Hitler Vs Stalin — by Arch Stanton





As for a comparison of Stalin and Hitler, Stalin was clearly a megalomaniac. Take a look at all the Stalin iconography versus that of Hitler. How many massive statues and murals featured Hitler as their focus? Stalin was a cold-blooded murderer, his track record leads to this conclusion. Stalin was behind the mass murder of his own people. Where did Hitler ever conduct any mass murder campaign, let alone that of his own people?

The Stalin regime produced the Soviet Gulag, a system of death camps purposefully designed to starve and work inmates to death. Hitler’s concentration camps spanned a twelve year period from 1933 to 1945. In 1937, there were only 7,500 prisoners in four concentration camps: Dachau, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald and Lichtenberg. Note that war at this point was less than three years away. German camps were originally designed to rehabilitate the inmates, hence the sign “Arbeit Macht Frei” i.e. learning a trade and becoming a productive German citizen led to the inmate’s release. According to Bernadac, Reichsführer Himmler “wanted the concentration camps to be primarily re-education centers, genuine courses that should result in lasting conversions.”

Before the war, German inmates were released from the camps after satisfactorily completing their rehabilitation process. Of course, the release process ceased with the beginning of the war.

By contrast, only a tiny percentage of inmates ever returned from Stalin’s death camps during a 71 year period spanning both side of WWII. Soviet camps were first established in 1919 under the Cheka. By the early 1930s, camp populations had already reached significant numbers and by 1934 the Gulag, or Main Directorate for Corrective Labor Camps, now under the NKVD, had several million inmates. A peacetime incarceration rate of several million inmates versus several thousand, how do these two leaders compare on this point alone?



Murderous Stalin felt the need to have his troops backed by “blocking units” tasked to execute anyone retreating from the front. He also branded anyone captured as a traitor and later executed these former prisoners, while sending family members to the camps. Where did Hitler ever have such policies? Hitler stated his intentions openly and never planned nor used the “sneak attack.” Unlike Stalin and his communists, who openly stated their intent for world conquest and domination, Hitler never had any known design for world conquest or domination.

Hitler tried repeatedly to prevent war by offering peace terms. These terms were rejected in toto by the allies who wanted war. Stalin sought a bloody global revolution that would lead to a communist victory and domination over the world. He planned the sneak attack on Germany after signing a non-aggression pact. Stalin had 22,000 poles murdered in the attempt to decapitate the Polish government and thereby any possibility of a Polish counter revolution. He then blamed this atrocity on the Germans. Where did Hitler ever order the mass murder of a country’s leaders and intelligentsia? When did he ever blame any actions, taken by himself or his government, on others?

The Soviet regime under Stalin considered a citizen insane if they did not recognize communism as the political paragon of virtue and slavishly support the “workers paradise” without question. Where did the National Socialists ever consider people crazy for not slavishly following their system? When did they ever incarcerate citizens in insane asylums for disagreement with their policies?

Unlike the sole example provided by Stalin’s Conversation with A.M. Kollontai, there are far too many other examples of these differences to list.

LD: The Stalin conversation with Alexandra Kollontai may never have taken place. There are definite indications that this entire diary conversation with Stalin is an outrageous fabrication or forgery, in which case what we are dealing with here is a worthless document. 

As for the number killed by Stalin and his soviet henchmen, never – ever – give the Jew, or his shabbos goy, the benefit of the doubt, for they will most assuredly repay balanced fairness with a knife to the back or a slash to the throat.

Instead assume the worst imaginable possibility and then multiply a thousand fold.

How many truths might it take to balance the scale of lies Jews have been feeding the goyim for centuries?

TORTURE IN STALIN’S GULAGSGULAG_IMAGE_02Danzig Baldaev, Drawings From the Gulag

012 (1)

Naked Christian women were lined up for inspection by Jewish commissars when they first arrived in Stalin’s gulags. The prison guards had their pick of the most attractive women.


As a result of exhaustion from overwork and starvation rations, many of the women suffered from vaginal prolapse.


In Stalin’s camps sadistic thugs were allowed to murder inmates by electrocution, stabbing, hanging, decapitation, and the insertion of red-hot crowbars into the anus.

010In Stalin’s torture camps Christian inmates were sodomized, as in this picture, by having long iron needles thrust up their rectums.

For more grisly pictures of the Soviet gulags, see here

Like this? Share it now.
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someonePrint this page

134 thoughts on “Hitler Vs Stalin — by Arch Stanton

  1. Given the right environment, humans can turn to savagery with ease.

    It seems that is what the USA and NATO keeps on doing, on behalf of the chosen ones and their “Christian” allies.

    I like to think most of these are lies, but the evidence suggest we can be a very cruel species.

  2. It would be fair to guess that the progeny of this scum, or those who condoned these atrocities, still have some power in Russia. Communism didn’t suddenly ‘die’.

    1. It moved to Israel. Many of these sadists and/or their offspring emigrated to Israel. The IDF has virtually no PTSD.

  3. Obviously, this is an extended recycle of Arch Stanton’s long comment to the post “Stalin as Psychopath — Robert Conquest” from Sep 1, 2015. It is pretty obvious also who the target of this post is. Call me crazy, but the target of this well-orchestrated attack is not Stalin – the target is our good friend lobro. I envision headlong collision of two completely different worlds here: ‘libration’ side of the Moon, on the one hand, and the ‘darkmoon’ side of the Moon – on the other.

    On second thought, lobro is not likely to fall into this trap.

    Enjoy the show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpqzabrdpsM

    1. @ Circassian

      It is pretty obvious also who the target of this post is. Call me crazy, but the target of this well-orchestrated attack is not Stalin – the target is our good friend lobro. I envision headlong collision of two completely different worlds here: ‘libration’ side of the Moon, on the one hand, and the ‘darkmoon’ side of the Moon – on the other. On second thought, lobro is not likely to fall into this trap.

      Hi Circassian,

      I haven’t had time to respond to this comment but I’ve been thinking about it. This gives me an opportunity to make a few points about Stalin and clarify our website policy in regard to the “Stalin Question”.

      1. We are are an anti-Stalin website in the same sense that we are an anti-zionist website and a pro-Holocaust revisionist website. We are unlikely to change our attitude to Israel or the Holocaust just because an angry Jew steps in to the Comment section here occasionally and tells us: “Stop attacking Israel and denying the Holocaust! Stop being so anti-Semitic!”

      2. In the same way, we are unlikely to do a U-turn on Stalin and suddenly convert to “Stalin worship” just because two commenters here (you and Lobro) are Stalin defenders. You are entitled to your views and have the full freedom of our website to make known your advocacy of Stalin. No one is censoring you. But if it distresses you too much to see your hero Stalin attacked and if it is actually making you angry, then the obvious solution is to avoid reading this website any more. Why go out of you way to court cognitive dissonance if you can’t handle it? Why fly into a rage every time someone points out that Stalin was a mass murderer and that he is being judged by his deeds alone — “Be their fruits ye shall know them”?

      We attach no importance to these “noble words” ascribed to Stalin in a single diary entry by such a dubious character referee as the sexually promiscuous Russian feminist Alexandra Kollontai. She is an untrustworthy source.

      3. Lobro has already confessed that he has never read a single biography of Stalin. As such, he is unlikely to know anything about Alexandra Kollontai and her bad reputation. He is also in no position to pronounce Stalin’s words (as quoted by Kollontai) as genuine, since he is totally ignorant of what Stalin said on other occasions in hundreds of authentic official documents and in his own voluminous published writings.

      4. In other words, scholarly historians like Robert Conquest and Robert Service, who have spent decades researching Stalin, would have no hesitation in casting doubts over the Kollontai diary entry and dismissing it as a fraud. If Lobro wishes to base his Stalin advocacy on a fabricated document, a forgery, he is welcome to do so. But the rest of us are not obliged to follow him down the path of folly just because he is a highly intelligent and educated man.

      5. Remember this: though Lobro may well be a genius in all other respects, he is also a self-confessed Stalin ignoramus — a man who has never found time to read a single biography of Stalin. Sorry, but much as I admire Lobro and regard him as a personal friend, his admitted ignorance about Stalin works against him and gives him zero credibility as a Stalin supporter. If Lobro had based his advocacy of Stalin on an authentic document, he might have had some credibility. But to defend Stalin for noble words Stalin never uttered and are entirely fictitious, that’s a different matter!

      6. We are quite prepared to publish the Kollontai article on this website, but surely we are also entitled to point out that its authenticity has been called into question? And giving proof of this.

      7. We are doing our best to be fair and objective. We have several anti-Stalin articles awaiting publication in drafts. They have been there for months. We haven’t published them yet because we’ve been trying our best to find some good pro-Stalin articles as a counter-balance. We have not been able to find any.The Kollontai article is the only pro-Stalin statement we’ve been able to find and so we are happy to publish it as a corrective to all the Stalin bashing, dubious though its authenticity is.

      8. We invite you and Lobro to submit an essay to this site entitled “In Defense of Stalin.” Tell us why you worship this monster. We will publish your respective articles provided they are not too long. Desired length: 1500-2500 words. Maximum length: 3000 words. We can’t be fairer than this. Accept the challenge. Defend your hero.

      1. LD –

        “Stalin was a mass murderer and that he is being judged by his deeds alone — “Be their fruits ye shall know them”?”

        I’ll speak from personal experience, FYI:

        In the US, all throughout the 1940s and until the late 1970s…. Stalin and Mao were considered the worst mass murderers in that century. They were used as examples in all of my schooling as that of ‘MASS murder’ and torture more than any others. Now they are heroes… reversals rule. Nobody says “RED China” anymore.

        Back then, Hitler was considered an evil murderer of Jews, but paled in the MASS murder category.

        ALL rulers lie. No one knows their true thoughts. Do not trust them.

      2. LD,

        Thanks for your comprehensive response. I wish to be completely candid with you. I am aware very well that this is an anti-Stalin website which is “unlikely to do a U-turn on Stalin and suddenly convert to ‘Stalin worship’ just because two commenters here ([Circassian] and Lobro) are Stalin defenders.” That is perfectly OK with me.

        However, I don’t believe that lobro is ‘Stalin defender’ or ‘Stalin worshiper’, to resort to your parlance, for the simple reason that he said so directly and unambiguously. He comes across as an honest man, and I tend to believe him. He can be mistaken in his judgment on any subject, just like anybody else here, and his smartness is not what makes him attractive in my eyes, but rather his genuine interest, perhaps even struggle, to figure out the truth. I have the same interest and the same struggle.

        I also wish to be frank in admitting that I consider you as an advisory, notwithstanding I have healthy respect for you, as anyone should towards his intelligent adversary.

        Regarding your generous invitation to submit an essay to this site entitled “In Defense of Stalin”, I don’t believe that Stalin needs my defense. If anything, the entire Western world, rotten to the core, needs defense from Stalin.

        P.S. I have no desire or interest in ruining your longstanding friendship with lobro

      3. @ Circassian

        Thanks for your polite response. The fact is, we ran an amicable debate here on the Old Testament a few months ago. If I remember correctly, both Lobro and Franklin Ryckaert denounced the OT in the most emphatic terms and refused to concede that the OT could have any redeeming features whatever! Their negative verdict on the OT didn’t upset me in the slightest, even though I took a contrary viewpoint. I thought we could have a similarly civilized debate on Stalin.

      4. Stalin was a Georgian, not a Russian or Ukrainian, thus he didn’t kill his own people in the sense of his own ethnic group. Stalin was put in power by the Jewish Lenin and Armand Hammer, the Jew international banker who was introduced to Stalin by Lenin as the cash flow line. The Jew minority Lenin put the non-Russian Stalin in power precisely because he would have no guilt in killing Russians.

        [Reposted by Admin from another site]

  4. This is not the first time I have made this comparison. Far too often Jews have people lumping these men in the same category of evil, sadistic, power-crazed, dictators. Nothing could be further from the truth, they were polar opposites. While Stalin most certainly fit in this category, Hitler most certainly did not.

    Hitler demonstrated a great love for the German people, while Stalin hated the Russians. Why else would Stalin preside over the mass murder of 66 million of his own people? One of the classic marks of the psychopaths is contempt or complete disregard for animals. Hitler loved animals as he loved his people. There is no evidence that Stalin ever treated animals any better than he treated his people.

    Fact – Hitler was a vegetarian
    Fact – Hitler neither smoked, drank or indulged in drug use. He never outlawed smoking as might a megalomaniac dictator like Castro. Nor did Hitler object to others who smoked, he just did not want any smoking in his presence.
    Fact – Hitler showed sexual restraint. This is obvious despite the Jew’s efforts to remake his image into a mirror of their own, that of a sexual deviant and sadist.
    Fact – Hitler was devoted to the German people and worked some 18 hours a day for the betterment of their nation .

    By any standard, these are the marks of a devoted acetic. Religions have regarded men of far less stature as their saints.

    Fact – Hitler saw himself as part of Germany, as the temporary leader responsible for returning Germany to its former status among other European nation. It was Jews that fomented the global war that forced Germany’s expansion beyond the territory taken form the Germans by the Versailles treaty. Hitler’s actions prove he never considered himself supreme dictator able to use abuse his power at will against the people. Whatever else one says about Hitler, he most certainly was NOT a megalomaniac, nor was he a psychopath as are the Jews projecting such accusations onto his personage.

    You will note I do not indulge in the frequent personal attack and back-biting found in the comment section. There is a reason for this, I have but one target, the rootless Jew and his sycophants. Trolls don’t even rate a comment, this post being a singular exception.

    1. I just read an article on Press TV, about Buchenwald being used today, as a rehab center for refugees. In a comment I said that many lies had been told, about Hitler, WW2, and concentration camps..

    1. Splitting hairs is a classic Jewish trick, e.g. They’re not really Jews they are Khazars! Oh, I see, now we can revise our ideas about the Jews? If you are a Jew, quibbling over details and splitting hairs is expected. However, if one is truly white, such tactics are most unbecoming.

      1. Arch , Saul ( Paul ) was a Jew by religion – NOT by race ! Read Acts 26 : 6 & 7 for starters ! The Germans were to be destroyed by the Jews ( offspring of the devil ) because , they in my opinion are the tribe of Judah ! The tribe of royalty of Israel ! That is why ALL European royalty are of German descent ! To understand the Bible one must first determine who is who and it starts in Genesis 3 : 15 Which countries of this planet are being inundated with immigrants ? The same ones who brought Christianity , law , technology , sanitation , music , and anything good to the rest of the world ! Traitors of our own people have helped the Jews and Jesuits to bring us to the brink of destruction of the REAL Israel people !

      2. “Splitting hairs is a classic Jewish trick”… so is splitting the atom, Archie.

        According to David Irving, the Brits invented the atomic bomb; now that’s splitting hairs with the jews who say they invented it.

  5. It will always be 1942 here at Darkmoon. Time stood still in 1942, I guess.

    The choice Darkmoon gives us is the choice of which dictator do you want. No other choices in life except to have a dictator rule over us. We only have to decide which dictator it is we want.

    No Constitutional Representative government please, we’re into Dictators. Let’s not waste our time trying to save our Constitutional Representative government our American Founding Fathers bequeathed to us, let us look up to one individual and look up to him as if he’s a God and let us pray for a dictator to rule over us. Before you pray for a dictator to come forth and lead you, decide which of these two dictators you would prefer, then pray for your favorite one to come forth as a Star Child to Save You!

