Hitler enabled White genocide. Hitler only went to war with White countries and gave the Talmuds the moral high ground to oppress Whites for decades afterwards. Hitler was funded by Zionists as a useful idiot.
The Barbarian Invasion of Europe
- Thread starter N°6
- Start date
-
- Tags
- immigration
Hitler enabled White genocide. Hitler only went to war with White countries and gave the Talmuds the moral high ground to oppress Whites for decades afterwards. Hitler was funded by Zionists as a useful idiot.
I can't find English speaking sources on what happened in Vienna. Anyway, in short, there were more attempts to kill people using cars. This had previously mainly been a "German" thing, but it seems as though the Austrian neighbours also received this update.
I just used Google translate for this Austrian article.
www.krone.at
I just used Google translate for this Austrian article.
Doppelter Terror-Alarm: 16 Schüsse auf Amoklenker
Autos als Waffe! Zweifacher Großeinsatz für die Wiener Polizei: Während in der Fußgängerzone rund um die Pestsäule im Herzen der Stadt Panik ...
www.krone.at
edited. the real traitors are the allies for coming to aid the jews. is that not obvious at this point still. why is europe in such a poor state after hitler being defeated, white genocide ongoing. how is hitler involved in the genociding of ukrainians and russians today. Seems the same things are happening with or without him, strange.
Last edited:
Hitler declared war on America, not vice versa. He was 100% useful idiot
Last edited:
America was already involved through the lend lease act way before hitler declared war. The same way they support ukraine today in the proxy war. If hitler was 100% useful idiot the allies are 1000% so.
He risked everything and that is the only way. you either win or lose there is no safe path to be free of jewish oppression. You have to gamble it all because to jews this is an existential struggle and they will not give you any other option.
He risked everything and that is the only way. you either win or lose there is no safe path to be free of jewish oppression. You have to gamble it all because to jews this is an existential struggle and they will not give you any other option.
That's ridiculous. Imagine if Putin declared war on America for supporting Ukraine. Russia would be destroyed (and most of the world in nuclear fire).
Imagine if Britain had declared war on Russia back when America was revolting against Britain (because Russia was supporting the colonies).
Picking more fights with more countries in addition to the ones you are already struggling against is called suicide.
No it absolutely is not ridiculous. Like everyone else who cowardly refuses to search for unbiased truth on WW2, Hitler is your convenient scapegoat. I want you to understand these truths, but you insist on pushing these historical falsehoods.
America was the aggressor from the beginning. FDR is the architect behind all of WW2. For how much you do not know on this subject, you are either a boomer or trolling at this point. Your understanding is deeply flawed in terms of historical timing, events, and cause-and-effect.
This is an absolute absurdity.
@ginsu This is another of his over-simplified historically inaccurate claims filled with logical fallacies. He reads too much articles on jew Ron Unz' site to be able to decipher proper truth regarding Hitler and WW2.
White countries had been going to war with each other for centuries. WWI, Franco-Prussian war, Italian Unification, Crimean War, The Napoleonic Wars, and various European conflicts (Thirty Years War, Hundred Years War) long before Hitler saw White nations fighting White nations.
The real architects of White decline came after Hitler through post-war policies like the Frankfurt School’s cultural subversion, open-border immigration policies, and deindustrialization, none of which were caused by National Socialism. All of them started in America, the USSR, and a little bit in England before the EU ever came into being.
If Hitler hadn't resisted the Soviet Union most of Europe would have fallen to Stalin whose Bolshevik regime had already murdered millions of White Christian Russians, Ukrainians, and other Slavs through massacres, collectivization, and political purges. Spain got a taste of this before WW2.
Another fallacy.
Hitler didn’t "choose" to go to war with Britain and France, they declared war on him after he responded to Poland’s massacres of ethnic Germans in territories stolen after Versailles.
The Soviet Union was not just any "White country" it was a Bolshevik-ruled, mongoloid anti-Christian regime that had already killed tens of millions of its own White citizens.
Japan and Siam, Axis allies, were not White. Germany had warm relations with many non-White nations, including Iran (then Persia), India (via Subhas Chandra Bose), Iraq, Afghanistan, and even some Arab nationalist groups who saw Germany as a counter to British and French colonial rule.
The reality is that Hitler fought only against regimes that threatened Germany’s survival not based on their racial makeup.
This is one of the most low-T arguments anyone can make about Hitler, completely devoid of truth.
The Soviet Union under Lenin implemented anti-Semitic laws in the 1920s, long before Hitler was ever prominent.
