We Need Great Historians Like David Irving – Our Knowledge of WW2 Is Completely Wrong

“The history of WW II is incorrect … it glorifies the victors and demonizes the vanquished … Irving’s histories are far more accurate than those written by court historians … (who) teamed up with Zionists to smear and demonize the best historian of our time.”

“Churchill’s career was funded by wealthy Jews who wanted war with Germany. Why do popular films and biographies hide this shocking fact?”

Source link

russia-insider.com

Paul Craig Roberts

June 11, 2018

The author is an economist who served as assistant Treasury secretary in the Reagan administration, was associate editor at the Wall Street Journal, and is a former professor at Georgetown University. (Full bio).

Now retired, he is a prolific columnist for his personal site, with a very large following on the internet. He writes frequently about Russia.

---

Ron Unz is one of the best men of our time. He searches for truth and he supports others who do the same. In this article, he comes to the defense of David Irving, the best historian of the 20th century.http://www.unz.com/announcement/the-remarkable-historiography-of-david-irving/

Zionists destroyed David Irving’s livelihood with slander and libel, because he made public a letter from the former chancellor of Germany, Hitler’s predecessor, to Winston Churchill, a letter that Irving found in the American publisher’s file of Winston Churchill’s history of the war, and which the publisher prevented Churchill from publishing in his history.

Churchill’s career was funded by wealthy Jews who wanted war with Germany. Why do popular films and biographies hide this shocking fact?

The former chancellor of Germany, who escaped the Nazis and lived in England, wrote to Churchill that two of Hitler’s financiers were Jews who managed two of the largest banks in Germany. One was a Zionist leader. The letter exists, and there is no reason to doubt its honesty. However, for making an important historical document public, Irving was labeled by a vicious propaganda campaign an “anti-Semite” and “holocaust denier.”

Irving simply thought that he was being an historian.

Another Irving honesty, the one that destroyed him, was that after 10 years of research he could not find one document that provided evidence for the claim that Hitler personally conducted the holocaust or that he even knew about it. Irving did find and report documents that he made available in which Hitler issues orders prohibiting extermination of Jews. Being truthful does not make Irving a Hitler apologist.

Irving did not say that there was no holocaust, only that things happen in governments, just as they do in police forces https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/06/07/power-unaccountable-police-leads-criminality/ about which those in charge are not informed. I know for a fact that things happened during the Reagan administration of which the president was unaware.

The history of World War II is incorrect. It is written in a way that serves the interest of those who prevailed. It glorifies the victors and demonizes the vanquished. As the old adage goes, the victors write the history. In other words, the history is self-serving, not accurate. Irving’s histories are far more accurate than those written by court historians. Consequently, the court historians teamed up with Zionists to smear and demonize the best historian of our time.

The two Irving lectures that Ron Unz has located and included are worth your attention. Irving explains why history written by professors is essentially incorrect and why correct renditions are unacceptable to publishers and the ruling class.

Wars are great producers of lies because propaganda is necessary to motivate soldiers to fight and to ensure that populations accept the associated hardships. The use of history as propaganda prevents us from learning from history. Thus, we continue to make the same mistakes.

---

Source: Paul Craig Roberts

Advertisements

Ten Years On, Putin Told Them So

“In its existing form, the G7 is a bunch of losers. It’s a retrogressive world view, not progressive. Russia is better off without.”

Source link

sputniknews.com

Finian Cunningham

June 19, 2018

© Sputnik / Sergei Guneev

You can hardly blame Russian President Vladimir Putin for enjoying a “told you so moment”. He lately reminded European leaders that their all-out spat with the United States is what happens when you are too deferential to American hegemonic ambitions.

This predicament is just what the Russian leader had warned against almost 10 years ago in a famous speech he delivered in Munich on growing global disorder.

Last week, during his nationally televised marathon Q and A with Russian citizens, Putin referred to the unprecedented trade tariffs that President Trump is slapping on European states.

Rightly, Putin said those penalties were effectively a form of economic sanctions imposed by Washington on its supposed allies.

Putin hinted that the Europeans were now getting a taste of the noxious medicine that has been doled out to Russia by Western powers which have inflicted sanctions on Moscow over dubious allegations concerning the nearly four-year-old Ukraine conflict.

The acrimonious fallout from Trump’s de facto trade war with Europe, Canada and Japan was all-too apparent during the testy G7 summit held this weekend in Quebec.

READ MORE: G7 Summit: Trump Trying to Prevent US From Losing ‘Superpower’ Status – Analyst

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau decried American “illegal” trade measures, while French President Emmanuel Macron jettisoned his earlier “bromance” with Trump to declare that the group of Western industrialized countries plus Japan may reformat as the “G6” without the US, in order to counteract Washington’s “hegemony”.

