The Heretics' Hour: Can Adolf Hitler be criticized?

Published by carolyn on Mon, 2013-10-07 18:49
 
00:00

Oct. 7, 2013

Carolyn takes on a difficult subject and attempts to make the point that Adolf Hitler embodied and worked for all things that were beneficial to the White European people. If we are also committed to what is good for us as White people, we should only praise Hitler and unify behind him as behind a single great idea. If one decides to criticize this or that aspect of his policies and/or decisions to the extent of making him the cause of failure of National-Socialism or the loss of the war, that greatly damages our strength as a unified force.  Instead of criticizing Hitler, we should be seeking to understand him because he was smarter than we are! Related topics covered:

  • Paul Eisen, the Jewish blogger who claims “I am a Holocaust Denier,” reveals how deep is the hatred of Jews for National Socialism, ergo Adolf Hitler;
  • Eisen celebrates the "deep, emotional, spiritual affiliation" Jews have with their Jewishness (while living in non-Jew countries) but doesn’t seem to recognize that Europeans also have the same affiliation for their own historical/ethnic identity;
  • According to Eisen, even well-integrated Jews feel it’s normal to feel fear and disdain for their non-Jewish neighbors – because in their minds antisemitism never goes away;
  • German Foreign Ministry wants to honor a German communist Ilse Stöbe, who was a Soviet spy asset from 1931 on, calling her a member of the “anti-Nazi Resistance”;
  • The People’s Court judgement against White Rose defendants  Schmorell, Huber and Graf sheds light on the nature and rationale of a National-Socialist state (especially in time of war).

Comments

67 Responses

  1. Markus

    October 8, 2013 at 2:37 am

    World View

    Weltanschauung: To look “on” -an-(German) to the world from the outside as a showing (Schauung). Almost like an out of body experience.

    Hitler as a religious figure. Yes, indeed. Although some say religion means “worship of God”, according to Cicero, religion derived from relegere “go through again” (in reading or in thought), from re- “again” (see re-) + legere “read” (see lecture (n.)). (etymology.com).

    Christians, who understand the bible like Hitler, Muslims like Hitler, Buddhists like Hitler (him being the reincarnation of Vishnu), Shintos (Japanese) like Hitler, Odinists like Hitler and nationalistic Atheists like him also.

    If the Jews wouldn’t demonize him so much by lying about him and threatening everyone who disagrees with THEIR Weltanschauung, humanity as a whole could unite under Hitler as messiah/prophet in the natural racial order. Now we have an opposite, unnatural order against Hitler with the Jews on top and their twisted values. Jews certainly hate Adolf just as much as they hate Jesus, if not more.

    Btw, 1933 was declared a holy year by Pope Pius for it was the 1900′s anniversary of Jesus’ death.

    Quote:
    There is no question but that Hitler belongs in the category of the truly mystic medicine man. As somebody commented about him at the last Nürnberg party congress, since the time of Mohammed nothing like it has been seen in this world. His body does not suggest strength. The outstanding characteristic of his physiognomy is its dreamy look. I was especially struck by that when I saw pictures taken of him in the Czechoslovakian crisis; there was in his eyes the look of a seer. This markedly mystic characteristic of Hitler’s is what makes him do things which seem to us illogical, inexplicable, and unreasonable. … So you see, Hitler is a medicine man, a spiritual vessel, a demi-deity or, even better, a myth.
    (Carl Jung, Swiss-German, President of the German (Reich) International Medical Society for Psychotherapy, 1933-40) (this part of Jung’s career is omitted by Wikipedia).

    Just look at the pro-Hitler sections. We are all devoted to Saint Adolfo, yet split in denominational churches. We spread the gospel of National Socialism, we evangelize non-believers and we baptize converted comrades that are reborn, once they know the truth. Hitler means hut builder. His message gives us a home and brings us under one roof. Hitler was a true King.

  1. Thomas Gaffney

    October 8, 2013 at 9:44 am

    Love the new music, almost fell of my chair…

  1. Hadding

    October 8, 2013 at 2:29 pm

    “This markedly mystic characteristic of Hitler’s is what makes him do things which seem to us illogical, inexplicable, and unreasonable. … ”

    I’d say it’s propaganda that creates that effect.

  1. Steven

    October 8, 2013 at 6:31 pm

    Any one can be legitamately critised if there is a good reason to do so.
    That is how problems get fixed if infact there is a problem. Did Hitler make mistakes? Absolutely! If these mistakes were critisized and solutions put forth and executed history as we know it might have been very different. We might now be living in a world with out jews, homosexuals, freemasons, democratic, communist and NWO governments. Feminism might have gone by the wayside as a social experiment that failed. There might have been more white people in the world.
    Morality might have won out against political correctness. All the wars since 1945 might been fewer or even nonexistant. All kinds of things might have happened differently if the few critical mistakes made by Hitler were critisized and corrective action taken. Failure to invade and occupy England immediately after Dunkirk and failure to capture the british army cost Hitler the war. At that point in time nothing else mattered except to put the western allied powers out of business and incorperate them into a greater european reich. Once europe is running like a well oiled machine the USSR could be dealt with and only on the basis of proper planning and strategy. After Dunkirk the initiative both tactical and strategic passed to the allies and that should not have been allowed to happen.

  1. Carolyn

    October 8, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    You are dreaming, Steven. To invade and occupy England was obviously just a matter of doing it, was it?

    In my opinion, all this obsession with Dunkirk is a distraction. And you put yourself in bad company, with the likes of Jim Condit and Henry Makow.

  1. Sarah Pilkington

    October 9, 2013 at 10:40 am

    hitler made a mistake alright.
    Murdering 6 million Jews in the name of an anti Semitic plague rises text written by a dreamy fanatic.