To suggest that Hitler’s defeat somehow set the stage for the creation of these anti-Semitic laws or their spread to other nations ignores the timeline. Laws against anti-Semitism existed before WWII, and long before the creation of israel. Hitler was not the cause of these laws, nor was his defeat the catalyst for their global implementation. The USSR had already put these laws into place as a part of its own uniquely jewish political agenda and not as a result of Hitler’s policies or defeat.
Your argument about blaming Hitler is a perfect example of inverted logic. It's the same flawed thinking as blaming Orthodox Tsarist Russia for failing to stop the Bolshevik revolution which was led by jews. The result of that failure was the Bolsheviks instituting laws against anti-Semitism, laws that not only became a cornerstone of the Soviet state but still exist today in modern Russia, long after the fall of the USSR.
If you're going to be a finger-pointer, then as an Orthodox Christian you should recognize that your own religious heritage is directly responsible for the very conditions that forced victorious Bolshevik jews to institute these "protective laws" in 1920s Russia, simply by your similar line of thinking "they lost so it's their fault." To blame Hitler for the unrelated result of centuries of Christian oppression of jews is morally bankrupt and an inversion of historical truth.
You see, the Orthodox Tsars allowed anti-Semitism to flourish for centuries, sponsoring pogroms and persecuting jewish communities. We all know why, and we all know they deserved far worse. When the Bolsheviks came to power they enacted laws protecting jews from such "discrimination" while they blew up Churches with glee. Are the Tsars and the White Russian Army "trashcan retarded suicidal garbage commanders" for losing and having this punishment and genocide heaped on the Russian people?
Blaming Hitler for the post-war laws against anti-Semitism is just as misguided as blaming Tsarist Russia for the laws against anti-semitism the Bolsheviks instituted. A majority of these laws against anti-semitism and holobunga denial weren't even implemented until the 1990s and 2000s, half a century after the war, because the IHR was exposing the grift of German pensions as a fraud. The holobunga was literally nothing for almost three decades after the war, there were no legal precedents preventing people from speaking freely about it except in the USSR, who created the scheme in the first place.
Neither the Orthodox Tsars nor Hitler were responsible for laws against anti-semitism, it's just a fact that jews, once in power, do this to hide their crimes as a deflect to lie about everyone else's ancestors. There is no moral high ground with jewish criminals and their fake laws.
This is a flat-out lie, and serious economists and historians have debunked it. For the nth time, you have not posted a single piece of proof for this. I have posted numerous documentaries, economic textbooks, accounts, and descriptions of Germany's economic system in the Reich, but the lone bully of CIK says Hitler was "funded by zionists" without a shred of evidence.
Germany’s economic recovery under Hitler was due to genius domestic policies, not foreign funding. Hjalmar Schacht’s economic strategies helped Germany bypass international banking control. MEFO bills allowed Germany to fund its military buildup without relying on foreign loans. The Reinhardt Program created jobs and infrastructure, breaking free from the Great Depression.
The "Hitler was funded by zionists" myth comes from distortions of the Haavara Agreement (1933). This was a negotiated deal between Germany and the British Empire to allow jews to emigrate out of Europe with part of their wealth. The British were the ones depositing them in Palestine. The agreement reached with Arab leaders would see them set up in a puppet state in French Madagascar which unfortunately did not happen. The Haavara was NOT "zionist funding of Hitler" it was a temporary practical solution to jewish emigration. The zionist groups actually boycotted Germany (e.g., the 1933 worldwide jewish boycott of German goods).
If Hitler was truly "funded by zionists," why did global zionist organizations declare economic war on Germany in 1933? Why did international financiers try to cripple Germany’s economy every step of the way? The argument makes no sense.
@ginsu I've clearly explained the Haavara and the funding of the NSDAP in the WW2 thread, but he refuses to read sources.
You 100% don't know what you're talking about.
Do you even know why this happened? Your argument ignores the reality that the U.S. was already waging war against Germany before December 11, 1941 Hitler simply made the war official rather than waiting for Roosevelt to do it first.
Here is a laundry list of essential components for understanding the causes of WW2 courtesy of FDR that you are completely unaware of:
-1933-34 – The Roosevelt administration boycotts German goods through jewish and international banking networks, aiming to weaken Germany’s economy.
-June 1934 – Nye Committee begins investigating U.S. arms manufacturers, revealing that American financiers played a role in fueling WWI; FDR secretly prepares for another war.
-August 1935 – U.S. Congress passes the Neutrality Act of 1935, prohibiting arms sales to warring nations. However, Roosevelt later finds ways to bypass these laws to aid Britain and France.
