Monday, February 16, 2015

The Realist Report - Friedrich Paul Berg: "Holocaust" revisionism

On this edition of The Realist Report, we'll be joined by Friedrich Paul Berg of Friedrich and I will be discussing the fake Jewish "Holocaust" narrative, outlining some key reasons for rejecting the "Holocaust" hoax. We will also address the manner in which the official narrative of WWII, especially as it relates to the false "Holocaust" story, is used to oppress and exploit not only the German nation, but the entire Western world. Calls are welcome! You can download the entire program here.

Below are relevant links for this program:
  • How the "Holocaust" was faked - John Friend
  • Iconic "Holocaust" imagery and mass mind control - John Friend
  • Luxembourg wartime bosses 'willingly helped Nazis find Jews' - The Times of Israel
  • Ian Kagedan, former National Director of Government Relations of B'nai Brith Canada, wrote in a 1991 Toronto Star op-ed piece titled "Memory of the Holocaust Central to New World Order":
  • The Holocaust stands as Western Civilization's greatest failure. It was a natural outcome of centuries of racism and of anti-Semitism. To deny the Holocaust is to deny racism's capacity to undercut our civilization's basic values and to destroy democracy. Achieving our quest of a "new world order" depends on our learning the Holocaust's lessons.


  1. Wonderful show, John and Fritz!

    Marcus raises good points, but I have addressed every single one of them, including criticisms against what I have said and do say which is nothing close to "rainbow Nazism" or "Hitler the multiculturalist," in these two books:

    Black Nazis!:

    Otherness in Nazi Germany:

    The third book in this subset, Nation & Race, is still being written.

    That said, Fritz did a wonderful job exposing the official holocaust usual.

    1. Thanks Veronica! Looking forward to the Nation & Race book!

      And yes, Fritz did an excellent job debunking the false "Holocaust" narrative.

  2. Outstanding interview! Great to see you back.

  3. Friedrich Paul Berg
    Learn everything at: (new window)
    Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!!
    There were NO “limited gassings!” There were NO homicidal Nazi Gassings at all!
    Please visit and support generously: (new window) (new window)

  4. Welcome back John. You've been greatly missed. I missed the show live but will be listening to the archive. Also, Friedrich is a great guest to have on in your return. Thanks to both of you!

  5. BlutundBoden, who called into this program, sent me the following comment via email. What follows are the quotes he read along with the source material.

    Hi John, as you per your request regarding the quotes I read on your show:

    “The belief in the value of heredity and in the value of the Germanic race is the fundamental premise of the National-Socialist worldview.” -Alfred Rosenberg (Race According to the NSDAP*)

    *The following excerpt (as well as the three that follow) is taken from the same source:

    “The German folk consists of several races: Nordic, Eastern (Alpine), Dinaric, East Baltic, Phalian, and Western (Mediterranean). (cf. Guenther, Brief Racial Study of the German Folk).

    The concepts Germanic, Romance, Slavic, etc., delineate not separate races but language- and folk-groups, which certainly also exhibit a distinctive racial imprint.” -Hansjoerg Maennel

    “Blood is greater than gold, a dirt clod is greater than a stock portfolio, honor is greater than the highest dividend, the folk stands taller than the sum of its business-transactions.” -Alfred Rosenberg

    “Never forget that the holiest right in this world is the right to land which one wishes to cultivate oneself, and the holiest sacrifice is the blood which one pours forth for this land!” -Adolf Hitler

    “Through the racial question alone, i.e. through the eternal laws of blood, of type, of nature, we can understand life and history. The results of the inquiries of natural science in the field of racial science disprove the fundamental concepts of the past. The Folkish Movement is the first political consequence of the more recent findings of science. National-Socialism deliberately places race at the center of political thought. Blood and Soil are the two most important foundations of life. “Blood” and”soil” are however not material, but the highest ideals. As our Germanic forerunners already recognized, blood and soil are eternal and holy values. For eternal is the bloodline which manifests itself from the past through the present into the most distant future. And eternal too is the soil, hallowed by the blood poured forth in its defense. These highest core-values place a great obligation upon us: remember that you are a progenitor!

    Only a people that observes the eternal laws of the preservation of the type, that believes in its own racial strength, has a future!” -Hansjoerg Maennel

    The above I posted on my blog here, The Religion of the Blood (that's one thing I want to clear up from my call, the problem with jews is not that they include race/peoplehood/ethnocentrism in their religion, as I want a racial religion for Europeans; the problem is how it is expressed by them. Also, even if theirs was no different than our own, we have subjective interests as a race and therefore should view their actions as bad because they are harmful to us, not because of some objective, universalist morality):

    1. "Race according to the NSDAP" refers to a blog post from Hadding Scott:

      Taken from the above link:

      This is a chapter [entitled "Race" -Blut] from the 1940 edition of Politische Fibel (The Political Primer of National-Socialism) by Hansjoerg Maennel, which was a collection of summaries to aid those responsible for teaching the doctrines of the NSDAP to new members. It is not a general treatise about race but a brief treatment of racial concerns specific to Germany in the 1930s. Translation by Hadding Scott, 2009.

      It is from the translated chapter "Race", featured in the above link, in which I took the above excerpts and did read on your program.

      Following that I read the "88 words":

      What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe. Every thought and every idea, every doctrine and all knowledge, must serve this purpose. And everything must be examined from this point of view and used or rejected according to its utility. -Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Volume 1, Chapter 8

      I read it from here, , but I do not know which English translation this is from. It can be found in this form in the following pdf, , which does not give the name of the translation.

      The same section, albeit worded slightly different, can be find in the Murphy Translation as follows:

      What we have to fight for is the necessary security for the existence and increase of our race and people, the subsistence of its children and the maintenance of our racial stock unmixed, the freedom and independence of the Fatherland; so that our people may be enabled to fulfil the mission assigned to it by the Creator. All ideas and ideals, all teaching and all knowledge, must serve these ends. It is from this standpoint that everything must be examined and turned to practical uses or else discarded.

      That is found on p. 172, here:

    2. In this translation the word "race" is used 222 times and the word "racial" 138 times. It would be insane to post all of the instances of their use and so I will only post a few choice excerpts below:

      The Jewish doctrine of Marxism repudiates the aristocratic principle of Nature and substitutes for it the eternal privilege of force and energy, numerical mass and its dead weight. Thus it denies the individual worth of the human personality, impugns the teaching that nationhood and race have a primary significance, and by doing this it takes away the very foundations of human existence and human civilization. If the Marxist teaching were to be accepted as the foundation of the life of the universe, it would lead to the disappearance of all order that is conceivable to the human mind. And thus the adoption of such a law would provoke chaos in the structure of the greatest organism that we know, with the result that the inhabitants of this earthly planet would finally disappear. Should the Jew, with the aid of his Marxist creed, triumph over the people of this world, his Crown will be the funeral wreath of mankind, and this planet will once again follow its orbit through ether, without any human life on its surface, as it did millions of years ago. -p. 61

      Generally speaking, we must not forget that the highest aim of human existence is not the maintenance of a State of Government but rather the conservation of the race. -p. 85

      Political parties have no right to meddle in religious questions except when these relate to something that is alien to the national well-being and thus calculated to undermine racial customs and morals. -p. 101

      Races which are culturally superior but less ruthless would be forced to restrict their increase, because of insufficient territory to support the population, while less civilized races could increase indefinitely, owing to the vast territories at their disposal. In other words: should that state of affairs continue, then the world will one day be possessed by that portion of mankind which is culturally inferior but more active and energetic. -p. 115

      The State is a community of living beings who have kindred physical and spiritual natures, organized for the purpose of assuring the conservation of their own kind and to help towards fulfilling those ends which Providence has assigned to that particular race or racial branch. Therein, and therein alone, lie the purpose and meaning of a State. Economic activity is one of the many auxiliary means which are necessary for the attainment of those aims. But economic activity is never the origin or purpose of a State, except where a State has been originally founded on a false and unnatural basis. -pp. 126-127