    I am white, European.
    Your views on this Website IN NO WAY REPRESENT “white interests”, my interests or the interests of anyone i know and it is probably frequented by a handful of racist anti Semitic bigoted subhumans.

    The Internet is a place of free speech but some people (I.e Markus there and his ilk), should honestly not be allowed to speak in the name of “white interests”.
    why don’t you people see yourselves in the context of social reality – racist and bigoted.

    The Nazi regime was a nation following (whether they wanted to or not), one mans DELUSION.

    Hitler was A MENTALLY ILL MEGOLOMANIAC PSYCHOPATH.

    get a fucking grip you neo nazi assholes.

  1. Hadding

    October 9, 2013 at 11:24 am

    Invading and occupying Britain was never a serious option because Britannia ruled the waves. It would have taken seven years of shipbuilding for Germany to reach naval parity with Britain.

    Many Americans seem to have this naively optimistic view that if you make all the right decisions, nothing bad can ever happen to you. Guess what? You can do everything right and still be ruined through the malice of others. It was the British Empire, the Soviet Empire, and that up-and-coming economic colossus, the USA, all together, that took down Hitler’s Germany. Can somebody succeed against all that by doing everything right?

    Some of what the armchair strategists like to indicate as “Hitler’s mistakes” were not mistakes but matters in which he had no choice, above all the invasion of the Soviet Union. This was a pre-emptive war against an empire that was about to attack.

    There’s not enough discussion about the mistakes of the Allies. They did not have to go to war against Germany; Hitler offered peace repeatedly. It was certainly a mistake for Britain. They lost their empire and became a second-rate power (superseded by the USA) because of it.

    http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com/2010/11/hitlers-policy-toward-ussr-justified.html

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCpZqV7GEgw&pxtry=1

    http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com/2011/01/hitlers-peace-offers-1933-1939.html

  1. Hadding

    October 9, 2013 at 11:27 am

    I should say, once the USA started sending ships to Britain, for Germany to reach naval parity with Britain was probably no longer possible at all.

  1. Carolyn

    October 9, 2013 at 11:44 am

    Thanks Hadding, for your clear explication. This all coincides with what I said in the program.

  1. Carolyn

    October 9, 2013 at 11:49 am

    Sarah – I doubt you are a female, and also that you are “white, European.” One is forced to suspect that you are Jew, “European” … which means you are not European at all. Get over it.

  1. Hadding

    October 9, 2013 at 12:06 pm

    The way for Germany to force Britain to make peace was to cross Spain and seize Gibraltar, then push the British forces out of Egypt and capture the Suez Canal. This would have made the Mediterranean into an Axis lake, making Britain’s naval superiority practically irrelevant, and at that point the British government would have sued for peace; some recently released document shows this.

    The first obstacle to this was that Franco wanted some French colonies transferred to Spain in exchange for Spain’s coming into the war, and Hitler did not feel that he could do this and still retain the acquiescence of the French people. Then there was the Red Army breathing down his neck, which made it very dangerous to commit large numbers of troops outside of Europe.

  1. Sarah Pilkington

    October 9, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    You doubt I am white European on what grounds ?

    Ipsi facto you have just proved my point you racist numpty yes I must be a jew because how irrational it is to think non Jews might think what you say is total tripe too?

    I am white British non Jew and you are a bigoted tiny brained racist.

  1. Carolyn

    October 9, 2013 at 3:00 pm

    I am white British non Jew

    If so, your “type” is the reason Britain is now a failed nation and white Brits are being made a persecuted minority in their own land. But even if you are a white non-Jew, you certainly are not a woman named Sarah. What are you afraid of?

    Everyone, behold how far a “white British” can lower himself! And all to defend Jews and non-whites.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 9, 2013 at 4:02 pm

    Hitler was too good, too ethical and too civil.
    .
    Wars aren’t won by civil gentlemen, as Hitler was the epitome.
    .
    Wars are won by the cunningly ruthless, Sulla and Genghis khan are two prime examples.
    .
    The virtues of peace are not the virtues of war. Hitler was a man for peaceful progress, not the mass carnage and destruction of war.
    .
    Someone explain the reason for an alliance with Japan. That runs contrary to our core beliefs. At least my core belief.

  1. Hadding

    October 9, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    “The Nazi regime was a nation following (whether they wanted to or not), one mans DELUSION.”

    Isn’t it funny then that Germany is in better shape today than Britain?

  1. Steven

    October 9, 2013 at 5:22 pm

    Look people I studied WW2 since elementary school and wargamed the problem.
    There is no way germany could have succeeded unless all of europe was conquered and that includes britain. My judgement is sound. As history turned out britain was allowed to become a giant air base, army base and navy base 22 miles away from europe ready to strike and conduct raids against europe. Also a free england made supplying the soviets possible and certainly a hell of a lot easier. Allowing this was the most idiotic screw up the Hitler made. Germany should have mopped up all of western europe by the spring of 1941 at the latest and presented a strong defence on the eastern front through 1941 while establishing a strong naval and air defence of the eastern atlantic. As for germany being the aggressor and initiator of WW2 that is obviously false. Britain, France and Poland are to blame for setting things up in such a way that made violence unavoidable. The Danzig and Bromberg massacres of the spring and summer of 1939 were clearly a crime against humanity and required an appropriate response. 58000 german polish citizens killed by polish and jewish partisans and government officials is no small matter.
    I have a question for Sarah. If the Israeli airforce bombed your home town and killed your fellow countrymen and family members what would you damand?
    1. The chance to kiss some jewish butt?
    2. The chance to return the compliment and bomb Israel?

