The only source I criticized is Red Ice, and its reputation as a white supremacist conspiracy theory peddler is not only my opinion, it is shared by many others.
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no
mediabiasfactcheck.com
During a House committee hearing on hate crimes, lawmakers expressed fundamental differences about what poses the biggest threat, who is to blame -- and what to do about it.
www.pbs.org
Dye did an interview with Red Ice TV, an online alt-media site, that gained several thousand views on YouTube between Wednesday and Thursday.
indianapublicmedia.org
The hearing comes as the role of technology companies in the hosting and spread of hate speech has come under renewed scrutiny after a gunman killed 50 people at two mosques in New Zealand.
www.nbcnews.com
There are more.
I appreciate the amount of dedication and research you put in, but I have to wonder that if you have such rock-solid evidence and conclusions, why would you post such terrible references? Even if Jesus himself descended from a cloud and imparted to you the literally-God's-honest-truth, any knowledgeable reader would see your evidence of:
- A white supremacist outlet;
- An asset taken over by Russian propagandists;
- A source that directly contradicts your statement; and
- A broken link,
and would then toss your ideas aside, with good reason and without a second thought.
Since I try to respond to every civil and thoughtful comment, I sometimes chose sources for the veracity of its content rather than its reputation with NPR and MSM.
In other words, if a guy wearing a "White Pride" T- shirt is yelling "FIRE!" and the building was filling with smoke, I might not immediately dismiss what he says. In this case, I doubt that Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Louis Kilzer, author of "Churchill's Deception", wears a "White Pride" T - shirt.
So, the article I chose, "Hitler didn't want world war" contained information that was not written by the owner or contributors to "Red Ice" but by Louis Kilzer.
In other words, the dates, assessments and facts were from Louis Kilzer, not anybody at "Red Ice"
In order to distinguish what is really a credible source and what is not, it important to acknowledge the rock solid reality that: "The Victors write the History."
Or, as George Orwell wrote:
"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past."
As I mentioned earlier, all sides used / use propaganda which is the reason that I
try to keep an open mind, study both sides of an argument and don't mind admitting when I'm wrong.
A different historian,
Friedrich Stieve, (1) also reveals the fact that Germany did not want war and I don't know of anyone else who has read Hitler's heavily repressed and numerous peace offers or is aware that both Churchill & FDR ( the USS Greer incident) wanted war with Germany for its colonies and industrial capabilities.
"We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not." - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)”
Winston Churchill: We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not. - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast) Germany becomes too powerful. We have to crush it. - Winston Churchill (November 1936 to US-General Robert E. Wood) Germanys unforgivable crime before WW2…
lorddreadnought.livejournal.com
The other sources explained why Germany tried to avoid a WW 2 with the Western world to be able to repel Stalin's "M - Day" and long planned attack on all the Western world, "M-Day":
- "Nazis ‘offered to leave western Europe in exchange for free hand to attack USSR"
http://www.historyextra.com/news/se...estern-europe-exchange-free-hand-attack-ussr’
EXCERPT ""A new book claims to have solved the riddle of the flight to Britain in 1941 of Rudolph
Hess, Adolf Hitler’s deputy. Historian Peter Padfield has uncovered evidence he says shows Hess, the deputy Fuhrer, brought with him from Hitler a detailed peace treaty, under which the Nazis would withdraw from western Europe in exchange for British neutrality over the imminent attack on Russia. The episode remains, more than 70 years on, shrouded in mystery."CONTINUED
-"Hess, Hitler & Churchill"
Amazon.com
EXCERPT "Peter Padfield presents striking new evidence that demands the wholesale reappraisal of the episode. For, allied to a powerful argument that Hess must have had both Hitler's backing and considerable encouragement from Britain, Padfield demonstrates that he also brought with him a draft peace treaty committing Hitler to the evacuation of occupied European countries. Made public, this would have destroyed Churchill's campaign to bring the United States into the war."CONTINUED
Before I post additional information that runs contrary to the standard, Western MSM narrative, I should point out that inconvenient facts have been unpopular since the beginning of time and any attempt to look at WW 2 objectively is anathema to many.
History is not so simple as: "It's all the fault of the evil Germans."
Next, you mentioned that I contradicted myself at a source I had posted about the fake invasion map the British used to deceive America.
My assertion was simply that the attempt to deceive Americans by the British was real but that the map they used was fake since the Germans had no plans to invade the Americas (S or N ).
Please clarify the contradiction.
Finally, the idea that Germany's leadership would go to great lengths to avoid a 2 or 3 Front war is just common sense and because of the expansionist nature of Communism a clash between National Socialism and Communism was inevitable.
While I've read that proof of Stalin's plans to attack all of Europe was the lack of defensive measures and troops in offensive positions, I heard the same thing from a German WW 2 Veteran who was there and made the same observation.
That was about 50 years ago in Germany when I was living, studying at the University and working as a stone mason with the same WW 2 Veteran.
So, do you believe that Germany was willing to surrender captured territory and make peace / neutrality with the Western powers in order to fight on just the Eastern Front?
Thanks,
(1). "What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers 1933–1940"
https://www.amazon.com/What-World-Rejected-Hitlers-1933-1940-ebook/dp/B00M5K8OEM?tag=usmb-20
EXCERPT " Written by Germany’s foremost diplomatic historian of the early twentieth century, this work maps out all the numerous times that Adolf Hitler made unconditional offers of peace to all the nations of Europe—and how the major anti-German belligerents, France and Britain, turned down these offers each and every time.
The author lists all of Hitler’s offers in detail, complete with quotes, starting with his first offer of May 17, 1933, his second offer of December 18, 1933, his third offer of May 21, 1935, his fourth offer of March 31, 1936, his fifth offer of September 30, 1938, his sixth offer of December 6, 1938, his seventh offer of late 1939 to Poland to settle the Danzig Corridor issue peacefully, and finally, his offer of world peace on October 6, 1939, just over a month after Britain and France had declared war on Germany for invading Poland on September 1 (but not on the Soviet Union, which also invaded Poland on September 17).
This edition benefits from four new sections which did not appear in the original publication. These are:
- The full text of Hitler’s “Appeal for Peace and Sanity” speech, made before the Reichstag on July 19, 1940, following the fall of France. In that speech, Hitler once again offered unconditional peace to Britain.
This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain. Although nearly half the British cabinet wanted to take up his offer, Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace;"CONTINUED
