When negotiating a non-aggression treaty with Germany in 1933, Pilsudski had the Polish embassy in France spread rumors he sought a joint Franco-Polish preemptive war against them, to force better terms. It was a tense relationship, with the danger of war looming large.
You just confirmed my point that Poland was never a passive victim but actively played high-stakes diplomacy against Germany. What Pilsudski was doing was nothing compared to the treachery under Rydz-Smigly. The idea that Poland never provoked tensions is shattered by the fact that it did consider a preemptive war and deliberately spread war-mongering rumors. The Franco-Polish alliance along with Poland’s refusal to negotiate over Danzig and the Corridor shows that Poland assumed it had backing strong enough to resist German negotiations.
Hitler talks about Pilsudski here:
Somebody asked you here before I think- you've invested more energy in defending Hitler, than the Church in the debate thread. He had enough power to fix and save his country peacefully, and could have been remembered as a true statesman.
This is a complete non-argument. The reality of pre-war diplomacy doesn’t change because of who I focus on in a debate. Besides Hitler’s attempts at peaceful resolutions from the multiple proposals for a fair settlement of Danzig to the the Anglo-German Naval Agreement to the the non-aggression pact with Poland were all ignored or rejected. The claim that he could have saved his country peacefully when Britain and France were deliberately encircling Germany while Poland took an obstinate stance is naive.
People individually decide what to believe. You're but reciting the false reasons for the war as given by Hitler's propaganda outlets. Why would Poland be so reckless. Nobody could get away with a massacre, individual murders were prosecuted diligently by the police. The international opinion would have found out and Poland would lose all support and forever stain its image.
So Poland wouldn't be reckless but it did spread war rumors about a preemptive strike on Germany? And it did refuse Hitler’s final peace offers? There is no logical consistency in your argument. The claim that Poland couldn't get away with massacres is confounding because every war begins with acts of violence that are conveniently ignored or denied by the aggressors. Under the protection of the Polish army groups of jews and riled up mobs of Poles did slaughter ethnic Germans, with documented killings in the Polish Corridor and later mass executions in places like and Bromberg. As for international opinion, look how Britain and France were already committed to Poland, so even if atrocities had been widely reported, it wouldn’t have changed their position.
Why would relatively small, and in reality made up incidents lead to a full scale war, an enormous undertaking. Allegations of 'massacres' and 'persecutions' are convenient pretexts.
Made-up incidents? Even mainstream historical accounts acknowledge the persecution of Germans in Polish-held territories. Dismissing it as a tiny pretext ignores the geopolitical reality that Poland was a strategic piece in the Anglo-French containment strategy against Germany. The war wasn’t about a single incident; it was about years of rising tension, hostile policies, and Britain and France guaranteeing Polish defiance against any German proposals. The same logic could be applied to countless wars were all pre-war conflicts over “small incidents” mere pretexts? That’s just historical ignorance.
As if the Germans had not been planning for this war for years, and building up invasion forces on the border for months. This genocide claim again, who believes these things? There are also German propaganda videos showing Polish mounted cavalry attacking German tanks with sabers.
Germany rearmed for survival as a nation surrounded by predatory enemies. Not just because of the November criminals of Versailles, but because of the countless revolutions and insurrections led by Bolshevik agents all across Europe. It had to re-arm and prepare to defend itself. Given that Poland was backed by two major world powers and refused all diplomatic settlements, what does that tell you? They were never interested in undoing Versailles. Rearmament does not prove that the conflict was premeditated on Germany’s part. If anything, Poland’s blind trust in Britain and France guaranteed its destruction, and they were taken for fools after the war by being given to Stalin by the USA and England for nothing. You’re conflating two separate issues of the persecution of ethnic Germans before the war and Germany’s military justifications for the invasion. The idea that Poland’s actions played no role in the escalation is historically false.
Germany staged a series of false flag attacks, most notably at Gleiwitz, code-named Operation Himmler.
You are literally regurgitating Allied victor propaganda. Unplug from the jewish history channel.
"Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." - Polish Marshal Edward Rydz-Śmigły, the Chief Commander of the Polish Armed Forces
Hitler announced in the Reichstag during a 10AM speech that Poland attacked them at 5:45 that morning, and that they were then responding with fire. This lying demagogue.