  1. Carolyn

    October 9, 2013 at 7:29 pm

    The problem, Steven, is that Germany was not able to “conquer all of Europe by spring 1941″ … or at all, your war games notwithstanding. As soon as Germans set foot on England, Roosevelt would have had the pretext to come full-on into the war already in 1940. The U.S. and Soviet Union would have joined forces right then, along with the British government-in-exile in Wash. DC.

    Since, as you say, Britain, France and Poland are to blame for setting up the “violence,” it was never Hitler’s intention to “set Europe ablaze.” He had no plans in place to conquer Europe. And you can’t blame him that England and America did.

    “Sarah” is a Jew and probably won’t be back. I had to delete four very short insult-comments, in which he copied my words to him since he apparently can’t come up with anything original. Or anything substantial.

  1. Hadding

    October 10, 2013 at 11:09 am

    Hitler was assuming that the British government would behave in accord with British interests, but that didn’t happen because the USA was telling first Chamberlain and then Churchill what they must do. One of Hitler’s biggest mistakes was overestimating the reasonability and independence of British politicians.

    “Failure to invade and occupy England immediately after Dunkirk” is not a realistic criticism. If Steve played a war-game that presents this as a realistic option then the game is flawed.

    I have already outlined how Germany could have forced Britain to make peace without crossing the English Channel. Considered in the abstract it was completely feasible, but it didn’t happen because it would have taken time, and Hitler had another, much bigger enemy that he couldn’t ignore.

  1. Hadding

    October 10, 2013 at 11:16 am

    The mistake of the British was in failing to recognize that the USA, as a maritime power, posed a much greater danger to British interests than could Germany.

  1. Sarah Pilkington

    October 10, 2013 at 11:20 am

    @Hadding
    I do find it slightly amusing yes, somewhat ironic, but what’s that got to do with the fact that you all think a genocidal delusional psychopath with a paranoid persecution complex was ok, civil even, and that racism bigotry and perpetuation of hate crime is acceptable??

  1. Sarah Pilkington

    October 10, 2013 at 11:25 am

    I a woman.
    A white British woman Carolyn, and my opinions (Whoch you also fear), are genuine,

  1. Tanstaafl

    October 10, 2013 at 12:21 pm

    “tiny brained racist”

    Squawks the mindless parrot.

  1. Carolyn

    October 10, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    So I approved two out of five new ones from “Sarah,” just to give us a laugh. This is not an educated person, and has never learned the King’s English.

  1. Hadding

    October 10, 2013 at 2:30 pm

    “a genocidal delusional psychopath with a paranoid persecution complex”

    What’s the source of this characterization of Adolf Hitler? It sounds like some of the War Department’s propaganda from 1943.

  1. Hadding

    October 10, 2013 at 2:34 pm

    I am against bigotry. If you look at the history of the word, you find that bigotry is primarily about hostility toward people with different beliefs.

    For example, fanatical anti-racists are bigots.

    Racism though is just common sense. Normal children by the age of three develop racial stereotyping. Anti-racism is a bigoted attempt to ban common sense.

  1. Monty Storm

    October 10, 2013 at 5:49 pm

    Before we even consider the thought of criticizing A. Hitler, lets see if we might criticize Roosevelt and Churchill, They are actually deserving much criticism.

  1. Bob in DC

    October 10, 2013 at 6:13 pm

    Carolyn,

    Every human being makes mistakes, and the higher up a person goes, the more deleterious are their effects. The bottom line problem here is that there were not a sufficient number of secondary and tertiary leaders, with the necessary ability, to correct this philosopher-king’s errors.

    Resignation is not an option, although this method is pushed upon our kikejew influenced polity. Another jewthink method is assassination, but that is not an option for White Aryans in power.

    At times, the leader must be faced down at threat of death — not his, but that of the subordinate who has discovered the significant error. Ideas have been proffered which can accomplish this potentially unfortunate task.

    [Again unfortunately, Adolf Hitler lost his finest mentor just when the NSDAP Sun began to shine. Dietrich Eckart passed in late 1923, possibly as a result of injuries sustained in the Putsch.]

    This simple line of thought may not be the ‘solution’ most folks want, but it is absolutely one which must be discussed and resolved.

    Thank you!

    Wolf Wall Street

    P.S. I use ‘kikejew’ to differentiate between those at the bottom who really don’t matter (whatever their thinking), and those at or near the top, who are both bad and powerful.

    Every man a king, but no one wears a crown.” ~ Huey Long

  1. Hadding

    October 10, 2013 at 10:16 pm

    I really don’t think that Hitler made any mistakes that should have been obvious with the information that he had available at the time.

    If your reasoning is that he must have made some serious mistakes because of how things turned out, then you are engaging in Whig history.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 11, 2013 at 2:06 am

    “Isn’t it funny then that Germany is in better shape today than Britain?”
    .
    Not ‘funny’, but a deeply tragic irony. We have lost millions , and will lose millions more, of some of the finest White ppl on this planet. The judeo-poison of ‘integration’ and ‘diversity’ etc. will cause so much loss to our race.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 11, 2013 at 2:26 am

    “I really don’t think that Hitler made any mistakes that should have been obvious with the information that he had available at the time.”
    .
    Really ?
    .
    Not listening to Galland’s emphatic plees to use ME262′s to bust bomber formations?.
    .
    Having mischlings in high level positions ?
    .
    Stopping the Luftwaffe in mid stride from turning London into a field of ashes on Dec 29,’40 ?
    .
    Not seizing all of France and its colonies, turning the Mediterranean into a German lake?
    .
    He was too civil. Warfare is the antithesis of civility.

  1. Carolyn

    October 11, 2013 at 9:58 am

    Fred – If you’re going to make definite claims re Hitler’s “mistakes”, you should link to where your claim comes from or can be proven.

