Secret Societies in the Old West

Secret Societies in the Old West

By Michael Hoffman

Commercial postcard celebrating the lynching of Arthur Compton and Joseph Wilson, April 30, 1870

I have investigated secret societies most of my life. Researching the mass lynching of whites in Montana for the September issue of Revisionist History® newsletter, I was shocked to discover that a masonic organization, the 3-7-77 vigilantes, were the perpetrators. 

It was also appalling to learn that beginning in 1956, the Montana Highway Patrol adopted 3-7-77 as their official symbol. History hacks will cite the Dimsdale and Langford books to defend the vigilantes as the territory of Montana’s "first law enforcement” (which is not true, local sheriffs and miner’s courts were the first). The problem is that both of those authors, if not actual members of the secret society, acted as its public mouthpiece. Their task was to hoodwink the public and they did a thorough job. As a revisionist historian my job is to penetrate the hoodwink. 

Freemasonic influence in the Old West has yet to be properly documented. That it was considerable, there is little doubt. The extent of the penetration has yet to be written, although we have published a groundwork for it by giving an account of what actually transpired in Montana.

In America today we are undergoing a new cycle of brainwash in which the lynching of black people in the U.S. — a very real crime, mostly perpetrated by the masonic Ku Klux Klan — is made to appear as the only, or the main extra-legal hangings in American history, replete with photos of ghoulish whites pointing to black victims dangling from a rope.  To promote this one-dimensional caricature context is excluded. 

The missing context consists of two primary facts. First, mixed crowds of whites and blacks lynched people they imagined were unpunished criminals, to the satisfaction of both races. 

Second, lynching of white people in places like the Montana territory,  was celebrated as much as the lynching of black people in the South and Midwest. Ghastly images of white men hanged by white mobs were made into postcards (see illustration above) and sold throughout America. There wasn’t a color monopoly on relishing the suffering of the hanged. These were equal opportunity grotesqueries, but just try to state that fact in a college classroom and then witness what happens to your career as a student or faculty member. 

We have a copy of one of these postcards in our files. You won’t find it on display at the new, National Lynching Memorial Museum in Montgomery, Alabama, which is a segregated, all-black “history” institution.  In the postcard we see the bodies of Joseph Wilson and Arthur Compton strung up in Helena, Montana. Their “capital crime”? They were accused of having rolled a drunk and stolen his pocket change. 

Sometimes the actual motive for a 3-7-77 lynching was to be rid of a competing businessman, a rival for the affections of a sweetheart, or a sheriff who had approached too close to a criminal investigation of members of the society. 

In the photo reproduced on the postcard one sees young boys in the crowd, taught by their fathers’ example to delight in the spectacle. We don’t possess in our files a mint reproduction of the postcard. It’s no surprise that unlike the omnipresent and iconic photos of whites savoring the lynching of black people,  gruesome photographic spectacles of whites appreciatively ogling their fellow lynched whites are hard to come by. 

We are not aware of the existence of something so low as a secret society of black Americans dedicated to killing their fellow black Americans, but we have documented the existence of the all-white 3-7-77 organization in Montana, and they are about as low as they come.

Imagine state police shoulder patches and patrol car fenders in Mississippi officially adorned with the letters K-K-K? Yet the equivalent exists in Montana to this day: the numbers 3-7-77 are sewn on the uniforms and painted on the patrol vehicles of the Highway Patrol. 

It makes you wonder whether the 3-7-77ers are still at work behind the scenes.

This is all part of the as yet unwritten secret history of America, which we have endeavored to at least partially excavate in this month's issue of Revisionist History®.

Copyright ©2018 RevisionistHistory.org

____________________

Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded - Banned by Amazon

Revisionist History Books Banned by Amazon

Revisionist History Books Banned by Amazon

On August 13, 2018 Amazon banned Michael Hoffman's Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded, which was published in 2011 and sold by Amazon for the past seven years.  Along with his much larger study, Judaism Discovered (sold by Amazon since 2008), this book has had an international impact both as a softcover volume as well as a digital book circulating on the Amazon Kindle. 