      The sacrifice of the individual existence is necessary in order to assure the conservation of the race. Hence it is that the most essential condition for the establishment and maintenance of a State is a certain feeling of solidarity, wounded in an identity of character and race and in a resolute readiness to defend these at all costs. -p. 127-128

    3. The frailest woman will become a heroine when the life of her own child is at stake. And only the will to save the race and native land or the State, which offers protection to the race, has in all ages been the urge which has forced men to face the weapons of their enemies. -p. 129

      But when nations are fighting for their existence on this earth, when the question of ‘to be or not to be’ has to be answered, then all humane and æsthetic considerations must be set aside; for these ideals do not exist of themselves somewhere in the air but are the product of man’s creative imagination and disappear when he disappears. Nature knows nothing of them. Moreover, they are characteristic of only a small number of nations, or rather of races, and their value depends on the measure in which they spring from the racial feeling of the latter. Humane and æsthetic ideals will disappear from the inhabited earth when those races disappear which are the creators and standard-bearers of them. -p. 146

      No improvement can be brought about until it be understood that economics play only a second or third role, while the main part is played by political, moral and racial factors. Only when this is understood will it be possible to understand the causes of the present evil and consequently to find the ways and means of remedying them. p. 181

      The present is a period of probation for racial values. The race that fails to come through the test will simply die out and its place will be taken by the healthier and stronger races, which will be able to endure greater hardships. As this problem primarily concerns posterity, it belongs to that category of which it is said with terrible justification that the sins of the fathers are visited on their offspring unto the tenth generation. This is a consequence which follows on an infringement of the laws of blood and race.

      The sin against blood and race is the hereditary sin in this world and it brings disaster on every nation that commits it. -p. 197

      Marriage is not an end in itself but must serve the greater end, which is that of increasing and maintaining the human species and the race. This is its only meaning and purpose. -p. 199

      Our school system must also rid itself of the notion that the training of the body is a task that should be left to the individual himself. There is no such thing as allowing freedom of choice to sin against posterity and thus against the race. -p. 200

      In all these things the aim and the method must be determined by thoughtful consideration for the preservation of our national well-being in body and soul. The right to personal freedom comes second in importance to the duty of maintaining the race. -p. 201

    4. If Nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.

      History furnishes us with innumerable instances that prove this law. It shows, with a startling clarity, that whenever Aryans have mingled their blood with that of an inferior race the result has been the downfall of the people who were the standard-bearers of a higher culture. In North America, where the population is prevalently Teutonic, and where those elements intermingled with the inferior race only to a very small degree, we have a quality of mankind and a civilization which are different from those of Central and South America. In these latter countries the immigrants - who mainly belonged to the Latin races - mated with the aborigines, sometimes to a very large extent indeed. In this case we have a clear and decisive example of the effect produced by the mixture of races. But in North America the Teutonic element, which has kept its racial stock pure and did not mix it with any other racial stock, has come to dominate the American Continent and will remain master of it as long as that element does not fall a victim to the habit of adulterating its blood.

      In short, the results of miscegenation are always the following:
      (a) The level of the superior race becomes lowered;
      (b) physical and mental degeneration sets in, thus leading slowly but steadily towards a progressive drying up of the vital sap.

      The act which brings about such a development is a sin against the will of the Eternal Creator. And as a sin this act will be avenged.

      Man’s effort to build up something that contradicts the iron logic of Nature brings him into conflict with those principles to which he himself exclusively owes his own existence. By acting against the laws of Nature he prepares the way that leads to his ruin. -p. 223-224

      All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its technical developments and discoveries, are the products of the creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their first beginnings must be attributed to one race. The maintenance of civilization is wholly dependent on such peoples. Should they perish, all that makes this earth beautiful will descend with them into the grave. -p. 225

      All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because the originally creative race died out, as a result of contamination of the blood. -p. 226

    5. Whoever ignores or despises the laws of race really deprives himself of the happiness to which he believes he can attain. For he places an obstacle in the victorious path of the superior race and, by so doing, he interferes with a prerequisite condition of all human progress. Loaded with the burden of humanitarian sentiment, he falls back to the level of those who are unable to raise themselves in the scale of being.

      It would be futile to attempt to discuss the question as to what race or races were the original standard-bearers of human culture and were thereby the real founders of all that we understand by the word humanity. It is much simpler to deal with this question in so far as it relates to the present time. Here the answer is simple and clear. Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is almost exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very fact fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who founded a superior type of humanity; therefore he represents the architype of what we understand by the term: MAN. He is the Prometheus of mankind, from whose shining brow the divine spark of genius has at all times flashed forth, always kindling anew that fire which, in the form of knowledge, illuminated the dark night by drawing aside the veil of mystery and thus showing man how to rise and become master over all the other beings on the earth. Should he be forced to disappear, a profound darkness will descend on the earth; within a few thousand years human culture will vanish and the world will become a desert.

      If we divide mankind into three categories - founders of culture, bearers of culture, and destroyers of culture - the Aryan alone can be considered as representing the first category. It was he who laid the groundwork and erected the walls of every great structure in human culture. Only the shape and colour of such structures are to be attributed to the individual characteristics of the various nations. It is the Aryan who has furnished the great building-stones and plans for the edifices of all human progress; only the way in which these plans have been executed is to be attributed to the qualities of each individual race. -p. 226

    6. Unfortunately the German national being is not based on a uniform racial type. The process of welding the original elements together has not gone so far as to warrant us in saying that a new race has emerged. On the contrary, the poison which has invaded the national body, especially since the Thirty Years’ War, has destroyed the uniform constitution not only of our blood but also of our national soul. The open frontiers of our native country, the association with non-German foreign elements in the territories that lie all along those frontiers, and especially the strong influx of foreign blood into the interior of the Reich itself, has prevented any complete assimilation of those various elements, because the influx has continued steadily. Out of this melting-pot no new race arose. The heterogeneous elements continue to exist side by side. And the result is that, especially in times of crisis, when the herd usually flocks together, the Germans disperse in all directions. The fundamental racial elements are not only different in different districts, but there are also various elements in the single districts. Beside the Nordic type we find the East-European type, beside the Eastern there is the Dinaric, the Western type intermingling with both, and hybrids among them all. That is a grave drawback for us. Through it the Germans lack that strong herd instinct which arises from unity of blood and saves nations from ruin in dangerous and critical times; because on such occasions small differences disappear, so that a united herd faces the enemy. What we understand by the word hyper-individualism arises from the fact that our primordial racial elements have existed side by side without ever consolidating. During times of peace such a situation may offer some advantages, but, taken all in all, it has prevented us from gaining a mastery in the world. If in its historical development the German people had possessed the unity of herd instinct by which other peoples have so much benefited, then the German Reich would probably be mistress of the globe to-day. World history would have taken another course and in this case no man can tell if what many blinded pacifists hope to attain by petitioning, whining and crying, may not have been reached in this way: namely, a peace which would not be based upon the waving of olive branches and tearful misery-mongering of pacifist old women, but a peace that would be guaranteed by the triumphant sword of a people endowed with the power to master the world and administer it in the service of a higher civilization.

      The fact that our people did not have a national being based on a unity of blood has been the source of untold misery for us. To many petty German potentates it gave residential capital cities, but the German people as a whole was deprived of its right to rulership.

      Even to-day our nation still suffers from this lack of inner unity; but what has been the cause of our past and present misfortunes may turn out a blessing for us in the future. Though on the one hand it may be a drawback that our racial elements were not welded together, so that no homogeneous national body could develop, on the other hand, it was fortunate that, since at least a part of our best blood was thus kept pure, its racial quality was not debased.