© AP Photo / Andrew Medichini

G7 Summit Highlights: Tusk Accuses Trump of Challenging ‘International Order’

Speaking on behalf of the European bloc, Donald Tusk, the European Council President, expressed his frustration at Washington’s increasing disdain for multilateralism by saying that under Trump the United States is destroying the “rules-based global order”.But hold on a moment. Let’s go back to the landmark speech made by Putin in 2007 at the Munich Security Conference. More than a decade ago, the Russian leader delivered a blistering, prescient warning back then, when he said that American hegemonic ambitions of unipolar power would inevitably disrupt the global balance.

As far back as 2007, Putin explicitly admonished that Washington’s drive for unrivaled global dominance would end up bringing chaos to international law and order. This was during the heyday of post-9/11 US-led wars in the Middle East, which the European states all-too deferentially went along with despite these wars being illegal and unleashing ongoing global problems of terrorism and refugee crises.

READ MORE: As Relevant as Ever: Why Trump Needs to Take Putin’s 2007 Munich Speech to Heart

Putin’s essential lesson in Munich more than 10 years ago was that the world order of multilateralism and diplomacy could not withstand the assault of a would-be hegemon, whether that is the US or any other power.

Today, the Russian president’s analysis has been vindicated, as can be seen from the shock among the Europeans and Canadians at being treated like nothing more than minions by an American bully.

Washington under Trump is showing its true colors towards supposed “allies”. For Washington, there is evidently no such thing as allies, only clients, who must do the bidding of American capitalism and imperialism. Any dissent is not tolerated, under pain of economic retribution, which the Europeans and Canada in particular are now getting a bitter taste of.

The contrast between the fractious G7 and the parallel summit taking place in China this weekend could not be more instructive.

Over the weekend, President Xi Jinping warmly welcomed Putin and the leaders of Iran, India, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan to the annual Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting.

Putin was honored with a medal of friendship and described by President Xi as his best ally. All SCO delegates underlined the strategic importance of fraternal cooperation and multilateralism — the exact opposite of the debacle taking place at the G7 in Canada.

In those two events, we see two diametric visions of global relations. The G7 is all about American bullying for unipolar dominance. Whereas the SCO heralds a new world of multipolar partnership. The former is a recipe for conflict and war; the latter is the way forward for joint prosperity, development and peaceful coexistence.

Ironically, however, the incumbent European powers still don’t seem to fully get it.

Admittedly, to a certain degree, their bruised interests and sensitivities seem to demonstrate a realization that they are being used and abused by Washington’s hegemonic desires. The Europeans and Canada are huffing and puffing with chagrin and talking about “asserting themselves” without America.

Nevertheless, despite all the huffing and puffing, the Western minions still don’t seem to get it.

READ MORE: This is First Time G7 Is So Controversial, Opposed to US – Academic

Paradoxically, it was Trump who said before the G7 summit that Russia should be readmitted to the forum. Previously, Russia was a member of what was the G8, but following the Ukraine crisis in 2014, the other members kicked Moscow out of the club, leveling unfair allegations that Russia had destabilized Ukraine and “annexed” Crimea.

© AP Photo / Evan Vucci

Putin Expects Trump to Fulfill Pre-Election Promise, Improve Ties With Russia

At least Trump seems to have looked beyond that dubious affair, and hence called for Russia to be “at the negotiating table” of a reformed G8.For their part, European leaders don’t seem to have come to their senses. Apart from the dissenting voice of the new Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, the EU bloc rejected Trump’s conciliatory offer to Russia. Germany’s Merkel, France’s Macron and the others said that relations would not be normalized with Russia “until Crimea was returned to Ukraine”.

The Europeans are hanging themselves by their own irrational petard over the spurious Ukraine issue.

Ukraine was, by far, much more destabilized by Washington and the EU’s unlawful interference than anything Russia has done. The people of Crimea voted in a legal referendum to join the Russian Federation. Europe needs to get over that illusion and stop making its futile demands on Russia.

The fact is that the EU has inflicted vast damage to its member state economies by sheepishly going along with a US-led NATO agenda of hostility towards Russia. The Europeans have slavishly aped Washington’s sanctions against Moscow for no sound reason, only based on hollow and demeaning claims about Russian “interference” and “aggression”.

More than 10 years after he told them so, European leaders are slowly realizing what Putin was warning about American bullying, unipolar dominance and its arrogant “exceptionalism”.