Sales to India, Japan and the Middle East were rapidly growing. The digital Kindle format is particularly important for the circulation of books because it bypasses borders and customs and hurdles over the prohibitive cost of shipping which the US Postal Service imposed on books sent to overseas destinations several years ago (the Post Office eliminated economical surface mail sent by sea; all books now must be shipped to Canada and overseas by very costly Priority Air Mail rates). 

Amazon has also banned Hoffman's The Great Holocaust Trial: The Landmark Battle for the Right to Doubt the West’s Most Sacred Relic (sold by Amazon since 2010), an important eye-witness account of the historic trial of a dissident publisher in Toronto, which has been cited as a source of information even by the Zionist organizations in Canada. Now this primacy source material on a civil liberties milestone is down the Orwwellian memory hole, at least as far as "earth's biggest bookstore" is concerned. Researchers, students and the public who wish to read it must now take the time and trouble to resort to a rare book search service. 

The three banned volumes maintain a high standard of scholarly excellence, had a majority of favorable reviews from Amazon customers, are free of hatred and bigotryand have sold thousands of copies on Amazon.

Out of the blue the author was told that “Amazon KDP” had decided that these three history books were in violation of Amazon’s “content guidelines.” Asking for documentation of the charge results in no response. It is enough that the accusation has been tendered. The accused are guilty until proved innocent, although how proof of innocence is presented is anyone’s guess. There is no appeals process. This is what is known as “Tech Tyranny.”

There is a nationwide purge underway that amounts to a new McCarthyism — blacklisting and banning politically incorrect speech and history books under the rubric of “hate speech” accusations, initiated in part by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). 

It’s a flimsy pretext for censoring controversial, scholarly books that cannot otherwise be discredited. Therefore, Amazon’s readers must no longer be allowed to view them on the Kindle, and Amazon will not sell them. We consider this censorship of our books a badge of honor. The disgrace is on Amazon for submitting to the appeals of organizations that operate as thought police in "The Land of the Free.” 

The August 7 New York Times online confirmed the outsize influence which the SPLC possesses at Amazon. The Timespublished a revealing piece by David French in which he wrote:

"We live in a world where the Southern Poverty Law Center, a formerly respected civil-rights organization, abuses its past trust to label a host of mainstream organizations (including my former employer, the Alliance Defending Freedom) and individuals as ‘hate groups,...based sometimes on...outright misreadings and misrepresentations of an individual’s beliefs and views...Amazon recently booted Alliance Defending Freedom from its AmazonSmile charity program because of the center’s designation.” 

Banning and censorship were not part of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’ public philosophy when he founded the company in 1994. Amazon experienced explosive growth in part because it functioned as an intrepid gateway to authentic works of scholarship, however much they were demonized, reviled or condemned by infuriated political or religious factions and pressure groups; that libertarian philosophy of freedom changed beginning in 2017, when Amazon gained a virtual monopoly over the sale of books in the United States.

In addition to our work being hate-free, we note that Amazon sells dozens of hateful Zionist and rabbinic volumes brimming with ferocious bigotry for Palestinians, Germans and goyim in general. For example, in 1997, Daniel Jonah Goldhagen wrote and Amzon began to offer, Hitler's Willing Executioners, one of the most racist books of the modern era. In it, Prof. Goldhagen purported to demonstrate that Nazi mass murder stemmed from an innate German predisposition to kill Jews. His book promulgates a theory of a genetic homicidal trait infecting the entire German nation. This bigoted trash has a right to be sold. We uphold that right because exposure of its thesis is the most effective indictment of its author. We note that Hitler's Willing Executioners is proudly sold by Amazon and, if the current zeitgeist persists, it will never be banned by Amazon. The target of Mr. Goldhagen's hatred is the German people who he collectively defames as a racially tainted ethncity. Consequently, his book constitutes a righteous type of hate— the approved hate that does not offend the Southern Poverty Law Center or the ADL.

Many dozens of books containing savage attacks on Christianity are also sold by Amazon. These volumes seem to be immune from removal and suppression. Meanwhile, the censors demand for their own media — Mr. Bezos owns the Washington Post newspaper —  freedom of expression for the writers they employ and the speech of which they approve. In this two-tiered ethical system we observe the familiar hallmark of revolutionary tyranny: the insiders demand and grant to themselves and their comrades the freedom they deny to demonized outsiders, using the phony “hate” imputation as their excuse.