    Not ‘funny’, but a deeply tragic irony. We have lost millions …

    How “tragic” is it when British Whites today still can’t see the error of their ways and still cling to WWII mentality? They are actually comic. It is probable that because Germans accepted blame (even though not deserved) while everyone else involved refuses to accept even one tiny smidgeon of blame — that this is why Germans have been able to move forward and the others are still bogged down protecting their lies.

  1. Carolyn

    October 11, 2013 at 10:35 am

    Bob in DC – You are talking foolishness from a purely intellectual perspective. It’s clear you have never deeply researched or thought through any of what you refer to, but have just adopted what you call a “Fourth Position” pose. Everything about you is somehow hidden [ie Wolf Wall Street], as though great deeds are being done behind the scenes. But nothing is being done by you except talk. And your talk is not the least bit convincing. You are basically an anti-capitalist populist [in thought only, of course], on the side of the “working man” who can only be the tool of his political leaders. It’s the Bolshevik system dressed up in a new name.

    The thought of you “standing up” to a real leader who you think has taken a wrong turn is laughable. And you deciding what Dietrich Eckart would have said to Hitler is laughable also. You really give yourself airs.

    Your “kikejew” is a turn-off word that means, as I thought, the same as Zionist Jew. It disregards the biological aspect of Jewishness — very bolshevik indeed. Finally, “Every man is not a king.”

  1. Carolyn

    October 11, 2013 at 10:38 am

    Before we even consider the thought of criticizing A. Hitler, lets see if we might criticize Roosevelt and Churchill, They are actually deserving much criticism.

    Well, that is understood, Monty. But it’s faulty reasoning to say that Hitler should not be criticized because R. and C. deserve it more. That’s not the issue.

  1. Hadding

    October 11, 2013 at 12:05 pm

    Fred Wilson sez:

    “I really don’t think that Hitler made any mistakes that should have been obvious with the information that he had available at the time.”
    .
    Really ?
    .
    Not listening to Galland’s emphatic plees to use ME262′s to bust bomber formations?.
    .
    Having mischlings in high level positions ?
    .
    Stopping the Luftwaffe in mid stride from turning London into a field of ashes on Dec 29,’40 ?
    .
    Not seizing all of France and its colonies, turning the Mediterranean into a German lake?
    .
    He was too civil. Warfare is the antithesis of civility.

    These are all sophomoric points.

    Germany had a problem in building large numbers of jets, which was that the internal engine-parts had to be alloyed with chromium to last more than a short time, and there was not a lot of chromium available. (The little that they could get came from Finland.) I read some book recently that analyzed whether going all out in building jet-fighters would have made a significant impact on the huge numbers of planes that the Allies put in the air and the final answer was no. Having the fastest fighter in the sky doesn’t mean that a bomber with a lot of guns on it (e.g. the Superfortress introduced in 1944) can’t shoot it down.

    Which mischling in a high-level position caused a problem?

    How would attacking civilians and their dwellings in London have won the war for Germany? It didn’t really help the Allies to bomb German civilians. It was supposed to be demoralizing, but it convinced the Germans that they were facing a barbaric enemy.

    I already dealt with what was necessary for turning the Mediterranean into an Axis Lake. There wasn’t time for it. Irritating the French people would have made France more troublesome to occupy and harder to defend.

    So all your would-be clever ruthlessness is poorly considered. The real world is more complicated than you imagine. This is typical American thinking, that the least civilized shall prevail.

  1. Monty Storm

    October 11, 2013 at 5:53 pm

    Carolyn
    Of course you are always correct, if I were to criticize Hitler it would be that A. Hitler being a supposed Christian didn’t know his bible very well. As Jesus said; what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace. He evidently underestimated the power of the Jew.

  1. Hadding

    October 11, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    One thing that would have helped Germany greatly in WWII, given the way the war developed, was NOT having Italy as a military ally. As a military ally Italy turned out to be a net liability.

    Only if capture of the entire Mediterranean had been pursued (which time and circumstances did not permit) would the military involvement of Italy (which had a decent navy) have become useful.

    Italy would have been much more useful as a friendly neutral country selling goods and supplies to Germany, which was what Spain also did until the Allies occupied France and the land-route from Spain to Germany was lost.

    This is all obvious with hindsight. Hitler couldn’t know in advance how things would go.

  1. endzog

    October 12, 2013 at 10:12 am

    Carolyn,

    Where you are right and most others in the movement are wrong on Adolf Hitler is that your examination is based not just on an appreciation of the greatest figure in white history but simply on ‘What is good for whites.’ Surely if we are to evaluate the legacy and heritage of this man it has to be in terms of what he was fighting for; the future of our race, the future of our children, families, culture, civilization and therefore if we want to bother with others, the good of the whole planet, who would benefit from our values.

    Most people seek shells from the Fuhrer and some seek diamonds but those who seek to learn from his wisdom to apply that to our plight today are the troops right at the front of our battle (even if it is a somewhat one-sided war at this time) with the Jews who are literally exterminating us day by day.

    Adolf Hitler was to my mind the most perfect man by comparison to any other man but he lived in an imperfect world with all the
    contradictions which exist even within our own movement today. He sought unity in much of the same disharmony and useless, wasteful, selfish disputations that make our current struggle almost a legless one.

    Understanding his teaching is the key to our liberation. He was without peer right then and he is right now.

    (re Eisen, Jews can afford to be gentle. The have mastered the art of getting brainwashed Goyim to carry out their assassinations).

  1. Carolyn

    October 13, 2013 at 11:16 am

    He evidently underestimated the power of the Jew.

