly transfixed every expert
       consulted: the Spokane anesthesiologist’s persistent use of the
       word “holocaust” to describe the horrors all around him.
       [...]
       Yet for decades after the war, the genocide lacked any formal
       title in English except, perhaps, “The Final Solution,” the term
       the Nazis used. In Hebrew, the calamity quickly became known as
       “Shoah,” which means “the catastrophe.” But it wasn’t until the
       1960s that scholars and writers began using the term
       “Holocaust,” and it took the 1978 TV film Holocaust, starring
       Meryl Streep, to push it into widespread use.
       [...]
       Allied governments, Donahue said, downplayed the extent of the
       peril to Jews in their rally-the-homefront propaganda materials,
       for fear that many non-Jews wouldn’t be willing to fight and die
       for what was still a marginalized religious minority regarded
       suspiciously even in the U.S. Wilsey himself reflected those
       attitudes in a letter on April 4, 1945, in which he complains
       about a Jewish anesthesiologist he was forced to bunk with. “
       Dear, medicine is so full of them, so usurped by them, so
       progressively becoming ruled by them — that we white men just
       must not do all we can to help them.” A paragraph later, in
       fact, he blames his Jewish colleague’s “Prussianism”—his Eastern
       European background—for “exactly what has caused 3 holocaustic
       wars.”[/quote]
  HTML https://newrepublic.com/article/121807/when-holocaust-became-holocaust
       Lol, the person who first used the term "holocaust" to describe
       the events of WWII blamed Jewish attitudes for causing WWII!
       That tidbit will certainly not be printed in history textbooks.
       Nor will things such as the diary entries of people like General
       Patton (who complained about the attitudes of Jewish journalists
       who were covering the US military occupation in Germany).
       There's countless famous quotations claiming victors write
       history. But the real power is the fact that the victors are the
       ones who get to teach history and shape the "official" narrative
       of what we accept as reality. Even if they don't outright make
       anything up, they pick and choose which pieces of information to
       include and which to selectively exclude, to shape what we think
       is important and what we will remain ignorant to. When it comes
       to facts of dubious accuracy, well, the vast majority of people
       don't care about facts and rational argumentation (and, even if
       they did, there is too much information in existence for every
       person to possibly process). The vast majority don't care about
       history either--it's just a subject they are forced to take in
       school and don't pay any attention to. They only care about the
       peer pressure to adhere to "accepted" narratives and the taboo
       against acknowledging unpopular narratives as potentially
       legitimate.
       However, what narratives are "accepted" can rapidly change, yet
       we are rarely aware of these changes in paradigm. We often just
       think what we had been taught is how the narrative has always
       been taught. Again, this is much more powerful than simply
       writing down history after it happens. What has been written
       will always be there--the truth, the lies, and the half
       truths--but which pieces are ignored and which are included in
       the narrative of history can always change. Who knows, 100 years
       from now the manner in which WWII is taught could completely
       change, and no one alive then would even realize how the war is
       taught today!
       To give another example of changing narratives of history, over
       the past few decades there's been a lot of revisionism trying to
       rehabilitate the legacy of Genghis Khan, apparently in a
       misguided (or intentionally misleading) attempt to be "woke".
       [quote]Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (2004) is
       a history book written by Jack Weatherford, Dewitt Wallace
       Professor of Anthropology at Macalester College. It is a
       narrative of the rise and influence of Genghis Khan and his
       successors, and their influence on European civilization.
       Weatherford provides a different slant on Genghis Khan than has
       been typical in most Western accounts, attributing positive
       cultural effects to his rule.
       In the last section, he reviews the historiography of Genghis
       Khan in the West and argues that the leader's early portrayal in
       writings as an "excellent, noble king" changed to that of a
       brutal pagan during the Age of Enlightenment.
       [...]
       The book suggests that the western depiction of the Mongols as
       savages who destroyed civilization was due to the Mongols'
       approach to dealing with the competing leadership classes. The
       Mongols practiced killing the ruling classes in order to subdue
       the general population, a technique used by other cultures as
       well. Survivors of the upper classes wrote the histories and
       expressed resentment of Mongol brutality toward them.
       Weatherford explores the Mongol treatment of the general
       population (peasants, tradesmen, merchants) under Mongol rule.
       He suggests their rule was less burdensome than that of European
       nobility due to lighter taxes, tolerance of local customs and
       religions, more rational administration, and universal education
       for boys.
       These benefits were enjoyed only by populations who surrendered
       immediately to the Mongol invaders. Those populations that
       resisted could be massacred as a warning to other towns/cities.