The Washington Post has as its motto, “Democracy dies in darkness.” Yet it is in that very darkness where Amazon’s book-banning dwells, due to the apathy of the media and the timidity of the American Bookseller's Association and the American Library Association. To ban books by a vulnerable independent scholar is not exactly a daring move in an age when “hate speech” is any scholarship which challenges someone’s sacred traditions or cherished folklore. The definition is so loose it functions as a one-size-fits-all inquisitor’s sword, and the non-persons who are the victims of this new inquisition are expected to descend quietly into sheol.

Michael Hoffman's critique of Orthodox Judaism constitutes a radical reassessment founded upon the depth of the documents and arguments he marshals in the course of advancing his thesis. The compelling and original scholarship employed in his study of Orthodox Judaism is never “anti-Semitic” or hateful. This would be easy to prove if there were an Amazon “tribunal” fair enough to consider a little something known as evidence. 
  

In both Judaism Discovered (p. 39) and Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded there are statements addressed “To the Judaic Reader”(photographically reproduced here: pp. 18-19, and here: p. 25), expounding our love and concern for their welfare and liberation. No book of “anti-Semitic hate” would ever print any such charitable and compassionate statements, and these are representative of the entire tenor of the volumes under consideration.

Enemies of truth can easily turn to their advantage books containing hatred of “The Jews.” What they have no credible answer to is a critique predicated, as our books are, on a sincere foundation of true Christian love. Boundary-breaking scholarship united to compassionate concern for the welfare of Judaic people is almost unprecedented in this field. This approach makes Michael Hoffman's studies of Judaism among the most powerful and effective because they are free of the “hate speech” which is the pivot upon which turns the machinery of liberal-approved censorship. For that reason, making Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded, and Judaism Discovered available on the Kindle undercut decades of hatred and libel. Therefore those volumes had to be suppressed.

A Kindle permits anyone connected to the Amazon website to read approximately the first thirty pages of any Kindle book free of charge. Consequently, Hoffman's Judaica research was on display around the world and therefore it was much harder to lie about him and mischaracterize his Talmud and Kabbalah research under those circumstances. 

Moreover, Judaic people are harmed by this book-banning which creates a special category of informed theological criticism that is banned from the Amazon Kindle and thereby obstructs the advancement of learning. To make an exception for Orthodox Judaism — forbidding the sale of the best scholarship critical of it— does no favors to Judaic people. Many Judaic persons don’t approve of this type of suppression and censorship of books and desire access to our information. We have received letters and e-mail from Judaics who were appreciative of our books and surprised by their evident compassion and concern for “Jews."

If we are wrong, show us where we are wrong, don’t signal through censorship that our facts are too explosive to be handled by inquiring minds; that type of suppression will only blowback on the censors.

It’s time that someone, including multi-billionaire Bezos, had the fortitude to stand-up to the virulent book banning lobby that continues to engage in one of the lowest forms of ignorance and superstition known to history: silencing a writer who can’t be refuted by free and fair debate.

Furthermore, to be banned by Amazon is not equivalent to being banned by any other private business. Most publishers will admit that Amazon has replaced Bowker Books in Print as the industry’s authoritative guide to what books in English have been printed in the past and what is in print now. Amazon is currently the reference source.

For a book to be forbidden by Amazon renders it largely invisible. It is equivalent to burning the book. So this is not a matter of Amazon exercising the prerogative of private enterprise. Amazon is a monopoly. It has no rival. If your book doesn’t exist on Amazon, then for most people who are not research specialists, your book doesn’t exist. The consequences for the pursuit of knowledge are ominous.

There is a problem here for Amazon as well. The more Amazon excludes books that embody facts and ideas that constitute radical dissent, the more it becomes a narrow censor’s aperture rather than a reliable bridge to the entire range of the Republic of Letters.

Apologists for censorship of radicals and authentic conservatives often claim that no First Amendment rights are violated when Amazon bans books, therefore it is not a civil rights issue, merely an inconvenience of the capitalist system. In the 1950s however, when the privately-owned movie studios banned certain directors, actors and screen-writers judged to be Leftists or Communists, that action on the part of private enterprise was inscribed in the rolls of the culture wars as the infamous “Blacklist,” and we are still reading and weeping over it sixty-five years later. So it depends on whose ox is being gored.