    Monty, Many underestimate the power of the Jew. Our Hadding Scott is one who does. There is the idea that if we think the Jew is invulnerable, we will be paralyzed. But most WN’s are paralyzed already. You are among a large group who think that God has a plan, so comfort yourself with this while waiting for the plan to unfold. This is just as big a mistake.

    I think more people need to fully understand just how powerful the Jew is, and what his power consists of. Not Satan, by the way. (But they have got the Western world in a kind of hypnotized state.) Only then will they be upset enough to do something about it. The new Catholic Pope is just one more who is entirely in the Jews’ hands.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 13, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    “”Germany had a problem in building large numbers of jets, which was that the internal engine-parts had to be alloyed with chromium to last more than a short time, and there was not a lot of chromium available. (The little that they could get came from Finland.) I read some book recently that analyzed whether going all out in building jet-fighters would have made a significant impact on the huge numbers of planes that the Allies put in the air and the final answer was no. Having the fastest fighter in the sky doesn’t mean that a bomber with a lot of guns on it (e.g. the Superfortress introduced in 1944) can’t shoot it down.”"

    Hitler totally misused the 262. He cast it in the role of ‘Blitz Bomber’, with disastrous results. The losses were catastrophic. He had to relent and completely reverse himself in Nov ’44. Then ordering all 262s to be built as fighters, When it was too late.
    The 262 was totally immune from the B-17. With 3 cm autocannon and m4k rockets it was far out of range of the 17′s 50 cal Browning machine guns. When the 262 was unleashed on the formations it slaughtered them.
    Proper application of the 262 alone might have saved millions of Germans. The German Army riding to victory under and umbrella of ME262s.
    Hitler had a wonder weapon and used it to plow dirt (that’s where the ‘Blitz Bombers’ wound up, in the dirt), until it was too late.
    Galland said, “given 200 262s, we could have downed 300 bombers a day”. No Dresden, no mass destruction in Germany.
    They were building over 200 a month in the last 5 months of the war.
    Hitler wouldn’t even give Galland the 20 he requested, when he needed them.
    Here…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1DdMDTby7M
    25 bombers downed in minutes, the rest jettisoned their bombs and ran for home. That could have happened at Dresden if Hitler had just listened to one of the most successful fighter aces in the Luftwaffe, Gen Galland (youngest general in all the German forces).
    The 262 was invulnerable at cruise speed. It was only vulnerable at slow speed ie. landing, takeoff, bombing and inexperienced pilots flying to slow.
    Good men can make bad decisions.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 14, 2013 at 1:12 am

    “One thing that would have helped Germany greatly in WWII, given the way the war developed, was NOT having Italy as a military ally. As a military ally Italy turned out to be a net liability.”

    Are you ever right on that !
    .
    Mussolini stepped into a deep pile in the Balkans, which Hitler had to bail him out of. Making Hitler’s invasion of the USSR late in the season. Consequently the Wehrmacht became stuck in the Autumnal Rasputitsa, giving Stalin the opportunity to evacuate factories to the East and bring in massive reinforcements.
    .
    Mussolini’s blunder in the Balkans may have been the first domino that lead to Germany’s final defeat.
    .
    I think that Hitler was excessively loyal. To a point that he harmed himself and his cause.

  1. Carolyn

    October 14, 2013 at 10:17 am

    I wrote:

    I think more people need to fully understand just how powerful the Jew is, and what his power consists of.

    The method of the Jew World Order is to keep the population from realizing they are being so tightly controlled and forced onto a certain path, because this realization brings with it resistance. If it appears that nothing is forced on us, but we are free to choose from a broad selection of personal possibilities, and to elect our political leaders, and talk and comment on shows from left to right … then people generally cannot complain. As long as the tightening is also done gradually so that the contrast from “then til now” is not so apparent. For example, major social changes have been introduced first on television programming.

    So ultimately, the goal is to have a people totally controlled (to the extent of enslavement) but they don’t know it and thus cooperate with it. This is not a new idea, btw.

  1. Hadding

    October 14, 2013 at 2:33 pm

    ” if Hitler had just listened to one of the most successful fighter aces in the Luftwaffe, Gen Galland …”

    Hitler listened to the manufacturer, Messerschmitt.

    During his conversation with Hitler, Messerschmitt, never hesitant to curry favor, touted the Me 209-II vigorously and also suggested to the Fuehrer that the Me 262 could be modified to carry bombs, apparently because Messerschmitt was promoting it in competition with the Arado Ar 234 and Dornier Do 335 in the fighter-bomber role. This may have been the first iteration of what became the “blitz bomber” concept. This was two months before the Insterburg demonstration, when Hitler had not yet received a detailed briefing about, or seen, the jet.

    In May 1944, following up on a subsequent conversation at the Insterburg demo, Hitler ordered the Me 262 fleet converted into fighter-bombers. http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/the-messerschmitt-me-262-jet-fighter/

    But this apparently didn’t have that much effect:

    Only a few dozen were so modified. The Luftwaffe’s operational leaders, especially Galland, did their best to ignore the order and fielded the Me 262 in fighter units.

    Belatedly, in July 1944, the first Me 262s entered service. In its first combat on July 25, 1944, an Me 262 attacked a British Mosquito flying a reconnaissance mission over Munich.

    Galland said in a 1994 interview that if the highest priority had been given to the jet before the war, it would have made a big dierence. Why? Probably because before the war access to chromium was not restricted. Galland’s statement may be accurate but this is expecting Hitler to know everything that is going to happen in advance. Hitler should have known in advance that Britain would wage a war against its national interest relying heavily on strategic bombing. The lack of chromium was the major reason why there were never more than 60 Me-262s in the air at any time. Yes, Hitler could have arranged to hoard chromium before the war if he’d had a soothsayer tell him that it was important to do that.