-July 1937 – Roosevelt publicly calls for a “quarantine of aggressor nations” (meaning Germany, Italy, and Japan), despite America’s supposed neutrality.
-March 1939 – Britain and France under American influence give Poland a blank-check war guarantee against Germany. This emboldens Polish leaders to reject German diplomatic negotiations over Danzig and the Polish Corridor.
-April-May 1939 – Germany presents multiple peaceful proposals to Poland, who initially accepts, but before work can be completed they are rejected due to British and American diplomatic assurances.
-August 23, 1939 – The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is signed between Germany and the USSR, shocking Britain and the U.S. Roosevelt sees this as a threat to Anglo-American power.
-September 1, 1939 – After being fired upon by the mobilized Polish Army for days, Germany invades Poland to stop the press-enraged mobs of Poles and Bolsheviks massacring ethnic Germans amidst Poland's continued refusal to negotiate.
-September 3, 1939 – Britain and France declare war on Germany only (but not on the USSR after it invaded later in September).
-September 5, 1939 – Roosevelt refuses to declare neutrality (against his own Neutrality Act) and begins openly supporting Britain and France against Germany.
-September 8, 1939 – Germany recovers Warsaw documents showing American promises of military support to Poland.
-April 9, 1940 – Roosevelt condemns Germany’s occupation of Norway and Denmark but remains silent on Soviet occupation of the Baltic states and Finland.
-June 10, 1940 – Roosevelt gives a speech calling for the defeat of Germany, despite America’s official neutrality.
-July 1940 – Roosevelt pressures Congress to increase military spending and expand U.S. armed forces, preparing for war.
-September 2, 1940 – The Destroyers-for-Bases Deal is signed, where the U.S. provided 50 old destroyers to Britain in exchange for 99-year leases on military bases in British-controlled territories.
This deal directly violated the U.S. Neutrality Acts of 1935, 1936, and 1937 which explicitly forbade the sale or transfer of arms to belligerent nations (like Britain, which was already at war with Germany). Roosevelt bypassed these laws by structuring the agreement as an exchange of assets rather than a direct sale of weapons, though the result was the same, strengthening Britain against Germany while keeping the U.S. officially out of the war.
-October 1940 – Selective Service Act is passed, instituting a peacetime draft for the first time in U.S. history.
-November 1940 – Roosevelt is reelected after falsely promising, “Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.”
-March 11, 1941 – The Lend-Lease Act is signed, making the U.S. the arsenal for Britain and the Soviet Union, effectively ending neutrality.
-April 11, 1941 – U.S. forces seize 64 Axis merchant ships in American ports, including 28 German vessels, imprisoning their crews.
-June 22, 1941 – Germany pre-emptively invades the Soviet Union to thwart Operation Thunder. Roosevelt immediately pledges support to Stalin.
-July 1941 – Roosevelt freezes German assets in the U.S., cutting off financial access.
-July-August 1941 – The Atlantic Charter is signed between Roosevelt and Churchill, outlining war aims against Germany despite the U.S. not being in the war yet.
-September 4, 1941 – The USS Greer Incident: A U.S. destroyer tracks and provokes a German U-boat, leading to an exchange of fire. Roosevelt uses this as an excuse to order a shoot-on-sight policy against German ships.
-October 17, 1941 – The USS Kearny is torpedoed after engaging and attacking German submarines. Roosevelt claims this is an unprovoked incident.
-October 31, 1941 – The USS Reuben James is sunk while escorting British supply ships (violating the Neutrality act once again), killing 115 U.S. sailors. This was the first open loss of American lives in the undeclared naval war against Germany.
-November 6, 1941 – The U.S. Navy captures the German civilian merchant ship S.S. Odenwald without legal pretense and imprisons its crew without trial.
-December 7, 1941 – After Roosevelt imposed economic sanctions, blockades, and embargoes on Japan for months, they retaliated against the American fleet in Pearl Harbor. forcing them into a war that would lead to Germany’s declaration against the U.S.
-December 11, 1941 – Germany finally declares war on the United States, citing the legal articles of the Tripartite Act (though Japan attacked on Dec 7th, America declared war on all of them when they declared war on Japan on Dec 8th), and Roosevelt’s repeated violations of neutrality and acts of war against Germany.
You run cover for Trump and Putin when it is obvious they are in the pocket of the jews, yet you cannot come up with one piece of tangible evidence for your incoherent points on your rabid hatred of Hitler other than these schoolyard insults.
You are beaten on this subject, admit you are wrong and save yourself further embarrassment. The more I have to school you out in the open about WW2 the more infantile your claims appear to people who can think for themselves, and the less traffic this forum will receive when a moderator is seen behaving like a gatekeeper when the truth is out and circulating freely.