    1. It will always be 1942 here at Darkmoon. Time stood still in 1942, I guess. The choice Darkmoon gives us is the choice of which dictator do you want.

      Why blame Darkmoon for an article she didn’t write?

    2. Arch is 100% correct on Hitler ! Alexander is wrong on Russia ? ( i do not think so ) The other side of the Jewish coin is Jesuit ! ( NEVER FORGET THAT ) Why does NO ONE write of the Jesuits on here ? They are just as EVIL ! The founding Fathers gave us incorporation ! Lysander Spooner was right ! The articles of confederation were FAR superior ! The constitution is what in my opinion caused us to have a civil war and never ending DEBT and never ending war ! A ( JUST ) dictator or king is far better than what we have ! Which ? I would choose Hitler any day ! He whom you call a star child will forgive your ignorance anytime BEFORE you die or he arrives ! And he will rule as King whether YOU like it or not !

  6. This article simply implies a frivolous comparison of
    And it obviously still says that they were both genocidal psycopaths!
    Its like comparing what Hitler did to Jews at ouchtswitz and what Jews do to Palestinians in Gaza
    it subliminally seconds my believe that…
    White People IS Sick

  7. To my surprise (maybe only because it is hard to imagine a boulevard or even a street named after Hitler or any other National Socialist today) when the German army liberated eastern European countries, a major boulevard would sometimes be named after Hitler. I visited the German city Memel in the early 2000’s (today Klaipeda Lithuania) and when Germany took the city back in 1938 they named one of the major avenues after Hitler. I saw it on an old map I was given by a Russian lady when I was trying to locate where my mother and other relatives homes were.

    Also Riga, the capital of Latvia had its main boulevard renamed after Hitler when the Germans took the city from the Soviets. Latvia was a pro-German country and had strong ties to Germany by history. It had a very large German population and Germans had founded Riga in the middle ages.

  8. Avatar – If white people is (sic) sick why are the countries that we developed and nurtured being overrun by non-whites who wish to live among us?
    Rehmat – Hitler was not surrounded by Jews and the myth of him being partly Jewish was begat by Jews to both discredit him and also, Jews being narcissists, to rub a bit of his mystique onto themselves.
    RealOriginalJoe – It’s still 1942 on the world stage, the war never ended.
    Arch Stanton- You’re a fine writer and make good points but the cartoons are over the top and degrade your argument

    1. Absolutely right on all counts. Some people repeat the most idiotic things, but it’s not their fault. The allied propaganda never ended and many of the lies already exposed are still repeated in the media.

      My guess is Avatar is an Arab, perhaps an Afghan or somewhere in that area and now lives in a western country, the best countries in the world (but declining fast with the millions of other Avatars that want to live here). He’s a victim of Jewish hatred, Jewish hatred against whites that portray whites (the people that let him into our country) as racist, and the constant Jew drumbeat of anti-white racism in the media they control.

      Beautiful Europe will soon look like Africa or South America if the migrant invasion continues. Many American cities already resemble an African city (Detroit and many other cities).

      1. I haven’t seen anyone else here denounce Avatar as a racist. If I’m wrong and someone else has, I apologize. But it seems to me you’re all taken in by the ant-white propaganda that says only whites can be racist. As the son of Germans who came to the USA I can attest to the ant-German hatred that was not only in the USA, but every other European country, including the four powers that defeated my parents country. The Jews make sure the hatred continues, but it’s much less today due to time passing.

        But to Avatar the people that hated Germans and Hitler most are all racists because they are white like Hitler and other Germans. How much more racist can someone be? But somehow I never see anyone else comment on this.

        Actually Germany’s most important and allies and friends in both wars were non-white. Turkey in WW I and Japan in WW II, with support from some Indians that wanted freedom from the British Empire and Arabs that were opposed to the Jews flooding into Palestine.

      2. Got a couple of questions Peter, were your forbears refugees? and if so, was it acceptable that they emigrated to “white” countries, because they were “white”?
        OK, I see you answered that..

      3. To Ingrid. My mother was a refugee. She was born in a city called Memel which was taken by Lithuania, she grew up in a city called Brieg which was taken by Poland and her family had a summer home near Konigsberg which was taken by Russia. All of these cities had been German for hundreds of years, Memel was German for about 700 or 800 years. She was one of an estimated 14 to 20 million Germans driven off of German territory that had everything stolen from them. So yes, she was a refugee. My father was from western Germany and they didn’t lose their homes or cities.

        My parents came to the US I believe under the same conditions everyone else did. Until 1965 the USA’s immigration policy was geared almost exclusively towards Europeans. The USA was founded by Europeans, it had been part of the British Empire, every one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, the founders of the IVY league schools and everything else in the country was done by European Christians. The overwhelming percentage of the population was European Christian with a small black population. In 1965 the USA changed its immigration policies and for the first time allowed large numbers of non-Europeans (non-whites) into the country. Since 1965 the US has changed dramatically. Christianity, like in Europe, has pretty much been wiped out and whites in the US are now 65 to 70% of the population, whereas they used to be about 90% of the population or maybe more.

        WASPS used to be the “elite” in the USA, they ran the universities, the government and most things. It was something of a deal when the first Catholic was elected President in 1960, President Kennedy. Protestantism was the dominant religion in the country. Already 100 years ago the Jews had a certain amount of power, but they had to do things in secret then. When they helped push the USA into WW I and then WW II this was done behind the scenes, in secret. Today Sheldon Adelson, the leading contributor to the Republican party openly calls for dropping an atomic bomb on Iran and everyone of the Republicans that accept his money are threatening Iran with war.

        Harvard University, which was founded by white Christians used to reflect the population of the USA, as did all the IVY league schools. Most students were white. Today Jews run Harvard and there are more Jews at Harvard than whites. Jews make up 2% of the US population and whites make up 65 – 70% of the US population. There are also more Asians at Harvard than whites. It’s the same in every other IVY league school. So Jews have displaced WASPS as the elite.

        So these are just facts. I’m not going to argue that the US has a right to maintain its culture, although I think a strong argument could be made for that. There are other Americans that will argue that.

        I will argue here that Europe has a right to maintain its culture. The United Nations definition of genocide is the deliberate destruction of a culture, ethnic group or race and Europe is being deliberately destroyed by genocide thru mass immigration. I read that Germany’s population is 20% non-ethnic Germans. That sounds a little high, but that includes other Europeans so it’s probably accurate. There are now several million Muslims in Germany. Germany, like the rest of Europe was a Christian country, all Christian except for a tiny Jewish population amounting to less than 1% of the population . That’s pre-war. And of course Germans were 100% white, except for a few thousand French colonial black soldiers the French dumped into the Rhineland after WW I because they didn’t want them. Germany’s population was thoroughly white and Christian, like virtually every country in Europe.

        Germany is a lot less German than it’s been for the thousands of years Germans have existed and it’s similar in many or most western European countries. London now has less ethnic Englishmen than non Englishmen as its population, whereas its population used to be virtually all Englishmen.

        It is estimated that Germany will take in 800,000 Africans and Muslims next year – that is 1% of its population in one year. They don’t plan on stopping immigration after that. Germany and the rest of Europe is destroying itself. It is carrying out a deliberate genocide against its own people. This is happening no where else in the world, only Europe, Canada, the USA and Australia – white countries. It’s not happening in Japan, it’s not happening in the middle east, nowhere else, except in tiny Tibet. For many years activists have decried what they say is the destruction of Tibetan culture because of a large number of Han Chinese moving into Tibet (the area is less than 1 million people). But they celebrate the destruction of European cultures that have existed for several millinea.

        The other day the traitor Angela Merkel cited Germany’s guilt ridden history and said Germany will be transformed in the future by a mass immigration of non-Germans into the country. She is leading the genocide against her own people.

        About five years ago I had a job opportunity in Berlin. A company was interested in me there. I would have jumped at it because I had lost my job in the USA. But they wouldn’t hire me unless I had a European passport, which I did not have. I called up the German embassy to inquire about claiming German citizenship based on my parents being German. All European countries have those laws, allowing people of their heritage to claim citizenship in the country. For myself I’m not talking about “heritage,” not great-great-great grandparents that came to the USA 300 years ago. These were my parents that left Germany after the country was completely destroyed, over 10 million Germans killed, 2 million women raped and over 14 million people (including my mother and her family) being driven off their land in what was the biggest migration of people in history. The German embassy informed me that Germany had changed those laws and I did not qualify for German citizenship. They had abolished the laws claiming German citizenship based on German ethnicity. Shortly after that I befriended and Afghan. His whole family had moved to Germany (Germany let them in) as a result of the fighting in Afghanistan. My idiot friend said the Germans are racists. Their laws keep his family from working, they collect welfare from the German gov’t and he says they are racists. They took his family in, kept me out (the son of a German woman who lost everything and almost her life) and they’re supposedly racist. Do you think there is another country in the world as asinine as that? Maybe you do.

        This all began I believe when a kike named Theodore Kaufman wrote a book called “Germany Must Perish!” in 1940. I call him a kike (I’m not sure what the word actually means, but apparently it’s the ultimate insult towards a Jew in the USA) because if even only one Jew was a kike it has to be Theodore Kaufman. In his book he put forth a serious plan to wipe the German people from the face of earth in a few months. The kike said if several thousand doctors were gathered and working around the clock in shifts they sterilized Germans, they could be done with the Germans in a few months. This plan was hailed in the major American media. Time magazine gave it an excellent review. Josef Goebbels read the book and informed the German public what the Jews had planned for Germany. This was 1940. The next year the Jews in Germany were sent east as suspected enemies of the state and quarantined. Then in 1943 an American anthropologist from Harvard named Ernest Hooton put forth a different plan.

        Here it is:

        ‘The Harvard University professor’s proposal called for genetically transforming the German nation by encouraging mating of German women with non-German men, who would be brought into the country in large numbers, and of German men, forcibly held outside of Germany, with non-German women. Ten to twelve million German men would be assigned to forced labor under Allied supervision in countries outside of Germany to rebuild their economies. “The objects of this measure,” wrote Dr. Hooton, “include reduction of the birthrate of ‘pure’ Germans, neutralization of German aggressiveness by outbreeding and denationalization of indoctrinated individuals.”‘

        This is essentially what has been carried out in Germany and other white countries. The deliberate destruction of peoples. In Germany the job is 20% complete.


      4. @Peter, I am so sorry about what has been done to your country, and it`s people, but it was carried out by kikes, and their minions. Similar things are being done to Muslim, and African countries, by the same perps. Many from Muslim and African countries are christian. You mentioned Merkel citing Germany’s guilt ridden history, what does Germany have to feel guilty about? but then, I did read somewhere that Merkel is jewish. The countries you mention, europe, US; UK; France, Canada, Australia, are all jew controlled, and all are responsible for all the sorrow being inflicted on many parts of the planet. All countries should have a right to maintain their culture, even Muslim, and African countries. I heard a programe on Africa a few days ago, which suggests that African leaders are calling for African unity, just as Iran is calling for unity in Islamic countries, the flies in the ointment being israel, and ksa. Resistance to these rogue elements is strong, I just hope it is strong enough.
        I watched the programe called “a simple question” on Press TV earlier, where they ask the opinions of people in the street, one young woman said, in effect, that the US eventually agreed to take part in WW2, for which she was grateful, since she is jewish. Pretty much sums it up..
        ” All European countries have those laws, allowing people of their heritage to claim citizenship in the country.” : Yes, this affected me. My Norwegian father, died as a result of WW2. We, his children, had a right to automatic Norwegian citizenship until age 18. I could have applied after that, but preferred to remain Scottish/British. My daughter, however, though she married a Norwegian, applied for Norwegian citizenship. It worried her that she might, one day, be deported..
        I would argue that Norway has retained it`s values, in spite of immigration. The same can be said about Iran, who`se population is composed of many ethnicities, including kikes. These were bribed to move to israel, they refused, just as well, when you see how that usurping, diabolical entity turned out..
        I`m sorry you didn`t get the job in your homeland, it`s similar to Palestinians not being allowed to return to Palestine, whilst every kike who wants to, can go there..
        btw, several think Avatar is a MOSSAD gunrunner, or smuggler..

    2. “Arch Stanton- You’re a fine writer and make good points but the cartoons are over the top and degrade your argument.” There are far worse out there from the Bolshevik era…..which I can attest to.

      1. Thanks for the compliment. However, those were not my cartoons, those are the webmasters inclusions. I thought they were interesting in that I had never seen them before. They certainly depict the horrors meted out to captive women in the Soviet Union.

        Slave goyim are THE Jewish wet dream, which explains why they have a booming trade in “shiksa” sex slaves in Israel. There are numerous movies that portray women in prison and other salve like situations. Women are viewed as mere toys by Jews, yet they have the Chutzpah to accuse white males of chauvinism. What liars and deceivers: “O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, (and races) wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?” Saul was right, they are sons of the Devil, and he should know, Saul was one of them. (Acts 13)

  9. Stalin created a personality cult around himself like other Communist dictators after him (Mao Tse Tung, Kim Il Sung, Ceausescu) in which he was worshipped almost religiously. One can safely ascribe that to megalomania.

    Hitler was more “modest” but still had all members of the armed forces and the civil service swear an oath of allegiance to him personally. Here is the content of the military oath of allegiance to Hitler :

    “I swear by God this sacred oath that to the Leader of the German empire and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, I shall render unconditional obedience and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath.”

    Here is a picture of a group of soldiers swearing the oath to Hitler :


    Also the fact that the Nazi Youth Organization was called after him “Hitler Youth” indicates that at least Hitler saw his role as central in his “Thousand Year Reich”.

    Megalomania in the Third Reich was not so much centered in Hitler as in the project of the Reich itself and that showed in the reckless plan to conquer Lebensraum in the immense space of Russia, the grandiose architectural plans (especially for Berlin) and the gigantomaniac sculptures of Arno Breker, which rightly could be called “megalomania in stone”.

    Here is a picture of the planned Volkshalle (“People’s Hall”) in Berlin :


    And here is an example of Arno Breker’s “megalomania in stone “:


    Hitler was in many ways better than Stalin, but I still would rather not have lived in his Reich. I prefer human beings to Übermenschen.

    1. According to what I’ve read it was members of the Waffen SS that pledged an oath to Hitler and this was because the Waffen SS was the praetorian guard to protect Hitler, founded when communists (with many Jews) attacked National Socialists.

      It is certain that many Germans in the armed forces were not members of the National Socialist party, many high ranking officers, Generals and Admirals were not. I would guess most of the estimated 100,000 Jews in the German army were not in the party and I would doubt the Jewish Admiral of the destroyer Bismarck was in the party.

      Many countries make plans. My God, a plan is not the same thing as an attack. I would be much more interested in American, British and French plans. No one has been caught lying as much as these people.

      It is believed by many historians that Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union was a pre-emptive strike that beat Stalin to the punch by a few days or perhaps a couple of weeks. Germany did not want another two front war. Hitler wanted good relations with England and after the allies had starved over one million German civilians during and after WW I, stolen their colonies and large parts of Germany, chopping the country to pieces and breaking what was left into two (separating East Prussia from the rest) Germany didn’t want to starve again. Shortly after WW I Hitler wrote of Germany’s need for land and this was where he wrote of a plan to take Russian land.