The operative word here is “slowly”. Europeans — the mainstay governments and Brussels establishment that is — still haven’t copped on that they are being played for minions and fools by Washington, as is evidenced by their irrational views about Russia and Ukraine.

European leaders — apart from Italy and a few emerging others — are still trapped within a servile transAtlantic role towards American imperialism. It is doubtful that the EU establishment as currently comprised will ever break out of its subservience towards Washington, despite being kicked around by the Americans.

© Sputnik / Dmitri Astakhov

Kremlin on Trump’s Call for Russia to Return to G8: We Are Focused on Other Formats

That’s why the Kremlin’s response this weekend to Trump’s “offer” of readmitting Russia to the G8 was spot on.Russia cooly said, “we are focusing on other formats”. That can be taken to mean the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union and the broader project of building a multipolar global order. Forums, that is, which are based on fraternal cooperation and genuine solidarity, not bullying and unilateral expedience.

In its existing form, the G7 is a bunch of losers. It’s a retrogressive world view, not progressive. Russia is better off without.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

Germany Was Defeated on the Eastern Front, Not Normandy

“Of Germany’s 10 million casualties in WWII, 75% were inflicted by the Red Army.”

Source link

http://www.strategic-culture.org

EDITOR’S CHOICE

ericmargolis.com

Eric margolis

10.06.2018

Germany Was Defeated on the Eastern Front, Not Normandy

On my many walking visits to the vast Normandy battlefield in France, I kept recalling the ever so wise dictum of Prussia’s great monarch, Frederick the Great:  ‘he who defends everything, defends nothing.’  On this 74^th anniversary of the D-Day landings, it’s well worth recalling the old warrior-king.

Adolf Hitler, a veteran of the infantry, should certainly have known better. Defending the European coast from Brittany to Norway was an impossibility given Germany’s military and economic weakness in 1944. But he did not understand this. Having so brilliantly overcome France’s Maginot Line fortifications in 1940, Hitler and his High Command repeated the same strategic and tactical errors as the French only four years later: not having enough reserves to effectively counter-attack enemy breakthrough forces.

Germany’s vaunted Atlantic Wall looked formidable on paper, but it was too long, too thin, lacked defensive depth and was lacking in adequate reserve forces.  The linear Maginot Line suffered the same failings. America’s fortifications protecting Manila and Britain’s ‘impregnable’ fortifications at Singapore also proved worthless. The Japanese merely marched into their undefended rears.

In 1940, the German Wehrmacht was modern history’s supreme fighting machine.  But only four years later, the Wehrmacht was broken.  Most Americans, British and Canadians believe that D-Day was the decisive stroke that ended WWII in Europe. But this is not true.

Germany’s mighty Wehrmacht, which included the Luftwaffe, was destroyed by Stalin’s Soviet Union.  The Red Army claims to have destroyed 507 German divisions, 48,000 German tanks, 77,000 German aircraft, and 100 divisions of Axis troops allied to Germany from Italy, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia,  and Finland.

Few Americans have ever heard of the Soviet Far East offensive of 1945, a huge operation that extended from Central Asia to Manchuria and the Pacific.  At least 450,000 Japanese soldiers were killed, wounded or captured by the Red Army, 32% of Japan’s total wartime military losses.  The Soviets were poised to invade Japan when the US struck it with two nuclear weapons.

Of Germany’s 10 million casualties in WWII, 75% were inflicted by the Red Army.  The once mighty Luftwaffe was decimated over Russia.  Almost all German military production went to supplying the 1,600 km Eastern Front where Germany’s elite forces were ground up in titanic battles like Kursk and Stalingrad that involved millions of soldiers.

Soviet forces lost upwards of 20 million men. Total US losses, including the Pacific, were one million.  To Marshal Stalin, D-Day, the North African and Italian campaign were merely diversionary side-shows to tie down Axis forces while the Red Army pushed on to Berlin.

D-Day was without doubt one of the greatest logistical feats of modern military history. Think of General Motors versus the German warrior Siegfried.  For every US tank the Germans destroyed, ten more arrived.  Each German tank was almost irreplaceable.  Transporting over one million men and their heavy equipment across the Channel was a triumph.  But who remembers that Germany crossed the heavily defended Rhine River into France in 1940?

By June, 1944, German forces at Normandy and along the entire Channel coast had almost no diesel fuel or gasoline. Their tanks and trucks were immobilized. Allied air power shot up everything that moved, including a staff car carrying Marshal Erwin Rommel strafed by Canada’s own gallant future aviator general, Richard Rohmer.  German units in Normandy were below 40% combat effectiveness even without their shortages in fuel.