    7. A complete assimilation of all our racial elements would certainly have brought about a homogeneous national organism; but, as has been proved in the case of every racial mixture, it would have been less capable of creating a civilization than by keeping intact its best original elements. A benefit which results from the fact that there was no all-round assimilation is to be seen in that even now we have large groups of German Nordic people within our national organization, and that their blood has not been mixed with the blood of other races. We must look upon this as our most valuable treasure for the sake of the future. During that dark period of absolute ignorance in regard to all racial laws, when each individual was considered to be on a par with every other, there could be no clear appreciation of the difference between the various fundamental racial characteristics. We know to-day that a complete assimilation of all the various elements which constitute the national being might have resulted in giving us a larger share of external power: but, on the other hand, the highest of human aims would not have been attained, because the only kind of people which fate has obviously chosen to bring about this perfection would have been lost in such a general mixture of races which would constitute such a racial amalgamation. But what has been prevented by a friendly Destiny, without any assistance on our part, must now be reconsidered and utilized in the light of our new knowledge.

      He who talks of the German people as having a mission to fulfil on this earth must know that this cannot be fulfilled except by the building up of a State whose highest purpose is to preserve and promote those nobler elements of our race and of the whole of mankind which have remained unimpaired. -pp. 308-310

      A non-White member of the Waffen-SS does not a "Nazi" (member of the NSDAP) make, nor does it earn him the right to permanent residence within the borders of the German Reich. Talk of sub-racial types, racial types, races, can be tricky due to language, but the above clearly demonstrates that Hitler was very concerned with race.

      Below is a jewtube video wherein more excerpts from Mein Kampf regarding Hitler's views on race are read. The video would more aptly be named, "Hitler's Views on Multiracialism":

      P.S. "The Racial Elements of European History" - by Hans F.K. Günther:

      According to wikipedia, "He received several honors during the Third Reich, notably in 1935 he was declared "pride of the NSDAP" for his scientific work. In the same year he received the Rudolph Virchow plaque, and in 1940 the Goethe Medal for arts and science from Hitler."

  6. Very informative quotes, John.

    I found a few related facts...

    Hans F. K. Guenther lacked any formal qualifications in racial anthropology.

    Guenther was asked by NS authorities to "moderate or suppress certain views with the required attitude, without claiming that this meant the end of academic freedom." This was in regards to his Nordic supremacy ideas.

    Walter Gross, Head of the Race Policy Office of the NSDAP, defended NS thought against the liberal charge of "a deterministic materialism, in which the mental-psychological-spiritual and the cultural were ***simply determined by race***. He denied that the scientific view of race took this one-sided view... The laws of inheritance applied both to the mental and the physical, but this ***did not imply there was a direct causal relationship between these domains*** (1936; emphasis added)."

    "...Alfred Rosenberg and his followers -- began to ***come under attack*** from the more technocratically oriented geneticists and racial anthropologists from ***Himmler's [own] Ahnenerbe***, in particular Karl Astel."

    The NS Ministry of the Interior declared the field of racial anthropology "unscientific" in 1941. This means it was discredited by a significant entity in the Reich.

    In ***1939***, Haase-Bessell said that race should not be seen as fixed characteristics but as "fields of variation in which genes showed particular statistical distributions."

    There are many, many more quotes like this in Chris Hutton's "Race and the Third Reich", but no one has even bothered to read it. He quotes one primary source after another.

    May I add that several white nationalists have denounced me as "mixed race" when in fact these folks have the SAME non-white DNA in their 23andMe readouts? At some point our white ancestors race-mixed, and yet, we are all still white. We are here. We are not destroyed. Their intense fear and loathing of the tiny percent who do race mix is unfounded and irrational. Most of them are not married and do not have children themselves, so what is the problem? Is it anger and frustration that they cannot get a perfect white princess that makes them fume and rage when a black or Asian man does? I don't know, but the MGTOW community of men rage at white women too. They are bitter about "feminist white women," they say.

    Here's my readout:

    1. You have it precisely backwards, VKC.

      1) It is rational to hope for the maximum quantity of genes like yours in the next generation and regret their elimination through admixture.

      2) It is the intense fear and loathing directed at the tiny number of White Nationalists from every orifice of the mainstream culture - and too many supposedly alternative voices - that is unfounded and irrational. Unless, that is, the goal really is genocide, and therefore Whites who simply want to stay White MUST be attacked and mocked and derided in every possible venue for every possible reason.

    2. Mr. Dean,

      Wonderful response. I am sure you have, or will eventually have, a white wife and several white children.

      Best wishes to you and your family, sir!

  7. John,

    One more detail: this woman, Ms. Editha Horn, was an Afro-German who lived in NS Germany? She is part of the Sabac el Cher family. Her "whiteness" is obvious and was not at all "destroyed" by her blackness. She was a beautiful woman admired by many strapping German men of her day.

    1. How far back in her lineage was her "black" ancestor? What percentage negroid were they? What percentage of her DNA is attributable to negroid genes? She obviously has no sizable negroid ancestry. What are the implications of her being tolerated considering she looks German? I don't think any other than to say there were exceptions to the rule and that the Germans weren't as portrayed by their opponents. If saying "Her "whiteness" is obvious and was not at all "destroyed by her blackness" is intended to indicate that they didn't care about race and that they weren't interested in keeping their blood as unadulterated as possible moving forward then you miss your mark. If it is to say that one can breed with a sub-saharan African and produce immediate offspring looking like her then that is also, of course, untrue. If the message is something else it ought to be made more clear.

    2. VKC,

      Her White (Black) ancestor's Whiteness (Blackness) was destroyed precisely in proportion to her Blackness (Whiteness). How could it be otherwise?

      If Whiteness and Blackness are things you care about then this is regrettable and is more regrettable the more it happens.


      White people do not suffer a lack of counsellors advising us not to care about the displacement of White genes. If you're truly anti-racist, go spread some of that love on pro-Black or pro-Asian or pro-American-Indian forums.

    3. Adolf Hitler:

      "At present, besides applying the term ‘race’ to the white, yellow, and black races—which cannot scientifically be justified and grounded as a valid categorization—it is customary within the white race, for example, to designate the Semites and the Aryans as ‘races.’ Among the Semites, one counts the Arabs, the Israelites, the Egyptians, perhaps also the Persians, and possibly several other tribes. Among the Aryans are the Germans, the Romans, the Slavs, and several others—for example, the Celts.

      But then again, it’s not quite as simple and clear-cut as I am making it sound. For through the migrations of nations; through Roman military despotism; through the major campaigns of conquest carried out by such groups as the Huns, the Magyars, the Tartars, and the Turks; through medieval dynastic measures and contemporary economic intertwining of interests; displacements and admixtures occurred that have hardly preserved ‘pure’ races, generally speaking. At the very least, within the families of nations and within the major races—that is, the Aryan, the Semitic, and so forth—strong reciprocal actions occurred, even biologically...Of special interest in this regard is the development of the Jews...And we can say that in great measure [that Jews have] retained [their racial] purity.

      ...‘the Jewish people,’ may be the only people of our history and our Mediterranean region that has remained pure."

      Who here mentioned anything at all about "anti-racist" or "spreading love"?

      Adolf Hitler said:

      "People who feel free of guilt and who are intellectually and culturally superior do not hate. Hatred is always connected with inferiority complexes."


    4. This is not from Adolf Hitler, but from Otto Wagener who says he is remembering what AH said in his presence, many years later. It's fraudulent to ascribe it to Adolf Hitler.

      Carolyn Yeager

    5. According to Otto Wagener in the year 1946 "Adolf Hitler said" such and such years earlier.

      Regardless, those comments actually reveal that Hitler was racially conscious to such an extent that rather than considering groups of what many consider European sub-races to add up to a broader European race, he was more concerned with subsets of it. This is the complete and total opposite of considering there to be no White race and therefore no races, it actually shows that he was hyper-racially conscious in the opposite direction down to the level of focusing on, again, what many consider sub-races of the wider European race and considering them to have been what truly qualified as having met a scientific categorization of what "race" is.

      "People who feel free of guilt and who are intellectually and culturally superior do not hate. Hatred is always connected with inferiority complexes."