Did you read any of his speeches prior to September1st, 1939? There were issues with Poland going back over a year. The massacres didn't start getting bad until March 1939.
Look at these filthy jews who led the groups that murdered thousands of German children.
Neither France, nor Britain, and certainly not Poland, which wasn't mobilized until the very last moment, much too late, wanted a war with Germany. Ask yourself then why would Poland engage in dangerous hostilities? The Soviet Union had always been our biggest worry- why provoke Germany.
France and Britain had already committed to war as a pretext by giving Poland an unconditional guarantee in March 1939. Poland believed in this support and refused to negotiate over Danzig or the Corridor, despite repeated German attempts at a diplomatic solution. And again, you contradict yourself, if the Soviets were Poland’s biggest worry why didn’t Poland cooperate with Germany to counter the USSR? Instead it chose to antagonize Germany while trusting the very same Western powers that had already betrayed Czechoslovakia.
At the port of Danzig, the battleship Schleswig-Holstein (there's your ominous hyphen) fired the opening shots against the Polish outpost of Westerplatte- an ammo depot built promptly after the Polish-Russian war of 1920, when Danzig dockworkers went on strike to sabotage us, refusing to unload urgently needed weapons.
So now you admit that Poland was aggressively militarizing its positions in and around Danzig? Poland’s unilateral moves in the Free City were one of the core grievances of the dispute. The League of Nations was supposed to administer Danzig neutrally yet Poland was clearly using it for strategic military buildup. This only further proves Germany’s case that Poland was an unreliable actor in Danzig and actively worked against German interests in the region.
While Czechoslovakia did not allow Poland-bound weapons transports from Hungary to pass through, to aid Russia against us.
This undermines your entire argument. If Poland was so concerned about the Soviet Union as its primary threat then why was it supporting weapons shipments to the USSR? This just confirms that Poland's foreign policy was erratic and inconsistent. It feared the USSR but also took actions that benefited it all while antagonizing Germany. If anything this supports the idea that Poland was playing dangerous games with both Germany and the USSR making reckless diplomatic moves that ultimately led to its own downfall. The naivete of their trust in people like FDR and Churchill ended up biting them in the ass in the most humiliating way possible.
Why would Poland attack Danzig, having invested so much in the building of the adjacent port city of Gdynia, a project partially spurred by that same incident, the competitor about which the Danzig authorities were constantly complaining?
The issue is that Poland was economically and politically strangling Danzig. The development of Gdynia was not merely an innocent economic project because it was a direct attempt to undermine Danzig’s economic viability and enforce Polish dominance over the Free City. By leveraging customs barriers as well as obstructing German trade and militarizing its position in and around Danzig Poland was effectively treating it as a Polish city in all but name, despite it being a League of Nations-administered Free City.
On top of that Poland was aggressively pushing its authority within Danzig refusing to compromise on its stance even when Germany proposed diplomatic solutions. The international complaints from Danzig’s Senate were not German fabrications, they were well-documented grievances against Poland’s economic and political chokehold.
Why attack Danzig, it was not technically German, but 'free', administered by a High Commissioner from the League of Nations, and Poland wanted to keep it that way.
Poland was treating Danzig as its own and was violating the spirit of its League-administered neutrality. The League of Nations' oversight did not give Poland the right to interfere in Danzig’s internal affairs, yet it used customs disputes, economic coercion, and even military positioning to enforce its dominance. The very fact that Poland wanted to “keep it that way” is the issue because Germany had legitimate grievances about the treatment of ethnic Germans there, as well as the strategically advantageous economic hold that Poland imposed on the city to the detriments of the Germans, who were not experiencing the same level of prosperity that the rest of Germany was.
Furthermore you saying Danzig was not "
technically" German is deceptive because it was overwhelmingly ethnically German with over 95% of the population identifying as such. The fact that Poland was adamant about keeping it under League administration, rather than allowing it to reunite with Germany through a peaceful referendum only reinforces how Poland took a militaristically rigid stance that ignored the reality on the ground from the people.
Polish tariffs and restrictions forced Danzig to rely on Poland’s economy rather than integrating with Germany’s booming economy under Hitler. Danzig could not benefit from German economic policies like the Reichsmark reforms, autarky (self-sufficiency policies), or military-industrial expansion because it was legally separated (illegally via Versailles).
Do you really believe what you copy and paste here?
