Nearly 90 Percent of Germans Do Not Believe Official 9/11 Fairy Tale

Russia just got a bombing suprise..courtesy of the mossad or similar.

Russia was naughty look what they did:


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4015504,00.html

Medvedev reaffirms Soviet recognition of Palestine


In Jericho, Russian president says Moscow has not changed its position since 1988 when it 'recognized independent Palestinian state with its capital in east Jerusalem'

Elior Levy Latest Update: 01.18.11, 16:36 / Israel News
share




Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday Moscow had recognized an independent Palestinian state in 1988 and was not changing that position adopted by the former Soviet Union.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

While I agree there were many reasons for the conditions which allowed Hitler to come to power, including the overly harsh Versailles treaty. Some of the authors premises seemed flawed. For example he states that the dispute over Danzig "could have easily been solved diplomatically". If so then why didn't Hitler make more of an attempt to do so? And IF after exhaustive diplomatic efforts failed. Why invade the whole country and divide it with Russia, why bomb Warsaw into rubble, why not just take Danzig by force and stop there?

(I only skimmed over the first fifty pages or so)

On the cover the author states that since all the published documents make Germany look like the villain then therefore many of the unpublished documents must necessarily, at least partially, exonerate Germany. I find that a bit of stretch and the comment even leads me to think the author may not be as unbiased and objective as he'd like to think he is.
Hitler and his staff desperately tried to solve the dispute diplomatically but Poland at some point ignored all attempts and refused to answer requests. That was when Poland received the unsolicited (!) guarantee from Britain and France to also fight against Germany even if Poland should invade Danzig and attack first.

The division plan with Russia was made as an insurance so Stalin would tolerate a military escalation and not immediately elevate the regional conflict to another world war. Look how Britain and the US later betrayed whole Eastern Europe to gain Stalin's support.

The way Hitler ran the military campaign in Poland was probably the fastest way to win. Germany offered the Western powers peace negotiations eight days after Poland capitulated but was declined. Same goes for subsequent German peace offers, all declined.

Walendy knows that the German war documents were published by the victors and later, cases of both forgery and omission were proven. I can provide examples here if you want but it will take me some time.

BTW, the American author Patrick Buchanan wrote a similar book called "Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World", published in 2008. It's summarized on Wikipeda:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill,_Hitler_and_the_Unnecessary_War
 
Quote from Code7:

Hitler and his staff desperately tried to solve the dispute diplomatically but Poland at some point ignored all attempts and refused to answer requests.
THAT if true would be significantly different from anything I've read or heard. Would you happen to have any documentation?
That was when Poland received the unsolicited (!) guarantee from Britain and France to also fight against Germany even if Poland should invade Danzig and attack first.
I've never heard anything about Poland threatening to invade, any documentation on that?

The division plan with Russia was made as an insurance so Stalin would tolerate a military escalation and not immediately elevate the regional conflict to another world war.
That's mostly true so far as I know.
Look how Britain and the US later betrayed whole Eastern Europe to gain Stalin's support.
Also true.

The way Hitler ran the military campaign in Poland was probably the fastest way to win...
Almost certainly, but I don't see how it's "justification" for brutally over running the entire country if your goal is supposedly only to take a small part of it.
Walendy knows that the German war documents were published by the victors and later, cases of both forgery and omission were proven. I can provide examples here if you want but it will take me some time.
No rush, but that would be interesting.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

THAT if true would be significantly different from anything I've read or heard. Would you happen to have any documentation?
I'll start with your first question and get to the others when I find the time.

The attack on Poland was already scheduled for 26 August 1939 but then cancelled to give diplomacy another chance. To learn how things went on, please read the chapters "Initiatives of the German Government" and "The Lethargic Polish Ambassador" from pages 415 to 422 in Walendy's book. Here's a small excerpt:
At 11.00 a.m. in the morning of 31 August, Birger Dahlerus, accompanied by the Counsellor of the British embassy, Ogilvie-Forbes, went to see the Polish Ambassador, Lipski. Dahlerus wrote of this meeting:

"Upon arrival one already sensed very strongly the gravity of the situation. Boxes were lined up in the hall and everywhere the personnel was busy preparing for departure. Lipski received us in his office, from which part of the furnishings had already been removed...