The public should be informed of the disgraceful tactics of the hypocrites who are so fearful of the radical scholarship for which they have no credible answer, that they pressure booksellers to ban the books that contain irrefutable challenges to their sacred dogmas. Human learning is often advanced by means of suppressed facts and ideas. This was formerly a truism in America, up until the rise of the Overlords of social media who seem to be more like a branch of Antifa than an intellectual class invested in discovery and enlightenment.

Knowledge is advanced on the basis that “Error has rights,” for the reason that demonized dissidents banned for supposedly spreading error, are sometimes in fact the bearers of rare discoveries that undercut enshrined dogmas, which appear credible through repetition by the dominant media empire. 

But the epigram of our time is “Error has no rights.” This was  the doctrine of the fiery Inquisition, of the head-chopping French Revolution and of the Bolsheviks, Nazis and Maoists. If error has no rights then neither does truth, in that what is denounced as hateful error by the mob is sometimes a destabilizing, necessary and even cosmic truth.

The ban on these three books of ours, particularly the complete ban (Kindle + printed book) on Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded, as well asJudaism Discovered banned from the Kindle, represents a signifcant loss to us of revenue. If we don’t somehow make up for this serious shortfall it will imperil our entire enterprise.

This is in God’s hands. Our prayer is that He inspires benefactors to assist us in this our time of need, as well as in the weeks and months ahead as we search for a replacement for what was regular monthly sales income upon which we depended for our Truth Mission.

The greatest loss of course is to minds hungry for knowledge, whether in India, Japan, the Middle East, Europe or here at home. Learning is a right which the book-banning antediluvians have now denied to readers and students throughout the world. God help us all. 

Copyright ©2018 Revisionist History®
https://www.revisionisthistory.org/page8/page8.html

Click on the text above to enlarge

Order these banned books from the publisher: here and here

Revisionist historian Michael Hoffman is one of the most controversial scholars of the 21st century. The Southern Poverty Law Center and the ADL seek to shut him down and ban his books because they can’trefute his research.  

Your donation helps our endangered Truth Mission survive

_________________________ 


New questions about the Southern Poverty Law Center's irresponsible smears and libel



Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a hate-mongering scam

__________________________________________


REVISIONIST HISTORY® 



Dedicated to love for all of humanity

"Let all that you do be done in love." I Corinthians 16:14

_________________________



Legal Notice 


Revisionist History® is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office as the exclusive trademark of

Independent History and Research

Box 849 • Coeur d'Alene • Idaho • 83816 • USA


_________________________



ALERT: Move to ban Hoffman's books on Judaism

Tech is being pressured to ban Michael Hoffman’s books critical of Judaism

The Tech Tyrants are considering banning Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded (382 pages; published in 2011) and sold by Amazon ever since.  Along with the much larger study, Judaism Discovered, it has had an international impact circulating on the Kindle. 

Beginning August 13 we learned of behind the scenes pressure on Amazon to ban two of our other history books, which Amazon has sold for many years without incident, both in digital Kindle format and as hard copy books. Theses books are:

Judaism Discovered (sold by Amazon since 2008)

The Great Holocaust Trial: The Landmark Battle for the Right to Doubt the West’s Most Sacred Relic (sold by Amazon since 2010)

These books maintain a high standard of scholarly excellence, had an average of four stars (out a possible five stars) favorable reviews, and are free of hatred and bigotry. They do however present a radical challenge to consensus history. Suddenly we are being told that "Amazon KDP" has discovered that the books have been in violation of Amazon’s “content guidelines” all these years. 

Asking for documentation of the charge results in no response. It is enough that the accusation has been tendered. The accused are guilty until proved innocent, although how proof of innocence is presented is anyone’s guess because there is no formal appeals process.

There is a nationwide purge underway that amounts to a new McCarthyism, blacklisting and suppressing politically incorrect speakers and history books under the rubric of “hate speech” accusations, initiated in part by two Zionist thought police organizations, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). 