Where am I copying and pasting from? My arguments are sourced, factual, and historically documented while your rebuttal is based purely on incredulity.
Thou shalt not bear false witness.
Interesting considering that you are the one denying documented massacres. The moral posturing would be amusing if it weren’t so transparent. If you care about truth, where is your counter-evidence?
Do you ever question your alternate history sources. You also posted arguments in defense of the absurd flat earth lie.
Now we get to the real reason for your tantrum. You have held a grudge because I engaged in an abstract discussion about alternative cosmological models in a completely unrelated thread and now you’re trying to use that to discredit everything I say, the classic guilt by association fallacy. You know you cannot refute the facts on the table so you grasp at unrelated personal grievances instead.
The only person here relying on jewvisionist history is you. The atrocities against Germans in Poland were well-documented by German diplomatic channels, contemporary reports, and even neutral parties. In fact some of these events were even acknowledged in Allied intelligence reports after the war. You demand "foreign intelligence reports"? Germany’s diplomatic complaints to the League of Nations and multiple eyewitness accounts are foreign sources you just refuse to acknowledge them.
Here's the writing's of Degrelle again, a man who lived through it all and escaped with his honor and life intact:
link to pdf:
https://ia801006.us.archive.org/7/items/AdolfHitlerCollection/Epic-The Story Of The Waffen SS.pdf
link to pdf:
https://ia902200.us.archive.org/4/i...Degrelle/Campaign-in-Russia-Leon-Degrelle.pdf
"Hitler: Born at Versailles" by Leon Degrelle is very comprehensive and contains logistical numbers and figures.
link to pdf:
https://ia801909.us.archive.org/24/items/BornAtVersailles/Born At Versailles.pdf
Anything I use is written from a consistent and nearly twenty-year study of these events. I have corresponded with David Irving, spoken to Wehrmacht veterans, Germans who worked under Hitler himself, I've even established connection with the Degrelle family's descendants in Spain and elsewhere as I am working towards permission to examine the documents he had managed to save from Allied destruction as well as their historical rewriting.
I do not believe in flat earth, if you read the cosmology thread correctly, I simply point out flaws in the existing accepted model whilst refusing to worship the "sun god." I question everything. There's a possibility that all of this is all fake, most of history is not trustworthy, but this conflict is the last piece of tangibility that my family is connected to, from both living relatives and dead relatives. Everyone has a different experience from it, depending on their level of involvement.
Propaganda. Do you have reports from foreign intelligence services. Such things would have drawn international attention. Were legitimate, old US based German organizations other than NAZI affiliated outraged at the gruesome news? There were no massacres of Russkies, Germans, or Jews in Poland, this is laughable to imagine 'massacres' in a civilized country in the 1920s and 30s, in the middle of the continent, as if some brutal dirty little war was taking place,
See this is where you show your ignorance of history. First you act like German diplomatic complaints were not recorded. The fact is Germany’s grievances regarding Poland were submitted to the League of Nations on multiple occasions. These were formal diplomatic correspondences, and yes they were noted by British and French intelligence services who for political reasons had no interest in validating them.
Moreover let’s flip the script: Do you have intelligence reports refuting these massacres? Can you show me documents from British, French, Soviet, or American archives that explicitly state "Germany’s claims of massacres in Poland are false?" No, you don't.
Any White European who uses the word "nazi" disparagingly is a cuck traitor and cannot be trusted. Every time you utter that word with disdain you curse the millions of Germans who were murdered by Allied hordes propagandized with hate for this false label, and the millions of Europeans killed since WW2 by the umbrella of this jewish smear, and in doing so you take the side of their slaughterers.
how could the world not have noticed, even the Soviets would have been screaming from the rooftops, Austrians, Germans of the Tirol, even the Swiss, Italians.
This is a fundamentally naive view of geopolitics. There are hundreds of documented atrocities throughout history that were ignored at the time for political reasons. The fact that Western media or intelligence agencies didn’t shout about something does not mean it didn’t happen.
-The Katyn Massacre of thousands of Polish officers by the Soviets was covered up by the West for years (which they tried to blame on Germany like every other atrocity they committed.)
-The Soviet-orchestrated Holodomor famine that killed millions of Ukrainians was ignored by Western journalists who even denied it was happening.
-The mass rapes by the Red Army in Eastern Europe and Germany were not acknowledged until decades after the war.
