Tag Archives: Polish revisionism

Enemy in the East – Reading & Analysis – Part Four

Audio©V. K. Clark & J. A. Sexton. Wilk Mocy Publishers. All Rights Reserved.

Pictured above & below: Polish Marshal Jozef Pilsudski, also known as “the Father of modern Poland.”

603568893

Part five: https://wilkmocy.com/?p=8039

German chauvinist blames Britain & Poland for WW2

All original grammatical and spelling errors have been left intact. This is the Hitler Worship Cult’s idea of “good research”:

I think there was one big mistake. I have read Stefan Scheil’s book about Ribbentrop. He says that Ribbentrop believed in peace when he flew back from The Soviet Union, but he did not assure Hitler that the Brits won’t fight. I think everybody knew after the treaty between Pland and Britain that the wari will be inevitable. Scheil says that all the statements about Ribbentrop wanting the war and believing that Britain would not fight are the lies from the Brits and the traitors in the Auswärtiges Amt (Germany’s Foreign Ministery) who were Weizsäcker, the brothers of Kordt and others.

From Hesse’s mission they finally knew that next day the declaration of war would be coming. Hitler did not cry to Ribbentrop. He just asked, what now should be done.

Ribbentrop did not want the war. He did not encourage Hitler to the War. He did not say the Brits would not fight. All these are just lies.The traitors themselevs did encourage Hitler to the war and wanted much more from Poland. They would not have made a deal with Poland in 1934 or later. Unlike the nationalsocialists did. The “nazis” wanted friendship with Poland.

Hitler said he would be an idiot, if he would have let himself to the World War because of Poland, if he would have another possibility. He had no choices because he knew that Britain wanted the war. In the Autumn he would have lost the war because of the weather. The Poles said they would attack Danzig and they would have. And without this the Brits would have started bombings or some provocations or falseflags. They knew it.

Ribbentrop had for years warned that England was planning the war and it would attack in any case. There were much talk for years in the floors and the cabinets of power. Churchill and the FOCUS were preaching for the war publicly from 1936. The propaganda machine had rolled and the people brainwashed.

At the same time there was the appeasement. Ribbentrop said that the appeasement was a fraud. The leaders of England needed an alibi for the war. It was Chamberlain who started the process of the annexation of the Sudetenland into the Reich. He promised it to the Germans. Scheil says that Chamberlain maybe did not want the war but he could not avoid it. Hitler and Ribbentrop believed he was just a pawn of the leading plutocrats so he could not do otherwies. I think too he eventually had to do what the USA and the plutocrats wanted. He has said himself that the World Jewry and the USA forced England to the war and he felt he had written a doom for the whole civilization with the declaration of the war.

So the revisions of the Versailles were good for the coming war and the Brits provided them, although they afterwards said they were humiliations and they must be stopped and cancelled.

When England and Poland refused to negotiate, Hitler knew the War was unavoidable. And Ribbentrop too. They had not another choice. The legends about Ribbentrop are dangerous because they create a picture of many choices. So if the book is about the guilty of Britain, it accuses Hitler too, if the author really believes these lies about Ribbentrop and Hitler.

The Elephant in White Nationalism’s Room: Adolf Hitler, Zionist

White nationalists, Alt-Righters and Tradcons, we’re all eagerly awaiting your explanation/justification for this:

Adolf Hitler supported and funded Zionism as well as the primordial Jewish state. Together, the Gestapo, NSDAP and SD trained, funded, aided and abetted the Jewish-Zionist Haganah, Hanotea, and Mossad le Aliyah Bet (modern Mossad’s forerunner).

nazi-zionist-medallion

This information, and much more, will be featured in two of Mr. Sexton’s upcoming publications. Stay tuned…

On C-SPAN: https://www.c-span.org/video/?289751-1/transfer-agreement

Jan Peczkis Reviews “Lives of Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers”

Includes Details on Full-Blooded Nazi-Spared German Jews

By Jan Peczkis | October 4, 2009

hitler-jewish-soldiers-hitler-zionistIn this sequel to his HITLER’S JEWISH SOLDIERS, Rigg focuses on individuals’ experiences. WARNING: The descriptions of the carnage at the Russian front are graphic, and may be upsetting to the sensitive reader.

