Sweepings from the Out Box
This is email. It is not the place to look for organized, formal, careful writing. Some of it may be deemed offensive. Enter at your own risk. Contains profanity (also contains nuts). Certain persons are referred to by name. Nothing personal. Subject to change at any time.
This article will be rewritten in a far more formal, academic style, with references, sources and quotations.
--
HITLER BLOG
ME: Hitler had a great range of interests and related very well to people. The Viennese are known for their charm, and he was no exception. His ability to convince is related to his ability to relate. He was unfailingly polite, and read everything. I think it's not very helpful to invent scientific names for unusual people, it reminds me of astrology. Of course he was a very intense person, he had to be, anybody has to be to be successful. He read hundreds of books on all subjects and could hold his own with anyone, in the other person's own field.
Maser tells many stories about Hitler's photographic memory and encyclopaedic knowledge of nearly everything imaginable.
He won a bet with the head of Mercedes Benz over the weight of a certain car. He had lunch with the mayor of Vienna and the question arose of the exact width of the Danube at a certain point. They mayor didn't know. Hitler did. He was disgusted. He thought it was the mayor's business to know things like that.
He could draw dozens of public buildings from memory with photographic accuracy. He once visited an opera house in some remote city and immediately remarked that there was a technical fault in the architectural design of the building from a purely theatrical point of view -- nothing to do with the design of the building at all; the stage door was too close to the orchestra pit, or something like that. He was right.
When he hired his chauffeur, who was also an expert mechanic, the driver said later that he was amazed how much Hitler knew about cars.
He knew all the armaments of all the world's armies, navies and air forces; General Keitel said it was impossible to find a single mistake.
During the invasion of Norway, one of his admirals complained that they needed an anti-aircraft gun that could fit through the hatch of a submarine; all the German ones were too big. Hitler said he saw a gun in Austria once that he thought would fit. The gun was located, and it fit exactly.
During the invasion of Normandy, his generals asked him how far away from the beach they had to be before they'd be out of range of Allied artillery on board Allied battleships.
Hitler replied that it depended on the armaments on the ships, the displacement of the ships, and the exact depth of the water at that location. He had all the figures in his head, did all the calculations on the spot and gave them the answer, right on the spot. And he was right.
In 1940 he visited Paris for the first time in his life and asked Arno Breker, who had lived there for 10 years, "Is that the Chamber of Commerce?", referring to some building in the distance. Breker said he didn't think so. They drove past it, and sure enough, it was.
He visited the Paris Opera and said he wanted to see the Oval Room. They said, there is no such thing. He said, "I'll show you where it is", took them to it, and it turned out that they had altered the floor plan, bricked up a doorway, built a wall or something, changed the shape of the room and changed its name in the 19th century, but basically it was still there. So once again he was right.
His landlord in Munich was a fashion tailor who had worked in Paris and who spoke fluent French. He said Hitler's French was perfect. Hitler was a runner during the war, i.e., he carried messages through no-man's land, through obscure villages, to distant units. Somebody said that even under fire, he never made any mistakes when speaking French. He never lost his nerve.
Maser says Hitler had a very good knowledge of the Bible, the Talmud, and that he knew some Hebrew, as very as very good French, and could understand English. He could also play the piano and composed the overture to an opera. Whether this means he actually wrote the music or just improvised the music on the piano or just wrote the libretto, I don't know.
One of his early friends was a professional musician emigrated to America and said, during the war, that Hitler's music was "logical and possessed structure".
Hitler was certainly a remarkable person, but not withdrawn at all. Most of the lies about him come from Hanisch, jailed for a week for misappropriating the funds from the sale of a Hitler painting. He made a very good living and sold a lot of paintings to Jewish art dealers.
He was also a draft dodger and went underground to avoid military service in Austria in 1908. He volunteered to serve in Germany in 1914. He attended Munich university for a couple of years and made a very good living as a painter, earning about 50% more than a bank clerk or teacher. His income tax returns are still in existence. So are all his medical records.