And let’s not pretend the jew-run Anglo-American press of the time wasn’t heavily biased against Germany, deliberately downplaying or outright ignoring reports that didn’t fit their geopolitical narratives. That’s a whole separate discussion. The idea that "if it was real, everyone would have known about it" is not how history works. Governments and media suppress, distort, and ignore inconvenient truths all the time.
It's like whites oppressing and persecuting minorities in the US, ridiculously untrue.
This does not apply in the same way, except Whites did for very good reasons. Jim Crow laws, segregation, anti-miscegenation laws, all the lynchings were there for reasons. The bloody scent of Haiti was always on their minds of what happens when you have a racially mixed country in bad circumstances. It's not White "oppression and persecution" in these cases, it is a completely different racial issue of survival in an unnatural mixing experiment.
I have some German heritage. One guy on my mother's side had signed the deutsche volksliste, my great grandfather didn't in spite of the nagging,
Having distant German ancestry doesn’t mean you automatically understand interwar German-Polish relations. Besides the Deutsche Volksliste (DVL) wasn’t even implemented until after the invasion of Poland in 1939. This has nothing to do with pre-war atrocities against Germans in Poland.
before the war there was one man in the family I heard of from grandma, who only spoke German, and nobody had heard of any massacres through the grapevine, or otherwise.
Well if
grandma didn’t mention it then it must not have happened! By this logic if my great-aunt never talked about the Holodomor does that mean it didn’t happen? If a French family in 1950 didn’t personally hear about the Katyn Massacre does that mean it’s a myth? Or does it just mean that not everyone is aware of every historical event?
This is beyond absurd. You act like isolated family stories somehow override documented evidence, diplomatic complaints, and period accounts. That’s not how historical research works.
My father's side is Polish, but one mid XX century tombstone has the name Johann with a German last name on it, married into the family I believe from what the old man said.
Many Germans were forcibly Polonized after Versailles and given Polish nationality. Others assimilated over time especially as anti-German policies ramped up in Poland. This proves nothing other than the fact that intermarriage happened which nobody denies.
Newly married, still without kids, my paternal grandfather's aunt and uncle died in a camp in their early twenties, I presume from starvation, as one Polish survivor hailing from the same place, related after the war that he had a glimpse of them while he waited to be transferred.
Now the classic "my family suffered too!" angle. This is a tactic to divert from the debate and establish moral high ground. Nobody is saying Poles didn’t suffer during the war, everyone did. Besides notice the vagueness: “Died in a camp.” Which camp? “Presume from starvation.” Assuming. “A Polish survivor said he had a glimpse of them.” That’s third-hand, unverified hearsay. We are approaching lampshade bendy-shotgun territory here.
They lived in a remote location, may have been suspected of helping partisans.
Here’s the subtle admission that your relatives may have been actively involved in partisan warfare which would have been grounds for detention during the war. It’s well known that partisan activity in Eastern Europe blurred the lines between civilian and combatant, even more so in contested areas where both sides committed reprisals. If your relatives were involved in aiding partisans then their deaths in a wartime context have no bearing on whether pre-war massacres of Germans happened or not.
General Degrelle talks about it in this documentary here. Go to the 38 minute mark.
"Epic: The Story of the Waffen-SS"
Hitler wanted to attack the Soviets and capture the resources, and needed an excuse to go through Poland.
Berlin had repeatedly attempted to resolve the Danzig and Polish Corridor disputes diplomatically throughout the 1930s. Under the encouragement of Britain and France which had both falsely guaranteed Polish sovereignty in March 1939, Warsaw rejected and continued to stymy negotiations outright.
If Hitler "needed an excuse" then why did he bother negotiating for years on end? He could have manufactured a casus belli long before September 1939. Instead Poland repeatedly escalated tensions refusing any territorial adjustments or plebiscites while its government encouraged abuse and murder of ethnic Germans while depriving them of economic freedom.
Had he waited for them instead, they would have been weakened fighting their way across the country, he would have had the moral high ground, and Poland on his side.
This is the same bizarre what-if fantasy others have posted here that ignores the geopolitical realities back then.
Poland was not going to ally with Germany against the Soviets. Waiting for Stalin to attack Poland first would have done nothing for Germany. The idea that Britain and France would join forces with Germany is utterly naïve. Britain and France were already committed to opposing Germany and had no interest in shifting their stance based on Soviet aggression as we saw with the Soviet invasion. None of you covert commies can ever answer why they never declared war on the USSR for doing the same thing Germany did, only even worse, without any defense or economic precedent.