      But he tried to make peace with Russia; Poland, England and France too. But the big western powers wanted a war with Germany. They were jealous of German success and power and Jews were coaxing and paying them to attack Germany.

      See this review of Gerd Schultze’s book incriminating the “democracies” of doing everything for war while Hitler was seeking peace. Note how they lied and inserted a phony statement in a Hitler speech to make it look like he wanted the war.


      Here is perhaps one of the biggest lies ever spoken by a leader. FDR’s Navy Day speech delivered on October 1941, a few months after the German-Soviet war broke out. Every available man the Germans had was fighting in the east, but here is this American liar saying that Germany planned on taking over South America and the Panama Canal and then presumably march German troops up to Washington D.C. Don’t embarrass yourself by saying this was even possible With liars like these you have the nerve to harp on Hitler? In the 1970’s the British admitted they created the phony map FDR is talking about and fed it to FDR.


      Also worth mentioning, Germany was peaceful and had very little violence under Hitler before the war broke out (despite the lying by the Jewish media) and the Soviet Union was murdering millions under Stalin. If anything, Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union was a liberation from mass murdering Jews. See Ukrainians welcoming German’s as liberators from Jewish murderers here. I can guarantee you no Germans welcomed their mass murderers as liberators.


      It is believed by the great historian David Irving and others that Germany saved Europe from Soviet-Bolshevik barbarism far worse than what people experienced under German occupation.

      With all the stories of how horrible the Germans were to the Czechs, how do you explain this mass meeting of 200,000 Czechs pledging loyalty to Germany in 1942. This flies in the face of every lie the democracies have told for 70 years about so-called “NAZI barbarism.”


      Here is today’s Czech Justice minister defending the behavior of Germans during the occupation of Czechoslovakia.


      I don’t know how old you are. I’m old enough to remember the every day lying and slandering of Germany, presenting them as the ultimate evil (the ones that wanted peace) while the war mongering allies were angels sent to earth.

      1. @ PETER

        There were separate oaths of allegiance to Hitler for members of the SS, the Army and the Civil Service. See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_oath

        The plans for the colonization of Eastern Europe could not be implemented, but what the Nazis did in Poland is an indication of what they had in store for the Russians. See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crimes_against_ethnic_Poles

        The Nazis also kidnapped some 200,000 Polish children and some 200,000 more from other nations to be “Germanized”. See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_children_by_Nazi_Germany

        The Nazis, those “great liberators”, also used some 12 million non-Germans as forced labourers . See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_labor_in_Germany_during_World_War_II

        But of course this is all “propaganda” against “Saint” Hitler and his “noble Nazis”. Dream on!

      2. “I don’t know how old you are. I’m old enough to remember the every day lying and slandering of Germany, presenting them as the ultimate evil (the ones that wanted peace) while the war mongering allies were angels sent to earth.”

        I remember when it was not good to say I was mostly German and Swiss, which basically lasted until Nam started. It caused fights. My last name is as popular in Germany as Smith is in America today. I was raised Lutheran.

        However it started way before then….

        Even the Crown changed their names to Windsor in 1917….. hiding their German origins.

        The House of Windsor is the royal house of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms. It was founded by King George V by royal proclamation on 17 July 1917, when he changed the name of the British Royal Family from the German Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (a branch of the House of Wettin) to the English Windsor, due to the anti-German sentiment in the British Empire during World War I.


      3. Peter, having both Russian and German grandparents who lived through WW2 and who liked nothing better than to reminisce over a glass of vodka or beer, respectively, and myself being an inquisitive child who enjoyed listening, your comment is true.

      4. Thank you Ingrid, Pat and Karen. It’s pretty obvious there is something terribly wrong with the story they’ve been telling us for over seventy years now.

      5. I present a convincing speech by a historian on his new book exposing the victors lies, one film implicating FDR as a liar of the highest degree, a film of Slavs (Ukrainians) welcoming German soldiers as liberators, another film of 200,000 Slavs (this time Czechs) in Prague pledging loyalty to Germany in 1942 and a recent article from Czech newspaper reporting the Czech justice minister saying the German’s were fair occupiers. I present actual documentary evidence contradicting everything the victors have said for more than seventy years and several of these pieces of evidence exposing them as liars.

        Franklin posts four articles from Wikipedia, all written in English. Wikipedia is a website that anyone can contribute to. None of the contributors have to show any professional knowledge of a subject. For the history section of Wikipedia, the only thing required is that what you write is acceptable to the Jews running the website. It is not a “professional” source, but even if it was, nothing he presented is documentary evidence.

  10. I stumbled across this website some time ago. As I had been studying the Jewish question for some time, I could not believe how many posters, not to mention the host of this site, held views similar to mine. I thought I was completely alone, as if in theoretical exile, because when you simply say the word, “Jew”‘, to people, they automatically clam up, and look at me funny.

    And so, what a joy it is to read the articles here, to read Arch Stanton ( great name by the way–I love that movie too), lobro, Franklin, and others. I am not insane apparently in thinking that the Jews are a criminal race, eternally agitating, complaining, subverting, etc. After having read several books and visiting many websites, much of what I had experienced as a young man made sense. The Jew doctor who tried to fleece me. The Jew management company who wouldn’t send me my tenant’s checks, the Israeli jewess who wouldn’t go out with me on a date, it all made sense.

    When the Ashley Madison hacking scandal broke, I thought, “I bet a Jew founded that revolting outfit.” I was right. Once I learned about the Jew, I couldn’t sleep at night. It is still hard to do so. Everything wicked and troublesome is brought about by the Jew! They are so few but wield so much! I reflected on my friendship with a Jew, who even on occasion sympathizes with my positions, and saw that what once appeared to me to be strange, was due to his Jewishness. His constant kvetching about persecution, even while piling up professional victories one after the other to the point where he is likely paid the highest salary as a humanities professor in the country, always struck me as bizarre. Not so much anymore.

    Anyway, I appreciate the articles here and the many intelligent commenters. Thank you.

    1. @ Starboardside

      Welcome aboard.

      The admin at Darkmoon has provided a great sounding board that is pretty wide open. They have done so without commercial distractions.

      You will easily pick out the disruptors/misinformation agents. However, since viewpoints differ among commenters on some topics, you will have to use your common sense and rational thinking to decide what to believe and what is not to believe.

      If you have an opinion, add it to the mix. If your opinion is attacked by other commenters, don’t take it personal. It’s all a learning experience and not necessarily between commenters. Tons of people visit that never post a comment.

      Again, welcome aboard.

      1. “Tons of people visit [the Darkmoon site] that never post a comment.”

        That’s true. The commentariat represent only a minute fraction of readers. Most of our readers are “silent readers” who never post a comment or drop in only occasionally to leave a very brief comment attacking someone (mostly) or paying someone a compliment. They are very fond of writing to us identifying Zionist trolls. Unfortunately, some of our best anti-Zionist commenters have been denounced as “trolls” or “disinfo agents”. Go figure. 🙂

      2. “Unfortunately, some of our best anti-Zionist commenters have been denounced as “trolls” or “disinfo agents”. Go figure.”

        I went and figger’ed… 🙂 AND… my guess is that Pharisees and Pharisees’ buddies sent those ‘denouncements.’ They hate the heat.

    2. If 10% of the people knew what I know about Jews, there would not be one left on the planet at the end of the week.

      It bears repeating again, again and again.

      “Was there any form of filth or shamelessness, particularly in cultural life, without at least one Jew involved in it? If you cut even cautiously into such an abscess, you found—like a maggot in a rotting body often dazzled by the sudden light—a little Jew.”

      [. . .]

      “The more I debated with them the more familiar I became with their argumentative tactics. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents, but
      when they got so entangled that they could not find a way out they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should they fail, in spite of their flagrant usage of fallacies of logic, they acted as if they could not understand the counter arguments and bolted away to another field of discussion. They would lay down truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, then they were applied to other problems and matters of an essentially different nature from the original theme. If you faced them with this point they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles, one’s hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a solid mass
      a moment afterwards. If your adversary felt forced to give in to your argument, on account of the observers present, and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day. The Jew[s] would be utterly oblivious to
      what had happened the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday’s defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct.
      Sometimes I did not know what amazed me the more; the abundance of their verbiage or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods.” – Adolf Hitler

      “And then these millions of Moslems already inside our base are going to start with the asymmetrical warfare, on a large scale. And then, and only then, the man comes around. And this time, I promise you, dear brothers: There aren’t going to be any camps.” – Andrew Anglin

      1. “Should they fail, in spite of their flagrant usage of fallacies of logic, they acted as if they could not understand the counter arguments and bolted away to another field of discussion.”

        It happens on these threads… every day.

        Then, the best one, the personal attacks overtake the subject matter.

    ‘the reckless plan to conquer Lebensraum in the immense space of Russia”

    BS, Frank. I have explained this in considerable detail to you already.
    Barbarossa was an improvised strike to take out the Soviets who were massing huge forces near the border for an attack of their own.

    1. If you read Hitler’s book “Table Talk” (compiled by Martin Bormann) he certainly had big ideas in that direction – Crimea as a resort for the German people – being one of his fantasies. His model seemed to be India and how the British Colonised it to their benefit…..of course as we all know it never happened.
      And, as to its authenticity … well, who knows.

    2. @LUCA K

      I see that Wiggins and Andrea Ostrow Letania already answered you, so I don’t have to do that again.

      Operation Barbarossa may have been a “preventive war” but that was not the original intent. The original intent was colonization. In his Table Talk Hitler clearly says that the people of the Ukraine would not be allowed to have education higher than elementary reading in order to serve their German masters.

      But I don’t think facts can convince you. You believe in the innocence of “Saint” Hitler and that is part of your religion and one cannot debate religion.

      1. Go to Andrea’s site and read her profile, you’ll find that one of her favorite books is The Susan Sontag Reader. Her answer has zero credibility.

  12. Mr.Stanton

    No need to inflate the death toll. There is NO valid evidence supporting 66 million victims of Stalinism. Estimates today vary from 10 to 25 million for the entire period of Communism, with most of it taking place under lenin/Stalin.

    We should also remember that, although the joos were indeed instrumental in bringing about the revolution, as well as the fact that they were truly hugely overepresented in the secret police, they were cut down to size after the 1936/37 purges. By 1939, most NKVD personnel, including the leadership, were no longer jewish. Yet the killings continued unabated until Stalin died. Only then the situation began to improve.

    1. This is not my “inflated” figure but Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s estimate. As a bonafide member of the Jew’s slave prison population witnessing the executions, I’m going to give Solzhenitsyn’s estimate precedence over any suspect figures possibly ginned up by a Jewish commissar.

      What I hear is, the gullible goyim, should give the six million shekel Jew the benefit of the doubt? How many times have Jews striven for historical accuracy, how many times have the Jews cut the goyim some slack, giving them the benefit of the doubt? How many times have they not only lied, but inflated the figures for their lies? Read it again:

      “As for the number killed by Stalin and his soviet henchmen, never – ever – give the Jew, or his shabbos goy, the benefit of the doubt, for they will most assuredly repay balanced fairness with a knife to the back or a slash to the throat. Instead assume the worst imaginable possibility and then multiply a thousand fold.”

      The figure stands until there is absolutely incontrovertible proof to the contrary. The same kind of proof revisionists have presented that the Holocaust is a lie, the most massive hoax in history. Official Yad Vashem numbers for the Hollowhoax have dropped well below the half way mark, yet Jews still scream the six million figure?

      So the white man is supposed to either maintain empirical, pinpoint accuracy or provide lower numbers? Wake up! Make no mistake, this is a war, a fight to the finish. Jews have laid out the rules, it’z either us or them, there can be no middle ground. In this war every weapon that works is valid. Obviously the Jew’s weapons work best, so why not use them?

      Now if only we can force unrestricted immigration and miscegenation in Israel, things might start to turn around.

  13. Stalin was a bad guy, but the commies had to use more violence in the early stages because they were trying to create a radically new order. Also, as the Soviet Union was huge and made of different ethnic groups, Stalin had to use cult of personality to hold everyone together. When a new order is being created, it’s gonna require more violence.
    But once the Soviet system stabilized after Stalin’s death, it wasn’t all that brutal. It could resort to violence, but not much more than most other regimes.

    Hitler was initially less violent and murderous because he was ruler of German lands. He has wide support, and his policies were not radical in economics and society.
    But when Hitler invaded other nations and sought to create a new empire, he acted as the Soviets did when consolidating their empire in the early stage. To create the new Nazi empire, Hitler began a campaign of mass killings and enslavement.

    Had HItler not sought war and merely been leader of Germany, he would have been better than Stalin. But once he invaded Russia and Slavic lands, his overall plan became even more evil than Stalin’s. HItler planned to kill tens of millions and enslave the rest of the population. Had he succeeded, he would have killed and enslaved more than Stalin.

    1. @andrea ostrov letania

      You claim Hitler sought war. That’s plainly not true. Your allegations are a result of the incessant jew indoctrination you’ve received for the whole of your life. It should be noted that Poland had refused to even negotiate over self-determination for the former German city of Danzig and the ethnic German minority in the so-called Polish Corridor, though Hitler had tried many times. When war finally came, it was because Germans in Polish territory suffered terribly. They had to bear the unspeakable hatred of the Poles. Some 35,000 of them (German authorities then claimed 58,000 murdered Germans!) were murdered, often under the most horrific circumstances. Hitler felt compelled to resort to arms when he did in response to the Polish campaign of terror and dispossession against the one and a half million ethnic Germans under Polish rule. Would that not be just cause for any national leader worth his salt to act to end the unjust murder of his people? If ever a military action was justified, it was the German campaign against Poland in 1939. And for this defense of his own German people in a border dispute with it’s close neighbor, powerful countries unaffected by the dispute, Britain and France declared war on Germany. And you say Hitler sought war and to establish a world empire? Poppycock!

  14. Just a little FYI.

    An interesting note concerning the ‘drawings of the soviet gulag’:


    Einsamerkrieger: Is a poster on the site : http://thefinalphase.proboards.com/
    You’d need to register these days to view any content.

    This site is full of zio-christians who took the ‘russians are going to start ww4’ bait from disinfo agent j.r.nyquist.

    J.r. nyquist wrote a book entitled ‘origins of the fourth world war’ (Calling the cold-war, the third world war)

    In this book he claims communism never fell but merely changed hats to suck in the
    western corporations and steal their technology…all the while the russian high command geared up for ww4
    behind the west’s back. Now the premise of communism never really falling is correct to a degree.
    What he hides is the ‘jewish’ face of communism and its ‘jewish’ western financiers/backers/enablers.

    J.r. nyquist was a columnist for mossad mouthpiece ‘worldnetdaily’ and continually fed his goy
    audience his theory that russia would launch the fourth world war. While never once
    portraying the ‘jews’ in any bad light…lest he bit the hand that fed him.
    He’s upheld the ‘jews’ as eternal victims that can do no wrong.

    Example of his writing for ‘worldnetdaily’:


    Since leaving ‘worldnetdaily’ he wrote for http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/j-r-nyquist

    His ideology is in the many articles on ‘worldnetdaily’ and financial sense.
    And he maintains his own site: http://jrnyquist.com/ ‘A website for patriots who think’

    The goy on the forum, dedicated to his theory, support israel unquestioningly.
    This includes einsamerkrieger. All he does is demonize russian nationals as lo-brained animals
    and blame them for bolshevism and all its horrors.