       These massacres were a method of psychological warfare to alert
       those populations not yet conquered. The resulting terror helped
       color the historical portrayal of the Mongols.
       [...]
       Weatherford explores Genghis Khan's legacy and influence; he
       attributes many aspects of the Renaissance, such as the spread
       of paper and printing, the compass, gunpowder and musical
       instruments such as the violin, to the influence of trade
       enabled by Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire. Weatherford
       suggests that the European Renaissance was a rebirth, not of
       Greece or Rome, but of concepts from the Mongol Empire. He notes
       the following: [/quote]
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan_and_the_Making_of_the_Modern_World
       Yet:
       [quote]One estimate is that about 11% of the world's population
       was killed either during or immediately after the Mongol
       invasions (around 37.75 - 60 million people in Eurasia).[1] If
       the calculations are accurate, the events would be the deadliest
       acts of mass killings in human history.
       Oliver Chancellor conducted research and found that the Mongol
       invasions induced population displacement "on a scale never seen
       before", particularly in Central Asia and Eastern Europe, and
       that "the impending arrival of the Mongol hordes spread terror
       and panic".[2]
       [...]
       The reputation of guaranteed genocide on those who fought them
       allowed the Mongols to hold vast territories long after their
       main force had moved on. Even if the tumens (tyumens) were
       hundreds or thousands of miles away, the conquered people would
       usually not dare to interfere with the token Mongol occupying
       force since they feared a likely Mongol return.
       [...]
       As Mongol conquests spread, that form of psychological warfare
       proved effective at suppressing resistance to Mongol rule. There
       were tales of lone Mongol soldiers riding into surrendered
       villages and executing peasants at random as a test of loyalty.
       It was widely known that a single act of resistance would bring
       the entire Mongol army onto a town to obliterate its occupants.
       [...]
       Genghis Khan was largely tolerant of multiple religions, but
       there are many cases of him and other Mongols engaging in
       religious war even if the populations were obedient. He passed a
       decree charging all Taoist followers to pay more taxes. All
       campaigns involved deliberately destroying places of worship.[6]
       Ancient sources described Genghis Khan's conquests as wholesale
       destruction on an unprecedented scale in certain geographical
       regions, causing great demographic changes in Asia. According to
       the works of the Iranian historian Rashid al-Din (1247–1318),
       the Mongols killed more than 700,000 people in Merv and more
       than 1,000,000 in Nishapur. The total population of Persia may
       have dropped from 2,500,000 to 250,000 as a result of mass
       extermination and famine. Population exchanges also sometimes
       occurred.[7]
       [...]
       The Mongols practised biological warfare by catapulting diseased
       cadavers into the cities they besieged. It is believed that
       fleas remaining on the bodies of the cadavers may have acted as
       vectors to spread the Black Death.
       [...]
       For example, there is a noticeable lack of Chinese literature
       from the Jin dynasty, predating the Mongol conquest, and in the
       Siege of Baghdad (1258), libraries, books, literature, and
       hospitals were burned: some of the books were thrown into the
       river in quantities sufficient to turn the Tigris black with ink
       for several months".[17][18] [19][20]; as well as "In one week,
       libraries and their treasures that had been accumulated over
       hundreds of years were burned or otherwise destroyed. So many
       books were thrown into the Tigris River, according to one
       writer, that they formed a bridge that would support a man on
       horseback" [21]
       The Mongols' destruction of the irrigation systems of Iran and
       Iraq turned back millennia of effort in building irrigation and
       drainage infrastructure in these regions. The loss of available
       food as a result may have led to the death of more people from
       starvation in this area than the actual battle did.[/quote]
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_under_the_Mongol_Empire
       How many times have you seen people repeat the narrative about
       Genghis Khan actually being "progressive" for his time and not
       that bad? (Even a series as "woke" as Assassin's Creed pushes
       this narrative of Genghis Khan!) Simply reading a few paragraphs
       of the Wikipedia article above could have corrected their
       beliefs. But they didn't bother, since narratives (i.e.
       propaganda) are more powerful and compelling than facts alone.
       And, of course, don't get us started on discussing communist
       apologists who don't even try to downplay the carnage and
       oppression of communist regimes, and are still able to embrace
       communism and cling on to the tiniest examples of how communism
       is supposedly positive! But it is somehow too taboo to examine
       any of the positives of the National Socialist regime, solely
       because they allegedly killed....tens of millions fewer people
       than the Soviets or Mongols...? I guess it's because the
       communists and Weatherford's narrative of Genghis Khan don't
       fundamentally challenge Western Civilization, and therefore such
       narratives are allowed to exist within the Overton Window.