      ^ That must describe your hatred of racialists, then. You have an inferiority complex. No, but seriously, granted he said that exactly as such, i.e. in the form of an absolute statement, he would have been wrong as the last sentence is demonstrably false. Hatred is merely an emotion and one that results from many different things as well as is expressed in a plethora of different ways.

      My beliefs do not result from hatred, my hatred results from my beliefs. Said hatred does not preclude my beliefs from being valid as hatred is a tool bestowed upon man by nature. Indeed, hatred serves a purpose just as important as love, if not more so. Love gives man reason to live, hatred the means to do so.

      Kai Murros on Hate:

      Anti-jewishness, for instance, is not the result of ignorance or a sense of inferioty, it is the result of enlightenment. It arises not from hatred of jews, but from the love of Aryans and/or simply for truth. Certainly, however, I have a moral obligation to hate anything that would seek to destroy that which I love.

      Hatred may sometimes be solely irrational, but forced racial integration is totally unnatural and therefore this irrationality, or even in some an inferiority complex, and the will that results thereof, should be paid heed to as it is an inborn instinct which serves a higher purpose.

    6. BlutundBoden,

      You wrote on Facebook that I was "ugly" and looked "like a man" and you even suggested that I might be "transsexual." Would you like to expand on how you viciously attack white women whom you disagree with in such a way? I am sure everyone here would like to hear your reasoning. You even got Sinead McCarthy to join in like a 10-year-old schoolyard bully.

      Please explain your viciousness. Is this how you treat all white women who disagree with you, reject you or question you? Scream "man," "transsexual" and "Jew" at them?

      There's no need to vent against me and my research because you do not have a white wife and numerous white children. That is not my fault or doing. And it seems to me that you really want this, so go get it. Who is stopping you other then yourself?

    7. "You wrote on Facebook that I was "ugly" and looked "like a man" and you even suggested that I might be "transsexual."" [...] "You even got Sinead McCarthy to join in like a 10-year-old schoolyard bully."

      ^ You are using quotation marks as though those are exact quotes, why? I certainly did not use those words. I did not give my opinion on whether I thought you were attractive or not. I also didn't suggest that you might be transsexual, I pointed out that you were asexual (one may attempt to argue that this was unnecessary, besides the point and uncalled for, but you yourself tend to highlight this fact). If you hadn't presumably asked them to remove the show post (perhaps you did not, but I just went to see if it was still not there, as it was removed pretty much not long after it was posted, if by your request than obviously because you did not like what was being said about you, and it is still absent. You have a tendency to clear the internet of content relating to your person.) then it could be re-posted here and commented on. I also did not get Sinead to do anything as you wrongfully assume, she added her remarks on her own.

      "Would you like to expand on how you viciously attack white women whom you disagree with in such a way? I am sure everyone here would like to hear your reasoning."

      ^ Well, since your recollection of events is faulty, no, and I'm fairly confident that no one here is actually wondering that. Also, what does you being a woman have to do with anything that was in my comment? None of it was untrue nor had anything to do with gender. You like to constantly point out that you are female in instances when it is totally irrelevant and yet continually attack racialists for concerns that are actually legitimate and justified. I do wish that the comment was still available to peruse, that in addition to everything you claimed I did and said on your blog and in youtube videos following having posted it, so that your overreaction could be noted. I left one stinking comment on the Red Ice FB post of your interview, none of it including anything in which you claim, and then for the next week or two you accused me of trolling you on your blog and in videos and repeatedly tried to link others' remarks (For instance, from the Truth Hertz chat, which HATES racialism and does nothing but bash White Nationalists and Kyle Hunt/Renegade Broadcasting in particular, all day long, yet you called them White Nationalists and tried to put me in the same boat as them.) with myself. Somehow my one comment became an excuse for you to find every supposedly misogynistic comment online and WN remark that you did not like and use me as representative of those views and attitudes. The asexual comment obviously touched a nerve, and perhaps the comments from others that followed. You should have just responded to the statements made in my comment in the form of a reply to my comment, instead of going on to lie and play victim.

    8. You literally dedicated a youtube video and blog post to me calling me your "#1 troll" for having left a single, solitary comment on FB.

    9. I'll never forget this anti-bullying lecture that a retired policewoman delivered one day in school. She was talking to the kids and everyone was dead silent, paying very close attention to her every word. Then, all of a sudden, she crumpled up a piece of paper into a ball in a most vicious way in her hands. And she told all the kids, this is what happens to your feelings when you get bullied. Every child in that room teared up. You needed a similar lesson because you acted like a child bully on Facebook.


    "Hans Friedrich Karl Günther (February 16, 1891 – September 25, 1968) was a German race researcher and eugenicist in the Weimar Republic and the Third Reich. He was also known as Race Günther (Rassengünther) or Race Pope (Rassenpapst). He is considered to have been a major influence on National Socialist racialist thought. He taught at the universities of Jena, Berlin, and Freiburg, writing numerous books and essays on racial theory. Günther's Short Ethnology of the German People (1929) was a popular exposition of Nordicism. In May 1930 he was appointed to a new chair of racial theory at Jena. He joined the Nazi Party in 1932 as the only leading racial theorist to join the party before it assumed power in 1933.[1][2]"

    "He studied comparative linguistics at Albert Ludwigs University in Freiburg, but also attended lectures on zoology and geography. In 1911, he spent a semester at the Sorbonne, Paris. He attained his doctorate in 1914."

    "In 1919, after the end of the war, he started his writing career. He wrote a polemical work entitled "The Knight, death and the devil: the heroic idea", a reworking of the tradition of German Pagan-Nationalist Romanticism into a form of "biological nationalism". Heinrich Himmler was very impressed by this book. In 1922 Günther studied at the University of Vienna while working in a museum in Dresden. In 1923 he moved to Scandinavia to live with his second wife, who was Norwegian. He received scientific awards from the University of Uppsala and the Swedish Institute for Race Biology*, headed by Herman Lundborg."


    "Statens institut för rasbiologi (SIFR, Swedish: The State Institute for Racial Biology) was a Swedish governmental research institute founded in 1922 with the stated purpose of studying eugenics and human genetics."

    What constitutes formal qualifications in racial anthropology? Seriously, I really don't know.

    Regarding the desire to tone down talk of Nordic superiority, that has been attributed to political motives by some. I am not saying that there were no respected individuals whose work they believed contradicts that notion, although I don't see how genetic study would have been logically thought at that time to disprove such a thing, unless they were saying that these classifications were totally meaningless, which, of course, they aren't. Regardless of whether or not they constitute some straw man definition of biological race, it cannot be said that observable types have no biological implications.

    In the description of Hutton's book, the following seems an odd thing to suggest:
    "Under the influence of Mendelian genetics, racial anthropologists concluded that there was no necessary link between ideal physical appearance and ideal racial character."

    These were German racial anthropologists? To state that there is no link between physical appearance and character implies that they would have come to believe that the behavior of negroes versus that of the European (generally) had no biological implications, which we all know to be absurd.

    I am not attempting to establish who was right about race, or what is factual, simply that the claim "Hitler didn't care very much about race" is insane.

    1. "...negroes versus that of the European (generally)..."

      ^ By "generally" I just meant the negroid race/s generally versus the European race/s generally, without narrowing them down to a particular strain of each.

      "I am not attempting to establish who was right about race, or what is factual *in that regard*,..."

      ^ Not meaning I am not interested in establishing facts, haha. Thought I ought to clarify those two things.

    2. France's popular comedian, Dieudonne, has found the most effective response to the Jews' blatant lies about Hitler's alleged plan to exterminate them. The Jews plainly were projecting on Germans the Jews' centuries-old desire to destroy Haman and all Amalekites. The real genocide was planned by the US Secretary of Treasury, the Jew Henry Morganthau Jr, in WW II. The Morganthau Plan urged turning Germany into farmland and shooting 50,000 German males.