    There were other problems:

    Galland said that persistent allied attacks on Axis fuel supplies also hindered Me 262 operations. Toward the end of the war, Me 262s were often towed to the end of the runway by draft horses in order to conserve fuel. In addition, many airframes sat idle waiting for engines that never arrived.

  1. Monty Storm

    October 14, 2013 at 8:33 pm

    Carolyn, Yes I do take comfort in knowing that God has a plan, and hopefully I am part of it. However I do not just sit back and wait for God’s plan to unfold, we are to occupy until he returns. That involves being a light in the world of darkness, However I will not fight evil with evil. I am sure you are a lot youger than I am, but I remember an America where a lot of evil would not be tolerated. My Dad, a man who never went to church, seemed to have a better grasp of righteousness than most christians I know today. It’s those moral values that my Dad and his generation possessed, I believe could defeat the jew and his evil grip on this world. I believe that judeo-christianity has given the jew most of the power he has today, and that power could be removed by christians following the real Truth, Life, and the Way.

  1. Hadding

    October 14, 2013 at 9:47 pm

    What I’ve found is that the knowitalls who say that Hitler made some obvious blunder don’t really have enough information to make that judgment.

    Hitler made a terrible mistake when he attacked the USSR! Really? He should have waited to be attacked by them? That’s what was going to happen.

    Hitler made a terrible mistake when he wasted time on Yugoslavia before attacking the USSR? Really? But there had just been a coup in Yugoslavia that meant that if he did nothing he would have a pro-Soviet government in his rear when hostilities with the USSR commenced.

    My inference is, if you think that Hitler made a decision that was absurd and shows him as crazy or a fool, you need to dig deeper and find out what circumstances and what information influenced the decision. Anglo-American history often underemphasizes or leaves out that kind of information, because they want to portray Hitler as crazy or a fool (and of course ordinary people like to fancy that they are much smarter than Hitler). When you know enough about a Hitler decision to say, “Okay now I see why he did that,” then you’ve got it.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 12:51 am

    “Hitler made a terrible mistake when he attacked the USSR! Really? He should have waited to be attacked by them? That’s what was going to happen.”

    You keep putting words in my mouth that I never said.
    .
    I never said he was a fool or crazy. Or that he should have waited.
    .
    The most you can infer from my comment is that circumstances ran against him. By conflicting events he was forced to take actions that he otherwise would have avoided.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 1:11 am

    The crux of my comment was, Mussolini’s actions in the Balkans caused Hitler to lose precious time that most likely ruined his plans for an early in the season attack on Russia. ( Hitler was well read and fully
    knew the mistakes Napoleon, the Swedes and Poles had made when attacking Russia).
    .
    i.e. you pay for the sins of others.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 1:23 am

    As to the 262 issue.
    There were over 100 262′s in the first production run. Galland ask for 20 and didn’t get a single one. There was ample fuel and all other necessities to use them as Blitz Bombers, then certainly those same supplies could have been used for 20 formation busters.
    The Blitz Bombers just became coffins for many highly experienced pilots. 20 might as well been used for their obvious role as fighter interceptors.

  1. Hadding

    October 15, 2013 at 11:49 am

    I wasn’t putting words into your mouth, Fred Wilson. I was citing frequently made criticisms of Hitler, pointing out that they are based on inadequate information.

    You never did flesh out your other accusations, about how some mischling at a high level position wrought havoc, or how killing a lot of civilians in London would have helped the German war-effort.

    On this Me-262 thing, I think you’re off-base, repeating other people’s too-eager accusation. The Me-262 was in action two months after Hitler said that it should be adapted for dropping bombs based on what Messerschmitt had told him. So that was not really a huge delay and it seems hyperbole to call it disastrous. There were a lot of considerations in this that we don’t know, like the relative cost in manpower and resources of building jets and keeping them in the air, compared to conventional fighters. Under the circumstances, the jets spent an inordinate amount of time in repair because of the lack of chromium.

  1. Carolyn

    October 15, 2013 at 5:12 pm

    Monty – Well stated. But I still see it as only logical that if you believe God has a plan, then your only job is to make yourself available to play whatever part in that plan God wants you to play. Otherwise, you could be working against God’s plan. But then you might also think that you cannot be outside of God’s plan, so whatever you’re doing is what God wants you to do. It all works out, doesn’t it.

    If your Dad, who never went to church, had better moral values than Christians today – what are Christian teachings doing for us? They are certainly not defeating the jew!

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 6:28 pm

    London was a major industrial city and arms producer. The Luftwaffe fully knew where the explosives and incendiaries were coming from that were raining down on German cities. The destruction of London would have severely crippled the British war industry. The majority of blockbuster and heavy bombs were manufactured in underground factories in the East End. The objective wasn’t to kill lots of civilians, most would take shelter in the safety of the Tube. The objective would be to ruin the arms production and infrastructure for war.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 6:39 pm

    Milch and Morell are the mischlings I meant. Milch with his hateful vindictive character and his cascade of petty changes that kept the aviation engineers diverted from increasing production. Dr. Morell with his meth injections, which he deceitfully called ‘vitamins’.
    .
    In one respect Eva Braun was miles ahead of Hitler. She wouldn’t have anything to do with Morell as a Doctor and didn’t want to sit at the same table with him.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    It isn’t hyperbole to call the use of 262s as Blitz Bombers ‘disastrous’. Many fine experienced pilots lost their lives in the bomber role. Men who weren’t there when critically needed, later in the war. When 262s slowed to drop bombs, they were ‘sitting ducks’ ( the words of American fighter pilots). Most of the 800+ 262s built as fighters in ’45 sat empty because there weren’t any experienced pilots to fill their seats or teach the younger pilots tactics. The young pilots that did attempt flying the 262s didn’t understand the use of high speed and were shot down.