There were no massacres even during the Polish - German clashes of the Silesian and Upper Poland uprisings of 1918-21:
This is false, the Silesian and Greater Poland uprisings did see violent ethnic cleansing and massacres of ethnic Germans. Polish insurgents killed ethnic Germans and expelled thousands from their homes in the regions they seized. German civilians were systematically targeted especially in Upper Silesia where thousands were forcibly deported or lynched by Polish forces. Even after Poland had secured these territories anti-German policies intensified laying the groundwork for further anti-German persecution in the 1930s.
I assure you God knows what he's doing allowing the self-destruction of Germany. Maybe it will break up into pieces, like before 1870. Some Muslim, some secular. A truly great irony: Nietzsche- That which is about to fall deserves to be pushed. One wonders if these lies will perish together with the Reich, when she finally dies.
Your pretentious moral posturing is nothing short of laughable. You claim to understand the fall of Germany through some divine lens as if this was some cosmic punishment. Let's get one thing straight Germany's defeat wasn’t a matter of divine retribution it was the cold hard result of a world united in its relentless effort to crush the Reich. A world united by hatred and jewish lies.
You want to talk about divine justice? It was the betrayal of the West, Britain’s refusal to let Germany recover after the first world war and their determination to crush it again before the second. That was the true moral low point. The entire world having learned nothing from the consequences of WWI made sure that Germany was never allowed to thrive again. If you think this was some moral victory you're utterly wrong. The truth is that Germany was brought down by the combined might of those who feared a resurgent European power, and not just by the Soviets, but by the very countries that caused the first world war to begin with.
In fact this anti-divine coalition of America, Britain, and the Soviet Union were all united in their desire to stop any nation from rising in Europe that could challenge their dominance. And in the end, that’s what happened: Germany was crushed under the weight of that opposition.
You hide behind Nietzsche and misquote him like some intellectual crutch as though invoking his name gives your argument weight. "That which is about to fall deserves to be pushed" he was referring to the decay of outdated systems (the 2nd Reich) not a righteous cause being destroyed by the combined forces of an entire corrupted world.
If I remember, you like or maybe even admire the last German emperor.
Kaiser Wilhelm II, although not a Freemason like his father and grandfather, hated the Catholic Church, in a letter to a baroness, or some such, he disparaged the papacy and the Church in a fittingly satanist, vile manner. I forgot her name, but it's out there to find.
Try to remember more clearly before you smear another. In Kaiser Wilhelm II’s private correspondence he was known to make strongly worded, impulsive, inflammatory remarks about various political and religious institutions including the Catholic Church, but there is neither a renowned nor a historically significant letter where Wilhelm II makes an outright “satanist, vile” attack on Catholicism. This is an exaggeration if not an outright fabrication. Many more renowned Protestant religious leaders have said much more condemning things about the Catholic Church.
Now that your historical details are exposed you are going this route, and given the nature of this forum it is easy to exploit by toeing the accusations of heresy as well as "support of heretics" for the audience.
This article doesn't even support your false statements. Wilhelm II was not a Bismarck. The Kulturkampf was primarily Bismarck’s policy in the 1870s before Wilhelm II even came to power. If you're trying to link the Kaiser to some grand anti-Catholic crusade, you’re looking at the wrong time period. By the time Wilhelm II took the throne, the Kulturkampf had already largely ended because Bismarck saw it was a failure and began making amends with the Catholic Church, despite Wilhelm being a devout Protestant.
And as a Protestant Wilhelm II did have some anti-Catholic sentiments, but so did many Protestant leaders of his time including British royals. That’s called historical context. Germany had a long Protestant-Catholic divide and while Wilhelm expressed his disdain for the Vatican’s political influence that doesn't equate to being satanic.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/german-catholics-under-the-iron-fist
Annelise Michel- who agreed to be possessed, and to sacrifice that suffering for the German Catholic clergy- speaking in Hitler's voice during exorcism; why would demons choose the fuhrer, along with other malevolent characters? Would God permit them to impersonate a saint in such circumstances?