Rigg reminds the reader that racial Nazi ideology and Nazi officials decided who was Jewish; self-identifications and self-repudiations of Judaism did not. Tens of thousands of Christians of Jewish origin, most of whom didn’t feel Jewish, were murdered by the Nazis as Jews. (p. 17). According to the Nuremberg laws, a Jew was anyone who had three or four Jewish grandparents. A half-Jew (1st Degree Mischling) had two Jewish grandparents and a quarter-Jew (2nd Degree Mischling) had one Jewish grandparent. (p. 12). According to the Halakah (rabbinical law), more than half of the 2nd-Degree Mischling were Jews. (p. 13).

Hitler's Jewish Soldiers (vídeo)

Some of the interviewees acknowledge once admiring Hitler, as for the extensive employment opportunities created by his Autobahn program. (p. 79). The interviewees served in the armed forces as German patriots. (e. g., p. 57). Rigg considers the Yiddish term Goy to be derogatory. (p. 14).

While it is true that the majority of the German Jews and Mischlinge interviewed by Rigg escaped persecution by concealing their background or being fortunate to serve under officers that disregarded it, there were also quite a few of them known and spared by top Nazi officials and re-labeled Aryans. Hitler did this with the stroke of a pen. (p. 13). In his Chapter 3, which is on those who received the Deutschblutigkeitserklarung (declaration of German blood), Rigg wrote: “No fewer than twenty-one generals, several admirals, and one field marshal of Jewish descent served with Hitler’s consent. And thousands in the lower ranks of the Wehrmacht remained there because Hitler personally exempted them from the laws.” (p. 171). Rigg reiterates the fact that Erhard Milch had been either a half-Jew or full Jew. (pp. 177-178). In his Chapter 4, Rigg discusses those who got the Genehmigung (racial amnesty, and permission to remain in the German armed forces.)

hitler jewish soldiers

The implications of the foregoing are clear. Typically, the Jewish victims of the Germans are, tokenism aside, exclusively featured in educational Holocaust materials. The chief argument adduced in support for this monopoly is the one about Jews being uniquely targeted for TOTAL extermination. This is once again shown to be manifestly incorrect.

image008The religious views of the interviewees figure prominently in this book. The interviewees recall their ancestors’ conversions to Christianity for opportunistic reasons, and describe their Christianity as mainly a cultural one–like that of most gentile Germans. Currently, many of the interviewees fault German Christian leaders for supporting Hitler, and view both Christianity and Judaism as purveyors of divisiveness and intolerance. One of them saw the Jews’ problems as the outcome of Jewish particularism and sense of being better than others. (p. 86). Most of the interviewees lost belief in God as a result of the Holocaust and of the battlefield horrors they had experienced. One, however, believed that God had audibly led him away from a location of certain death (pp. 73-75), while another interviewee felt that God was with him and that his sense of being abandoned by God was no different from that of Christ while on the Cross. (p. 241). Rescued Rebbe Joseph Isaac Schneersohn (1880-1950) is faulted by Rigg for contending that the Holocaust was God’s punishment for the Jews’ sins. (pp. 266-268). [However, one should remember that collective divine punishment for the Jews’ sins is a common Old-Testament theme (e. g., the Babylonian Captivity).]

Several of Rigg’s interviewees took part in the 1939 German conquest of Poland. Ironic to the common portrayal of Polish soldiers as foolhardy, one of the interviewees alluded to German foolhardiness: “[Dieter] Fischer recalled that his Frankfurt division lost 25 percent of its officers, many to snipers noticing rank insignia on their uniforms. He pointed out that `stupid courage’ got many killed. One day several officers drove up and asked for a status report. Fischer explained they had spotted a Polish tank down the road and should not go further. `Are you a coward?’ one of the officers asked. They drove on and a few minutes later, the tank blew up the car. Every officer inside died.” (pp. 232-233).

wolf_divider_2

Jan Peczkis Reviews “The Butcher of Poland: Hitler Lawyer Hans Frank”

Nazism in Context: The Personal and Professional Life of the Butcher of Poland. Atypical Insights on Stauffenberg

By Jan Peczkis | May 7, 2014

One major shortcoming of this book, for which reason I give it three stars, is the information and quotations that are not linked to any of the sources in the bibliography. This makes it difficult for the reader to conduct further research, and s/he must resort to other books on Hans Frank.