In addition to our books being hate-free, we note that there are hundreds of hate-filled Zionist and rabbinic books brimming with ferocious bigotry for Palestinians, Germans and goyim in general, which are sold by Amazon. These hate-filled volumes to do not offend the ADL and SPLC, America's most powerful censors and arbiters of which books deserve circulation and which require censorship, therefore bigoted Zionist and rabbinic books are immune to removal and suppression.

We have requested an appeal on the ban on our books.

Copies of Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded as well as Judaism Discovered are available here:

https://truthfulhistory.blogspot.com/2016/02/judaica-books-and-resources.html

The Great Holocaust Trial: The Landmark Battle for the Right to Doubt the West’s Most Sacred Relic is available here:

https://revisionisthistorystore.blogspot.com/2010/03/michael-hoffmans-online-revisionist.html

______________________

E. Michael Jones and Usury in the Church

E. Michael Jones and the issue of Usury in the Church

On Aug 7, 2018, at 17:28, J. M. wrote:

 In the most recent edition of E. Michael Jones Culture Wars magazine a "name withheld" commentator inquired if E. Michael Jones agreed with your position about the Roman Catholics being the guilty ones for introducing the practice of usury.

E. Michael Jones' response...."That's not true."

Mr. Jones goes on to say the Church has never changed its usury position.

I look forward to reading your reply to Mr. Jones' assertion.

Sincerely...a loyal subscriber.

J.M.

Dear Mr. M.

Copyrighted material ©2017

In addition to hundreds of pages in my book Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not, my most recent “reply" to disinformation about Rome’s Money Power, such as Dr. Jones appears to be promoting, will be found on pp. 594-631 of The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome (consisting of the chapter, “The Breeders of Money Gain Dominion Over the Church of Rome"). 

Printed editions of Martin Luther’s thunderous sermons against renting money. These anti-usury pamphlets were banned by the Medici pope and circulated only in areas not controlled by Rome. 

Dr. John Rao of “The Roman Forum” held a symposium recently on how Martin Luther was supposedly the source of the rise of greed in Christendom, when in fact, a substantial part of Luther’s revolt against the papacy was his rage over the incremental papal permission for renting money, most notably by the detested papalist banking house of Fugger in Germany, and in Italy, the Medici bank, on whose behalf Medici Pope Leo X, on May 4, 1515, loosened some of the strictures against usury for the sake of alleged "charity-lending to the poor.” Papal situation ethics were employed for the accumulation of filthy lucre by his family’s banking house and that of others like them, using the alibi of the Monte di Pietá. 

The gradual steps initiated by the Renaissance and post-Renaissance pontiffs, evolving from covert incremental loosening to full overt permission for usury, took a little more than three centuries, culminating on August 18, 1830 in Pope Pius VIII’s directive to the effect that those Catholics who take interest on money to the rate permitted by law are free to receive Holy Communion and need not confess what had been a mortal sin for the first millennium of Christ’s Church. This remains the situation for contemporary church-goers. 

Perhaps it was a coincidence, but two years later, in 1832, the Rothschild bank of Paris extended a loan to keep the papacy afloat. In July 1849 the pope (Pius IX) cast lines anew to the Rothschild bank. In January 1850 Rothschild approved a loan of 50 million francs. In 1857 Vatican Secretary of State Giacomo Antonelli used Peter’s Pence as collateral in negotiating a new loan with Rothschild (cf. Usury in Christendom, p. 265).

If Drs. Jones, Rao and other Romanist leaders like them, along with their supporters, will not study the evidence in my two books and attempt to refute it, what would be the point of any engagement with them on my part? 

As we have noted numerous times since its publication in May of 2017, the vast majority of “conservative Catholic” and “traditional Catholic” editors, bloggers and podcasters have given The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome the silent treatment. This is a technique well-known to victims of the Zionist media; that it is employed by the Romanists comes as no surprise to this writer.  When partisans have no credible answer to new discoveries in history which seriously undercut their belief systems, they suppress them. The similarity to rabbinic tactics of evasion and avoidance is striking.

Sincerely,

Michael Hoffman

For Further Research

Index (free) to Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not

Prequel (free) to The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome

Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not

The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome

____________

Recent responses to our Hitler-Russia newsletter no. 97

Our thanks go to the many people who sent an e-mail with regard to the July, 2018 issue of our Revisionist History® newsletter.

