What if Hitler was Indicted for the holocaust?

Before I begin my pretentious repertoire, I need to first introduce an important man. His name is Raul Hilberg. This man was considered–and in some regards still is–the world’s “preeminent scholar of the holocaust.” His 1961 three-volume dissection of the Final Solution, “The Destruction of European Jewry,” is considered the standard of holocaust history.

In 1988, during a PBS taping of a documentary about overcoming rape with tai chi, Hilberg decided to make a fantastic admission about Herr Hitler and the holocaust. The admission, unsurprisingly, was edited out and locked away by PBS.

Luckily for us, the audio was leaked for the first time ever by a Jewish revisionist in 2015. And I have a copy of it.

In order to show this is the genuine audio edited from the documentary, I will present the timeline of where it was sliced out. The documentary can be found here. His speech begins at  53:36. The audio clip linked below (that is uploaded on the official Moonlit History YouTube channel) morphs into where PBS decided to cut.

Now, without further delay, here is Hilberg’s admission:

“In 1976, I went to a small town in Bavaria, Ludwigsburg, which has the headquarters for investigations of so-called National Socialist crimes, an office maintained by the provinces of the Federal Republic of Germany. About thirty prosecutors were housed in that particular building, and I went there to study court records, various affidavits, and other materials.

But one afternoon, they said, “We’re having a party today, would you join us?” Why, yes. They said, “we have one bottle of wine for each person.” (Laughter from audience). And after a while I chanced to talk to the deputy chief of that office, and I said to him this: I’ve been troubled by one question. And I’m afraid that I went into print with something that isn’t entirely accurate. And that is the role of Adolf Hitler himself in the annihilation of the Jewish people in Europe. Now, I know that you are only concerned here with live individuals, and that you do not investigate the dead. But still–what do you think?

“Achh,” he said. “We’ve often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry–and then it dawned upon us: what would we do? We didn’t have the evidence.

…And he laughed.”

Yes, let that soak in for moments few. Inhale. Exhale. What am I to say after presenting this information? What are the possible ramifications of this information? What do you think? What are we supposed to think? We have been force-fed through education and pop-culture that the evidence linking Hitler to the Final Solution is monumental.

Rewind to 1985. Hilberg testified during the infamous Zundel Trial in Canada. He said that there was one, maybe even two, direct orders from Hitler to begin the destruction of European Jewry. Indeed, this man defended under oath the not “entirely accurate” passages of his work. In retrospect, PBS had to edit out this admission, or else a circus in the media would have danced around the fact Hilberg perjured himself.


What History Forgot: 6,000,000 Jews Persecuted before WWII

The 6,000,000 figure is the greatest lingering piece of propaganda in modern history. As clear as day the figure of persecution can be found in countless newspapers before, during, and after the First Great War.

It wasn’t Germany doing the persecuting, keep in mind, it was Russia (a then ally during the First Great War). Here are some examples, courtesy of the Library of Congress:

The Kendrick Gazette, June 17, 1904.

Goodwin’s Weekly: A Thinking Paper for Thinking People, February 20, 1915.

The Tacoma Times, Feburary 28, 1916.

The Chattanooga News, June 18, 1920.

Naturally you must wonder why we do not train children in school systems about that facet of history. You must wonder why you were entirely oblivious to these facts.

You must wonder why we do not have a national memorial museum in D.C. dedicated to the previous 6,000,000’s that respectively remained stagnant at 6,000,000 for an unusually long amount of time, even though they were apparently being starved and expelled repeatedly, like clockwork.

You must wonder why we don’t see dozens upon dozens of Hollywood movies depicting that facet of forgotten history.

You must further ponder why there are no Orwellian laws restricting the Freedom of Speech when dealing with those pre-WWII persecutions.

Strange, isn’t it?

Winston Churchill was a Racist Ass#*%!

Churchill is seen as the British icon of endurance and strength through gloomy war. His drowning voice of “we shall fight on the beaches” is easily identifiable with World War II. And he was a complete drunk.

But what do common folks now-a-days know of this man? Do you know much about Dear ol’ Churchill? Let’s find out.

In December of 1910, while young Churchill was Home Secretary, he wrote: “The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the Feeble-Minded and Insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate. I am convinced that the multiplication of the Feeble-Minded, which is proceeding now at an artificial rate, unchecked by any of the old restraints of nature, and actually fostered by civilised conditions, is a terrible danger to the race.” Churchill was all-for forcing “feeble-minded” people to labour colonies. January 19, 1899, Churchill wrote in a letter to his cousin: “The improvement of the British breed is my aim of life.” [1]

Wait a minute, he was in favor of eugenics? This sounds really familiar to someone else in history, I just can’t remember his name. Anyway, moving on.

As a young MP, it was well-known he believed that “the Aryan stock is bound to triumph.”—Okay, wait! He sounds just like that guy with the funny mustache!

Quotes from an article by The Independent:

“When concentration camps were built in South Africa, for white Boers, he [Churchill] said they produced “the minimum of suffering”. The death toll was almost 28,000, and when at least 115,000 black Africans were likewise swept into British camps, where 14,000 died, he wrote only of his ‘irritation that Kaffirs should be allowed to fire on white men.’”

“As Colonial Secretary in the 1920s, he unleashed the notorious Black and Tan thugs on Ireland’s Catholic civilians, and when the Kurds rebelled against British rule, he said: “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes…[It] would spread a lively terror.” [2]

And after Ghandi’s movement of peace was taking hold in the then British colony of India, Churchill was noted to have said: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” Churchill’s gross demeanor towards others not of his skin did not cease while the Bengali famine occurred in 1943 (which led to the death of nearly 3 million souls). He remarked the famine was not Britain’s fault, but it was “their” fault—because they “breed like rabbits.” He was talking about the Indians, of course. Amartya Sen, an economist who won the Nobel Prize in 1998, proved for a fact that the famine was due to the imperialist structure of the British Empire. [3]

In conclusion: make your own conclusion.

[1] Winstonchurchill.org
[2] The Independent
[3] BBC