Yet people claim there are all kinds of mysteries, like whether he had a normal sex life. The answer is yes, but he had little or no interest in sex without love, which is a bit unusual for a man. He was perhaps a bit puritanical, never went to prostitutes or anything in the army.
Maser believes Hitler had an illegitimate son from a love affair during WWI, and Maser claims to have located the man in France. Women flocked after him, but he just laughed at them.
Another possibility why Hitler’s grandmother did not marry until age 35 or so is money. Hitler's family were peasants, very thrifty, very shrewd, saved enormous amounts of money from ordinary work and invested it well. She probably didn't marry until she found an economically advantageous husband. The family were quite well off, but basically just ordinary peasants.
HIM: I think they are arguing that if the Holocaust mythology were to collapse, all beliefs and dogmas surrounding events from WW1-WW2 would unravel (from Versailles to Pearl Harbor to the status of Germany and Austria), and the truth would be known, showing the British/US to have been much worse than Hitler. It would cause an ideological revolution, and perhaps more!
ME: Hitler was a very positive personality, one of the greatest men in history, with something positive for everyone, the most popular national leader in history.
The connection is not obvious, but read Sturdivan [THE JFK MYTHS] and you'll see what I mean. The situations are almost exactly the same [re the Hoaxoco$t and JFK conspiracy myths, all complete lies]. All the physical evidence is one side, all the hysteria, hearsay, lies and profiteering on the other. Both myths are of left-wing/Communist origin. Psychologically they are almost identical. You could take paragraphs from Sturdivan, change a few words, and pass them off as the writings of a revisionist, like Butz or Faurisson. But it's a very difficult little book. I took one look at it and thought, "I could never read something like that", but I did, 5 times, it's easy once you get used to it. Plus it's a beautiful little book, very well illustrated. The author is a very good medical illustrator, among things, one of the drawings is his own.
HIM: Really? I didn't know there was a connection, but I am not surprised at anything anymore...!!
ME: ...the Table Talk book is not reliable. Irving cannot be trusted. He puts all sorts of stuff on his website, “Hitler's skull”, etc. It's not Hitler's skull, no trace of Hitler's body has ever been found. Two complete records of his medical records exist intact, and it is very easy to prove that the skull did not belong to Hitler. Plus the body was monorchidic, so to back up the tale of Hitler's skull, they had to claim Hitler had one testicle! Maybe that was why he hated Jews! That's it! Well, everything one might ever want to know about Hitler's skull, penis, testicles, rectum, bowel problems, flatulence, etc, -- all caused by his vegetarianism -- is readily available from the original documents. Not only is that not Hitler's skull, but physically Hitler was normal in every way. He was a hypochrondriac and was always having medical exams. How can Irving fall for this? Plus a lot of the links on his website are to the Daily Telegraph. How is that possible? If we can just read the Daily Telegraph, what do we need Irving for?
I think Irving would not be as successful as he is if Werner Maser's books were better-known in English. Maser runs circles around Irving. I no longer believe half what Irving says. For example, Irving is always bragging about he exposed the Kujau Hitler diaries. Well, Maser says Irving said they were genuine at first. This is exactly what I remember...
My chief sources are FÄLSCHUNG, DICHTUNG UND WAHRHEIT ÜBER HITLER UND STALIN, and HITLER: LEGENDE, MYTHOS, WIRKLICHKEIT, published in English a good 35 years ago as HITLER: MYTH, LEGEND, REALITY. Werner Maser. The first book is largely a repetition of the second, with added material on Stalin. I'm trying to get everybody to read the second book, LEGEND, MYTH AND REALITY. I don't think Maser believes in the Hoaxoco$t, but he runs rings around it pretending to, more skillfully than anybody I ever saw. The problem of the Table Talk is whether Bormann added remarks that Hitler never made. For this reason, Pick, another person present, refused to say they were entirely authentic, particularly relating to Christianity. Anyway Hitler's style is very recognizable if you listen to his speeches. Somebody I know claims the Table Talk is fake because "Hitler" claims the Earth collided with the Moon and the Moon gave the Earth its atmosphere, or something like that. I prefer Hitler's speeches. I've got between about 40 hours of them in MP3 files. That way you can't go wrong. I listen to them all the time. The speeches may not reveal his intimate thoughts, but at least you know they aren't completely fake.