Last edited:
They are in the pocket of the Talmuds because Hitler handed over the world to them when he declared war on the entire world and gave total power to the them. If Hitler had half a brain he would have waited, built up Germany, and waited for the USSR to invade. Then Britian and France would have started off the war on his side against the USSR. Once the USSR had been taken out, Hitler could have easily cleaned up the rest of Europe. He was an idiot, with no strategic restraint or foresight, and gave the Talmudic Jews everything they wanted. Now they own everyone and you still can't connect the dots as to why.
You're an ideologue stuck in a mind rut, refusing to question basic premises, worshipping a failed leader who doomed the White race with his megalomania.
But this is all off-topic, so I won't be responding anymore here. We already have another thread for this topic.
In what parallel universe do you envision such thing to occur? This is a preposterous assumption to say the least. Britain and France were funding the Bolshevik revolution while the Milner group sought to destroy German economy since the start of 20th century. They would not move a muscle like they didn't when Poland was invaded.
This is why the reading of '200 Years Together' Pete Quinones and dr. Johnson are doing is essential information.
I didn't misspell it.
Ah OK, Matthew Raphael Johnson, good guy and interesting perspectives on Russian history. Also know Quinones from the Tim Kelly Our Interesting Times podcast, as a longtime listener, he's nearly always on target, one of the best political podcast from a Catholic perspective.
The 200 Years Together looks like a long series where Quinones reads the book and Johnson comments, a really long listen.
The problem with WW2 is that most of it (if not all) is misdirection and disinformation. NMFP might be right about a lot of things but he still took information from wherever he did and I'm sure his intentions are true but that source is most likely also infiltrated. Best to stick to current affairs.
And yes, the walls of text don't help any argument either as it shows inconfidence so I'll leave it at that.
How would you suggest undoing nearly a century of lies then? With simple phrases and short sentences? It is literally deprogramming the spoon-fed fake history, it is not going to come undone easily.
No, I assess information from sources that are not compromised or infiltrated. Pre-war publications, pre-war speeches, pre-war logistics, wartime publications, wartime speeches, wartime logistics. Post-war sources diverge into the Allied victor narrative and its fanfiction of truth repression, and the few accounts of the Axis survivors who did not have their testicles crushed by jackboots at Nuremberg to force a fake confession. The rest of the information requires a strong filtering mechanism and a retinue of knowledge of that time, geopolitics, laws, geography, demographics, etc.
There is no need for infiltration on WW2 because the entire official narrative is a psyop, along with any of the works it has spawned. This means every single mainstream publication from 1945 onwards, be it a book, movie, documentary, or interviews, are fake history. They are lies, that's it.
The reaction of those who hate Hitler and misdirect curious minds away from the only solution that dispels jewish power are where most of the friction in settling the debate comes from. Too many people's irrational hatred of Hitler prevents them from seeing Germany's economic miracle and the trajectories of the time. Saddam and Gaddafi were both on the same trajectory to empower their own people similar to how Hitler did to the Germans, but both were capped before they had a chance to achieve what he did.
Current affairs are all kabuki theater, you have to go to the root to understand the setup.
Gaddafi is a good stand-in for Hitler here, he wrote a lot of good things, even red pilled items, but he was a very flawed and unstable leader, one who also miscalculated and ended up destroying his country. He was also, like nearly all other Arab leaders, put at the helm by foreign powers.
Saddam was a little more sane than Gaddafi, but as a smalltime thug lacked intelligence and fell into the traps that were laid for him over and over. He was also put in power by the CIA.
Gaddafi's story is whole lot more interesting than that mate (starting his own currency away from FIAT, bringing water to the people in the Sahara etc). I'm sure @MusicForThePiano can fill me in here.
I don’t know, because I don’t even know where I heard this years ago, it could have been mainstream media and suspect… but I heard that saddam was no slouch either.
They tried every trick in the book to take control of Iraq.
Economically, he wouldn’t take the “investments”.
Assassination, he was too cagey.
Finally they had to send in boots.
There were many strong leaders in the "east" like Gadaffi and recently the eye surgeon Assad who tried their best not to be corrupted by the "west".
It's a sad state of affairs now that Israel is getting it's way.
Can you name me one leader in history who was not "flawed?" What does this even mean to you? All humans are flawed to a certain degree. It's not a very descriptive term to call someone that distinguishes them from others.