Forbes... asked me to read the German note addressed to Poland, and I did so. But Lipski soon said that he was unable to understand the contents. Forbes then put down the main points himself and handed the note to Lipski, who took the paper, hands shaking, and looked at it for a moment -- but then stated that he could not understand what was written, whereupon I offered to dictate the note immediately to his secretary...

While I was dictating to the secretary, Lipski had told Forbes that he had no reason to interest himself in any notes or offers from the Germans. He had had many years experience of Germany... he stated his conviction that unrest would break out in this country in the event of war and that the Polish army would march triumphantly on Berlin." 129)

Lipski described the German proposals offhandedly as "a sign of weakness". 130) Polish leading circles were ridiculing the German readiness for negotiations, and it was not only Warsaw radio that expressed such an attitude. 131)

129) B. Dahlerus, op. cit., p. 110.
130) M. Freund, op. cit., vol. III, p. 373.
131) "Polish White Book", doc. 136.
Another game played by the Poles was that their Ambassador Lipski simply refused to receive German proposals. Needless to say, there also was no Polish plenipotentiary at Berlin on 30th August.
Sir H. Kennard to Viscount Halifax (Received 7:15 p. m.) Warsaw, August 31, 1939.

I then asked him [Józef Beck] what attitude Polish Ambassador would adopt if Herr von Ribbentrop or whoever he saw handed him the German proposals. He said that M. Lipski would not be authorized to accept such a document as, in view of past experience, it might be accompanied by some sort of ultimatum.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk96.asp

Viscount Halifax to Sir H. Kennard (Warsaw). September 1, 1939, 12:50 a. m.

On the other hand, I do not see why the Polish Government should feel difficulty about authorising Polish Ambassador to accept a document from the German Government, and I earnestly hope that they may be able to modify their instructions to him in this respect. There was no mention of any ultimatum in the report on the German proposals which has been furnished to us, and the suggestion that the demand for the presence of a Polish plenipotentiary at Berlin on 30th August amounted to an ultimatum was vigorously repudiated by Herr von Ribbentrop in conversation with His Majesty's Ambassador. If the document did contain an ultimatum, the Polish Government would naturally refuse to discuss it until the ultimatum was withdrawn. On the other hand, a refusal by them to receive proposals would be gravely misunderstood by outside opinion.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk100.asp
 
Quote from Lucrum:

No rush, but that would be interesting.
For now, I'll focus on your last question. If there's further interest, I might be able to post more on the weekend. This is from a speech by Walendy on "The Methods of Re-education" at Zell in March 1986 that I partly typed and translated:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I raise the official complaint for years that these [German] document publications -- which, incidentally, have been carried out only by a few people from the US, France, Britain -- include an array of fakes and do not contain an abundance of essential documents. I could mention a couple of examples. Let's take the one example, when Professor Hoggan, I think in 1964, came to Germany and was greeted by hate-dripping German media, including Professor Walter Hofer who accused, this man Hoggan fakes history, as for instance:

Hoggan claims that Hitler had called on 2 September 1939, in response to Mussolini, to convene a conference to prevent the impending war. This is incorrect, because if Hoggan had just taken a look at the files of German Policy, Volume Seven, document such and such, then he would have to establish that Hitler not on 2 September but 3 September late in the evening, after presence of the British declaration of war, wrote a letter to Mussolini with so many reservations that clearly shows that Hitler did not want a conference.

I then looked at the German files, agreed. Yes, Hofer from Switzerland was right. This is given so in the German files. A letter dated 2 September is not printed there. Now, any student who gets these files in hand with the German federal eagle perceives these files as documents and says yes, this is a document, this must be true. Hoggan responds very confidently and wrote a public letter to Hofer with the content:

Apparently, Professor Walter Hofer from Switzerland has never cast a glance at the Italian records. Had he done so, he would have found in volume so and so, document this and this, that Hitler in fact responded on the 2nd and responded positively. That letter dated 3rd has never existed.

