by Weronika Kuzniar (V. K. Clark)
Hitler’s Table Talk is a worthless primary source. There, I said it. And I’m not just saying this to evoke a reaction. I’m saying it because I really mean it. The renowned “Hitler expert” Lord Dacre, better known as Hugh Trevor-Roper, knowingly and willingly engaged in a massive cover-up regarding Hitler’s Table Talk (hereafter TT).
Had it not been for the outstanding research at the low cost of just $50 taken up by historian Richard Carrier, we might still be in the dark about this, 64 years after TT’s first appearance in the English language. Sorry to bust this bubble, Hitler and Third Reich enthusiasts, but TT is worthless.
In this article, I establish three things: 1) that Hugh Trevor-Roper knowingly and willingly engaged in academic fraud for profit and prestige, 2) that TT is a worthless primary source, and 3) that renowned Hitler “experts”, both Revisionist and Mainstream, have failed the public regarding reliable Hitler primary sources.
A fake Hitler quote cited by Irmin Vinson on Greg Johnson’s Counter-Currents website:
#1 NEW RELEASE ON AMAZON IN “HISTORIOGRAPHY” (7/2-7/3/17 & 7/14/17)
Read the FREE abridged PDF online (my original contributions to this research pertain to Mr. David Irving and Werner Koeppen): Table-Talk-Debunked-VK-Clark-2017
Just $15.99 for the updated & expanded softcover on Amazon: https://amazon.com/dp/1548258768/
Or, get it on audiobook: https://amazon.com/dp/B076FDPHFN/
**6/24 UPDATE** The text comparisons have commenced on my end and the results are stunning!
First, we have here Henry Picker’s December 13, 1941 entry (based on the “original” notes of Heinrich Heim before he [Heim] modified and expanded them[!!; op. cit. Nilsson]):
Henry Picker on December 13, 1941 (mittags):
“Es ist gut, dass ich die Pfaffen nicht hineingelassen habe in die Partei. Am 21. März 1933 – Potsdam – war die Frage: Kirche oder nicht Kirche? Ich hatte den Staat gegen den Fluch der beiden Konfessionen erodbert. Wenn ich damals angefangen hätte, mich der Kirche zu bedienen – wir sind an die Gräber gegangen, während die Männer des Staates in der Kirche waren–, so wurde ich heute das Schicksal des Duce teilen. Für sich ist er ein Freigeist. Aber er hat mit Konzessionen begonnen… Ich wurde im Vatikan einmarschieren und die ganze Gesellschaft herausholen. Ich würde dann sagen: “Verzeihung, ich habe mich geirrt!” – Aber sie wären weg!”
“It is good that I did not let priests into the party. On 21 March 1933 – Potsdam – the question was: Church or no church? I had conquered the state despite the curse of the two confessions. If I had begun to serve the church — we went to the graves, while the men of the state were in the church — I would now be sharing the fate of the Duce. He is a free-thinker. But he has initiated [begun with] concessions … I would enter the Vatican and throw the whole lot of them out. I’d say, “Excuse me, I’ve been wrong!” – But they would [already] have been out [gone]!”
Source and original entry (13 December 1941, mittags):
Next, we have Heinrich Heim’s modified and expanded version of his own notes purportedly taken down on December 13, 1941 (mittags), which were (unbeknown to Heim) hijacked by Mr. Picker and published as his own in the book above! (We have Mr. Picker to thank for inadvertently exposing Heim as a fabricator in this respect; op. cit. Carrier)
Heim’s modified entry for the same day of 13 December 1941 (mittags):
And the softcover English translation, which, like Heim, adds much content to the original one paragraph entry:
And then we have the following divergent notes from Werner Koeppen, who John Toland (on p. 682 in https://www.amazon.com/dp/0385420536) wrote had “furtively jotted down notes” on a paper napkin as Hitler spoke. Well, if Koeppen furtively jotted notes, then how come he had so much less content than Heim (above) and such different content than both Picker and Heim?
Some of Koeppen’s 9/18/1941 notes (my translation):
Little of Koeppen’s content matches Heim’s. It should match Heim’s entry more closely as far as theme and subject matter if both men furtively took verbatim notes as Hitler spoke to them. In fact, they ought to be identical. But the very different content suggests a lot of omission and divergence on both men’s parts. Not okay for a steno reporter! The only thing we can say for sure after comparing Koeppen’s September 17th (not posted here, but is in my book) through 18th entries is that a general discussion of the eastern front and Reichskommissariat Ukraine took place. Nothing more. We have no idea what Hitler actually said or did not say. The entries agree only in the most general sense. (E.g., Heim features Hitler calling the Slavs “a mass of born slaves” and Koeppen does not.)
Here is Heim’s entry for that day (September 17th to the 18th):
Lastly, the entry of January 18, 1942 (nachts) suffices as the final blow to Heim’s credibility as a reliable steno reporter. Compare Mr. Picker’s hijacked Heim notes with those later expanded and amended by Heim (unbeknown to Picker).
Picker’s hijacked Heim entry (18. Januar 1942, nachts):
Heim’s entry for the exact same time/day (18./19. Januar 1942, nachts):
All updates and textual comparisons have been added to my book.
POWERWOLF PODCASTS ON HTT