Both leaders took control of countries whose banks were incorporated into the Rothschild international jewish finance system, but they both pulled out prior to, and causing their downfalls via warfare, not by destroying their countries. The CIA wasn't so keen on understanding national politics in the late 1970s so whatever influence they had their intention was to set the various Middle Eastern powers against one another (which was partially successful with the Iran-Iraq war and all the israelis who sold to both sides).
Saddam's government nationalized Iraq’s oil industry in the 1970s, cutting out Western corporate interests that had previously exploited Middle Eastern resources. Saddam refused to trade oil in U.S. dollars and attempted to transition to the Euro in 2000 directly challenging the petrodollar system controlled by Western financial institutions. Iraq implemented state-controlled economic policies limiting foreign ownership of Iraqi industries similar to how Hitler restricted jewish and foreign ownership of German industries.
It is very early 2000s neo-con to call Saddam a smalltime thug. The Ba'athist party was a more brutal Iraqi version of National Socialism, but Arabs need a strong-arm leader because most of them are barbaric people. Someone with a whip has to keep them in line. They are not polite Germans.
Saddam promoted Pan-Arab Nationalism, seeking unity among Arab nations based on shared ethnicity, history, and language, just like National Socialism sought. Like Hitler’s Germany, Iraq had little debt and strong state-led industry before Western interventions and the ZOG coalition invasion.
Iraq was invaded under the false pretense of WMDs but the real reason was economic sovereignty, just like Germany. The only difference between Saddam's economic starting point and Hitler's economic starting point is that the pre-WW2 Nationalist and Fascist movements were the last truly grassroots movements to never receive big jew funding to start with. What Saddam tried to do is still honorable. I've talked with Assyrian Christians who lived there in the years before the invasion and they said that it was much better, despite him being portrayed as a *monster*.
Yes Gaddafi was one of the last visionaries in recent times, which makes him a monument among north Africans. He was much more closer to a Hitler figure in his aims, they were like African versions of Hitler's peacetime programs. His aims were outlined in his book "Green Book".
https://ia601507.us.archive.org/4/items/TheGreenBookMuammarGaddafi/gaddafi-green-book.pdf
He proposed the African Gold Dinar which was a gold-backed currency for trade between African nations aiming to free Africa from IMF and World Bank dependency (both of which are under jewish financial control).
Like Hitler he bypassed the traditional debt-based monetary system and aimed for direct trade using resources-backed value (gold in Libya’s case, labor and barter in Germany’s case). Libya was one of the few nations without a Rothschild-controlled central bank before ZOG’s 2011 intervention.
He implemented state-funded housing, healthcare, and education (similar to Hitler’s welfare programs). Libya under Gaddafi had the highest standard of living in Africa (after previous Apartheid SA and Rhodesia), with zero-interest home loans, free healthcare, and free education. Gaddafi promoted Pan-Africanism which paralleled Germany’s Pan-Germanic vision of uniting ethnically similar peoples. Do you see how ethnic unity can be achieved, whether it be among Germanics, Arabs, or Africans?
Gaddafi started the Great Man-Made River Project, the largest irrigation project in the world that was designed to transform Libya into a fertile, self-sustaining nation. ZOG drones bombed the aquifers after the "Arab Spring" and it's just a series of ruined concrete pipes now. He also promoted state-subsidized farming and industry that encouraged agricultural growth and aimed for food self-sufficiency, similar to Germany’s push to reduce reliance on imports.
Gaddafi’s Gold Dinar project threatened the Western financial order leading to the violent coup and assassination. Libya was falsely framed as committing mass atrocities despite evidence proving otherwise.
When his Pan-Africanism ideology was scuttled, the true invasion of Europe picked up exponentially. The HIAS groups ushered in the biggest invasion of Europe in history that is still ongoing. The throngs of the dark continent could go live on welfare and rape and murder with abandon in Europe, rather than fight over food and water with their neighbors, so naturally the choice for these millions of fiends was easy. The non-White races need to have strong leaders to corral their people in their own lands, and who knows, Gaddafi's vision for a fertile Sahara may have actually worked and all of them would never want to set foot in Europe.
@Cooper you use the same inverted moral logic here that you use against Hitler, that Gaddafi and Saddam "destroyed" their own countries by opposing the jew world order. You cannot sell this morality in a flea market to a penny-pinching jew. All three built up their countries, and all three were destroyed by overwhelming odds of the thugs enforcing submission to jewish international finance. You do understand that all wars are economic and the other aspects of them come afterwards. That is the crux of jewish power, money, and the value they want for it to be. It literally hurts a jew to know there are people out there who are happy and free and not paying debt to some hebraic scam.
Last edited:
They also had to make his death as gruesome as possible for the whole world to see. A bit like with Mussolini.