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    To a degree I am repeating other ppl, but ppl I have the highest esteem for and are worthy of respect by their merit and accomplishments. Gen. Galland being a principal source.
    .
    “That’s a wicked aeroplane. Wicked. WICKED ! I’m sure glad that they ( the Germans) screwed up the tactical use of this aeroplane.” Gen Spaatz, CO 8th AF USAAF, after a demo flight of a 262 at Melun, June ’45.
    .

  1. Fred Wilson

    October 15, 2013 at 7:26 pm

    “There were a lot of considerations in this that we don’t know”
    I’m certain that is true.
    .
    “the relative cost in manpower and resources of building jets and keeping them in the air, compared to conventional fighters.”
    There isn’t a comparison, the 262s could do something that no amount of piston planes could do. They could catch up to bombers, stay out of harms way, attack from the side which gave them a very large target silhouette. Once the 262s ( just a few ) broke the formation with its concentrated, coordinated firepower, the piston fighters (109s and 190s) could pick off the disordered remainder.
    In the youtube vid I posted it illustrated that the 262 invoked so much fear that bombers jettisoned their bombs and ran. That alone is invaluable and worth even the 10 hrs MTBF, of the initial engines.

  1. Carolyn

    October 15, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    Milch and Morell are the mischlings I meant. Milch with his hateful vindictive character and his cascade of petty changes that kept the aviation engineers diverted from increasing production. Dr. Morell with his meth injections, which he deceitfully called ‘vitamins’.

    Fred, I am limiting the number of individual comments you can post. This trait of writing several short, trivial comments in a row does reveal a short attention span and lack of grasp of the bigger picture. If you are unable to write a single comprehensive critique to explain your point of view, then just refrain.

    This comment is particularly void of substance. If you only had Milch and Morell in mind in the beginning, you should have mentioned their names then, rather than leaving an open accusation that there were many troublesome mischinge. But you probably only had Milch in mind. Milch is very controversial, but former Luftwaffe pilots I have known were of the opinion he did a good job. Once again, I ask you to give the source of your information so it can be investigated by the readers.

    Morell was not part-Jewish. I looked into this myself at one time. Many people want to say he was, but mostly disreputable people. It doesn’t matter what Eva Braun thought. Please give your sources that Morell was Jewish.

  1. Hadding

    October 15, 2013 at 11:23 pm

    Milch was not a mischling. His mother’s husband was not his biological father. See David Irving on that.

    I have never read that Theo Morell was a mischling.

  1. Carolyn

    October 16, 2013 at 1:45 am

    Hadding – that was an N-S created story about Milch’s father, so that he could be promoted by Goering. His father really was Jewish. If you want us to “see David Irving” you better give a link.

  1. Hadding

    October 16, 2013 at 11:39 am

    It’s easy enough to find. This is from a review of Irving’s The Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe (1974):

    Like another airman, though of more lowly rank — Aircraft-man T E Shaw, otherwise Colonel Lawrence (‘Lawrence of Arabia’) — Milch was born illegitimate. The accident of his birth was to prove an embarrassment to him, but for a different reason than with Lawrence. In Milch’s case, his nominal father, Anton Milch, who had married his mother, was of Jewish antecedents, though his mother was not; neither was his real father. Nevertheless it was alleged that Erhard Milch was Jewish, not only by his enemies under the Hitler regime, but even more unjustly by the American prosecutor at Nuremburg. The reason why Frau Milch never married Erhard’s father was that their relationship was one which the Church forbade as between man and wife. Out of respect for Milch’s wishes, Mr Irving goes no further than this — in fact the father was the mother Clara Milch’s maternal uncle. http://www.fpp.co.uk/reviews/Milch/Books_Bookmen_0574%20copy.html

    The General was born illegitimate. The Jew married his mother after he was born. The Jew was not his biological father.

    If you’re going to assume that people are lying all the time, there’ll be no end to confusion.

  1. Monty Storm

    October 16, 2013 at 11:50 am

    Carolyn,
    I agree with much of what you have said, but I did differentiate between true Christians and the those that call themseles Judeo-Chistians, who I believe are not Christians at all. I love listening to your programs, You have a pleasant voice, and a good sense of humor. Those posting responses to your program are very intelligent, Perhaps it would be better if I read more of what others have to say, and keep my comments to myself. Keep up the great work, guess I can’t say keep the faith.

  1. Carolyn

    October 16, 2013 at 1:34 pm

    If you’re going to assume that people are lying all the time, there’ll be no end to confusion.

    Ha! What a comment. If you’re going to assume David Irving is right all the time, there’ll be no end to the confusion.

    Milch was the man of whom Göring said: “I decide who’s a Jew.”

    Further, the reviewer of the 1974 book by Irving is very pro-British. Here is a quote from him:

    In my judgement The Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe ranks with Albert Speer’s memoirs Inside the Third Reich as by far the most important book on Hitler’s Germany to have appeared.

    Albert Speer’s Inside the Third Reich is full of “post-1945″ anti-Hitler slurs and other inaccuracies that the British reviewer just loves. I am soon going to publish for the first time the last translation from Hermann Giesler’s Ein Anderer Hitler that Wilhelm Kriessmann and I produced. Giesler knew and worked with Albert Speer, something that David Irving cannot claim. All DI can claim are his interviews. I just need a little space of time.