    And that’s yet another example of how the ‘alternative’ media has been infiltrated
    and how gullible-goys are lead by the nose.


    Concerning one of the comments from ‘ilea’ below the gulag pictures:

    “Oh, I will answer your simple question: why russian dictator Putin is a prickhead?
    Because he is third generation Khazar crypto Jew bolshevik , having conveniently
    converted to Orthodox Christianity in the 1960’s. Putin’s fathers real name was
    Epstein and his mother name is Shalomova wich make him 100% jew. His paternal grandfather
    worked all his life as the chef for Lenin and Stalin. Putin’s maternal grandfather was
    a Ukrainian ( aka Khazar ) Jew named Mordechai involved in the bolshevik revolution.
    Now you know WHY!”

    Anyone want to run the putin is a ‘jew’ up the flagpole?
    I have no opinion on the matter as i have no facts before me.
    Yet, there’s this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJlsmQPAxNk


  15. Knickerbocker had asked Jung: “What would happen if you were to lock Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin in a room together, and give them one loaf of bread and one pitcher of water to last them a week? Who would get all the food and water?” Jung answered: “I doubt if they would divide it. Hitler, being a medicine man would probably hold himself aloof and have nothing to do with the quarrel. He would be helpless because he would be without his German people. Mussolini and Stalin, both being chiefs, or strong men in their own right, would probably dispute possession of the food and drink, and Stalin, being the rougher and tougher, would probably get all of it!”

    Jung, My Mother and I: The Analytic Diaries of Catharine Rush Cabot (p. 215)

  16. @Franklin

    Wiggins and Andrea Ostrow Letania have proven NO SUCH THING.

    I have already said that i don’t think Hitler was a saint but the problem with the likes of you is that you just don’t know what the hell your talking about.
    You have never studied WWII in depth and you are pretty comfortable getting your ‘facts’ from wikipedia. You just don’t have a clue.
    Talking to you about wwII is like trying to discuss differential equations with someone who doesn’t understand the 4 basic operations.
    It’s you, therefore, who has an unhealthy and dogmatic(religious) approach to Hither and NS, not me. Please, don’t project your tendencies upon others…

    1. @ LUCA K

      Here is an example of one of my “projections” out of sheer ignorance of course :

      “The foundation of St. Petersburg by Peter the Great was a
      fatal event in the history of Europe; and St. Petersburg must
      therefore disappear utterly from the earth’s surface. Moscow,
      too. Then the Russians will retire into Siberia.
      It is not by taking over the miserable Russian hovels that we
      shall establish ourselves as masters in the East. The German
      colonies must be organised on an altogether higher plane.
      We have never before driven forward into empty spaces. The German people have absorbed both northern and southern Austria, and the original inhabitants are still there; but they were Sorb-Wends, members of basic European stock, with
      nothing in common with the Slavs.
      As for the ridiculous hundred million Slavs, we will mould the best of them to the shape that suits us, and we will isolate the rest of them in their own pig-styes; and anyone who talks about cherishing the local inhabitant and civilising him, goes straight off into a concentration camp !”

      Source : Hitler’s Table Talk [PDF], p.617 (google that).

      So your “innocent” Hitler who “only wanted to defend Germany” clearly talks about :

      1) Destroying St. Petersburg and Moscow.
      2) Establishing the Germans as “masters” in the East.
      3) Organizing German colonies.
      4) The fact that Germans expanded in the past, but did not mix with Slavs, implying that they are “racially inferior” to them.
      5) He calls the hundred million Slavs in the East “ridiculous” and promises to mold the best of them to the shape that suits the Germans, and to isolate the rest in their pig-styes.
      6) He says : “Anyone who talks about cherishing the local inhabitant and civilise him, goes straight off into a concentration camp.”

      The only way you can wriggle out of that is by saying that Hitler’s Table Talk was “written by the Jews”.
      Good luck with that!

      1. >> The only way you can wriggle out of that is by saying that Hitler’s Table Talk was “written by the Jews”.

        Not really. There is a very simple explanation for this. Table Talk was nothing but an application for a job. And who was the employer? The employer evidently was someone who was:

        (1) in the position to bring Hitler to power, and
        (2) very much interested in a strongman who could do what Hitler said he would do.

        Hitler evidently was politically savvy dude – he understood clearly that this was his only chance to come to power and try to save his nation. It is quite plausible that he tried to double cross his employer (think Molotov-Ribbentrop pact) but evidently the employer held him by his balls, so he had no other choice but do his best to deliver what he promised to deliver in his application for the job.

        The rest is history.

      2. Franklin,

        I grant you that “YAwwwnnnn” is not an argument but you have to admit that your opponents also have a point: You should not expect to find answers to difficult questions by reading wiki pages. I suggest you run an experiment – google “Who was Hitler’s employer?” (in quotation marks!), and see what you get. I just did that and I got only one hit and that one reads:

        Asked Who was Hitler’s employer and said it was the same as Did Hitler have an employer 2 May 2011 01:57
        Current answer: No, he was a dictator and he did not report to anyone.

        That’s what wiki.answers.com tells us: Hitler did not report to anyone. Really? It’s like saying Merkel does not report to anyone, Holland does not report to anyone, neither does any of the rest of the whores “in charge” of EU countries report to anyone – they are free to pursue the interests of their own people. Well, why then EU is flooded with “the refugees”? Is it in the interests of the people of Europe to commit demographic suicide, or to be “amused to death”?

        My post already contains the answer to your question “Who was Hitler’s employer?” for every thoughtful person to see.

        The absolutely crucial question is (which is conveniently never asked): How could Hitler come to power in the country that was under the boot of the victors in the WWI – the Anglo-Zionists – without their consent. Can you imagine someone coming to power in today’s occupied Germany without the consent of the victors in the WWII – the Anglo-Zionists – without their consent? Is there any doubt that the same Anglo-Zionists would bring to power in a heartbeat Hitler-II (provided they could find one, which is not possible in today’s Germany, in my opinion) who would do to Putin’s Russia what Hitler-I volunteered to do with Stalin’s Russia?

        There is Russian saying Кто девушку ужинает – тот её и танцует (He who diners the girl dances her).

        Think, Franklin, think; don’t just keep reading wiki pages. One has to exercise plausible reasoning, or “good guessing” as our good friend Brownhawk puts it, to understand what is going on in the world. You shall not expect that Wiki will explain all that to you.

      3. Thus, thesis

        (4) Hitler was not part of the solution – Hitler was part of the problem that was solved successfully by Stalin.

        from my comment to the resent post Stalin as Psychopath — Robert Conquest

      4. Circ –

        I can help you…

        Hitler’s employer was IBM.

        He was a computer programmer for IBM in Germany, Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft, or DEHOMAG.

        Dehomag, obeying the direct orders of IBM and Thomas J. Watson, became the main provider of computing expertise and equipment in Nazi Germany.
        Dehomag gave the German government the means for two official censuses of the population after 1933 and for searching its data.

        For really good ‘rumors’ SEARCH: “dehomag hollerith IBM hitler”

      5. Circassian says Hitler was part of a problem solved by Stalin, yet, what? expects readers to figure it out without elaborating on what is the cryptic nature of his writing in order to do so?

        This is your responsibility, Circassian, otherwise you’re just blowin’ smoke when you don’t offer any tangible basis for your argument. At least I go out on precarious limbs in attempting to provide my best guess on whatever is the subject at hand. Yet you are the pot calling the kettle black when you tell Franklin to go beyond his seeming dependency on wikipedia in thinking things through. If you yourself have done this, as you suggest, but are negligent in providing information for the purpose of furthering a discourse, your credibility suffers as a consequence.

      6. And I don’t mean information gleaned solely from links, but in your own words based on what YOU have arrived at

      7. @ CIRCASSIAN

        Your argument can be used to destroy itself. If the “Anglo-Zionists” brought Hitler to power one has to ask : “for what purpose?” If it was to destroy Germany then that was superfluous because Germany after WW I was already destroyed (Hitler restored it, remember?). If it was to destroy Stalin’s Russia, then why did the “Anglo-Zionists” help Russia to defeat Germany? Sometimes simple logic is better than a farfetched conspiracy theory.

      8. Franklin,

        Your simple-mindedness is breathtaking. Brits who colonized half of the planet Earth would never allow, if they could, any power anywhere in the world to challenge their dominance – especially on the continent. Among the possible contenders could be France and Germany. But Russia was, and still remains, the most formidable adversary of Anglo-Saxons for centuries. That’s why Germany and Russia had to be destroyed, and had been destroyed in the WWI. But Russia has this pesky habit of coming back like phoenix rising from the ashes. Germany does not have that. Germany would never come back on its own after its destruction in WWI. Never. Russia did.

        Just ask yourself: Did Germany come back from the destruction after the WWII? No, it did not – Germany is an occupied territory to this day. Did Russia come back after its destruction after the WWI? Yes, it did. Did Russia come back after its destruction in the WWII. Yes, it did. Did Russia come back after its destruction in the WWIII (the so-called Cold War) on its own? You bet, it did.

        Hitler’s Germany was nothing but a tool against Stalin’s Russia. Hitler had no chance whatsoever: if he was to become too strong, the devil would side with Russia to bring him down, weakening in the process his main adversary – Russia. Have you heard of Churchill’s Fulton Speech? Why would Churchill call on his ally brothers in America to nuke their mutual ally Stalin? That does not make sense if we follow your simpleminded logic.

        You are not thinking, brother.

  17. YAwwwnnnn, Franklin, you are boring…
    Do u think yourself a clever boy, frank, for posting this kind of crap, as if it is anything new to me?
    Again, I refer you to what i wrote in my previous post, PAY ATTENTION:

    “I have already said that i don’t think Hitler was a saint but the problem with the likes of you is that you just don’t know what the hell your talking about.
    You have never studied WWII in depth and you are pretty comfortable getting your ‘facts’ from wikipedia. You just don’t have a clue.”

    Just one last thing; since you believe in idiotic stuff such as :

    “The foundation of St. Petersburg by Peter the Great was a fatal event in the history of Europe; and St. Petersburg must therefore disappear utterly from the earth’s surface. Moscow,
    too. Then the Russians will retire into Siberia.”

    WOW! Why don’t u also believe in the holohoax?
    After all, the quality of the “evidence” for the joo extermination is actually more ‘compelling’ than what passes for “evidence’ of a Slavic extermination project. Just curious.
    Or maybe i got it wrong and, in fact, u actually do believe in the holohoax as well, the gas chambers, 6 million and all.

    1. @ Luca K

      Pat is in many ways the ideal poster. He seldom loses his cool, even when attacked. You could learn much by imitating Pat.

      1. @Sardonicus

        Hahaha, maybe, maybe… i’m in my early 30s and who knows, maybe as i get older…
        But i gotta tell ya, I’m like this in person as well, it has even earned me a few good fistfights!
        But you r probably right!

      2. @ Luca K

        I think you’re one of the best posters here, to be honest, and would hate to get into a fist fight with you! This is the problem with the young though: too much testosterone.

        Restraint in speech comes with age, but it doesn’t come with age unless wisdom comes first. That beautiful line in King Lear springs to mind: “Thou shouldst not have been old until thou hadst been wise.”

        And yet, apropos of testosterone, this is good to have in manageable quantities as it’s a source of creativity and muscle strength. Too much of it, however, can lead to problems — especially when sexual energy is misdirected into antisocial aggression and, ultimately, into warmongering.

        This is the trouble with America: too much testosterone in high places, possibly caused by excessive meat-eating and protein intake.

      3. Sard –

        Aggression is not due to testosterone levels at all. The US is NOT the country with the highest meat consumption per capita.

        That excuse does not fit for the radical Muslims nor the ‘Pussy Riot’ girls and the feminists in Europe and Russia. It certainly could not be the reason for Jap kamikaze attacks.

        That phony reasoning is a myth invented by Pharisees and their ‘experts’ and ‘professionals’ to drive a wedge between men and women to destroy the family.

        DON’T fall for it.. TOSS the Jew-made doctrines..!!

      4. @ Pat

        OK buddy, you’re the expert on aggression, I’m willing to concede that! So what is aggression caused by, huh? Let Sardonicus into the secret. 🙂

        Listen, this is a complex matter and we could talk about it till the cows come home. My own view, reinforced by something I read in the New Testament, is that lust and anger are closely connected emotions and that one of the root causes of war is uncontrolled libido.

        High testosterone levels and excessive meat-eating, at the most, are contributory causes of aggression. Not the underlying cause itself.

        Why do you think eunuchs are castrated, Pat? It calms them down, that’s why! Mass castration would certainly solve a lot of social problems. A huge drop in sex crimes, for a start. A nice way of controlling population growth. A good way of promoting eugenics, if only the degenerate elements in society were castrated and the most intelligent and physically fit specimens of humanity were allowed to procreate.

        Not seriously suggesting mass castration. Just playing with ideas. Mass castration would certainly put an end to wars.

        Side effects of mass castration? Huge increase in lesbianism, huge decrease in abortions.

      5. “Why do you think eunuchs are castrated, Pat?”

        Meat eating and creating eunuchs are separate issues.

        Eunuchs served royalty.
        The rulers knew that just a vegetarian diet would not keep the servants from screwing the concubines and princesses and wives….. producing bastard offspring…. and resultant miscegenation…. race-mixing.

        The rulers wanted to keep down the production of mongrels.

        They wanted slaves to screw slaves….. not the rulers’ family members.

        Mass castration would cause women to be MORE frustrated than they already are… with the feminization of men today. More ‘Pussy Riot’ members would be produced.

      6. Pat –

        Just now had the TV on and saw the carrion bitch Democrats on Fox News getting excited about ‘their candidate’, Hillary Clinton, yielding way to ‘their candidate’ Carley Fiorina (a Republican). So, here it is, for better or worse: TPTB are driving yet another wedge between the sexes via female political candidates ostensibly vying for POTUS (yes, I understand the pre-arranged out come for the office, but I believe the carrion never misses such a collateral opportunity). The show further triggers arguments among families and friends, and lends more ammunition to expand differences. I blame the panty-waist men more than I blame the slut wenches, and often think a bloody conflict is the answer to ‘getting real’. As far as the ridiculous notion that meat eaters are more volatile than vegetarians, I can only measure the notion in terms of my own life. I consume faaar less meat, and am almost qualified as a strict vegetarian, and I have even LESS patience for reckless stupidity these days. 🙂

      7. Our male dog has some American Staffordshire in his make up. This breed is banned in Norway, any puppies born from a union of our dog and bitch, would have been unwanted, and would probably have had to be “put down”. For that reason we had Bracken castrated..

      8. I consume faaar less meat, and am almost qualified as a strict vegetarian, and I have even LESS patience for reckless stupidity these days.

        Second that.
        I detested meat almost from birth, became a vegetarian as quickly as I could (with occasional small lapses when in company) and yet, the older I get, the more imaptient.
        One of the reasons I no longer own a car and rarely drive is because I drive too aggressively and want to massacre all the slow, indecisive and stupid drivers ahead of me.
        And yet, after more than 4 decades, I never ran down any animals, not even the brain damaged squirrels that Toronto abounds in.
        (I guess windshield bugs don’t count)

    2. @LUCA K

      So what are you trying to say (or trying to avoid to say)? That Table Talk is a fabrication? Fabricated by whom? The Jews?