HIM: Yes, I was aware of the WWI “stab in the back” by the Italians. Mussolini even supported the war against Germany (1915-18). But their performance on the Allied side wasn't exactly hot stuff either. On a website devoted to fascist Italy, a person posted a thread with the idea that in WWII, the British deliberately let the Italians side with Germany so that they would be an albatross around their neck. It sounds way out at first, but the more I think about things, especially, the failure of Italy even to attempt an invasion of Malta when it is only a stone’s throw from Sicily, makes it seem at least plausible.
ME: Don't forget, the Italians did the same thing in WWI! They entered the war as German-Austrian-Hungarian allies, then changed sides in 1915 because the British promised them the South Tyrol. Then the same people, the British, stabbed the Italians in the back by giving away Dalmatia and Istria, or whatever they called those areas right outside Trieste that are now part of Yugoslavia. This meant Trieste was cut off from its hinterland, farmland, trading outlets, etc. A great Italian poet, D'Annunzio occupied one of these areas in protest, with an army of other poets and crackpots. This is still a problem in Italy.
HIM: Do you think there was any collusion between the German traitors and the behaviour of the Italians? In 1943 they not only just surrendered but turned around and declared war on their former ally. They fought alongside Germany for 3 years and then stabbed them in the back. Getting out of the war is one thing, but to do that, to me, is incomprehensible. In his Posen speech, Himmler wasn't far off the mark when he said the Duce was the only one who wanted to fight. I read that even Eisenhower was embarrassed by this brazen act of treason and skullduggery.
ME [...] :Anyway, the important thing, I certainly don't intend to turn the whole thing into a Hitler website. I don't know much about von Weizsäcker or Generals Halder, Beck, Brauschitz or the others, but there was a whole slew of them who should have been shot. There's a book on traitorous German generals and diplomats called VERRATENE VERRÄTER [The Traitors Betrayed].
Stalin was smarter in some ways, which doesn't mean he ever accomplished anything positive, because he did not. But it's often that way. He would have shot all those guys. Instead, Hitler simply allowed them to retire.
HIM: Yes, the other day I was reading about the traitor Halder. He claimed Göring told him something along the lines of "I am the only one who knows about the truth of the Reichstag fire as I am the one who lit it". This statement was presented as an affidavit at Nuremberg and Göring denied it. The Heretical.com website has Sefton Delmer's account and even he acknowledges it was van der Lubbe acting as a communist albeit a splinter group not taking orders from Moscow.
ME: Maybe, I think Morell's importance has been exaggerated, but the German underground played a big role in causing the war, and then causing Germany to lose it. Morell was not supposedly a member, he was just a quack, as you say. David L Hoggan also says Hitler was disabled by poison for as much as two weeks. What's important to me is the treason of the generals.
Another strange thing is that Hitler had a very good knowledge of medicine, as much as some doctors in certain respects. A doctor said that Hitler knew all about cell biology, etc etc.
ME: In regards to Morell and his claims of deliberately putting Hitler into a stupor, etc, I take them with a grain of salt. Morell made these remarks after the war, when denazification tribunals were in place and I would say he made these remarks to draw favourable attention to himself and make him look good in the eyes of his captors. At best, I would say he was into alternative medicine and at worst a quack.
Chief sources:
ADOLF HITLER: LEGENDE -- MYTHOS -- WIRKLICHKEIT by Werner Maser (available in English as Hitler: Legend, Myth and Reality)
FÄLSCHUNG, DICHTUNG UND WAHRHEIT ÜBER HITLER UND STALIN by Werner Maser