  1. Carolyn

    October 16, 2013 at 1:50 pm

    The problem is, Monty, that there are very few “true Christians,” as you mean by it. For example, my sister-in-law is a regular Catholic and she believes the Jews are okay. So does the rest of her family, and most Catholics. Nothing to worry about. I have a niece who is (or used to be) a sort of fundamentalist, bible-based Christian (no make-up, no jewelry); she hates the Muslims, loves the Jews. So it doesn’t quite work to say that antisemitic Christians are the “real Christians;” they are in truth very much in the minority in the Christian world. Sad, but true. I wish it wasn’t so.

    You and they would do better to spend your efforts in talking to Christian-Zionists about the error of their ways, rather than just writing them off. This is where committed Christians should be working. Charles Carlson is the only one I know who is actually doing that, with his impressive ministry.

    Keep listening (and comment if you want) and thanks for the compliments!

  1. Carolyn

    October 16, 2013 at 6:59 pm

    I would be pleased to know that Erhard Milch was not part Jewish. However, David Irving’s account, though from 1974, is new to me. Here is something that creates a bit of a problem with it. Quoted below is the commonly circulated story:

    In 1935, Milch’s ethnicity came into question because his father, Anton Milch, was rumoured to be Jewish. This prompted an investigation by the Gestapo that Göring suppressed by producing an affidavit signed by Milch’s mother stating that Anton was not really the father of Erhard and his six siblings, and naming their true father as Karl Brauer, her deceased uncle. These events and his being issued a German Blood Certificate, by Adolf Hitler, prompted Hermann Göring to famously say “Wer Jude ist, bestimme ich” (I decide who is a Jew).

    We’re to believe that Milch’s mother had seven children with Karl Brauer, her uncle, and then he died? So she married a Jew and named him, after the fact, as the father of the seven children?! The eldest had to be at least 10 years old by then. If her family were such good Catholics that she needed to be married in the Church, how is it she could then marry a Jew? And why would this Jew marry her and name himself the father of so many children?

    Erhard had a famous brother, Werner, who was a Doctor of Law and

    was a highly decorated Major der Reserve in the Fallschirmjäger during World War II. He was also a recipient of the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross. The Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross was awarded to recognise extreme battlefield bravery or successful military leadership. During the Milch Trial, he acted as co-counsel for his brother Generalfeldmarschall Erhard Milch alongside Friedrich Bergold.

    This means all the Milch children were declared to be Aryan, as Wikipedia says, not just Erhard. But as I said, how that works out with the mother and father and the Jew is strange, to the point of being questionable. The scenario in which Hitler approves the “correction” in their records makes more sense.

    Perhaps Milch was sensitive to being called “the Nazi Jew” after the war and preferred the story the N-S Party, with the help of his mother, came up with … in spite of the too close relationship.

  1. Hadding

    October 17, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    These events and his being issued a German Blood Certificate, by Adolf Hitler, prompted Hermann Göring to famously say “Wer Jude ist, bestimme ich” (I decide who is a Jew).

    The funny thing is that this statement (“I decide who is a Jew”) is also attributed to Karl Lueger, the mayor of Vienna, decades before Goering might have said it.

    Of course Goering could have been wryly quoting Lueger, but it’s hard to imagine a situation where Goering would have said it publicly. It seems most likely apocryphal.

    It certainly wouldn’t be the first remarkable statement falsely attributed to Goering.

  1. Hadding

    October 17, 2013 at 1:19 pm

    Here’s a more credible account of the circusmtances under which Goering might have said, “I decide who is a Jew!” from a column by George F. Will:

    “I decide who is a Jew around here.”- Hermann Goering in 1934, when told that a favorite Munich art dealer was Jewish http://nypost.com/2007/12/01/hawaiian-apartheid/

    The reason why this is more credible is that in this account Goering isn’t mocking the whole government’s Jewish policy, only mocking himself for buying from a Jew.

  1. Carolyn

    October 17, 2013 at 3:00 pm

    The reason why this is more credible is that in this account Goering isn’t mocking the whole government’s Jewish policy, only mocking himself for buying from a Jew.

    I looked at the link you gave to the Jew York Post/George Will. I have to say I’m surprised that you would find this interpretation more credible — that what Goering said about an art dealer would become well-known enough to be switched to a truly serious issue about Milch. I mean, who cares about the art thing? And Goering, a serious art collector, would certainly know whether a “favorite” art dealer was Jewish or not. Nobody would have to tell him. All art dealers were Jews, anyway. No date is given, nor any source for it from the anti-Nazi George F. Will.

    You are inventing motives for Goering by saying he would publicly “mock himself for buying from a Jew.” Imo, he would never say that over such a minor thing. In what context did Karl Lueger say it? I can imagine G. would be quoting Lueger, but not necessarily.

    However, I don’t think this is the major issue in whether Milch was half Jewish or not. The marriage of his mother to a Jew after she had 7 children with her uncle is what I find unbelievable. She could never have covered that up, so it would have had to be common knowledge … which it didn’t seem to be since the Gestapo were fooled!

  1. Hadding

    October 17, 2013 at 5:41 pm

    There is a whole book about Karl Lueger that has, “I decide who is a Jew!”
    as its title.

    http://www.amazon.com/Decide-Who-Jew-Papers-Doctor/dp/081912494X

    If you’d investigated the question of fake quotes in general as I have, you would realize that often the circumstances of a statement are altered to change its significance and thereby to make it more damaging. I don’t know where George Will got his version of the story about Goering but it is obviously much less damaging than what you presented, and therefore less dubious on its face.

    Proving that Goering didn’t mock Germany’s Jewish policy doesn’t prove that Milch wasn’t a mischling, but it does show that what you quoted is reckless and biased.

    I doubt that Milch was so indispensable in 1935 that Hitler’s government had to risk embarrassment by covering up for him. They didn’t cover up for Emil Maurice.

Add new comment