      Dieudonne has written a song which mocks the effrontery of the Holohoax titled, "Shoa ananas" (Shoah Pineapple).

      Dieudonne has developed the gesture, the "Quenelle" -- which is a counter-gesture -- a mocking reversal of the Nazi salute, which, in effect, "gives the finger" to the Jewish propaganda.

      Dieudonne has a 3-minute film of an American soldier (played by Dieudonne) entering Auschwitz and being shown around the camp by a skinny Jew who is obviously fabricating the facts.

      This mockery is the only sane response to this carefully nurtured Jewish Hoax. . . that has led to dozens of Jewlywood propaganda movies from The Diary of Anne Frank (itself a hoax) to Exodus to Schindler's List. The Jews renew this line of propaganda to saturate the brains of the Sheeple every twenty years.


    3. The Jews are politically active; they contribute to electionsand to Israel. They control medicine, law, big business, big oil. They are held together by their sense of being superior. They are held together by their centuries-old mercantile scheming and their Talmud-inspired Goyim-hatred. The Bankster Jews keep their lesser brethren in line by perpetuating the collective paranoia.

      The Holohoax is only the "tip" of the iceberg of Jew-lies. . . Jewlywood and Jew-controlled Mainstream Media -- and their partners in crime (Freemasons, Mormons) are at the center of numerous hoaxes from.the Apollo moon hoax to.the 9-11 Twin Towers false flag.

    4. From VKC's comment that I earlier responded to which is now for some reason no longer visible:

      "Under the influence of Mendelian genetics, racial anthropologists concluded that there was no necessary link between ideal physical appearance and ideal racial character."

      ^ Concerning Mendel; from "Der Reichsführer SS/SS-Hauptamt, Rassenpolitik (Berlin, 1943 [?])." [I've seen both 1942 and 1943 followed by a question mark from academic sources.]:

      "The Racial Question as the Decisive Question for our People

      Whenever the existence of a people is threatened, the foundation of their development and rise becomes important. The history of every great nation shows a clear idea of its uniqueness and a rejection of foreign races. This attitude is as innate in people as it is in animals. This becomes problematic only when peoples disobey god-ordained laws, when the destructive ideas of equality destroy their instincts, when racial mixing develops. It is then usually too late to turn around, and the decline of the peoples can no longer be stopped. Warning voices were raised in the 18th and 19th centuries when Liberalism began to destroy the peoples of Europe. Gobineau recognized with sure perceptiveness the danger of race mixing. H. St. Chamberlain followed him, as did many others, above all F. K. Günter, who wrote The Racial Nature of the German People.

      We owe these Nordic scientists this revolutionary knowledge: Humanity is not equal. Just as plants and animals are of different types, so, too, are people. Each of these types inherits certain characteristics, which distinguish it from all other types, from all other races. Racial differences are physical, spiritual, and intellectual. The most important differences are in the spiritual and intellectual areas, in life styles. Racial science is further supported by advances in genetics. Nordic scientists probed ever deeper into the secrets of life and nature. Gregor Mendel was the first to discover the laws of genetics, opening the way to understanding one of God’s greatest secrets, the nature and continuation of life.

      Genetics tells us that characteristics are passed unaltered from generation to generation, and that spiritual and other characteristics are inherited along with physical ones. The environment can only influence what is already present in the genes. Unlike animals, a person does not have a single environment, but also lives in the cultural world of his race and people. This too determines the development of his inherited traits. His culture comes from his inheritance. Therefore, the race to which we belong determines the life we are born into, and the life we pass on."

      The rest is worth reading.

  9. The Holo[$]hoax and the Phony Six Million:

  10. Being white ain't good enough, folks! The greatest mass murderers of "white people" were, and still are, other white people. Of course, they were thoroughly brainwashed--but they still are. If they had another chance to r-o-a-s-t German women and children and babies again, they would. All they need is the go ahead from their Jew masters--and they will line up by the millions to go on another killing spree against Germans or other white people, Iranians for example--as they have so recently in Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of those people are white also.

    Our real enemies are the Jews--even if they pass for white! Wake Up. morons! Jews are the r-e-a-l and ultimate racists. They are NOT our racial brothers at all. They must be expelled from our communities and ranks just as the Germans tried to expel them before and duiring WW2. Europe today is waking up again.

    There were no gassings of Jews or anyone by the national-socialists or Germans. I hoped, however, to bring attention also to the fact that there was "no NS deliberate policy of starvation" either. NS Germany treated Jews extremely well under horrendous circumstances and that is why there are still so many "Holocaust Survivors" alive everywhere today.

    There was, however, a deliberate Allied policy to starve the German civilians because the Anglo-Americans were too cowardly as soldiers to NOT fight against women and children by all means; against German soldiers they were pathetic. They have been lying about their supposed "greatest generation" and its fraudulent heroics ever since--and about the Germans in general.

    The "greatest generation" needs the holocaust hoax to cover its own cowardice and r-e-a-l atrocities. They were the worst generation that ever walked the planet. Shame on Amerrica, forever--and ever! Shame on all those who refuse to wake up!

    Friedrich Paul Berg

    1. Adolf Hitler said:

      "Thanks to the Jews, socialist movements all over the world have turned into mechanisms of battle against the organic development of the peoples. Their influence on nations is not constructive but destructive. They love the socialist idea, not for the sake of the idea, but for the possibility of using the concept to win over the disconnected masses to the struggle against the indigenous Volk leadership. Since, on the basis of the Biblical promise made to him, the Jew strives for power within all peoples, the indigenous leadership in every nation is his enemy!"


    2. You're doing it again. According to Otto Wagener, in the book you link to, Adolf Hitler said this, but it is not a quote from Adolf Hitler.

      You did the same thing in your book "Hitler and Himmler Uncensored."

      Carolyn Yeager

    3. Adolf Hitler said in 1944 (excerpt):

      "...when I started with my education almost 25 years ago, that was not the case. Back then I was always told that the nation and race are one and the same. – No, the nation and the race is not the same. The race is part of the blood, the core, but the nation often is not made up of just one race but rather of two, three, four or five different core races. In spite of this it is neither possible nor wishful to dissolve such a nation; however, it can happen in the span of political developments that such a clarification is applied.

      When we look purely biologically at the German nation from this viewpoint, we see a body of people with the same language – that is here maybe the deciding point – however from different racial backgrounds: a northern race core, but there are also eastern race cores, there are Mediterranean race cores, and there is one other European basic race included as well, a prehistoric race which we cannot exactly define, but it is present; it was already present in the Greek culture, the Helots came from it. Also this race is included in our nation.

      As such we see a nation that is made up of different race cores. These race cores each have their own capabilities: because the capabilities do not come primarily from the nation but they rather are explained by race. That the German nation consists of many different race cores is evident by the various abilities it exhibits..."

      Explaining how the German people's talents are the result of its many "race cores" (or "nuclei" or "kernels" or "core races") is not advocating race purity, German purity, or Nordic supremacy. One can translate this passage a number of ways but the the meaning is always the same, Ms. Yeager. Hitler says, point blank, that the Germans are multiracial and that their talents are the result of this multiraciality. The "core" that happens to be suited to leadership is the Nordic core, in his opinion. That is all he's saying. And the vehicle for recruiting and training the Nordic types suited to lead is the NSDAP (Hitler only mentions the Party in his speech, not the SS).

      Now, why aren't you the leader of American white nationalism and able to get all whites, or at least Germans here in the States, on board with you since you yourself are at least part "Nordic" and "pure German" as you say? You did say that, right? "Pure German"?

      Hitler announced, during his 1933 Nuremberg Party Day speech:

      “We do not conclude from a man’s physical type his ability, but rather from his achievements his race.”

      Not Wagener, Ms. Yeager...Hitler.

      Since I am "20% Polish," according to you, and thus "unworthy of you" and your "German purity," why do you feel the need to bother with my research? You seem concerned, Ms. Yeager. One radio show and post after another dedicated to trashing me? Some trolls of yours have even taken to Amazon comment sections in an attempt to attack me and John Friend personally, just like the Jews and liberal SJWs.