       --------
       And, just for fun, if you like to read deeply into things:
       From the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica:
       [quote]HOLOCAUST (Gr.
       ὁλοκαυστον,
       or ὁλόκαυτον,
       wholly burnt), strictly a sacrifice wholly destroyed by fire,
       such as the sacrifices of the Jews, described in the Pentateuch
       as “whole burnt offerings”[/quote]
  HTML https://www.gutenberg.org/files/39232/39232-h/39232-h.htm#ar175
       From Webster's Dictionary, 1913:
       [quote]HOLOCAUST
       1. A burnt sacrifice; an offering, the whole of which was
       consumed by fire, among the Jews and some pagan nations. Milton.
       2. Sacrifice or loss of many lives, as by the burning of a
       theater or a ship.
       Note: [An extended use not authorized by careful
       writers.][/quote]
       [quote]SCAPEGOAT
       1. (Jewish Antiq.)
       Defn: A goat upon whose head were symbolically placed the sins
       of the people, after which he was suffered to escape into the
       wilderness. Lev. xvi. 10.
       2. Hence, a person or thing that is made to bear blame for
       others. Tennyson.[/quote]
  HTML https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29765
       So Zionist historians/propagandists scapegoated the Jews as the
       biggest victims of WWII, who were then capital-H holocausted...
       And Yahweh certainly rewarded them for their offering.
       #Post#: 7824--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: July 31, 2021, 11:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I actually find this narrative somewhat plausible:
       [quote]Weatherford explores Genghis Khan's legacy and influence;
       he attributes many aspects of the Renaissance, such as the
       spread of paper and printing, the compass, gunpowder and musical
       instruments such as the violin, to the influence of trade
       enabled by Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire. Weatherford
       suggests that the European Renaissance was a rebirth, not of
       Greece or Rome, but of concepts from the Mongol Empire. He notes
       the following:[/quote]
       I merely happen to consider the Renaissance to be the worst
       event in all of history, therefore acknowledging Genghis Khan's
       role in it just makes him an even more evil villain in my mind.
       The problem with False Leftists is that (being progressives)
       they think the Renaissance was a positive event to begin with.
       True Leftists can work with anyone who hates the Renaissance, no
       matter whom they blame for it. True Leftists cannot work with
       anyone who likes the Renaissance, no matter whom they credit for
       it.
       #Post#: 7986--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: August 10, 2021, 1:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If you ask neo-Nazis about what Hitler disliked about Poland,
       they will claim basically that Hitler considered Poland too
       ghetto. Of course they do not have a clue what they are talking
       about. Here are some videos of pre-WWII Poland:
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biBCosaZ_0w
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0hlKsZdnhI
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7o0SP4zK4
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjps5GHWEgE
       What you see in these videos is what Hitler actually disliked
       about Poland. As a matter of fact, it was only after Hitler got
       the Luftwaffe to bomb the above into dust:
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crimes_against_the_Polish_nation#1939_September_Campaign
       [quote]Over 100,000 Poles died in the Luftwaffe's terror bombing
       operations, like those at Wieluń.[27] Massive air raids
       were conducted on towns which had no military
       infrastructure.[28] The town of Frampol, near Lublin, was
       heavily bombed on 13 September as a test subject for Luftwaffe
       bombing technique; chosen because of its grid street plan and an
       easily recognisable central town-hall. Frampol was hit by 70
       tonnes of munitions,[29] which destroyed up to 90% of buildings
       and killed half of its inhabitants.[30] Columns of fleeing
       refugees were systematically attacked by the German fighter and
       dive-bomber aircraft.[31]
  HTML https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/18/Frampol_bombing.jpg
       Amongst the Polish cities and towns bombed at the beginning of
       war were: Brodnica,[32] Bydgoszcz,[32] Chełm,[32]
       Ciechanów,[32] Częstochowa,[33][34] Grodno,[34]
       Grudziądz,[34] Gdynia,[32] Janów,[32] Jasło,[32]
       Katowice,[34] Kielce,[34] Kowel,[34] Kraków,[32][33] Kutno,[32]
       Lublin,[32] Lwów,[34] Olkusz,[32] Piotrków,[35] Płock,[32]
       Płońsk,[34] Poznań,[33][34] Puck,[34] Radom,[32]
       Radomsko,[34] Sulejów,[35] Warsaw,[33][34] Wieluń,[32]
       Wilno, and Zamość.[32] Over 156 towns and villages
       were attacked by the Luftwaffe.[36] Warsaw suffered particularly
       severely with a combination of aerial bombardment and artillery
       fire reducing large parts of the historic centre to rubble,[37]
       with more than 60,000 casualties.[24][/quote]
       that infrastructure was rebuilt post-WWII in the
       Brutalist-influenced styles that neo-Nazis complain about as
       being "ghetto".