Annaliese had temporal lobe epilepsy. People with temporal lobe epilepsy experience vivid hallucinations and lifelong delusions. The content of these hallucinations is determined by what the person has been exposed to in their upbringing. The Church's official stance on this is that it was mental illness, not possession. They admit that the exorcism was a mistake, and the priest was jailed over it.
By the 1970s Germany had been under Allied “re-education” for nearly three decades with a total societal shift in perception especially in Bavaria, a historically Catholic stronghold (now under Vatican II falsities). The entire post-war German education system was built to enforce a narrative of national shame with Hitler depicted as the ultimate force of evil in all of human history. Every single German child had this bored into their temples harsher than a lobotomists drill.
If anyone in post-war Germany suffered from religious delusions they would have naturally included Hitler in their visions as a “demon” because that was the cultural programming of the time. Hitler was given the Judas treatment only magnified. Had Anneliese lived in the 1930s and suffered the same symptoms she would have had the opposite perception of seeing Hitler as an angel or savior figure, just as an overwhelming majority of Germans loved Hitler during his rule.
Exorcists do not always correctly ‘identify’ demons. The priest in this case told her that she was possessed by Hitler. She never declared this herself. She never said "I am Hitler," just like she never said "I am Cain" or "I am Judas" or "I am Nero" and so on. The Church itself admits that the names spirits give are often deceptive.
The Church has every reason to promote legitimate exorcisms but it has never confirmed Anneliese’s case because the evidence overwhelmingly points to mental illness and abuse. If you are using the tapes of this exorcism as evidence when the Church doesn't even acknowledge it, then you have no point to begin with.
Look at your line of thinking. If Hitler was a ‘demon’ why did he bring Germany from economic ruin to prosperity? Why was he beloved by the people who actually lived under him? Why did he restore order and purpose to a collapsing nation? Why would a 'demon' ban pornography and usury and abortion and outlaw degeneracy?
The Allies turned Hitler into a religious symbol of ‘evil’ only after they destroyed Germany. You’ve been conditioned to view him as a spiritual enemy because that’s what suits the post-war world order. Your desperate retreat into spiritual superstition is just further proof that you have no historical argument left.
The devil leads people to destruction while promising success, was there ever a saint whose actions led to the deaths of millions. Christian martyrs were brave, noble and virtuous heroes who died for great causes. The way Hitler's life ended doesn't look like God was his guide. Maybe he lived out his days in Argentina, probably not.
Your logic is flawed. Just because someone’s actions contributed to war does not make them a devil or ‘demon.’ Saint Joan of Arc led thousands into battle and death, was she a devil because she didn’t lead an army of pacifists? Or was she following God’s will in the context of her time?
By your line of thinking, then every political leader who ever lost a war must have been ungodly, which would include Constantine before his rise, Charles Martel before Tours, and even King David in his losses before uniting Israel.
You are still believing in another myth (Argentina) as well which shows how little historical research you've done.
Where would be the sense in permitting demons to impersonate a saint during their silly disruptive antics. God would not allow that methinks.
You’re wrong on a theological level here. The Bible makes it clear that satan can masquerade as an angel of light
(2 Corinthians 11:14). He can even impersonate saints, if it serves to mislead. The ability of the devil to deceive is one of the most dangerous powers at his disposal. To claim that God would never allow such impersonations is to misunderstand the complexity of spiritual warfare. God allows free will even to demons to act according to their designs whether that’s deceiving people with false visions or manipulating their actions. That doesn’t mean God is ‘approving’ of their actions. God allows evil to exist in the world not because He approves of it but to preserve the ultimate integrity of free will.
Sure, When they tempt you- unless you're suicidal, or in some life wrecking state of mind- aiming to destroy God's harmony and order, they offer help and many seemingly wonderful things, the best deal ever, expecting to cause much greater harm in the end, to others and to your own person when it's of no use to them anymore.
You’ve missed the point. Hitler’s ‘successes’ had nothing to do with his personal gain. He believed that Germany needed to revive itself morally, spiritually, culturally, innovatively, and militarily for its survival and that this was justified. He was a man of his people.
The people who attacked Hitler, FDR, Churchill, Stalin, and Truman, along with all the jewish bankers and freemasons booted from the con, were all literal occultists who made pacts with demons, and yet they *won* the war and the spoils. Go look at their initiation rituals and tell me there is no demonism going on there. Go read their books where they invocate quite literally to lucifer in exchange for knowledge power and tell me they are the *good* guys. You're describing Hitler's enemies, not Hitler.