      If all else fails, attack the person, right? Call her "20% Polish" and suggest she has a "black husband" even though she has never even been married, right? Call her "mixed race" to discredit her hominem, right?

      Speaking of ad hominem, is it true that you got a misdemeanor for theft in 2009 (and got it dismissed via probation)? I have heard rumors from your enemies, but I want to confirm with you whether it's true.

      BTW, my 23andMe results indicate that I am mostly Northern European, not Eastern European or Slavic:

      The 20% Pollack ;^)

    4. To VKC,

      Point: "Some trolls of mine" referring to me. Wow, you really descend into the gutter when it comes to ascribing who is doing and saying what.

      Point: More rolling in the gutter by passing on "rumors" from "your enemies." I've heard them all - they run the gamut. I have responded and there is no gain in responding any more to such crap.

      Point: YOU put in writing to me once that you were 20% Polish. I'm sure I can find it if I look but I don't keep a detailed file going back 10 years like you do. But ... since you want to make so much of your 23andMe readouts, what does "mostly Northern European" mean? Mostly can mean 51% and up. Your 23andMe readout gives you as 12.6% Eastern European and 5.7% Southern European. Plus, the other graph you show has you as only 3% German/French, 5.3% British/Irish. And we cannot see which chart is which, nor the population breakdown. So this is not an exact science ... but it does give you 0.7% East Asian/Mongol plus a smidgen of African and Ashkanazi.

      Carolyn Yeager

    5. You're the one obsessed with whiteness and purity. So, since I am not "white enough" for your "puritanical" self...go talk to pure white Germans like yourself.

  11. And from "Hitler's Table Talk":

    “Really creative music is composed partly of inspiration and partly of a sense of composition. The inspiration is of a Slavonic origin, the art of composition is of Germanic. It is when these two mingle in one man that the master of genius appears... As regards glance at his head shows that he comes from a different race. It is not pure chance that the British have never produced a composer of genius; it is because they are a pure Germanic race.” (hardcover ed., p. 709)

    "My one fear is that the Ministry for Eastern Territories [aka Alfred Rosenberg] will try to civilize the Ukrainian women. These girls, bursting with health, would introduce a ***welcome strain into the race***, for many of them are obviously of sound Germanic origin--otherwise, whence the fair, blue-eyed children? The best among them we will gradually assimilate and take into the Reich; the rest can remain here." (softcover ed., p. 466)

    "It is ***not possible to generalize*** on the extent to which the Slav races are susceptible to the Germanic imprint... For example, to label the Bulgarians as Slavs is pure nonsense; originally they were Turkomans. The same applies to the Czechs. It is enough for a Czech to grow a moustache for anyone to see, from the way the thing droops, that his origin is Mongolian. Among the so-called Slavs of the South the Dinars are predominant..." (softcover ed., p. 356).

    So, Hitler was allied with mixed race peoples? Turkoman types and Mongolian types? He also speaks of Germanizing the Croats, who are also have mixed origins.

    On this same page, the notes indicate that Gauleiter Forster defended Germanization of Poles with some vigor. Bormann attacked him and wailed about 'horrible consequences' of such mixing; Hitler didn't offer a direct comment on this issue. Instead, he speaks more about Slavs, Germanization, and how great Germans are generally.

    Later in this monologue, he says, "I shall have no peace of mind until I have succeeded in planting a seed of Nordic blood wherever the population stand [sic] in need of regeneration." (p. 358)

    Is this not evidence that he supports some degree of race mixing...via planting Nordic seeds everywhere Germans go to improve these other races? Races that need, in his view, "regeneration"?

    If white nationalists want to continue to only point out Hitler's staunchly racist and German supremacist comments, so be it. But the man was split-minded on the issue of race and it comes across in many memoirs, monologues and policies of his. He even made exceptions for Jewish-Germans "Mischlinge".

    Why? Why did he do such a thing when he so often spoke vehemently against the Jewish race/people and racial mixing generally?

  12. VKC -- Your reasoning about Hitler is stretched thin to the breaking point. To quote Hitler, in a casual conversation in which you don't know the entire context of it, as saying that he wants to plant seeds of Nordicism in the German population, and to use that as "evidence that he supports some degree of race mixing" is absurd and worthy only of the schlock books that are full of lies about Adolf Hitler.

    I state categorically that he was never "split-minded on the issue of race" and it never comes out in words that are directly from him. You try to show otherwise by being dishonest, mixing up sources and taking a sentence or phrase out of context.

    Carolyn Yeager

    1. I think you're stretched thin to the breaking point, which is why you attack, attack, attack everyone around you.

      Go badger someone who cares what you think.

  13. Perhaps Carolyn can explain why she believes I "made a fool of myself" when I had some heated exchanges months ago with Fredrick Toeben and Fred Leuchter about railroad gas chambers i,e., .really b-i-g German gas chambers.. Where did I get anything wrong?

    Friedrich Paul Berg

  14. VK Clark,

    I'm glad you said this because I forgot to add in my earlier comment (Feb. 25, 9:07) that you accuse me of attacking you and picking on you, when all I do is correct your deliberate falsehoods. You keep making them so I keep correcting them.

    You call yourself a historian, you identify yourself that way in your books and interviews, yet you scream bloody murder when your disinformation and falsifications of historical reality are pointed out. You do not answer such criticisms with serious consideration AS YOU SHOULD but instead you attack your critic with accusations of your own.You seem to think that history is only your opinion about it, and the opinion of others, and you can substitute your opinion for researched and demonstrated fact. History may not be a science, but it's not fiction either.

    I will continue to draw attention to your irresponsible use of sources and references (or lack of any such) as long as I am able to do so. I do it in defense of Adolf Hitler and the Truth because, like him, I love Germany and Germans. Your desire is to destroy the whole concept of "German," put in doubt that there even is such a thing, so that you can define it in a way that you and your black friends can fit themselves into it. That is an abomination that has nothing to do with me insisting on "purity or puritanism" (as you put it). I hardly ever use the word "pure" or "purity" except as I quote it from the literature.

    Every argument you put forth is easily taken apart because it's 'mickey mouse', not because you are hated by white purists, as you like to portray it. Have you considered how very Jewish your reactions are to people who don't buy into what you are selling? You call it "hate" and persecution against VK Clark personally for no reason, and say it has nothing to do with you and everything to do with the failings of white racists. Why do you revert to Jewish behavior? You are really all mixed up.

    Carolyn Yeager

    1. Interesting factoid: Hitler considered the Brits a "pure Germanic race" according to his Table Talk. The Brits did more to destroy Germany than any other single race besides the Jews.

      Meanwhile, an estimated 1.5 million Russians of many ethnic varieties fought and bled alongside Germans against Stalinism.

      Can you speak to this irony?

    2. No, because it has nothing to do with Hitler's views on race, which is the argument here. It only has to do with YOUR views on race. You are changing the subject again away from your dishonesty to an area where you can go on the ATTACK. Thus, you're only highlighting and proving what I've already said about you,
      However, that said ...

      Fact: Hitler said a lot more about the Brits, both pro and con, in Table Talk than the three words you have pointed to.

      Fact: For Hitler, race did not mean who was for or against you, but the quality of the people. He admired the British as a race.

      Carolyn Yeager

    3. Part One

      And here I was all this time thinking this was about your personal interpretation of Hitler's race views...