      1. Table Talk is a fabrication? Fabricated by whom?

        Forged by whom? By someone who wanted to twist the authentic truth expressed in the Mein Kampf.
        What are his ulterior motives, I don’t know and I don’t care but your quote about Hitler denigrating Slavs is so totally out of character displayed in Mein Kampf as to be ridiculous.
        You might have equally attributed them to Jesus Christ because some no name tiny point-dexter sat at the foot of the Cross and took notes in French.

        Lot of serious people dispute much of these notes as fake and all I can say is that they don’t tally with philosophy and personality behind the one authentic document that expresses Hitler’s views.

        Just as if someone showed up here and started narrating in your words how you like cross-dressing as a drag queen in Tel Aviv gay pride parade, why would I accept it as authentic?
        Jews (Deborah Lipstadt) have used the Table Talk as offensive weapon in Irving and Zundel trials, ostensibly to support the 6 million dead Judases job and I just cannot bring myself to look at it seriously.
        There may actually be some truth woven into it but that is like serving creme brulee with month old feces, not worth eating in my view.
        But that, of course is just my view, others may find it quite tasty and nutritious.

        Here are some equally fake comments attributed to Hitler about how he despised Christianity.

        In my opinion, we have heard enough cheap maligning of Hitler’s life and motives, how he was a teenage male prostitute who played chess with Lenin at Tavistock institute while Eva Braun shat on his chest.
        And he signed the Table Talk with a ball point pen.

        caveat sheeple.

      2. @LOBRO

        “..but your quote about Hitler denigrating Slavs is so totally out of character displayed in Mein Kampf as to be ridiculous. You might have equally attributed them to Jesus Christ…”

        Mein Kampf was written when Hitler had no power at all and therefore needed not to think about the practical matters of the colonization of Russia and its ideological “justifications” (i.e. the supposed “inferiority” of the Slavs), but in his book Hitler did already talk about Germany’s need for Lebensraum in the East.

        Your rejection of Hitler’s true remarks in his Table Talk because they don’t tally with your idealized image of the man has assumed almost religious overtones, which shows in your comparison with Jesus Christ.

        It should be clear by now that I am no member of the pious Hitler-was-innocent-Church, which marks me as an “heretic” in the eyes of many here. So be it. I am more interested in the truth than in “political correctness” of any kind.

      3. Your rejection of Hitler’s true remarks in his Table Talk because they don’t tally with your idealized image of the man has assumed almost religious overtones

        So, my adhering to text (Mein Kampf), written by Hitler’s own hand is an article of religious faith but whatever the case, this text is some kind of subterfuge when he was powerless and in Circassian’s imputation, “looking for a job” (a Rothschild job) and you seem to agree with this.

        Meanwhile, a putative document, “unearthed” by a French, who refused to show to Irving the original German text, allegedly written by some Nazi official present at these meetings is the TRUTH, though strongly disputed by Irving, who I suppose is my coreligionist.
        According to Irving:

        Mr Irving, astonished, asked Genoud whose was the writing. Genoud admitted it was his own. Later still, he admitted in conversation with Mr Irving that the entire typescript was his own confection, saying: “But it is just what Hitler would have said, isn’t it?”

        So this is your truth, huh?
        Irving and Lobro dispute it.
        You and Deborah Lipstadt take it as a gospel truth.
        Well, not gospel, that would sound religious, wouldn’t it.

      4. @LOBRO

        You seem to confuse Hitler’s Last Testament of which I am prepared to assume that it is a fabrication by Genoud, with his Table Talk of which I am not aware that it is considered to be a falsification. Read my quotations from his Table Talk below, or read the whole book, and then decide for yourself.

      5. Hitler’s Table Talk is regarded as 100% genuine by David Irving. He writes:

        Hitler’s Table Talk is the product of his lunch- and supper-time conversations in his private circle from 1941 to 1944. The transcripts are genuine. (Ignore the 1945 “transcripts” published by Trevor-Roper in the 1950s as Hitler’s Last Testament — they are fake).

        For forty years or more no German original was published, as Genoud told me that he feared losing the copyright control that he exercised on them. I have seen the original pages, and they are signed by Bormann.

        They were expertly, and literately, translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, though with a few (a very few) odd interpolations of short sentences which don’t exist in the original — the translator evidently felt justified in such insertions, to make the context plain.

        The Table Talks’ content is more important in my view than Hitler’s Mein Kampf . . . It is unadulterated Hitler. He expatiates on virtually every subject under the sun, while his generals and private staff sit patiently and listen, or pretend to listen, to the monologues.

        For full version, see here:


      6. Lobro,

        I am afraid that you have misinterpreted my conjecture – not intentionally, I suppose. Hitler was not looking for a job to serve the Rothschilds. Personally, I believe that Hitler’s ultimate goal was to liberate his people. How could he do that? By coming to power. How could he come to power against the will of the forces that were in complete control of the Wiemar Republic? Could you elaborate on that question a bit. I am willing to be persuaded into accepting the alternative conjecture: Hitler came to power without any help or consent from those forces.

        Like I said, Hitler – most likely – did not have the intention to serve the Rothschilds. The idea was to come to power using whatever means were available to him then double cross “the employer”. Making that kind of move is not uncommon in politics at all – that is exactly what Lenin has done, for example. But Lenin and Hitler both underestimated the shrewdness of the devil.

        Stalin was the most successful chess player against the devil so far. Now we come to my thesis

        (6) Putinism is Stalinism of the 21st century which has better chance of succeeding.

  18. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle.

    I’d say Stalin was not the total monster he is portrayed to be. Nor was he some hapless dupe of the jews. He was complicit in his own way with crimes against humanity. Probably in keeping with SPQR’S comment that he was a “Georgian ‘mongrel’ who killed Slavs.” Given his masonic affiliation, maybe this was his own personal “calling card”, so to speak, indicating some form of usefulness in alignment with the overall plan for One-World Totalitarianism.

    It should be considered that even if his conversation with Kollontai was legitimate he could have been talking out of his ass in denouncing Zionism if his harboring animosity towards Slavs served the greater purpose of International Jewry.

  19. For those like LUCA K who still believe in Hitler’s innocence and who aver that Operation Barbarossa was only a pre-emptive defensive strike with no intentions of colonization of the Slavic East at all, I will show here several quotes from Hitler’s Table Talk that speak otherwise. As appears from these quotations Hitler considered the Slavic peoples as inferior, only fit to be ruled by Germans, who should colonize their lands and keep them on a primitive level of civilization. Quotations are from : Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944 [PDF], which can be read on line. Here we go :

    About the “inferiority” of Russians :

    “By instinct, the Russian does not incline towards a higher form of society.” TT p.3

    “In the eyes of the Russian, the principal support of civilization is vodka.” TT p.3
    (comment by me : this is the most ridiculous form of ethnic prejudice.)

    “It is doubtful whether anything at all can be done in Russia without the help of the Orthodox priest. It’s the priest who has been able to reconcile the Russian to the fatal necessity of work —by promising him more happiness in another world. The Russian will never make up his mind to work except under compulsion from outside, for he is incapable of organising himself”. TT p.3

    “For the Russian, the return to the state of nature is a return to primitive forms of life”. TT p.4

    The Urals as frontier, Moscow must be destroyed :

    “To those who ask me whether it will be enough to reach the Urals as a frontier, I reply that for the present it is enough for the frontier to be drawn back as far as that. What matters is that Bolshevism must be exterminated. In case of necessity, we shall renew our advance wherever a new centre of resistance is
    formed. Moscow, as the centre of the doctrine, must disappear from the earth’s surface, as soon as its riches have been brought to shelter”. TT p.5

    The East should be ruled by Germans and the population be kept primitive :

    “It should be possible for us to control this region to the East with two hundred and fifty thousand men plus a cadre of good administrators. Let’s learn from the English, who, with two hundred and fifty thousand men in all, including fifty thousand soldiers, govern four hundred million Indians. This space in
    Russia must always be dominated by Germans.
    Nothing would be a worse mistake on our part than to seek to educate the masses there. It is to our interest that the people should know just enough to recognise the signs on the roads.
    At present they can’t read, and they ought to stay like that”. TT p.15

    Southern Ukraine should be colonized by Germans and the local population be expelled :

    “We’ll take the southern part of the Ukraine, especially the Crimea, and make it an exclusively German colony. There’ll be no harm in pushing out the population that’s there now. The German colonist will be the soldier-peasant, and for that I’ll take professional soldiers, whatever their line may have been previously”.

    “These soldier-peasants will be given arms, so that at the slightest danger they can be at their posts when we summon them. That’s how the ancient Austria used to keep its Eastern peoples under control”. TT p.16

    In the Baltic states other Germanic peoples will be accepted as fellow colonisers :

    “In the Baltic States, we’ll be able to accept as colonists some Dutch, some Norwegians—and even, by individual arrangement, some Swedes”. TT p.16

    More about the colonization of Russia :

    “The sense of duty, as we understand it, is not known amongst the Russians. Why should we try to inculcate this notion into them?
    The German colonist ought to live on handsome, spacious farms. The German services will be lodged in marvellous buildings, the governors in palaces. Beneath the shelter of the administrative services, we shall gradually organise all that is indispensable to the maintenance of a certain standard of living. Around the city, to a depth of thirty to forty kilometres, we shall have a belt of handsome villages connected by the best roads. What exists beyond that will be another world, in which we mean to let the Russians live as they like. It is merely necessary that we should rule them. In the event of a revolution, we shall only have to drop a few bombs on their cities, and the affair will be liquidated. Once a year we shall lead a troop of Kirghizes through the capital of the Reich, in order to strike their imaginations with the size of our monuments. What India was for England, the territories of Russia will be for us. If only I could make the German people understand what this space means for our future! Colonies are a precarious possession, but this ground is safely ours”. TT p.24

    More about the Germanization of the East :

    “We must no longer allow Germans to emigrate to America. On the contrary, we must attract the Norwegians, the Swedes, the Danes and the Dutch into our Eastern territories. They’ll become members of the German Reich. Our duty is methodically to pursue a racial policy”. TT p.25

    Regular wars are good for the German people :

    “For the good of the German people, we must wish for a war every fifteen or twenty years. An army whose sole purpose is to preserve peace leads only to playing at soldiers—compare Sweden and Switzerland. Or else it constitutes a revolutionary danger to its own country.” TT p.28

    The Ukraine and Volga bassin will be the granaries of Europe :

    “The Ukraine, and then the Volga basin, will one day be the granaries of Europe. We shall reap much more than what actually grows from the soil”. TT p.28

    For those who still aver that ultimately Hitler was not after world hegemony :

    “The struggle for the hegemony of the world will be decided in favour of Europe by the possession of the Russian space. Thus Europe will be an impregnable fortress, safe from all threat of blockade. All this opens up economic vistas which, one may think, will incline the most liberal of the Western democrats towards the New Order.
    The essential thing, for the moment, is to conquer. After that everything will be simply a question of organisation.” TT p.32, 33

    The Slavs are born slaves :

    “When one contemplates this primitive world, one is convinced that nothing will drag it out of its indolence unless one compels the people to work. The Slavs are a mass of born slaves, who feel the need of a master“. TT p.33

    The Germans as colonisers in the East :

    “If the English were to be driven out of India, India would perish. ( my comment : that didn’t happen) Our rôle in Russia will be analogous to that of England in India”. TT p.33

    “The Russian space is our India. Like the English, we shall rule this empire with a handful of men”. TT p.33

    Again about the inferiority of the Slavs :

    “The German peasant is moved by a liking for progress. He thinks of his children. The Ukrainian peasant has no notion of duty”. TT p.33

    “It’s not a mere chance that the inventor of anarchism was a Russian. Unless other peoples, beginning with the Vikings, had imported some rudiments of organisation into Russian humanity, the Russians would still be living like rabbits”. TT p.34

    “The Slav peoples are not destined to live a cleanly life. They know it, and we would be wrong to persuade them of the contrary. It was we who, in 1918, created the Baltic countries and the Ukraine. But nowadays we have no interest in maintaining Baltic States, any more than in creating an independent Ukraine”.
    TT p.34

    The local Slavs must be kept primitive :

    “I am not a partisan, either, of a university at Kiev. It’s better not to teach them to read. They won’t love us for tormenting them with schools. Even to give them a locomotive to drive would be a mistake. And what stupidity it would be on our part to proceed to a distribution of land !” TT p.34

    “We’ll supply the Ukranians with scarves, glass beads and everything that colonial peoples like”. TT p.34

    Hitler’s dislike for peace :

    “To-day everybody is dreaming of a world peace conference. For my part, I prefer to wage war for another ten years rather than be cheated thus of the spoils of victory”. TT p.35

    And here is the essence of Hitler’s justification for the colonization of Russia. The Germans are superior but they have to live on a small territory. The Russians are inferior but they live on a big territory. Therefore the Germans have the right to take their land :

    “It’s absurd to try to suppose that the frontier between the two separate worlds of Europe and Asia is marked by a chain of not very high mountains—and the long chain of the Urals is no more than that. One might just as well decree that the frontier is marked by one of the great Russian rivers. No, geographically
    Asia penetrates into Europe without any sharp break. The real frontier is the one that separates the Germanic world from the from the Slav world. It’s our duty to place it where we want it to be. If anyone asks us where we obtain the right to extend the Germanic space to the East, we reply that, for a nation, her awareness of what she represents carries this right with it. It’s success that justifies everything. The reply to such a question can only be of an empirical nature. It’s inconceivable that a higher people should painfully exist on a soil too narrow for it, whilst amorphous masses, which contribute nothing to civilisation, occupy infinite tracts of a soil that is one of the richest in the world”. TT p 37, 38

    Russians are actually “brute Asians”:

    “Asia, what a disquieting reservoir of men ! The safety of Europe will not be assured until we have driven Asia back behind the Urals. No organised Russian State must be allowed to exist west of that line. They are brutes, and neither Bolshevism nor Tsarism makes any difference—they are brutes in a state of nature”.
    TT p.40

    For those who still doubt Hitler’s plan was to colonize the East :

    “In twenty years’ time, European emigration will no longer be directed towards America, but eastwards.
    The Black Sea will be for us a sea whose wealth our fishermen will never exhaust. Thanks to the cultivation of the soya bean, we’ll increase our livestock. We’ll win from that soil several times as much as the Ukrainian peasant is winning at present”. TT p.42

    For those who believe that Hitler was a pious Christian :

    “So it’s not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it”. TT p.59

    “It’s not desirable that the whole of humanity should be stultified—and the only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little”. TT p.61

    Again about the colonization of the East :

    “The immense spaces of the Eastern Front will have been the field of the greatest battles in history. We’ll give this country a past. We’ll take away its character of an Asiatic steppe, we’ll Européanise it. With this object, we have undertaken the construction of roads that will lead to the southernmost point of the
    Crimea and to the Caucasus. These roads will be studded along their whole length with German towns, and around these towns our colonists will settle. As for the two or three million men whom we need to accomplish this task, we’ll find them quicker than we think. They’ll come from Germany, Scandinavia, the Western countries and America. I shall no longer be here to see all that, but in twenty years the Ukraine will already be a home for twenty million inhabitants besides the natives”. TT p.68

    The locals will be kept in primitive conditions :

    “We’re not going to play at children’s nurses; we’re absolutely without obligations as far as these people are concerned”.