We were happy to see that most were from subscribers who took the time to read what we wrote first before making a comment.

Others were from folks who wanted to restate the standard tale in the expectation that I have not read Icebreaker or a couple of the other books that seek to absolve Hitler of responsibility for the Russian invasion disaster. I am fully conversant with the thesis which has not been updated over the years in response to new revelations from the archives. Our article in the July newsletter is predicated on those findings. It’s too bad that for many people Nazism is a religion and Hitler the chief idol. They are afflicted with two unfortunate, self-sabotaging traits: 1. Little or no curiosity about historical discoveries that threaten their Nazi religion and 2. What psychologists term “confirmation bias” — reading only those sources which tend to confirm one’s preconceived ideas. With such people, whether they are true believers in the homicidal gas chambers of Auschwitz, or true believers in Adolf Hitler, they exhibit the same mentality; their minds are frozen.

A few years ago, when we published in Revisionist History® no. 80 a study of the life of Gregor Strasser and his murder by Hitler, we lost approximately 20% of our subscribers. One lady who left us had been a consistent donor and subscriber. She was infuriated by the article because in his book Hitler Democrat, Leon Degrelle had said that Strasser was a guilty plotter who deserved to be killed. Strasser was no such thing. Colonel Degrelle was repeating Nazi propaganda. What is more useless than the party line? What is more tragic than human beings who swallow it? 

The revisionist vocation is a re-visioning of every human belief in the face of new information when it contradicts the old. Some of those who say they are revisionists are not. For them revisionism is a means to an end — rehabilitation of the reputation of Hitler. The revisionist epistemology itself is of no interest to such people. In fact, they betray it with their assent to virtually any disinformation that buttresses their “side.” Revisionist history takes no sides. It follows the truth wherever it leads.

We witness the Auschwitz execution gas chamber true believer mentality among these ersatz revisionists — only their sacred relic is Hitler, not mass extermination gas chambers in Auschwitz. But make no mistake — the mentality is the same. We have no time or patience with this grotesque pantomime of the thought process. 

A few of the e-mails we have received and our replies: 

Dear Michael 

This issue was hands-down one of your best. If the Hitlerophiles still think that Hitler got a raw deal from the allied historiographers, then your revisionist revelation of new material and trenchant interpretation should give them significant pause in their hopes to make of his image a quasi-Teutonic Phoenix coming out of the ashes. Bloody good show!  

P.F., M.D.

____________________

Hi Michael

Your paper on Hitler in the latest edition of your newsletter is excellent and compelling. I was a specialist in Russian-Soviet studies for many years and it was my privilege to go through thousands of documents pertaining to the German invasion of Russia. 

I agree that Hitler believed the war could be easily won with Russia, but only initially, and only briefly. He was still under the delusion he could make peace with England and that the U.S. would remain neutral until Germany achieved a victory in the USSR. Even before war plans were drawn up he realized this would not be the case, but pushed on to save face. The delusion of an easy victory was perpetrated by some of his generals, even though they knew by early September that a grave miscalculation had been made. Goebbels ordered that soldiers being sent to the Eastern Front not be outfitted with winter clothes to prolong the illusion that the Eastern Front war would be over by Christmas. 

Many of the generals were afraid to stand up for the soldiers, whose death by exposure and sometimes starvation was one of the most forced mass suicides in military history....

Thanks for another terrific newsletter!

Best Regards,

P. G.

___________________

Michael Hoffman replies:

Dear P.G.

I appreciate your remarks though I dissent in one respect. You write:

“I agree that Hitler believed the war could be easily won with Russia, but only initially, and only briefly....Even before war plans were drawn up he realized this would not be the case, but pushed on to save face. The delusion of an easy victory was perpetrated by some of his generals...”

Hitler was in fact the driving force behind the belief that Russia could be conquered as an act of will and that it would occur in 1941, and not later. His generals followed suit, but they did not initiate the delusion; responsibility for it rests with Hitler. 

I draw your attention to his first speech to the nation since he had ordered the invasion of Russia in June — this was given on October 3, 1941 in Berlin at the annual Kriegswinterhilfswerk (Winter War Relief organization), wherein he predicted the imminent end of the war on the eastern front. 