The Germans in France were also very short of ammunition, supplies and communications.  Units could only move by night, and then very slowly.  Hitler was reluctant to release armored forces from his reserves. Massive Allied bombing of Normandy alone killed 15,000 to 20,000 French civilians and shattered many cities and towns.

Churchill once said, ‘you will never know war until you fight Germans.’  With no air cover or fuel and heavily outnumbered, German forces in Normandy managed to mount a stout resistance, inflicting 209,000 casualties on US, Canadian, British, Free French and allied forces.  German losses were around 200,000.

The most important point of the great invasion is that without it, the Red Army would have reached Paris and the Channel Ports by the end of 1944, making Stalin the master of all Europe except Spain. Of course, the Allies could have reached a peace agreement with Germany in 1944, which Hitler was seeking and Gen. George Patton was rumored to be advocating.  But the German-hating Churchill and left-leaning Roosevelt were too bloody-minded to consider a peace that would have kept Stalin out of at least some of Eastern Europe.

 

“The greatest country, the richest country, is not that which has the most capitalists, monopolists, immense grabbings, vast fortunes…

Apparently nothing much changes.

“The greatest country, the richest country, is not that which has the most capitalists, monopolists, immense grabbings, vast fortunes, with its sad, sad soil of extreme, degrading, damning poverty, but the land in which there are the most homesteads, freeholds — where wealth does not show such contrasts high and low, where all men have enough — a modest living— and no man is made possessor beyond the sane and beautiful necessities.”
–Walt Whitman
American poet (1819-1892)

slumdog-millionaire-salaam-mumbai-india-

Shattering Mark Set During Dust Bowl, US Just Had Hottest May Ever Recorded

Source link

Common Dreams

by Jake Johnson, staff writer

June 07, 2018

“If you thought it was a strangely warm May, you’re right.”

April 1938: A dust bowl farmstead in Dallam County, Texas, showing the desolation produced by the dust and wind on the countryside adding to the problems of the depression in the USA. (Photo: Three Lions/Getty Images)

Surpassing a mark set during the peak of the Dust Bowl in 1934, the continental United States just had its hottest May on record thanks in large part to the human-caused climate crisis, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced on Wednesday.

“For May, the average contiguous U.S. temperature was 65.4°F, 5.2°F above the 20th century average,” NOAA observed in its breakdown of the new data. “The first five months of 2018 were marked by large month-to-month swings in temperature, but when averaged, the contiguous U.S. temperature was 45.0°F, 1.6°F above the 20th century average and was the 21st warmest January-May on record.”

“The warmth was coast-to-coast,” Jake Crouch, a climate scientist with NOAA’s National Center for Environmental Information, said in an interview with USA Today.

While acknowledging that tropical storms—in addition to other “climate anomalies“—played a role in driving up May’s average temperature, Crouch told USA Today that the man-made climate change contributed significantly the record-breaking heat.

In addition to surpassing the average temperature over the entirety of the month, May also saw “more than 8,590 daily warm temperature station records broken or tied,” NOAA notes.

“This was 18 times more than the approximately 460 daily cold temperature station records during the month,” NOAA found. “Several of the daily records were noteworthy, including 100°F on May 28 in Minneapolis, Minnesota—the earliest such occurrence on record.”

How Long Will We Pretend Palestinians Aren’t People?

“Yes, we know all the excuses. Hamas – corrupt, cynical, no “purity” there – was behind the Gaza demonstrations. Some of the protestors were violent, sent burning kites – kites, for heaven’s sake – across the border, others threw stones; though since when has stone-throwing been a capital offense in any civilized country?”

Source link

With permission from

http://www.counterpunch.org

by Robert Fisk

May 18, 2018

Photo by Jordi Bernabeu Farrús | CC BY 2.0

Monstrous. Frightful. Wicked. It’s strange how the words just run out in the Middle East today. Sixty Palestinians dead. In one day. Two thousand four hundred wounded, more than half by live fire. In one day. The figures are an outrage, a turning away from morality, a disgrace for any army to create.

And we are supposed to believe that the Israeli army is one of “purity of arms”? And we have to ask another question. If it’s 60 Palestinians dead in a day this week, what if it’s 600 next week? Or 6,000 next month? Israel’s bleak excuses – and America’s crude response – raise this very question. If we can now accept a massacre on this scale, how far can our immune system go in the days and weeks and months to come?

