Things you were not told about Hitler

[Jurgen]

Hi All,

a good article here on "Things you were not told about Hitler".

http://topinfopost.com/2015/01/05/thing ... out-hitler

The article is not about the holocaust, but rather good things he enacted...protection for animals/environment, Families, workers, anti-tobacco etc. Most of which have been implemented in many western countries.

I have been having some "holocaust" conversations in the comments fields. Nothing has been censored yet, so if some experts would like to join in the conversations?

What I find uplifting is that there are a number of people who seem to be aware of the truth.

P.S., Im not sure of this is the correct forum to post these types of topics? Is this ok?

[Hektor]

Just a point of note: There are two discussions one facebook and one with Disqus.
Both seem quite nice.

[Mulegino1]

Hi All,

a good article here on "Things you were not told about Hitler".

http://topinfopost.com/2015/01/05/thing ... out-hitler

The article is not about the holocaust, but rather good things he enacted...protection for animals/environment, Families, workers, anti-tobacco etc. Most of which have been implemented in many western countries.

I have been having some "holocaust" conversations in the comments fields. Nothing has been censored yet, so if some experts would like to join in the conversations?

What I find uplifting is that there are a number of people who seem to be aware of the truth.

P.S., Im not sure of this is the correct forum to post these types of topics? Is this ok?

I think it is relevant on this forum, because the way Hitler is portrayed on the History Channel and on most mass media is simply an insane, fiendishly evil, shrieking madman always giving the Nazi salute (notice you'll seldom get subtitles when he is speaking) who, from day one of his time as German Chancellor, had only two goals: to conquer the world, and to kill all the Jews.

(A good antidote to this demonization of Hitler is to listen to the "Hitler-Mannerheim Recording", in which Hitler speaks in a normal, casual conversational tones in a deep baritone voice. Hardly the "shrieking madman", but I digress.)

It's easy for most of the sheeple to believe that "this monster of evil" could have committed the horrors of the "Holocaust".

But once Hitler is portrayed in a realistic sense, i.e., not a saint or boy scout, but certainly not the Devil incarnate, it becomes clearer and clearer that he was not a cruel or insane man, certainly not one who enjoyed inflicting needless suffering and cruelty upon others.

[Inquisitor]

Hi All,

a good article here on "Things you were not told about Hitler".

http://topinfopost.com/2015/01/05/thing ... out-hitler

The article is not about the holocaust, but rather good things he enacted...protection for animals/environment, Families, workers, anti-tobacco etc. Most of which have been implemented in many western countries.

I have been having some "holocaust" conversations in the comments fields. Nothing has been censored yet, so if some experts would like to join in the conversations?

What I find uplifting is that there are a number of people who seem to be aware of the truth.

P.S., Im not sure of this is the correct forum to post these types of topics? Is this ok?

I think it is relevant on this forum, because the way Hitler is portrayed on the History Channel and on most mass media is simply an insane, fiendishly evil, shrieking madman always giving the Nazi salute (notice you'll seldom get subtitles when he is speaking) who, from day one of his time as German Chancellor, had only two goals: to conquer the world, and to kill all the Jews.

(A good antidote to this demonization of Hitler is to listen to the "Hitler-Mannerheim Recording", in which Hitler speaks in a normal, casual conversational tones in a deep baritone voice. Hardly the "shrieking madman", but I digress.)

It's easy for most of the sheeple to believe that "this monster of evil" could have committed the horrors of the "Holocaust".

But once Hitler is portrayed in a realistic sense, i.e., not a saint or boy scout, but certainly not the Devil incarnate, it becomes clearer and clearer that he was not a cruel or insane man, certainly not one who enjoyed inflicting needless suffering and cruelty upon others.

I believe this is a very important point, and quite relevant to "holocaust" Revisionism. And one need not be pro-Hitler, or pro-Third Reich in any way, to still admit as a thinking person, that the common depiction(s) of Hitler and by default the remainder of the Reich itself, are indeed primarily ludicrous propagandistic caricatures of arch evil, better suited to comic-books than history books!