Regarding Soviet Russia, Hitler told the German people, “...this opponent has already broken down and will never rise again!” (Cf. Hitler: Speeches and Proclamations, 1932-1945, vol iv, p. 2494 [Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 2004]).

He was so confident of this preposterous delusion that he openly admitted in his speech that he was shifting German industrial production away from the desperate needs of his infantry, an act of criminal incompetence and betrayal of the troops: 

“Today it is only a question of transport. Today we have taken care in advance so that, in the midst of this war of materiel, I can order further production in many spheres to cease, because I know there is no opponent whom we would not be able to defeat with the existing amounts of ammunition” (cf. Hitler: Speeches and Proclamations, 1932-1945, vol iv, p. 2494 [Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 2004]).

___________________

From Joe T:

AS a very long standing admirer of almost everything written by Mike Hoffman I couldn't believe my eyes when reading what you wrote below.

You leave out everything of real relevance.

1. Hitlers attack on June 22, was pre emptive.  Stalin planned to attack Germany soon after June.  

     And in that sense I think it almost certain that Stalin would have won soon after....which would have been greatly beneficial for everyone including the Germans.

  ( see the writings of Victor Suvarov and especially Hitler himself.   Also Gerard Menuhin also agrees with Suvarov etc).

2. Without ... the massive, gigantic aid to Stalin from the West the Soviets would have collapsed already in early 1942 if not earlier.

   I don't think you have ever studied the  enormous quantities of aid from the West to the Soviets....starting immediately after June '41 ... if not earlier.

  googel it.

 15 million pairs of boots from England. 

 British planes were already used in the defence of Moscow in 1941.

 Every kind of military and industrial aid was given.

 As Solzenitsen said...."" we (in the Russian army) would have all starved to death if not for our cans of American stew.

  I knew German soldiers who in 1941 captured Soviet soldiers who had rags tied around their feet instead of shoes.

Without the gigantic aid from the West the Soviets had NOTHING...nothing but hungry empty handed  men.

___________________

Michael Hoffman replies

Dear Mr. T.

Your main points are refuted in the current July issue as well as in Revisionist History® no. 82, “Did Stalin Want War with Hitler?”

Quoting Hitler in his own defense is not exactly a conclusive argument against our thesis. Victor Suvarov’s book (Icebreaker) is the standard apologia. It is not a classic (except to true believers) but obsolete, in light of recent data.

Take the time to study our current issue and then respond.

___________________

On Jul 24, 2018, at 13:05, W.B. wrote:

Well written article. Up until your recent articles on the subject I always thought Hitler did what he thought he had to do to protect Germany; I'm now rethinking that. Was he in the employ of the "Shadow Men" and he intentionally destroyed his country? Or was he a egomaniac who thought he could save Europe, but foolishly overstepped his limits? A lot to think about. Is your concern about the right wing’s attempt to sanitize Hitler that we will fall under his psychological influence today and again follow a leader who will promise a utopia he can't deliver?

W.B.

___________________

Michael Hoffman replies:

Dear Mr. B.

In our opinion, the Cryptocracy wants to confine the movement for rights for white people largely to neo-Nazi contours, either directly or indirectly.

The  issue is one of leadership. The neocons are often accused of messianic ambitions in foreign policy and of course the Israeli state, but is not the neo-Nazi model most guilty of this messianism? Is there any National Socialism without a single, messiah-like figure at the head, heedless, as was the Church of Rome at the First Vatican Council, of the truth that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely?

Hitler put himself above Germany. He wanted Germany to prevail as a reflection of his own genius. An occult mindset and mandate is apparent in his Russia policy, militarily and diplomatically. Russia was supposed to be conquered by the collective will of five million apprentice magicians in the Wehrmacht and SS, under the direction of the Master Magician. 

The concept reads like a Hollywood B-movie script, which is one reason why for years we had difficulty countenancing it. A deeper study of Operation Barbarossa shows it to be tragically all-too true. I don’t believe Hitler was working for anyone other than himself first, and the German nation a distant second. The future of the German people after the Third Reich mattered not to him. He threw that future away on a gamble—of  becoming a military genius who succeeded where even Napoleon had not.

