Friday, April 29, 2011
David Irving - ''Hitler Tried To Protect The Jews''
Irving demonstrates that on Kristalnacht, when 60 or 70 Jews were murdered, Hitler tried his best to stop the madness of what was happening, sending out continual messages through the night to his deputies.
Irving shows evidence from 1942 that Hitler tried to defer the solution to the Jewish problem, postponing it until after the war was over. There is no evidence that Hitler was implicated in what happened to the Jewish people in Germany. On the contrary he tried to do what he could to save them, Irving says.
The story of Hitler the Madman was created to give the reason why Britain and her Empire had to be sacrificed to win the war. In fact it wasn't true. The international bankers who controlled Churchill wanted an end of the British Empire, to create a power vacuum that they could fill, with the spreading of Communism. Hitler's offer to fight alongside the British to protect the British Empire from other aggressors, such as the Japanese, and to team up against the spread of communism, was rejected by Churchill. Churchill was on the point of accepting the terms offered in July 1940, but realised that his own role as war leader would be over, and that he'd lose his position to the peace movement.
The British people wanted peace. More than half the cabinet wanted peace. Churchill knew from code-breaking that Hitler had ordered that no bombs be dropped on Britain. Churchill told Ambassador Kennedy that he was very keen for the bombing of London to start, and Hitler's order to be reversed, as that would kill off the growing British peace movement, and help bring the Americans into the war.
The process of wars being created through deception by international bankers, in liaison with intelligence agencies, media and personally ambitious politicians, continues right up to the present day.
Here is another bit of Irving describing Churchill's reaction to bombing raids......................One thought. He says Coventry is three hundred and fifty miles away from London. More like a hundred, I'd have thought. One verbal slip allowed. I hope there aren't others. It's dramatic stuff to listen to, and possibly very revealing. Usual caveats apply. But Irving's opinions tally with Irslinger's book, and with many of the comments being left by BRIT in recent days. It all kinda rings true to me, and makes the story of the world since WW2, and events we witness today, more explicable, to see how Churchill was keen for the war to go on, for his own interests.
On the other hand, I wonder how it was that Hitler was unable to stop the killings of the Jews, if that is what he wished to do. It's a subject I know little about to form a proper view. But it is interesting to hear Irving talk, and give another side to the story we have heard so many time previously. This next clip shows how awful the actions of the SS in the East against the Jews were, and how much hatred there was against them. You need a strong stomach to even look at these events, let alone form an objective view of what actually happened.
But were there six million Jews available to be killed in Occupied Europe? Apparently not.
Is the gas claimed to be used, capable of killing one or two thousand people at a time? Again, apparently not.
Was Hitler a monster? Those who study history's original sources, say he was not. Here is an example. Hitler loved higher German tradition, and desired to get rid of the influences of Bolshevism. Hitler created jobs for 6 million unemployed. The factories were well organised, with swimming pools, social security, and he inspired German youth. He cut off international finance, and launched his own Central Bank, creating enormous wealth for Germany. That is one reason why he has been vilified ever since.
Surely it would have been very difficult for Britain to embrace the Germans in an alliance against Bolshevism. There would have had to be a joining of the hip for such an idea to succeed. While Hitler might have been tolerated at a distance, becoming his best buddy would have been very difficult indeed to stomach. But was turning down his overtures of peace worth a war that lost the empire, ruined us financially and killed millions? It seems that these events are more complex than can be understood from any single perspective.
We can't turn the clock back, even if we wanted a different outcome. But can we learn from history and see that the power of central bankers played a big role in starting and continuing wars, just as it does today....from the American War Of Independence onwards, up to Iraq and now Libya. Somehow the influence of that power should be taken back, and the good things that Hitler could achieve by breaking free, and Gaddafi has delivered to Libya is what we all should be availing ourselves of.
But each time a political leader tries they end up assassinated, from Lincoln to Kennedy. Our democracies are effectively neutralised by the overriding power that the central bankers and the cartels have created. Whichever way we try to see a way out, the doors seem bolted. But let's keep looking, just in case.