I then looked at the Italian records and found Hoggan, United States, was right. Yes, Hitler immediately responded on the 2nd. This makes it clear that the Intelligent Service Groups responsible for the re-education in Germany had access only to the German records. They did not have access to the British records, they did not have access to the Italian, American, French and other records. And that was their big mistake. Namely, they have published the German documents unilaterally, without realizing that historical events can also be reviewed internationally. So it must be noted, the Italians published their documents in the original without re-educators.

Above all, please read the British Foreign Policy Documents which have been published so unlikely correct 30 years after the war that you sit down and ask yourself: Man, are they beyond remedy, didn't they know what they were publishing? Given that in there is all you need to know about war guilt. It contains the whole scam, which was arranged by Halifax, and I've discussed some of that in my books.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Quote from Code7:

For now, I'll focus on your last question. If there's further interest, I might be able to post more on the weekend. This is from a speech by Walendy on "The Methods of Re-education" at Zell in March 1986 that I partly typed and translated:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I raise the official complaint for years that these [German] document publications -- which, incidentally, have been carried out only by a few people from the US, France, Britain -- include an array of fakes and do not contain an abundance of essential documents. I could mention a couple of examples. Let's take the one example, when Professor Hoggan, I think in 1964, came to Germany and was greeted by hate-dripping German media, including Professor Walter Hofer who accused, this man Hoggan fakes history, as for instance:

Hoggan claims that Hitler had called on 2 September 1939, in response to Mussolini, to convene a conference to prevent the impending war. This is incorrect, because if Hoggan had just taken a look at the files of German Policy, Volume Seven, document such and such, then he would have to establish that Hitler not on 2 September but 3 September late in the evening, after presence of the British declaration of war, wrote a letter to Mussolini with so many reservations that clearly shows that Hitler did not want a conference.

I then looked at the German files, agreed. Yes, Hofer from Switzerland was right. This is given so in the German files. A letter dated 2 September is not printed there. Now, any student who gets these files in hand with the German federal eagle perceives these files as documents and says yes, this is a document, this must be true. Hoggan responds very confidently and wrote a public letter to Hofer with the content:

Apparently, Professor Walter Hofer from Switzerland has never cast a glance at the Italian records. Had he done so, he would have found in volume so and so, document this and this, that Hitler in fact responded on the 2nd and responded positively. That letter dated 3rd has never existed.

I then looked at the Italian records and found Hoggan, United States, was right. Yes, Hitler immediately responded on the 2nd. This makes it clear that the Intelligent Service Groups responsible for the re-education in Germany had access only to the German records. They did not have access to the British records, they did not have access to the Italian, American, French and other records. And that was their big mistake. Namely, they have published the German documents unilaterally, without realizing that historical events can also be reviewed internationally. So it must be noted, the Italians published their documents in the original without re-educators.

Above all, please read the British Foreign Policy Documents which have been published so unlikely correct 30 years after the war that you sit down and ask yourself: Man, are they beyond remedy, didn't they know what they were publishing? Given that in there is all you need to know about war guilt. It contains the whole scam, which was arranged by Halifax, and I've discussed some of that in my books.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for taking the time with the responses. At the risk of sounding like I'm dismissing them out of hand (I'm not) the author does comes across a bit like a conspiracy theorist to me.

Why would the German government supposedly be opposed to bringing out the "truth", since it makes them look at least somewhat less responsible for the war in Europe?

If Hitler really didn't want war, why invade western Europe or Russia for that matter, was it supposed to be a "defensive" strategy?
 
I haven't followed the whole thread, but has anyone mentioned that 90% of Americans couldn't care less what Germans believe? Just asking. ; )
 
Quote from Ricter:

I haven't followed the whole thread, but has anyone mentioned that 90% of Americans couldn't care less what Germans believe? Just asking. ; )
Hmmmm, I think the number is more like 80%. The 20% that identify themselves as loony liberals care more about what other countries think than what their own fellow Americans think.
 
Back
Top