I have heard a great deal over the years about the “masonic American revolution.” Many Freemasons were involved in the revolution; some of them guilty of evil acts, such as Benjamin Franklin (see here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RH7H7TT73VDC/ref=cm_cr_othr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0300217498).

Some joined the masonic order in that era in the manner in which alienated youths joined the hippie movement in the late 1960s and early ‘70s and then becoming disillusioned with the hypocrisy, dropped out later in life. George Washington did the same with Freemasonry and Jefferson was never a member.

Modern Americans have little or no understanding of the depths of revulsion in 1776 against the Calvinist and Roman churches over the Old World's fratricidal wars of religion. America was founded with the intent to allow no such fratricide in the New World and Freemasonry exploited that noble aspiration by falsely pretending to be a brotherhood outside of ideology and against priestcraft, when it was actually a church with a dogma at least as rigid as the ones it claimed to oppose.  

A certain someone once stated, “By their fruits you shall know them." The fruits of the U.S. leadership in the early Republic were generally fine: Jefferson, James Madison, George Mason and the other limited government freedom-seekers and advocates made good on many (though not all) aspects of the promise of the American Revolution. If they were not themselves Christians most were shaped and formed from deep immersion in the Christian culture into which they were born. Their early American model of leadership was a formula for peace, freedom and success.

Hitler rejected all of that. He harkened back to a pre-Christian model of the potentate, which we find so often in the Orient, even though he and his cohort repeatedly sneered at Russia as an “Asiatic" state.

As we argued in Revisionist History no. 82, contrary to the Icebreaker thesis, Stalin feared war with Hitler and the Wehrmacht, and relished the prospect of Hitler destroying Britain. There was no immediate threat from Russia in 1941 and none foreseeable in 1942. The Non-Aggression Pact was holding. Stalin was shipping Hitler vital supplies of oil, grain and rare metals.

In issue no. 82 we pointed to Hitler’s immersion in the Wagnerian myth of Götterdämmerung. He would gamble on pursuing his impossible aims and if his will did not triumph and the German people would have to face the ruinous consequences of his folly — an apocalypse — well, it only meant that they were “unworthy” of him. In this Götterdämmerung scenario, there was zero future for Germany after the demise of the führer.

Neo-Nazis often speak of “irresponsible” welfare-chiselers and black ghetto dwellers in America who won’t face the consequences of their actions and only make excuses for their failure. Yet this is what I see the neo-Nazis exhibiting with regard to their idol: everyone was to blame for getting the German people massacred, Prussia lost and the remnant of Germany occupied and divided, except poor Adolf. It was Churchill or Roosevelt or Eisenhower’s fault. It was the fault of the Communists for having the nerve to mount a vigorous defense in Russia that Hitler did not anticipate. The neo-Nazis who preach to the colored races about taking responsibility, absolve their idol of almost all responsibility for the firestorm his catastrophic fantasies and bumbling egoism brought down upon Germany.

Germany would have been infinitely better off had Hitler never been born — so too the world — no “Israel” on Palestinian land in the Middle East, no “Holocaust” agit-prop, comparatively little stigma on exposing Talmudism or Zionism — tens of millions of Germans alive to reproduce and build on one of history’s great civilizations, admired world-wide as "the people of Bach and Beethoven."    

We could debate this until doomsday. I am only interested in results however, and the result of Hitler’s rule was a Götterdämmerung for Germany. If some type of closet Nazism is reanimated it will also end in ashes for the whites who adopt it. Here’s the winner's formula: We will have no King (or “führer) but Jesus. 

_________________

Please note: We are grateful for the e-mail feedback received. I do not however, have time available to debate this matter further online. Those who have curiosity about new discoveries in history can order issue no. 97 or issue no. 82, or both, and determine for themselves who is and is not in error on this subject. These days too little effort is devoted to deep study. (As with issue 82, issue no. 80 on Gregor Strasser, “Hitler had him Murdered,” can be ordered and paid by credit card with an invoice we can e-mail to you).

To budding revisionist researchers our advice is to search for data that undercuts your beliefs and if those beliefs remain intact after having consulted sophisticated contrarian views, you can proceed on course; otherwise you must re-vision. Those outside this process cannot be taken seriously. They are cheerleaders for a partisan side. 

Michael Hoffman is the editor of Revisionist History®

_________________________