And with that established, the mind-boggling claims of mass-murder, sadism, and myriad forms of uniquely diabolical wickedness, visited primarily upon Jews, becomes entirely believable to the uncritical masses.

Hitler = impossibly evil ; Third Reich = thoroughly evil ; SS = barbarically evil ; Thus...Holocaust = 100% believable


___

[A.N. Field]

General Degrelle's Hitler Democrat is a fascinating book on the topic - http://www.barnesreview.org/hitler-demo ... Path=80_48

[Hektor]

...
I believe this is a very important point, and quite relevant to "holocaust" Revisionism. And one need not be pro-Hitler, or pro-Third Reich in any way, to still admit as a thinking person, that the common depiction(s) of Hitler and by default the remainder of the Reich itself, are indeed primarily ludicrous propagandistic caricatures of arch evil, better suited to comic-books than history books!

And with that established, the mind-boggling claims of mass-murder, sadism, and myriad forms of uniquely diabolical wickedness, visited primarily upon Jews, becomes entirely believable to the uncritical masses.

Hitler = impossibly evil ; Third Reich = thoroughly evil ; SS = barbarically evil ; Thus...Holocaust = 100% believable

Sure, the scenery must fit the picture. And there is nothing wrong with historical accuracy no matter what your point of view on politics and history is. Unless of course, you got a political agenda. Something which Exterminationists frequently attribute to Revisionists, but the way they do it pretty nicely reveals their own bias.

[Mortimer]

Hi All,

a good article here on "Things you were not told about Hitler".

http://topinfopost.com/2015/01/05/thing ... out-hitler

The article is not about the holocaust, but rather good things he enacted...protection for animals/environment, Families, workers, anti-tobacco etc. Most of which have been implemented in many western countries.

I have been having some "holocaust" conversations in the comments fields. Nothing has been censored yet, so if some experts would like to join in the conversations?

What I find uplifting is that there are a number of people who seem to be aware of the truth.

P.S., Im not sure of this is the correct forum to post these types of topics? Is this ok?

Try also looking at the CODOH world war 2 forum and threads such as Hitler Speaks - The Bogus Memoir of Hermann Rauschning Hitler Speaks - The Bogus Memoir Of Hermann Rauschning

[Inquisitor]

...
I believe this is a very important point, and quite relevant to "holocaust" Revisionism. And one need not be pro-Hitler, or pro-Third Reich in any way, to still admit as a thinking person, that the common depiction(s) of Hitler and by default the remainder of the Reich itself, are indeed primarily ludicrous propagandistic caricatures of arch evil, better suited to comic-books than history books!

And with that established, the mind-boggling claims of mass-murder, sadism, and myriad forms of uniquely diabolical wickedness, visited primarily upon Jews, becomes entirely believable to the uncritical masses.

Hitler = impossibly evil ; Third Reich = thoroughly evil ; SS = barbarically evil ; Thus...Holocaust = 100% believable

Sure, the scenery must fit the picture. And there is nothing wrong with historical accuracy no matter what your point of view on politics and history is. Unless of course, you got a political agenda. Something which Exterminationists frequently attribute to Revisionists, but the way they do it pretty nicely reveals their own bias.

Indeed - it is the old, "your conclusions conflict with my chosen worldview, therefore they must be wrong, and clearly motivated by wickedness" position. "My views, on the other hand, are good and correct and thus, can only be motivated by unbiased righteousness."
Or, my bias is "good," and therefore I'm not biased. Your (alleged) bias is "bad," and thus you are.

Even a child should be able to see the blindingly obvious flaws and naked hypocrisy in this thinking. Of course, one cannot expect a logical discussion from those who have preached and practiced their own extreme ethno-racial supremacism for centuries, even as they loudly condemn any similar sentiment from others.


____