      Historian John Lukacs:

      AND NOW: WAS HITLER'S CONCEPT of the German people identical with his concept of race? It was not. Yes, Hitler was a racist—in the sense in which many people (all kinds of people, including Benjamin Disraeli) have recognized the unavoidable influence of race in the conflicts of humanity. He did write in Mein Kampf that "the racial question was the key to world history." That he was not consistent in his racial preferences is obvious. When the occasion demanded, he chose, or sought, alliances with Japanese, Chinese, Romanians, Arabs, and so forth, while remaining committed to fighting or even destroying his "Nordic" or "Aryan" opponents. This may, of course, be attributed to the exigencies of his statecraft, especially during the war. But that was not all. We have no evidence that—even during his formative years, in Vienna—Hitler read or took seriously the late-nineteenth-century French or German racialist philosophers, such as Gobineau, Vacher de Lapogue, Lagarde; or that the hysterical racist pamphleteers of the "Ostara" type had a strong or definite influence on him. Not many of his biographers have noted or emphasized this. Haffner did, however. Aware of the above-cited sentence in Mein Kampf about race being the key to history, Haffner noted that race was "never defined by him and often equated with the concept of 'nation' . . . A supreme race as a master nation shall, according to Hitler, rule the world one day—but which, a race or a nation? the Germans or the 'Aryans'? This is never entirely clear with Hitler. Equally unclear is whom he regards as Aryans. Only the more or less Germanic nations? Or all whites except the Jews? This is nowhere clarified by Hitler." The real racial differences among white, black, and yellow-skinned people did not much interest Hitler. What interested him was "the struggle within the white race, between the 'Aryans' and the Jews." Only about Jews did he remain consistent, to the very end of his life. Yet even on the subject of what the Jewish race meant, he changed his mind, as we shall see in a moment.

      For, whether race was the key to history or not, there was an evolution of his thinking in that regard. There were many committed and rigid racist and racial dogmatists among his early allies and followers. The dogmatic racists among the higher members of the Third Reich's hierarchy, such as Himmler, were numerous and important; their racial philosophy led to the establishment of various institutions. Yet Hitler did not share Himmler's "primitive biologism" (well put by Marlis Steinert). Schramm noted that he “had serious reservations about the glorification of the early period of the Germanic peoples—unlike many of his followers.” Speer cited Hitler's dismissal of Himmler's racialist mysticism: "What nonsense! [W]e have . . . reached an age that has left all mysticism behind it, and now he wants to start ... again. We might just as well have stayed with the church. At least it had tradition." A number of historians noted that Hitler did not take Alfred Rosenberg seriously at all, and that he was contemptuous of Rosenberg's cloudy book Myth of the 2oth Century. According to Speer, Hider said, "a relapse into the mysticism of the Middle Ages. Speer cited one of Hitler's 1942 table talks, in which he expressed his pleasure with Cardinal Faulhaber's public protests against Rosenberg's screed.

    4. Part Two:

      Hitler's many—and there were many—statements about races are really statements about what he saw as national characteristics. There was a racist element in his thinking (as is true of almost every nationalist), but his governing obsessions were not biological. He knew of the relative lack of response among the German people to the racial propaganda put out in streams by Rosenberg and Himmler. National sentiments of superiority, where and when they existed among the German people, were cultural rather than racial. This is a subject of enormous significance and delicacy which lies largely unexplored. There was (and remains) a superficially slight but essentially profound difference between a folkish and a racist type of thinking. The response that Hitler wished to evoke was the result of the former rather than the latter. And that reflected, too, the evolution—if that is what it was, if not a gradually hardening recognition—of his own beliefs.

      In May 1944, to officers in a remarkable speech at the Platterhof, Hitler said: “We have this people of ours that is not to be identified with a race, and this is now clear to millions. . . . But when I began [speaking] about twenty-five years ago this was not so. I was told by [counterrevolutionary-bürgerlich] circles: Yes, Volk and Race are one and the same! No! Volk and race are not the same. Race is a component of blood, a hematologic [blutmässig] kernel, but the Volk is very often composed not of one race but of two, three, four or five different racial kernels. . . . Each of these racial kernels possesses particular talents.”**

      ...NATIONALISM AND RACISM are not easily definable terms. (Nor is there a first-rate general history of either nationalism or of racism. One reason for this is that nationalism may differ from country to country more than internationalism or socialism does.) And this is not the place to expatiate on their differences or on their origins, except to emphasize three matters: (1) that Adolf Hitler was more of a nationalist than a racist; (2) that nationalism can be even more exclusionary than racism—mostly because of its attribution of cultural, linguistic, and even religious elements; and (3) that nationalism, more than racism, is a modern, and populist, phenomenon.

      **A small portion of Hitler’s speech of 26 May 1944, was originally published and annotated by Hans-Heinrich Wilhelm, in Militärgeschichtlich Mitteilungen, 1976 (2), on pp. 149-50. In this speech Hitler did not insist on the superiority of the Nordic racial "kernel": "The strongest of these racial kernels, with a commercial but no creative talents, would have been the Jews among us, in the long run, and with the difference that this Jewry would not have been absorbed racially by the German people but that it would have destroyed the German Volk gradually, step by step." [...]

      On Amazon:

      No doubt you'll shriek against this author he's "WRONG" and only you are right. Only you know what Hitler thought, right? FYI, there are racial statements in the many Hitler speeches compiled by Baynes that would make you recoil.

    5. He's a jew, btw. Just saying.

      "Lukacs was born in Budapest to a Roman Catholic father and Jewish mother."

    6. BundB,

      I am aware of that. But his book is still excellent and his Jewishness appears to give him uncanny insight into racio-ethnic awareness that white peoples lack. Especially white liberals.

      FYI, Erich von Manstein was actually Erich von Lewinsky/Levy.

      There were an estimated 150,000 Jewish-blooded people serving in Hitler's military and navy. Hitler **personally** declared hundreds upon hundreds of them "German-blooded."

      The man who designed the Blitz campaign against white Polish people, many Nordic types, was part Jewish. It's all in Rigg's book and fully backed by primary source material.

    7. "A number of historians noted that Hitler did not take Alfred Rosenberg seriously at all,..."

      ^ That is wrong, then. Not taking his book seriously is far different then not taking the man seriously. The Myth of the Twentieth Century (I am aware of Hitler's criticisms) was first published in 1930 and unless wikipedia is completely full of crap when it says that "In January 1934 Hitler granted Rosenberg responsibility for the spiritual and philosophical education of the Party and all related organizations." and "In 1940 Rosenberg was made head of the Hohe Schule (literally "high school", but the German phrase refers to a college), the Centre of National Socialist Ideological and Educational Research..." then this assertion is obviously false. Also,

      "Speer cited one of Hitler's 1942 table talks, in which he expressed his pleasure with Cardinal Faulhaber's public protests against Rosenberg's screed."

      ^ From Table Talks:

      "In short, the second edition was launched by Cardinal Faulhaber of Munich, who was maladroit [adj. meaning "ineffective or bungling; clumsy"] enough to attack Rosenberg at a Synod of Bishops and to cite quotations from his book. The resultant placing of the book on the index, as a work of heresy on the Party's part, merely gave additional fillip to its sale; and when the Church had finally published all its commentaries in refutation of Rosenberg's ideas, "The Myth of the Twentieth Century" sold its two hundred thousandth copy. It gives me considerable pleasure to realise that the book has been closely studied only by our opponents. Like most of the Gauleiters, I have myself merely glanced cursorily at it. It is
      in any case written in much too abstruse a style, in my opinion."

    8. "For, whether race was the key to history or not, there was an evolution of his thinking in that regard."

      ^ "I speak prophetically. Just as the discovery that the earth moved around the sun led to a complete transformation of the way people looked at the world, so too the blood and racial teachings of National Socialism will change our understanding of mankind’s past and its future.”

      (The Führer before the Reichstag on 30 January 1937)"

  15. Mr Berg,

    I really enjoyed the show and I thought you made many valuable points. Unfortunately, I think some of them are getting lost in the discussion above, so I wanted to comment:

    "Our real enemies are the Jews--even if they pass for white! Wake Up. morons!
    Jews are the r-e-a-l and ultimate racists. They are NOT our racial brothers at all."

    This is what everyone needs to realize. White people have been brainwashed and pitted against each other, and others, for Jewish interests. Jews see whites, especially Germanics, as rivals to be eliminated, and blacks and asians as slaves and tools. They are using us now, but seek for us to destroy ourselves longterm, and they don't care whether that’s through war & environmental destruction, or race mixing & immigration. The whole world is waking up to these facts now.