    “We’ll confine ourselves, perhaps, to setting up a radio transmitter, under our control. For the rest, let them know just enough to understand our highway signs, so that they won’t get themselves run over by our vehicles!” TT p.69 (comment by me : mark the utter cynism).

    “There’s only one duty: to Germanise this country by the immigration of Germans, and to look upon the natives as Redskins”. TT p.69

    Hitler is not plagued by any conscience :

    “In this business I shall go straight ahead, cold-bloodedly. What they may think about me, at this juncture, is to me a matter of complete indifference”. TT p. 69

    But he is full of enthusiasm for the task ahead :

    “How I regret not being ten years younger!”

    “What a task awaits us! We have a hundred years of joyful satisfaction before us”. TT p.70

    Big Russian cities will have to be destroyed :

    “Everything that resembles civilisation, the Bolsheviks have suppressed it, and I have no feelings about the
    idea of wiping out Kiev, Moscow or St. Petersburg”. TT p.71

    Great glory lies ahead :

    “In comparison with Russia, even Poland looked like a civilised country. If time were to blot out our soldiers’ deeds, the monuments I shall have set up in Berlin will continue to proclaim their glory a thousand years from to-day. The Arc de Triomphe, the Pantheon of the Army, the Pantheon of the German people…” TT p.72

    Here comes “Hitler the Christian” again :

    “The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges : the pox and Christianity. Christianity is a prototype of Bolshevism: the mobilisation by he Jew of the masses of slaves with the object of undermining society”. TT p.75, 76

    Hitler’s megalomaniac plans for Berlin :

    ” What is ugly in Berlin, we shall suppress. Nothing will be too good for the beautification of Berlin. When one enters the Reich Chancellery, one should have the feeling that one is visiting the master of the world. One will arrive there along wide avenues containing the Triumphal Arch, the Pantheon of the Army, the Square of the People—things to take your breath away ! It’s only thus that we shall succeed in eclipsing our only rival in the world, Rome. Let it be built on such a scale that St. Peter’s and its Square will seem like toys in comparison ! For material, we’ll use granite. The vestiges of the German past, which are found on the plains to the North, are scarcely time-worn. Granite will ensure that our monuments last for ever. In ten thousand years they’ll be still standing, just as they are, unless meanwhile the sea has again covered our plains”. TT p. 81

    These are quotations from only 81 of the 722 pages of the book, but I think they give a sufficient insight into the mind of this man. What appears is that Hitler – not a Christian but a ruthless Darwinist – had the megalomaniac ambition of creating a “Thousand Year” Germanic Reich at the cost of the Slavs whom he considered to be racially inferior. No costs of human suffering, neither of the Slavs nor even of his own people, were too high to achieve this “ideal”. We can practise “historical revisionism” by stressing the war crimes of the Allied as much as we want (and they are real !), but that doesn’t alter the reprehensible moral status of this man. His vegetarianism and his love for children and animals doesn diminish that.
    I think the Hitler-was-innocent-Church can now be abolished.

    1. @ Franklin Ryckaert

      Life isn’t pretty or fair. None of these quotations bother me as they seem to you. The Russians were already the slaves of the Communists, so why do you hang up so much on them being conquered by the Germans? We are already quite conquered by the jew, and this pressure on us will either force us to evolve (I believe spiritually as well as physically) and overthrow them, or they will simply win, we die off, and this planet is basically finished. That just appears to be the design of this world – competition between various forces and energies. I do not find this to be “ruthless Darwinism,” but simply being honest.

      @ Lobro

      David Irving has repeatedly said he believes Table Talks to be genuine. In fact, I was listening to a tape of his the other day on Himmler and he said how he would read a chapter of Table Talks every night at around age 10, and was completely blown away by Hitler’s insight each time. Interestingly, he said he’s never read Mein Kampf, and thinks that it is a combination of Hitler’s writings as well as those in prison with him (though he didn’t say how he concluded this without ever actually read it!). He said for true, unadulterated Hitler, read Table Talks. This blog often has a chapter of Table Talks reproduced every other day, for short, easy snippets of reading – https://chechar.wordpress.com/

      @ SPQR

      Hang in there. . .

      1. Hitler also read Bhagavad Gita. Has Irving?
        If not, how in this world might he (or anyone) assume to know Hitler?

        This is avoided like the plague even by those who do know!

        Irving’s (and others) opinion holds about as much water as my opinion when I say the 17th Earl of Oxford wrote those sonnets and plays.

      2. I wouldn’t rely on quotations written in English that Hitler or any other German supposedly said. So much of what has been said about Hitler and Germans has already been shown to be outrageous lies. Some people here just keep running there mouths, ignoring the solid proof that the real war mongers were Britain, France and the USA, in that order.

      3. @LSPM

        “The Russians were already the slaves of the Communists, so why do you hang up so much on them being conquered by the Germans?”

        The Russians eventually liberated themselves from Communism. There is no justification to enslave a people because they “are already slaves”. Hitler is portrayed as “innocent” by some commenters here. I wish to explode that myth.

      4. @PETER

        “I wouldn’t rely on quotations written in English that Hitler or any other German supposedly said.”
        The reliability of quotations is not dependent on it being translated or not, as long as their originals are extant. Then their reliability can easily be checked.

        Hitler didn’t want war with the West, but he definitly wanted to conquer Russia up to the Urals to found his Thousand Year Germanic Reich. If anything that becomes clear enough from his Table Talk.

      5. @HP

        I am not aware of Hitler having read the Bhagavad Gita, but I know Himmer had a copy. Presumably that sinister man saw it as a kind of “magic” book without grasping its spiritual message.

      6. @Franklin. The reliability of quotations relies on at least two things, first that they were actually said or written and, second that the translation is accurate. Something from Wikipedia proves neither. What is clear is that FDR wanted a war with Germany. You can see that from the speech I posted above. The excuse was “NAZIS” in 1940, what was the excuse in 1917?

        Fraudulent “NAZI” Quotations [Courtesy of England, USSR and USA]


        As I said before, a plan doesn’t mean much. All countries have plans and more than any other country, Germany needed plans. Viktor Suvorov and many others have unearthed evidence that the Soviet Union planned to attack Germany and Germany’s attack was a pre-emptive strike. That is also consistent with the stated goal of the communists to take over the world, which they largely did, at least half of it. But what you completely ignore is Germany was peaceful, Hitler improved the lives of Germans and very few people were being bothered by the government – very few. Jews were having their privileges and power stripped of them for being clannish and taking advantage of German generosity and for stabbing Germany in the back during WW I.

        Meanwhile, the Soviet Union under Jew control was murdering millions of people. Germany saved Europe from these mass murderers only to have idiots from the west destroy Europe and murder more than 50 million Europeans.

        Goebbels on the mass murder being carried out in the Soviet Union. Churchill and FDR embraced the murderers, because they were mass murderers themselves.


        “Robert Conquest, an Anglo-American historian whose works on the terror and privation under Joseph Stalin made him the pre-eminent Western chronicler of the horrors of Soviet rule, died Monday in Palo Alto, Calif. He was 98 years old.”

        “He estimated that under Stalin, 20 million people perished from famines, Soviet labor camps and executions—a toll that eclipsed that of the [my note: discredited] Holocaust.”



      7. @ F.R.

        Re: “Hitler is portrayed as “innocent” by some commenters here. I wish to explode that myth.”

        Try exploding your stink bombs at the The Daily Stormer, which is a pro-Hitler site, much more so than DM. I dare you!

        FYI, here is what Andrew Anglin, publisher of The Daily Stormer, has to say about Hitler:

        “There is no way, in this day and age, that anyone who cares about the truth can actually believe that Hitler was evil or that Jews are not responsible for all problems. Anyone who tells you that something other than Jews are the problem, or that Hitler was anything other than a heroic fighter for truth, justice and freedom, is lying to you.”

  20. The Hitler Stalin comparison is good, but it really misses the point. Although these two countries were ideological enemies, each with their own security concerns, they made an attempt at peace and might have achieved it if not for the real war mongers, Great Britain and the USA. Churchill was being paid by Jews to attack Germany and start WW II and probably thought the English Channel would save him. It saved him from defeat, but it bankrupted his beloved empire and forced it to break up. FDR had an ocean separating him from where the fighting took place. The coward knew the war could only benefit the US and of course it did. After leading the world for two thousand years these two destroyed Europe and handed world leadership to Americans and Soviets. Asia’s rise and western civilizations decline is on these a-holes shoulders. Beholden to Jews, one destroyed his empire and they both destroyed Europe and murdered over 50 million Europeans.

  21. LD writes: “Hitler’s Table Talk is regarded as 100% genuine by David Irving.”

    Miss Darkmoon, one can hardly tell what David irving really thinks or believes in.
    Also, what Irving regards as correct or not should be taken with a grain of salt… for one, he believes, or claims to believe, that the Aktion Reinhard camps were death camps where joos were killed in their millions.

    1. David Irving is the only prominent historian to stand up for the truth. According to some he was one of the three or four top experts on the Third Reich and WW II, according to others he was “the top expert.” I think one can understand what David Irving thinks or believes very well. When he wrote “Hitler’s War” in the mid 1970’s, one of his greatest works the “Holocaust” was presented as fact. It was a small part of the book and he showed that Hitler did not know what was being done, if even anything was being done. He was crucified worldwide for saying Hitler was unaware of whatever was happening. If you weren’t born or old enough in the 1970’s let me tell you that every day the western media bombarded the population with “one man, the most evil man in history killed six million Jews.” No one dared stand up to that statement and except for David Irving no one stood up to the most ridiculous and asinine statements by the “top” historians in the world. He has done the same thing in every area of WW II, exposing the corrupt Churchill who accepted huge bribe money from Jews to attack Germany. This has been exposed, there is no doubt about it, with even one of the Jews that paid the bribes writing a full length book about it and the world media has put an embargo on discussing this. Irving stood alone and stood up to the world.

      He acknowledged he knew little about the holyhoax and that is one reason it was a small part of “Hitler’s War,” but when the revisionists showed Irving what they found out at Auschwitz, he was converted by the strong evidence they had and not a denier like the Jews and their supporters who refuse to even acknowledge the enormous evidence against their case.

      Irving once said something like “if I’m wrong about something I’m not going to grumble or yell” to win my case “I’ll say I gave you a good run for your money, but you’ve found something out here.”

      He is the greatest historian of the 20th century and let the world under Jew control ruin his career and lucrative livelihood for the sake of truth. If he believes in the “Reinhard Camps” were whatever they were, first, as much as I admire him I’m not interested. Now that Auschwitz and every other lie has been exposed they move on to there?. The liars have been exposed, but Irving is not a liar, he believes what he says. Cut the great man some slack. Cut him a lot of slack. We write on blog, he withstood the Jew scum of the world in a full attack against him for decades.


  22. @JFC
    Andrew Anglin is a racist(in the real and nasty sense of the word, and hes proud of it) and a very ignorant person.
    I’m myself a race realist – though not a ‘white nationalist’ – but anglin and his pals are terrible.
    Everyone who is not an ethnic euro is trash to that guy, he openly calls blacks and others, ‘monkeys’.
    The only non euro ethnic group I’ve seen that dude show a glimmer of respect for, is the Japanese. IMO, this sort of thing hurts the work being done by,for instance, TOO.
    For someone so obssessed with Race, Anglin knows very little about it.
    People from the balkans are viewed as mongrels, gypsies and muslims. Bosniaks and Albanians, both indigenous european populations, are not whites to those nutcases, bc they are ‘muzzies’. That US politician Ted Cruz, who is half white cuban/half Canadian, is a ‘mexican'(which translates into mongrel for them) to them…. after all his surname is Cruz….
    At first, the stuff i saw there is so fringe, i thought it was a government disinfo operation…
    But most likely it is just a bunch of very ignorant and racist individuals gathering there…
    With that said, at least he constantly and openly speaks about the jew problem.
    So, in a way, i have more respect for Anglin than for the likes of the despicable Jared Taylor.

  23. My good friend Mr.Heink, wrote several good pieces in 2011 and parts of it cover the alleged plan of mass extermination of Slavs in pursuit of living space.
    A few chunks from it, any of my own comments in brackets.
    Context is Mr.Heink was reviewing an essay( which is part of a book) by British court historian Richard J. Evans, titled: “Wie einzigartig war die Ermordung der Juden durch die Nationalsozialisten?”(How unique was the killing of the Jews by the National Socialists?).

    Actual National Socialist policies regarding the new European order, as worked out by Heinrich Himmler, were revealed when German forces occupied Poland in June 1941, so says Evans. Half a million German nationals (Volksdeutsche) from Eastern Poland, Rumania, the Soviet Union (SU) and other east European countries were to displace the dispossessed Poles. This so called (Evans’s words) Generalplan Ost (Master Plan East) stipulated that 64% of the Ukrainian -, as well as 75% of the Byelorussian population was earmarked for expropriation -, death via hunger/disease or be deported further east. 30 to 45 million were to die and the whole territory populated by millions of German farmers, effectively moving Germanys border 1000 km east. If this plan have been realized, Evans summarizes, it would have resulted in the biggest mass murder of all times. This Generalplan Ost was supposedly based on Hitler’s long held ambition to create “Lebensraum”(living space) for Germans.

    The extermination of the Jews must be seen in the context of this far reaching master plan – and with this Evans has finally made a connection to the actual topic. But, he cautions, the extermination of Jews should not be viewed as just a side show of this Master Plan to re-arrange Eastern Europe along ethnic lines. No, this plan envisioned the starvation/killing of millions of Slavic peoples for economic reasons — their territories intended for future German settlement The Jews on the other hand were mostly poor[ claims Evans ] and therefore of no economic benefit to the Germans. Jews were used as slave labor whenever necessary and allowed to live for a while.[…]

    Comments by Mr.Heink: Evans claims that this Generalplan Ost was a long held ambition (auf die lang gehegte Ambition) by Hitler to create “Lebensraum” for Germans. We must backtrack some to see if what Evans charges is accurate. Evans no doubt referred to what Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf. While Hitler did desire more living space, he had a legitimate basis for doing so. The British blockade during WWI was still fresh in his mind, hundreds of thousands of Germans had died because of this blockade, a blockade left in place long after hostilities ceased.[1] As for Mein Kampf, Hitler told the French reporter Bertrand de Jouvenel of the “Paris Midi” that when he wrote his book, the Ruhr region was occupied by France, etc., and yes, France and Germany were enemies. When asked by de Jouvenel if he would rewrite what he wrote Hitler answered that he is not an author, corrections will be made in the book of history.[2] And he did just that, never laying claim to Alsace-Lorraine. Hitler also mentioned that when he wrote his book he could not even dream of becoming chancellor of Germany. But, when Hitler did become chancellor, he wanted the Allies to honor what they had promised at Versailles – and did so from the start – to disarm as agreed to and as stipulated under Article 8 of the Versailles Treaty, which reads:

    “The Members of the League recognise that the maintenance of peace requires the reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety and the enforcement by common action of international obligations. The Council, taking account of the geographical situation and circumstances of each State, shall formulate plans for such reduction for the consideration and action of the several Governments. Such plans shall be subject to reconsideration and revision at least every ten years. After these plans shall have been adopted by the several Governments, the limits of armaments therein fixed shall not be exceeded without the concurrence of the Council. The Members of the League agree that the manufacture by private enterprise of munitions and implements of war is open to grave objections. The Council shall advise how the evil effects attendant upon such manufacture can be prevented, due regard being had to the necessities of those Members of the League which are not able to manufacture the munitions and implements of war necessary for their safety. The Members of the League undertake to interchange full and frank information as to the scale of their armaments, their military, naval, and air programmes and the condition of such of their industries as are adaptable to war-like purposes”.