All German gains against the Bolsheviks were wiped out, and then some, and Germany is destroyed like a discarded broken tool, an instrument of destruction in the hands of the devil.
No. Germany was a victim of a worldwide conspiracy led by the jew-owned Allies who relentlessly used their economic and military power to cripple Germany at every turn. The U.S. and Britain with their overwhelming industrial might kept the USSR alive through the Lend-Lease Act (Murmansk & Persian Corridor routes) which allowed Stalin to build back his military endlessly to eventually overwhelm and destroy the German forces.
The devilish narrative you propose is simplistic. Germany was not destroyed because of some spiritual flaw inherent to the people or their leadership. Germany represented the very antithesis of that ‘destruction’ you describe: a society that restored its national dignity, rise above the ashes of defeat from World War I, and combat the global anti-Christian Marxist threat. The 'devil' in this scenario wasn’t Hitler it was the overwhelming global forces of the Allies determined to crush any semblance of national sovereignty.
Naturally, God has the last word, his plans and ways are hidden from us. In Akita, Our Lady warned that many nations will perish whole if there's no repentance- like addicts on the slide, or by suicide it seems.
Yes God’s ultimate plans are beyond human comprehension but it’s equally true that God has endowed us with reason to discern the realities of the world and to act within it. You seem content to wrap your argument in vague spiritual terms but history is not shaped solely by divine will it’s shaped by human action, politics, and choices and those who avoid this responsibility do so at their own peril.
The Akita prophecies are not necessarily prescriptive. They’re warnings not inevitabilities. The idea that nations will perish because of lack of repentance is not to be taken as a blanket statement against one country or another but as a call to individual and collective moral responsibility within that nation.
Sad to see Germany, a great nation ruined the way it is. But then I remind myself Poland never did similar things, we don't have guys like Dirlewanger.
Don't fall for this rhetoric to turn you against your neighbors. You blame Hitler in the entirety of your post but why don't you blame the Americans, the British, or the French for backstabbing you twice, both by lying to you before the war, and by turning their backs on you after the war? Why don't you blame the USSR for killing all your intelligentsia?
You don't know anything about Dirlewanger, you just perpetuate another narrative. All of the accusations about him are lies as well. Just more lies on top of lies.
"There is not a boiled-alive woman in sight, nor one injected with strychnine, nor a line of tortured, raped women, not much time for necrophiliac activities either. Black propaganda of a massively defeated Soviet-promulgated Polish-communist planned military action that Dr. Dirlewanger played a decisive part in completely defeating. So they demonized him and the brigade as the "devil's division".
"The Truth about Oskar Dirlewanger & The Dirlewanger Division"
Literally everything you believe about Hitler and the German National Socialists and the SS are what jews and their accomplices do on a daily basis still in 2025. You're buying into their projection.
Reconcile with your German brothers or you too will face extinction. Try to find it in your heart to forgive whatever hatred has been instilled in you for them. If you think Poland will survive while Germany is wiped off the map by canaanite savages you are helpless.
Read about
Pilecki, or familiarize yourself with the inhumane treatment of Polish children in camps like the one in Lodz:
Catholics should also remember these sad facts:
What's sad is that you believe these scams to be facts. You're a thick one. If you believe in the holohoax fable you are already under a demonic spell, and you need to cleanse yourself of that delusion before you go criticizing good Aryan Christian men with outright lies. The camps were humane. The only horrors at the camps were when they began starving and dying from typhus. According to the Red Cross barely 270,000 people died in those camps, and an overwhelmingly majority of them were from disease after Western bombing severed supply lines to said camps. There is an entire thread dedicated to details on the camps:
https://christisking.cc/threads/exposing-the-lies-of-history-setting-the-record-straight.682/
Trillions of dollars has been pumped into this narrative the likes of which you cannot comprehend so that infinity shekels can be grifted from it. Just like the sign above the entrance to the camps, "Arbeit Macht Frei" works make you free, and so too does work for the mind in freeing you from the lies of the jews, not the Germans, who are still implementing their designs for the extermination of your people as we speak. Come down from your jew horse and stop listening to sweet nothings from piles of shoes.
In the very least, read more about this subject if you want to ingrain yourself in it. It is not a simple one.
