Historical Revisionism

By Raymond Goodwin

RARE IS ANY CREDIBLE LITERATURE DEALING WITH ADOLF HITLER – the man, and his time on the stage of history. There are, of course, tons of articles and books written about that, but the key word in the lead sentence is “credible.” Anyone who has any ability to think for themselves knows that any such writing is automatically “qualified” right off the bat by letting the reader know that Adolf Hitler was the most vile, evil, megalomaniac who ever lived. And what follows that introduction is nothing but Cinderella fairy-tales that are worthless in any CREDIBLE study of the man and his era. See the message under the photo on page 128 about a false statement from a Dr. Ferdinand Sauerbruch, explained as “it was the style of the time after the war to make up wild stories about Adolf Hitler.”

The book that every student of Hitler needs to own …

The Artist Within the Warlord—An Adolf Hitler You've Never Known

The collected translations and commentary by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D. and Carolyn Yeager from Hermann Giesler's German-language memoir Ein Anderer Hitler.

A wealth of insight into the REAL HITLER awaits you in this new book that puts it all together in thirteen revealing chapters that lay out the world view and the unique personality of the most controversial leader of the twentieth century. Hitler the artist ... Hitler the humanist … Hitler the persistent planner ... are three of the aspects of Adolf Hitler you will learn about, or learn more about, in this book. [See special announcement below with the ordering information.]

Looking for an image for this difficult-to-illustrate post, I came across this one and found it was attached to a very good essay written in 2014. I read it, having already completed my essay below, and think it is an excellent complement to my own thoughts. So I highly recommend you read it too.

Whatever happened to the Truth Movement?

or

Are we living in a climate of anti-truth?

by Carolyn Yeager

TRUTH HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAID TO BE SELECTIVE. That is, we select that which we hold to be true because it agrees with us for a number of reasons, and on the same grounds we hold its opposing position to be false, often without actually having a clear understanding of why.

When it comes to the question of the viable ongoingness of the European people and our culture on this planet, we face that problem of truth. How important is it? Is it better to have the right strategy, or to seek power, or to work toward a larger following? Should we try to defeat our enemy outright in battle or should we use stealth to insinuate ourselves into increasingly powerful positions? The arguments can go on endlessly. And truly, I have gotten weary of all this theorizing in article after article about how to approach the issues, how to respond, how to, how to …

THIS ARTICLE WAS FIRST PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL LIBERATION IN 1958, during the Cold War. Written twelve years after the end of WWII, it is still necessary reading today. I am posting the entire long article here because I think every word is valuable. I have taken the liberty of bolding some words and sentences that I think are particularly valuable. During this holiday season, take some time to read it, not necessarily all in one sitting. You will be immeasurably enriched and informed by it.

Harry Elmer Barnes (1889-1968) is pictured above in a portrait created for The Barnes Review magazine. He was one of the most influential American scholars of the twentieth century.

Revisionism and the Promotion of Peace

By Harry Elmer Barnes, 1958

During the last forty years or so [since 1918 -cy], revisionism has become a fighting term. To so-called revisionists, it implies an honest search for historical truth and the discrediting of misleading myths that are a barrier to peace and goodwill among nations. In the minds of anti-revisionists, the term savors of malice, vindictiveness, and an unholy desire to smear the saviors of mankind.

By Carolyn Yeager

THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED FOR THE PAST FEW DAYS BY FEMALE PUNDITS and news show hosts, and all liberal Democrats on TV … about the women who are coming forth to accuse Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump, of forcing unwanted sexual advances on them. What reason would they have for lying? It was asked the other night by Megyn Kelly of Fox News, with a sorrowful look on her face as she seemed to be trying to make her eyes water to demonstrate how seriously she takes it.

But this question is one those of us engaged in historical revisionism are very familiar with. In holocaust revisionism, especially, it is used as a standard defense for the wild stories told by survivors (or surlievors, as I call them) without any corroborating evidence or witnesses to back them up. Why would they lie about such a thing, it is asked. What reason do they have to lie?

How naive. Plenty of reasons, is the answer.

by Carolyn Yeager

Above: General Andrei Vlasov speaks to Soviet collaborators wearing the uniform of the German Wehrmacht, after completion of field service training.

Right: ROA (Russian Liberation Army) Chevron Identification insignia.

Go to Part 1

What David Irving wrote about Vlasov in his book about Joseph Goebbels

Guess what? It all fits on one page, 770, of the Pdf version of Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich. It reads as follows:

The Case of what David Irving wrote about Joseph Goebbels according to Wolf Wall Street.

The question: Did Goebbels fight to convince Adolf Hitler to put the captured Soviet general and collaborator Andrey Vlasov into the field against the Red Army, sometime before 1943?

Background: Vlasov's army was surrounded and he was captured on July 12, 1942. A Baltic German captain convinced Vlasov to cooperate with the German Army. Vlasov was taken to Berlin under the protection of the Wehrmacht's propaganda department. He founded the "Russian Liberation Committee" in hopes of forming a Russian Liberation Army. In Spring 1943 Vlasov wrote an anti-Bolshevik leaflet that was dropped by the millions on Soviet forces. He also wrote an open letter against Bolshevism. The propaganda department issued Russian Liberation Army patches to Russian volunteers using Vlasov's name, but those who wore them never served under his command. Both Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler were against giving Vlasov command of an army of Russians so it wasn't until March 1945 that he was given this opportunity. His final act in early May was to allow his battalions in Prague to join the Czech Resistance and fire upon the SS troops still fighting there.

By Carolyn Yeager
copyright 2012 Carolyn Yeager

 The following article is based on my notes for my radio program of March 19, 2012 (found here: https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-false-story-gleiwitz-false-flag-...), and expanded to include further research and also clarification of a few details that became somewhat unclear largely because of the weather-related interruptions during the program. Once again, I hope readers will spread this article far and wide. Pictured right: German Radio Station Gleiwitz in 1936.

*      *      *