       #Post#: 8281--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: guest55 Date: August 24, 2021, 12:15 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hitler's Jewish Soldiers
       [quote]Many men who were partly of Jewish ancestry served in the
       German armed forces during WW2 - find out how and why they ended
       up in Hitler's army.[/quote]
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRfCwrI--is
       In other words, many people of Jewish blood wanted to be Germans
       more than they wanted to be Jews. Many Germans rejected their
       Jewish identity altogether.
       Reminder:
       Remarkable tale of Hitler's young Jewish friend
  HTML https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/BC0E/production/_104324184_207359e2-26ac-4e1b-b47b-400e4b1623ed.jpg
       [quote]At first glance, the picture of the man hugging the
       beaming young girl appears to show a scene of great
       happiness.[/quote] (Uhhhh, maybe because it does? LOL! WTF!?!?)
       [quote]But a closer look reveals a far darker tale: this is
       Adolf Hitler, the man behind the [s]murder of six million
       Jews,[/s] and the little girl is Jewish.
       (Do Western historians really not realize how retarded sentences
       like this read?)
       Despite this, Hitler would go on to build a friendship with Rosa
       Bernile Nienau, which only ended when top Nazi officials
       intervened five years later.
       And now this rare, signed image from 1933 is going up for
       auction in the US.
       Alexander Historical Auctions, in Maryland, estimates the
       picture, taken by photographer Heinrich Hoffmann, could fetch as
       much as $10,000 (Ł7,500) when it goes on sale on
       Tuesday.[/quote]
  HTML https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46192941
       A Westerner can tell you exactly how many Jews died during WWII,
       but can they tell you how many Germans died? How many Russians
       died? How many French died? etc.? But they absolutely positively
       know how many Jews died right? Why is that? This fact alone
       should make a normal person want to vomit.
       #Post#: 10390--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: January 2, 2022, 10:26 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       New blog post:
  HTML http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/white-supremacism-defeated-hitler/
       #Post#: 10929--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: guest55 Date: January 31, 2022, 12:12 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       What the World Rejected: Hitler's Peace Offers 1933-1939
       [quote]"Germany will be perfectly ready to disband her entire
       military establishment and destroy the small amount of arms
       remaining to her, if the neighboring countries will do the same
       thing with equal thoroughness.
       ... Germany is entirely ready to renounce aggressive weapons of
       every sort if the armed nations, on their part, will destroy
       their aggressive weapons within a specified period, and if their
       use is forbidden by an international convention.
       ... Germany is at all times prepared to renounce offensive
       weapons if the rest of the world does the same. Germany is
       prepared to agree to any solemn pact of non-aggression because
       she does not think of attacking anybody but only of acquiring
       security." — Adolf Hitler, May 17th, 1933[/quote]
  HTML https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/nothanks/wwr00.html
       [img]
  HTML https://fft-keymilitary.b-cdn.net/sites/militarykey/files/styles/article_body/public/imported/2020-03-24/img_105-2_10.jpg?itok=IWiT85Zz[/img]
  HTML https://static.toiimg.com/imagenext/toiblogs/photo/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/article-2.jpg
       #Post#: 10988--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: christianbethel Date: February 2, 2022, 2:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Where do we direct the people who claim Hitler hated 'black'
       people and use quotes from Mein Kampf and his 1.18.27 speech in
       Thuriginia?
       #Post#: 10992--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western Revisionism of WWI and WWII
       By: guest55 Date: February 2, 2022, 3:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=christianbethel link=topic=40.msg10988#msg10988
       date=1643834607]
       Where do we direct the people who claim Hitler hated 'black'
       people and use quotes from Mein Kampf and his 1.18.27 speech in
       Thuriginia?[/quote]
       Would be a good place to start I suspect:
  HTML https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41D1asjyHdL._SX316_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
  HTML https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1347770829l/11059697.jpg
  HTML https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51cWcAb-eVL.jpg
  HTML https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1408932416l/18794291.jpg
       [quote]Why is the Black Nazis book and thesis so controversial
       to so many? Why have [s]extremists[/s] on both the left and
       right attacked the author's premise with such indignant
       ferocity? This concise interview conducted by Ernest Young of
       Germany's Zuerst! magazine of author Veronica Kuzniar answers
       these questions.[/quote]
  HTML https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18794291-the-controversy-of-black-nazis-ii
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page