Yes, we know all the excuses. Hamas – corrupt, cynical, no “purity” there – was behind the Gaza demonstrations. Some of the protestors were violent, sent burning kites – kites, for heaven’s sake – across the border, others threw stones; though since when has stone-throwing been a capital offence in any civilised country? If an eight-month old baby dies after tear gas inhalation, what were her parents doing bringing their infant child to the Gaza border? And so it goes on. Why complain about dead Palestinians when we have the Sissis in Egypt and the Assads in Syria and the Saudis in Yemen to contend with? But no, the Palestinians must always be guilty.

The victims are themselves the culprits. This is exactly what the Palestinians have had to endure for 70 years. Remember how they were to blame for their own exodus seven decades ago, because they followed the instructions of radio stations to leave their homes until the Jews of Israel were “driven into the sea”. Only of course, the radio broadcasts never existed. We still must thank Israel’s “new historians” for proving this. The broadcasts were a myth, part of Israel’s foundational national history invented to ensure that the new state – far from being founded on the ruins of others’ homes – was a land without people.

And it was a marvel to behold the way in which the same old reporting cowardice began to infect the media’s account of what happened in Gaza. CNN called the Israeli killings a “crackdown”.

References to the tragedy of the Palestinians in many news media referred to their “displacement” 70 years ago – as if they happened to be on holiday at the time of the “Nakba” – the catastrophe, as it’s known – and just couldn’t make it home again. The word to use should have been perfectly clear: dispossession. Because that is what happened to the Palestinians all those years ago and what is still happening in the West Bank – today, as you read this – courtesy of men like Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law, a supporter of these wretched and illegal colonies built on Arab lands and appropriated from Arabs who have owned and lived on the land for generations.

And so we come to the most ghastly of all fateful events last week: the simultaneous bloodbath in Gaza and the glorious opening of the new US embassy in Jerusalem.

“It’s a great day for peace,” Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, announced. When I heard that, I wondered if my hearing was defective. Did he actually say those words? Alas, he did. At times like this, it is an immense relief to find that journals like the Israeli daily Haaretz maintain their sense of honour. And the most remarkable piece of reportage came in The New York Times where Michelle Goldberg caught perfectly the horror of both Gaza and the embassy opening in Jerusalem.

The latter, she wrote, was “grotesque… a consummation of the cynical alliance between hawkish Jews and Zionist evangelicals who believe that the return of Jews to Israel will usher in the apocalypse and the return of Christ, after which Jews who don’t convert will burn forever.” Goldberg pointed out that Robert Jeffress, a Dallas pastor, gave the opening prayer at the embassy ceremony.

And Jeffress it was who once claimed that religions like “Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism” lead people “to an eternity of separation from God in hell”. The closing benediction came from John Hagee, an end-times preacher who, Goldberg recalled, once said that Hitler was sent by God to drive the Jews to their ancestral homeland.

Of Gaza, she added: “even if you completely dismiss the Palestinian right of return – which I find harder to do now that Israel has all but abandoned the possibility of a Palestinian state – it hardly excuses the Israeli military’s disproportionate violence.” I’m not so sure, though, that Democrats have become more emboldened to discuss Israeli occupation, as she thinks. But I think she’s right when she says that as long as Trump is president, “it may be that Israel can kill Palestinians, demolish their homes and appropriate their land with impunity”.

Rarely in modern times have we come across an entire people – the Palestinians – treated as a non-people. Amid the trash and rats of the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps in Lebanon – oh fateful names they remain – there is a hut-museum of items brought into Lebanon from Galilee by those first refugees of the late 1940s: coffee pots and front door keys to houses long destroyed. They locked up their houses, many of them, planning to return in a few days.

But they are dying fast, that generation, like the dead of the Second World War. Even in the oral archives of the Palestinian expulsion (at least 800 survivors are recorded) organised in the American University of Beirut, they are finding that many whose voices were recorded in the late 1990s have since died.

So will they go home? Will they “return”? That, I suspect, is Israel’s greatest fear, not because there are homes to “return” to, but because there are millions of Palestinians who claim their right – under UN resolutions – and who might turn up in their tens of thousands at the border fence in Gaza next time.

How many snipers will Israel need then? And of course, there are the pitiful ironies. For there are families in Gaza whose grandfathers and grandmothers were driven from their homes less than a mile from Gaza itself, from two villages which existed precisely where stands today the Israeli town of Sderot, so often rocketed by Hamas. They can still see their lands. And when you can see your land, you want to go home.

More articles by:Robert Fisk

Robert Fisk writes for the Independent, where this column originally appeared. 

Everything We Know About The Sphinx Is Wrong? (19 min)

Joe Rogan and Robert Schoch talk about how our current view on how, why and when The Sphinx was constructed could be wrong.