    The Versailles Treaty (German defense lawyers were never allowed to mention that Treaty at the Nürnberg trial) allowed Germany an army of 100 000 lightly armed troops, and Hitler, in a speech of 17 May 1933 promised to send even those home if the Allies did likewise.[3] In this same speech, Hitler told his audience that he had agreed to the MacDonald Plan, a plan allowing Germany 200 000 troops, about one-fifth of the number of troops allowed other countries surrounding Germany – the Russian army of about 1 million not even included. Also, Germany was not allowed any planes, while Poland was allowed 22, Belgium 150, the Baltic’s 150, the little entente 550, France 500: England and Russia are not mentioned. Again, Hitler agreed to this plan, even though France demanded that Germany be placed under a 4 year prohibition period.[4] The Allies kept stalling – efforts were made to extend the prohibition period by another eight years – and negotiations were finally to resume in 1935,[5] the Allies arming all the while. Those stalling tactics forced Hitler to break off negotiations and on 16 March 1935 he gave the order to re-arm Germany, as any responsible statesman would have done. On 2 May 1935, France and Russia signed a mutual assistance agreement (Beistandspakt), which officially added the Red Army to the list of foes. That was followed on 16 May by the signing of a similar agreement between Moscow and Prague,[6] and Hitler was supposed to wait 12 years before re-arming Germany???

    Germany was also concerned with the newly created state of Czechoslovakia. Ribbentrop stated at the IMT:

    “I remember that in this connection he (Hitler) quoted especially the former French Minister of Aviation, Pierre Cot, who had called Bohemia and Moravia, that is Czechoslovakia, the “airplane carrier” against Germany. I believe it was Reich Marshal Goering who already mentioned that at that time we received intelligence reports of Russian pilots or Russian missions being on Czech airdromes[…]”[7]

    Still, Hitler took no action until the maltreatment of minorities[ethnic Germans] by Czech authorities aroused even the displeasure of the British. To save face they send Lord Runciman to investigate.[8] Thus the Sudetenland was finally allowed to reunite with Germany, and Czechoslovakia was eventually dropped by the British [9].

    On 26 January 1934, Germany and Poland signed a non-aggression Treaty, and on 24 October 1938, Ribbentrop had a lengthy talk with the Polish envoy Lipski, to see if outstanding issues could not be settled. His suggestion: Danzig(which was about 97% German at the time and had never been Polish. Versailles had robbed Germany of 1/8 of her territory and 1/10 of her people) was to be returned to Germany and a rail/road link built connecting East Prussia to Germany[East Prussia had been severed from the rest of Germany after WWI]. Poland, in return, would get to keep all the German territories given to it at Versailles, with Germany to guarantee the border for 25 years.[ plus, Poland would be left in control of the economic and railway facilities in Danzig. At any rate the poles were building their own port, Gdynia, and could continue to use Danzig. There was no reason whatsoever for Poland to rule Danzig. ] Lipski promised to relay those proposals to the Polish foreign minister Jozef Beck. Those very reasonable proposals were eventually turned down by the Poles.[10] Negations continued but when the British gave the Poles that unconditional guarantee, against Germany, the Poles – emboldened by the British guarantee – refused to negotiate any further. But even after Britain had given the Poles that guarantee, Hitler, along with other ministers, had worked out a 16 point program in order to try and settle issues peacefully. He had informed the British about this program and waited, right up to 31 August 1939, for a Polish emissary, no one showed up. The 16 points were broadcast on the radio at 21:00 hrs (9:00 o’clock) on 31 August, the Poles ridiculed them and called their people to arms[general mobilization], on 1 September 1939, the German army marched into Poland.[11]

    Germanys peace offerings, following the outbreak of war with Poland, are well known, but they fell on deaf ears. Hitler demonstrated again and again that he did not want war, and when the French campaign[Western campaign of 1940] ended he ordered demobilisation, sending whole divisions home: production of war material changed to production of consumer goods.[12] Thus, if the Generalplan Ost was really a long held ambition of Hitler’s, he sure had a strange way of going about it.

    Just briefly to the war with the Soviet Union: At the meeting with Molotov in Berlin in November 1940, Hitler told him that because of the war with England, Germany had been forced to advance into territories in which it had no interest in.[13] Hitler than stated that Germanys’ Lebensraum had been greatly expanded, and even though both, Germany and the Soviet Union, might not have achieved what they set out to do, they could be satisfied nevertheless.[14] But Molotov demanded more concessions from Germany[15] and following this meeting Hitler realized that war with the Soviet Union was inevitable. Barbarossa, the strike against the Soviet Union, was a preventive strike, though establishment historians are still loath to admit this in spite of the growing evidence.

    Given this evidence one cannot possibly see any preconceived notion on Hitlers’ part re. the Generalplan Ost, as claimed by Evans. This plan, if it ever actually existed as stated, was created for administration purposes — after the war against the SU had started and huge territorial and population gains made at first. On 15 July 1941, Konrad Meyer-Hetlich presented this administrative plan to Himmler, who had requested it.[16] Hitler supposedly discussed his plan in a meeting of 16 July 1941: what is known from this discussion was presented at the IMT as L-221.[17] The original document that might prove the malicious intent of Generalplan Ost does not exist or has never been found — only bits and pieces of related documents were presented at the Nürnberg trials. As such, there is no proof at all that this plan was a long held ambition of Hitler’s, and to try and use it to prove “The Holocaust” is folly.[…]

    So, a nation of some 85 million, that number of course including woman, children and the old, set out to conquer the world? Absolute rubbish. In his speech of December 31, 1941 Hitler reminded the world of his repeated offers to disarm, starting in 1933, and of his many peace offers since. He also told his listeners that England and France declared war on Germany because Germany wanted to conquer the world. Was Danzig the world, Hitler asked? Germany was not allowed an additional 500 000 square kilometers, whereas it was acceptable for 45 million Englishmen to rule over 40 million square kilometers of territory.[31] As mentioned, following the French campaign whole divisions were discharged and production of war material curtailed. Germany likewise never build any long range bombers like the Allies. In 1940, less than 15% of Germanys’ GDP was spend on armaments, in 1941 it was still just 19%…reaching 50% in 1944, when “total war” was declared.[32] In contrast, Stalin spend 32.6% of his nations GDP on armaments in 1940, and 43.4% in 1941.[33] This confirms that the threat originated in the Soviet Union[the USSR responded for 13% of Global GDP distribution in 1940, while Germany for 11%].

    But, but… none of this cold logic will penetrate the skull of true believer Frank.R, who thinks the Germans were getting ready to invade the USSR and wipe out entire cities and tens of millions for living space. What a gullible fool.

  24. Hitler’s dislike for peace :

    “To-day everybody is dreaming of a world peace conference. For my part, I prefer to wage war for another ten years rather than be cheated thus of the spoils of victory”. TT p.35

    Note the choice of these quotations, and I note parenthetically that LD tacitly agrees with all of them since she considers the Table Talks as more genuine reflection of Hitler’s mind than Mein Kampf.

    Next, we have Luca’s quotes from a work by Heink (himself reviewing a book by RJ Evans), part goes as follows

    … Hitler, in a speech of 17 May 1933 promised to send even those home if the Allies did likewise.[3] In this same speech, Hitler told his audience that he had agreed to the MacDonald Plan, a plan allowing Germany 200 000 troops, about one-fifth of the number of troops allowed other countries surrounding Germany – the Russian army of about 1 million not even included. Also, Germany was not allowed any planes, while Poland was allowed 22, Belgium 150, the Baltic’s 150, the little entente 550, France 500: England and Russia are not mentioned. Again, Hitler agreed to this plan, even though France demanded that Germany be placed under a 4 year prohibition period.[4]

    Is Hitler’s 17 May 1933 speech an actual, verifiable fact?
    If it is, it is a guaranteed, iron clad proof that the Table Talk is nothing but a vicious, propagandist LIE.
    So, in order to maintain a minimum of credibility for the Table Talk, published well after Hitler’s death and the just as atrociously malignant Nuremberg trials, you must furnish proof that that 17 May 1933 speech never made mention of Hitler’s agreeing to such terrible and unjust appeasement, all in hope of securing lasting and true peace.
    Not to mention the Rudolf Hess affair – another proof of Hitler’s pathological belligerence?.

    Ball in your court.
    See, LD how I don’t need to read a dozen biographies to zero in on the crux of the matter, in fact, too much reading might dull the focus – not to say that ignorance is bliss but neither is illiteracy an automatic case of ignorance – Jesus was nowhere nearly as well read as a one-time poster boasting a library of 20,000 serious tomes, requiring him/her to have maintained 82 years of book-a-day pace, thus if having gotten an early start he/she would be close to 90 years old (I had trouble reading even in grade 2, girls would tie my shoes for me, I say this fully cognizant that it will be rolled into some denigrating comment more than once).

    1. Lobro,

      Have you read at least Mein Kampf? If you haven’t, you probably should not talk too much about “genuine reflection of Hitler’s mind” in Mein Kampf. If you have, you probably didn’t pay close attention to anything in that book except perhaps the “genuine reflection of Hitler’s mind” on the Jewish question.

      Here is couple of quotes to substantiate my assumption that Hitler was appealing to the forces that could put him in power.

      “Therefore we National Socialists have purposely drawn a line through the line of conduct followed by pre-War Germany in foreign policy. We put an end to the perpetual Germanic march towards the South and West of Europe and turn our eyes towards the lands of the East. We finally put a stop to the colonial and trade policy of pre-War times and pass over to the territorial policy of the future.
      But when we speak of new territory in Europe to-day we must principally think of Russia and the border States subject to her”. Mein Kampf p.597

      That’s what I call an application for a job. The message is quite clear here: Hitler is applying for a job as an attack dog. He knows exactly what the potential employer is looking for.

      Then he goes on to inform us that the fallen Russian Empire was a craft of the “Germanic element in a race of inferior worth” anyway:

      “Destiny itself seems to wish to point out the way for us here. In delivering Russia over to Bolshevism, Fate robbed the Russian people of that intellectual class which had once created the Russian State and were the guarantee of its existence. For the Russian State was not organized by the constructive political talent of the Slav element in Russia, but was much more a marvellous exemplification of the capacity for State-building possessed by the Germanic element in a race of inferior worth. Thus were many powerful Empires created all over the earth. More often than once inferior races with Germanic organizers and rulers as their leaders became formidable States and continued to exist as long as the racial nucleus remained which had originally created each respective State. For centuries Russia owed the source of its livelihood as a State to the Germanic nucleus of its governing class. But this nucleus is now almost wholly broken up and abolished. The Jew has taken its place. Just as it is impossible for the Russian to shake off the Jewish yoke by exerting his own powers, so, too, it
      is impossible for the Jew to keep this formidable State in existence for any long period of time. He himself is by no means an organizing element, but rather a ferment of decomposition. This colossal Empire in the East is ripe for dissolution. And the end of the Jewish domination in Russia will also be the end of Russia as a State. We are chosen by Destiny to be the witnesses of a catastrophe which will afford the strongest confirmation of the nationalist theory of race.” Mein Kampf p.597

      So much for “genuine reflection of Hitler’s mind”.

      You can download Mein Kampf from here: http://bookfi.org/book/1411048

      1. Circassian, re:

        you probably didn’t pay close attention to anything in that book except perhaps the “genuine reflection of Hitler’s mind” on the Jewish question

        This is a fair observation.
        Regarding the rest, nothing for me to dispute, except to possibly clarify Hitler’s motives for saying it.
        The entire cultural class of Russia was wiped out.
        I refer to some past comment by the very erudite but absent poster, not favored by many here) as per the illuminating conversation between two Bolshevik Jews few years after the October coup (St Petersburg Maidan), whereby all the academics, priests, physicians, teachers, journalists, kulaks – about 5 million were eliminated on orders of Jew commissars, to the last.
        So what’s left, illiterate, brutish serf class that the Jew could manipulate at will.

        So, what Hitler sought was to replace Jew’s sadistic rule by a German enlightened one.
        After all, most of the world today would appreciate being run along the German lines – even today, and the system worked so much more effectively in the National Socialist day, even in Africa they still speak nostalgically of the German regime.
        Everywhere the German immigrants are spoken of with the greatest respect, in Venezuela, Cuba, Romania, Paraguay, Mexico and Belize (Mennonites), just as Jews are rightfully vilified everywhere.

        Look at all the auxiliary Slavic regiments in Wehrmacht and SS, they were all eager volunteers, military commanders with names like Blaskowitz, Guderian, Skorzeny and many more, all belying the Teutonic superiority meme.

        That Hitler and Stalin couldn’t come up with a joint action plan is the grand tragedy of the 20th century.
        I don’t know why and don’t want to apportion blame, no longer relevant.
        What is relevant is that they are natural allies and together they can rid the world of this Judeosarcoma.
        (Another straw in the wind?)

      2. Lobro,

        I said it once and I’ll say it again: I appreciate your honesty; your pro-Hitler stance does not bother me for that very reason. LD’s anti-Stalin position does not bother me either, although for altogether different reasons.

        Your problem is, as I see it, psychological in nature: You are willing to forgive Hitler’s Germany and Hitler himself for all what he has done to my country (pay attention – my country, not yours) not because of Hitler’s goodness at all (try to sell that thesis to the defenders of Stalingrad, or to the survivors of Leningrad siege, and see where it takes you), but only because you are focused on one problem and one problem only – the Jewish problem. That is very generous of you, but there is no dignity in being generous at someone else’s expense.

        You see the Jew as the menace to your survival – and rightly so – but you are so fricking frightened by it that it blinds you to the absolutely monstrous crimes committed by Hitler’s Germany against the Russian people (pay attention again – Russian people, not yours).

        That’s called myopia, my friend.

      3. @ Circassian

        I welcome your intelligently expressed views, even though I don’t always agree with them, and so I hope you will be able to continue to give us the benefit of your insights without anger and ill-feeling from your critics. However, I am saddened you were unable to accept my invitation to write an essay for this website propounding your pro-Stalin views. In lieu of that, perhaps you will be able to recommend a good pro-Stalin article published by someone else?

        This article would obviously have to argue that Stalin had good intentions, that he had been grossly misunderstood and demonized by his ideological adversaries, and that the genocidal crimes attributed to him had either been invented or exaggerated.

        This would then allow us to publish a whole slew of anti-Stalin articles as a counter-balance. In short, to get a lively debate going, provisionally entitled, “STALIN: FOR AND AGAINST.”

      4. @ Circassian

        It’s important that a fervent Stalin admirer like yourself should realize that we have no vested interest in demonizing Stalin on this website. Ultimately, we seek only the truth, and the truth is always nuanced and more complex than we thought.