Author O’Connor puts emphasis the role of the Bavarian Catholic Church in supporting Hitler. However, he sees this as a church that had allowed itself to be shaped by the popular culture, as he comments, “`The Church which is married to the Spirit of the Age will be a widow in the next’. Dean Inge’s judgment is often quoted today in support of Catholic traditional values. In many disastrous ways the Catholic Church in the late 1920’s and the 1930’s was married to the `Spirit of the Age’.” (p. 103).

In time, the Nazis showed their true anti-Christian colors. Already in 1934, the song of the Hitler Youth included stanzas that were anti-Christ, anti-papist, and openly stated that the singer is not a Christian and not a Catholic. (p. 97). Hitler repeatedly made snide remarks about Christianity. (pp. 98-on). The Nazis abolished mandatory prayer in schools in 1935, and eliminated religious education for 14-15 year olds in 1940. (p. 95, 105).

The author touches on the sexuality of the Nazis. They modeled their homosexuality on that of the male bonding of the Spartans. (p. 57). He considers it inconclusive as to whether Hans Frank was a homosexual or bisexual. He also puts the later Nazi persecution of gays in perspective, “Later the Nazis prosecuted homosexuals and sent them to concentration camps, though this did not happen with the thoroughness of the destruction of Jews, Catholics, intellectuals, opponents of the regime, and the disabled.” (p. 95).

What about the possible Jewish ancestry of some of the Nazi leaders, including Hitler? The author notes that this question is not answerable because the Nazis had destroyed the relevant records. (p. 87).

Unfortunately, this book repeats the old canard about Polish cavalry charging German tanks during the 1939 German-Soviet conquest of Poland. (p. 124). On the other hand, author Gary O’Connor has a good grasp of the Nazi German crimes in occupied Poland, especially for a non-Polish author. These crimes were hardly limited to Jews as victims. The author features the destruction of Poland’s intelligentsia, and mass shootings of Poles, the systematic confiscation and destruction of Polish cultural treasures, the mass deaths (by starvation and cold) of Poles expelled from the Reich-annexed territories, the thorough German destruction of Warsaw after the fall of the Soviet-betrayed Warsaw Uprising, etc. One minor point: the genocidal “Zamosc experiment” against Poles is misspelled as Zamosz. (p. 171).

But, according to white nationalists, Hitler was “Mr. White Solidarity”, “White Power”, “White Nationalism.” Why, then, did he do this to the white Poles?

The author demythologizes Claus von Stauffenberg, notably as portrayed in the movie VALKYRIE. The would-be assassin of Hitler supported the German conquest, exploitation, and colonization of Poland. Even in 1944, Stauffenberg wanted a peace with the Soviet Union that would return Poland to the partitioned state of 1914. (p. 130). This reminds us once again that being anti-Hitler does not make one an anti-Nazi, and that being an anti-Nazi does not prevent one from being a German imperialist.

At the Nuremberg trials, the Nazi defendants commonly attempted to exculpate their conduct by blaming it on the “injustices” of Versailles, and by adopting an “Allies were just as bad” line of rationalization. Some tried to equate the authoritarianism of the Nazis with that of the Catholic Church. Psychologist Douglas Kelley, accused of being the one who smuggled the cyanide capsule to Goering, later (December 1957) himself committed suicide by taking the same poison–an alleged souvenir from the Nuremberg trials. (p. 238).

Hans Frank warned that Hitler was but the first stage of a “new man”–one that is amoral. The author then juxtaposed it with the warnings of Pope John Paul II about the emergence of a “culture of death”, albeit one that manifests itself in many different forms, and not only totalitarian ones. (p. 220).

URL: http://www.amazon.com/review/R26RFH2RFAA484/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0752498134