        Attacks on Stalin, moreover, are not to be construed as attacks on the Russian people, if only because Stalin was NOT a Russian but a Georgian — which is quite different as you know. Stalin’s hard Marxist-Leninism, with its total commitment to atheism, was certainly not in the interests of the millions of Russians who relied on Christianity to keep themselves happy and sane. A crutch maybe — this “opium of the people” — but a necessary one, for painkillers are necessary in a world full of pain and suffering.

        Neither Tolstoy nor Dostoevsky would have approved of Stalin, nor would the Tsar and his family who went to their deaths on the orders of Lenin.

      5. LD,

        I said it once, and I’ll say it again: I don’t know who Lasha Darkmoon is – a beautiful woman, a man, or even some entity – but it is pretty obvious to me that we are dealing here with a highly intelligent being. This is not a cheap shot at pleasing or flattering you – this is simply the way I see it.

        If you are indeed a decent person in honest search for the truth (I would not rule out completely such a lucky turn of events :-)), then the only rational explanation for your pathological revulsion towards the image of Stalin, I can think of, is as follows:

        I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.
        – Leo Tolstoy

        If you are truly interested in finding the truth about Stalin – you will have to magnanimously forgive me for having some reservations in this regard – I have some ideas along the lines you have suggested that could be of some interest to your readership.

        To be continued.

      6. @ Circassian

        “. . . the only rational explanation for your pathological revulsion towards the image of Stalin, I can think of, is as follows . . . “

        This is too strong. I am opposed to Stalin, yes, because of his criminal record that has been closely documented. But “pathological revulsion”, no. For that implies an ineradicable hatred that I do not have. If someone could persuade me I had misjudged Stalin and that he was actually quite a nice guy, I would do a U-turn.

        I have the same attitude in regard to the Jews. No “pathological hatred”, just anti-Semitism based on long exposure to lots of anti-Jewish material. There is always the possibility of my doing a U-turn on the Jews if presented with fresh evidence that the people I have hated so passionately in the past have been cruelly misjudged.

        An interesting little story for you, Circassian. Think of this woman who is filled with burning hatred for her rapist, the same man who not only raped her but tortured her husband to death and killed her child. And this man is in prison now, and has been there for 10 years, and all this time her hatred for this monster has grown. And then something happens. New DNA evidence comes to light that proves beyond any shadow of doubt that the man she has hated for so many years is innocent. Spotlessly innocent. In fact, he tried to rescue her from the real rapist!

        What happens then . . . ?

        One could make a movie out of this idea.

      7. @Lasha Darkmoon

        It seems odd to call revulsion for a man, who at the lowest estimate killed 20 million people, “pathological”.

        Rather I would call Circassian’s admiration for that monster “pathological”. He has no excuse of ignorance or stupidity, so it must be a moral defect.

      8. Circassian, you said:

        (…) it blinds you to the absolutely monstrous crimes committed by Hitler’s Germany against the Russian people (pay attention again – Russian people, not yours).

        That’s called myopia, my friend.

        maybe so, Circ, maybe just partially.
        Couple of points you neglect to mention.
        Hitler attacked preemptively, fearing Bolsheviks (Rosa Luxemburg and her coreligionists who were getting their daily to-do list by a Soviet taskmaster) above all.
        Yes, the sieges of Stalingrad, Sevastopol and Leningrad were ugly indeed and many Russians, including civilians perished (just don’t bring up Babi Yar, lest I bring up, please).

        But think of how many of these victims were callously sacrificed because the Soviet government couldn’t be bothered with evacuating the civilians and how many of the poorly trained and equipped troops were used as cheap cannon fodder, pushed into the killing fields ahead of bayonets of the Bolshevik commissars.

        And finally, whatever the German kill was in wartime, it does come short of the Gulag cull, whose number was never accurately established but the lowest estimates were in 20-25 million.

        So, to paraphrase:
        (…) it blinds you to the absolutely monstrous crimes committed by Stalin’s Soviet Union against the Russian people (pay attention again – Russian people, yours).

        That’s called astigmatism, my friend.

        Now, I am trying to establish the possibility that Stalin was to some extent ignorant of these abominations and to some extent powerless to stop them, although never totally exculpated, however you look at it.

        As well, I credit him for putting away a lot more Jews than Hitler ever did and had they not succeeded in assassinating him medically, he would have undoubtedly cleaned out quite a few more but was unfortunately stopped in his tracks.

        Also, he put Russia on the world map like no ruler before him or afterwards, Russia (USSR) became a global superpower that acted as a counterweight to the NATO golem and saved many countries that were earmarked for the Iraq/Saddam treatment.
        Russian average lifespan reached its apex under Stalin, despite all the horror stories.

        Hitler was a much nicer person, kind and considerate at every level, hated suffering, which is what condemned Germany to Jew inspired and led genocide, pillage, rape, torture and humiliation.

        Stalin was not so nice and it worked out much better for the Russians, he had total respect, a Mike Tyson of geopolitical ring, Joe, the Man of Steel just like Iron Mike.

        So you see, i am not quite as myopic as you make me out to be.

        I prefer Hitler as the man but Stalin as the leader.
        A terrible bad luck that they couldn’t work in a joint venture to shut down the Protocols forever.

      9. lobro —

        “As well, I credit him [Stalin] for putting away a lot more Jews than Hitler ever did and had they not succeeded in assassinating him medically, he would have undoubtedly cleaned out quite a few more but was unfortunately stopped in his tracks.”

        You show your ignorance of Stalin by this comment of yours. You really should try reading a few books on Stalin instead of relying on disreputable internet sources.

        1. You speak as if it’s an established fact that Stalin was assassinated by his Jewish doctors. This has never been proved. It’s merely a theory put forward by certain dininfo agents with an axe to grind. Pure speculation. A possibility at the most, but a proven fact — most definitely not!

        2. There’s no proof that Stalin killed more Jews than Hitler and still less proof that he was a raging anti-semite. He worked with Jews for decades without exhibiting the slightest anti-Semitism. He turned against Zionist Jews only after 1948 when the state of Israel was founded. He was also against Trotsky and the Jews in Trotsky’s camp. But he certainly didn’t hate ALL Jews and set out to destroy them, as you erroneously suppose. Otherwise why did he remain on such friendly terms with the most psychopathic and genocidal of Jews — Lazar Kaganovich and Ilya Ehrenberg?

        (These small, undeniable facts puncture your theory of Stalin’s entrenched anti-Semitism. There is even the rumor that he married Lazar Kaganovich’s daughter, Rosa. Which he would hardly have done if he’d been anti-Semitic.)

        Your admiration of Stalin is based on the totally false idea, for which there isn’t a shred of evidence, that Uncle Joe was a nice old guy who set out to solve the Jewish problem by bumping off the Jews (“more than Hitler”) and that he was stopped short in his tracks by being assassinated by his Jewish doctors.

        I repeat: NO PROOF that Stalin was assassinated by his Jewish doctors! A possibility? Yes, maybe. But NO PROOF! Just idle chatter and gossip.

        Certainly there is proof that he got rid of some Jews, but this wasn’t because they WERE Jews, it was because they stood in his way and he would have removed them even if they had been NON-JEWS.

        Stalin got rid of ANYONE who stood in his way, Jew and non-Jew alike.

      10. Authoritative ‘experts’ and highly placed historians, researchers, etc. avoid mention of true experts like Tom Horn, Patton, Hackworth and Smedly Butler. The Real McCoys who were actually there as major participants.

        Men like Patton who strive for perfection in their duty/dharma, including precious honor and honesty are very rarely liars. When they tell you ‘we fought on the wrong side’ their words are worth more than professional experts, bureaucrat-historians and esteemed $cholar$. Who really believes those authors of all those books knows more about the end and the Jewish subversion than Patton!?
        And JFK, and Pat Tillman, and on and on and on..

        Who you gonna believe ..
        Patton or some homo-commie bureaucrat professor?

      11. Nikolay,

        Let me tell you why I won’t read any Stalin bios.
        Because at this stage of the game, it is just a useless curiosity, an anomaly.

        If I am wrong, so what, I certainly won’t lose any sleep over it, you can chop and dice historical detail with Circassian who cares and has every right to care about Stalin’s legacy.
        Stalin was every bit as unique as say, Genghis Khan or Geronimo, but he did not set an image likely to be replicated or followed.
        Hitler, on the other hand is very much worth studying (and partial copying, I might add), because apart from the ground game, his philosophy is properly enunciated and recorded and hopefully studied by leaders, present and future.

        If Stalin is a murdering psychopath, so be it, he yet served a very useful purpose of having kicked the Pharisees off the Bolshevik throne, as did Putin, not that I compare the two apart from that.
        I am actually kind of tired of this ongoing debate about Stalin, I thought I had him pegged but when all is said and done, his legacy is not a living one, as opposed to Hitler, whatever your opinion might be of him.

        So, I am tapping out – I leave the field to you and others, whatever you might say is not a major concern to me, any more than say, whether Julius Caesar was Alexander The Great’s boyfriend.

        But Putin is highly topical and I will follow and analyze every move of his carefully, all his feints, dekes, parries and thrusts, because it concerns the world and thus, my own skin and that of my family and friends.

        Remember this, Nikolay, judicious ignorance leaves free space for more relevant pursuits, so you should cultivate it if the final score matters – intellectual rope-a-dope.

    2. @LOBRO

      You should take into account different times and circumstances. The first statement was made on May 17, 1933 when Hitler was still trying to avoid a war with the West, the second statement was made on September 17, 1941 when war in the East was going on (The invasion of Russia started on June 22, 1941). Opinions of politicians can change according to time and circumstances. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the second statement must be false.

      Following are two more statements of “peaceful” Hitler about war in his Table Talk :

      “For the good of the German people, we must wish for a war every fifteen or twenty years. An army whose sole purpose is to preserve peace leads only to playing at soldiers—compare Sweden and Switzerland. Or else it constitutes a revolutionary danger to its own country”. TT p.28. Date : August 19, 1941.

      “Geographically, we shall never dominate the Mediterranean. But the French will certainly never be given the chance to do so—particularly after the peace treaty which we shall impose on them. It is to be hoped that one day we shall achieve complete hegemony in Europe.”

      “As a general principle, I think that a peace which lasts for more than twenty-five years is harmful to a nation. Peoples, like individuals, sometimes need regenerating by a little bloodletting.” Both on TT p.661. Date : August 26, 1942.

      Keep also in mind that “peaceful” Hitler had organized the German youth in his Hitler Youth where they were practically prepared to be soldiers.

      You can read about the history of the Table Talks in the wikipedia article, from which the following quote :

      Albert Speer, who was the Minister of Armaments and War Production for Nazi Germany, confirmed the authenticity of Henry Picker’s Table Talk in his 1976 memoirs.[14]

      You can read Hitler’s Table Talk in the original German on line in PDF under : Adolf Hitler : Monologe im Führerhauptquartier, 1941-1944.

      1. “…Peoples, like individuals, sometimes need regenerating by a little bloodletting…”

        So Franklin, tell me, how is this any different than what Jefferson was alluding to when he opined that a revolution was probably necessary every generation or so? When he said that the tree of liberty needs to be fertilized every now and then by the blood of patriots and tyrants alike.

        Hasn’t history always shown itself to be the ground of stark reality? Practical necessity, in the mind of the beholder who must decide what is necessary, reveals that starkness when national leaders like Hitler are faced with making crucial decisions where that practicality must be addressed.

        We’re living in a dream world if we were to arrive at any other conclusion in this regard. Agreeing or disagreeing with policy is moot.

        That Hitler would prepare German youth to be prepared as soldiers simply reflects a practical need to do so. After the stab in the back in 1918 and the resultant travesty called the “Treaty” of Versailles, Peace certainly proved itself to be an unrealistic luxury.

  25. Circassian wrote to Lobro:
    “You are willing to forgive Hitler’s Germany and Hitler himself for all what he has done to my country (pay attention – my country, not yours) not because of Hitler’s goodness at all (try to sell that thesis to the defenders of Stalingrad, or to the survivors of Leningrad siege, and see where it takes you”.

    Right… how about first you recognize the fact that Soviet diplomatic/military policies toward Germany were what triggered the German-Soviet war in the first place? As recognized by many Russian historians?
    How about we ask the millions who perished in famines, The Gulag, mass shootings, brutal deportations, etc, carried out by the Stalin regime? Much of it in peacetime, btw?
    Or how about we ask all the hundreds of thousands of soviet soldiers who were wasted in stupid frontal attacks(bc of the rigidity imposed by the Stalinist regime) against dug in german soldiers, the thousands executed via court martials, the ones who could have survived as pows, but did not, thanks to Stalin, the countless massacred by the dreaded blocking units, all the civilians who died bc of Stalins scorched earth policies, etc…
    We cannot ask them…. they r all dead.

    1. Luca K wrote to Circassian:

      … how about first you recognize the fact that Soviet diplomatic/military policies toward Germany were what triggered the German-Soviet war in the first place? As recognized by many Russian historians?

      How about I help you to understand why and who set Hitler against Stalin? I can introduce you to a guy who wrote a book on that very subject. I want you to give me first your list of “many Russian historians”, but keep in mind that many means at least more than three. Are you an impartial researcher looking for the truth, or a blabber who takes no responsibility for his pronouncements?

  26. Circassian wrote:

    “I want you to give me first your list of “many Russian historians”, but keep in mind that many means at least more than three. Are you an impartial researcher looking for the truth, or a blabber who takes no responsibility for his pronouncements?”

    The blabber here is you, Circassian, and an ignorant one at that, since you appear to be unfamiliar with the vast body of work conducted by many Russian(or former Soviet nationalities) historians/researchers into the matter of Stalin’s responsability for igniting the Soviet-German conflict, and even WWII. The Western allies, particularly the US and the brit warmongers were just as responsible.

    A partial list of such Russian researchers:
    Soviet Major General Pyotr Grigorenko, former Soviet intel officer ,Vladimir Bogdanovich Resun(Viktor Suvorow), Russian historian Dr. Mikhail Meltiukhov, V. A. Nevezhin, Colonel V. D. Danilov, Igor Bunich, Irina. V. Pavlova, V. L. Doroshenko, M.Solonin, Constantine Pleshakov, Dr.Alexander Pronin, Prof. Dr. Maria Litowskaja, Colonel Kiselev, Dr. Dschangir Nadschafow, faculty director of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, etc.

    For some of the Russian researchers major conclusions, read more at:

    This is the reason for Putins new holohoax style ‘laws’, forbidding ‘revisionism’ of the so called ‘great patriotic war’, as well as the sealing of hundreds of thousands of archives.
    With such measures, I’m sure that now most historians in Russia will not broach the subject.

    1. I would highly recommend to everyone here:

      (1) to read (reread – if you already have)


      posted by the ultimate expert on Stalin Regime Luca K and enthusiastically endorsed by LD;

      (2) go on to read very carefully all the comments by MAGNUS DUX POLONORUM to Luca K’s post, plus everything this Polish gentleman recommends for reading;

      (3) judge for yourself whether MAGNUS DUX POLONORUM is a reasonable man or not by examining carefully what he says, and how he says it, in the comments section to another post


      P.S. I hope that MDP is not banned on this site – I do not see any comments from him lately. If he is, that would be a shame, Toby.

Comments are closed.