    "All they need is the go ahead from their Jew masters--and they will line up by the millions to go on another killing spree against Germans or other white people, Iranians for example--as they have so recently in Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of those people are white also."

    Westerners, especially white activists, must see that we are being pitted against the very middle eastern countries which contain white populations. Truly barbaric Islamic countries, like Saudi Arabia, are “friends”, while the whitest and most civilized ones, like Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Syria, are targeted. This doesn’t mean Europeans should accept Islamic immigration, but instead they must understand the Jew’s global anti-white plan.

    Regarding Ms. Clark's and Ms. Yeager's work, I think the most valuable thing these historians can do is to continue to reveal the truth about the innocence of Germany and its leaders. Clearing Germans of guilt will help remove the burden of guilt on all white people, and will reveal to non-whites the extent of Jewish manipulation against us all.

    We argue over Hitler and his ideas is because he and his allies were the only modern people to successfully oppose Jewish power. If Hitler made mistakes, it was because he took on a mission that was too much for one man, one movement, and one people to handle. He and the German people were true heroes, & their legacy cannot be underestimated, because they are a positive example not only for whites, but for all people.

    Given the stakes involved, its no wonder we have contentious debate, but we can’t let it distract us from the greater issues. On one hand, we have to remember that there is a global audience, and that we need to join forces and connect with others outside our ethnicities and countries. Otherwise, we stay as isolated as Hitler was in 1939, which doesn’t help us. This doesn’t mean distorting Hitler’s ideas, but instead showing how they can be a positive model to others.

    At the same time, we must also remember the challenges our own people face. We’ve gone through physical wars and decades of psychological warfare. Our young people have been taught to hate themselves and each other, and internalize that at a deep psychological level. Alot of our best were killed, and in the new order our worst have thrived and multiplied. In this degenerated culture there are “bad apples.” But, we must not let these people turn us against our own. Thugs, perverts, and woman-haters do not represent Western civilization, and in fact everything we truly stand for is against these things. How many of these people are really Jews (or certainly Jewish in spirit)?? We have to remember that and fight for our people. Otherwise, we accept the worst lies and slanders of our enemies, and they have won. So we must address our own with respect and understanding. Otherwise we alienate honorable and descent white people looking to us for answers.

    I really appreciate all the work you have done for the revisionist cause around the world, Mr. Berg, and I know that others do too. Thank you (and thanks to John as well),


    1. Oscar, what you say here could be called "Jewish Question 101" -- we all know this. Can we please go up a level or two? Fritz Berg also said on this program:

      "Hitler wanted Germany to evolve racially as a people, and I don't think he had any fixed ideas about, of who or what races could be part of this German gene pool, even blacks, even Asians were accepted. [John Friend objects to this.] Well there were some blacks in Germany and they were treated quite well throughout this period. They were even in the German military as a good friend of ours has shown us. [:Good friend" VKC] Now that did not mean that Hitler saw these people as non-different [afraid to say “equal”] or as part of the German group but uh it was not as if they were automatically expelled from the German gene pool. The blacks who were in Germany got married and even had children as there are their offspring in Germany still to this very day. [The Algerian soldiers who raped German women -- they got married?? I don't think so. He's referring to one story of one negro who married a German woman that "our friend" put in a book of hers.]

      Some of them are very active, especially today on the German political scene, as Markus probably knows and – and it's not the great tragedy that we imagine." [ End of Berg quote]

      Oh yes, it is a tragedy. And Adolf Hitler, whose views they were talking about, would very much mind it ... today as well as then. But he had more important things to do than worry about the handful of Negroes who happened to be in Germany. But he spoke out about the half-castes whom he did not include in the German Folk. So do you agree with Mr. Berg on this, Oscar?

      I can tell you that in 2007 Fritz Berg was a racist himself and he wanted me to befriend Veronica Clark, who had put up a website about Hitler, and maybe I could convince her to drop her Negro and Mestizo-inclusive views. Well, there wasn't a chance of that and now Mr. Berg has succumbed to these views himself. Whadaya know? It's what Hitler called the poison that will spread throughout the whole Volk community. His National Socialist program was designed to fight against that very poison.

      And Mr. Berg is on record (in fact, at VK Clark's personal website where she has posted her DNA test results) as writing that he doesn't understand the need for a National Socialism ... it doesn't make any sense to him. Why then does he also say Adolf Hitler was "the greatest man who ever lived"?

      Now you might say, Let's separate the Hitler racial question from the Holocaust question. Fine, if Mr. Berg would do that, but he hasn't. He has jumped into the Hitler-race beliefs-Holocaust hoax all together on this program ... because he's so hot to include VK Clark in it. He always has to drag her behind him. So it's Mr. Berg who has become unprofessional ... and he's done so by attacking a whole slew of other revisionists too.

      You Oscar, need to graduate from jewish question 101, take a clear stand on the race question, or else put on the dunce cap.

      Carolyn Yeager

      P.S. When Mr. Berg said this:

      "All they need is the go ahead from their Jew masters--and they will line up by the millions to go on another killing spree against Germans or other white people, Iranians for example--as they have so recently in Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of those people are white also."

      ... he was referring to the USA and the American people (white, black and brown) which he deeply hates and blames for everything bad about WWII. He doesn't even mention the British RAF fire-bombing of German cities, but blames only Americans!

    2. When and exactly how did I ever say something to be misinterpreted as this:: ".. doesn't understand the need for a National Socialism ... it doesn't make any sense to him."??

      Friedrich Paul Berg

    3. Why should anyone mention the RAF? Hitler says in his Table Talk that the Brits are a "pure Germanic race". They are "your" people, Ms. Yeager, by your own definition of Germanness (and Hitler's).

    4. According to the research of John Connelly, in "Nazis and Slavs," the only reason the Nazis denigrated the Poles and treated them so unfairly is because Poland rejected a German alliance and sided with the Brits. In other words, Poland showed Germany the back of her hand and Germany's feelings were hurt. It had nothing to do with Poles being "lesser" racially. The Nazis were all about Polishness until their alliance fell apart. So Nazi race policy and attitudes were influenced by politics. They were **not** always based on science.

      In the Table Talk monologue, Hitler says, "There is one cardinal principle. This question of the Germanization of certain peoples must not be examined in the light of abstract ideas and theory. ***We must examine each particular case***. The only problem is to ***make sure whether the offspring of any race will mingle well with the German population and will improve it***, or whether, on the contrary (as is the case when Jew blood is mixed with German blood), negative results will arise.

      Unless one is completely convinced that the foreigners whom one proposes to introduce into the German community will have ***a beneficial effect***, well, I think it's better to abstain, however strong the sentimental reasons may be which urge such a course on us. ... To me, that is a proof that the representatives of the Germanic tribes who settled formerly in Styria not only infused new strength into the indigenous blood stream, but also, by virtue of their own more vigorous blood, imposed their own attributes on the natives, and thus created ***a new racial type***. This ***encourages me to station troops who are ethnically healthy in those regions where the race is of poor quality and thus to improve the bloodstock of the population***.... I shall have no peace of mind until I have succeeded in planting a seed of Nordic blood wherever the population stand in need of regeneration.

      If at the time of the migrations, while the great racial currents were exercising their influence, our people received ***so varied*** a share of attributes, these latter blossomed to their full value only because of the presence of the ***Nordic racial nucleus***... But it is thanks to those attributes that are ***peculiar to our race*** that and which have been preserved in Lower Saxony that we have been able harmoniously to absorb extraneous characteristics [i.e. from other races]--for we possess one faculty which embraces all the others, and that is, the imperial outlook, the power to reason and to build dispassionately." (Table Talk, softcover ed., pp. 357-358)

      This is proof that Adolf Hitler supported some degree race of mixing: "planting Nordic seeds everywhere Germans go to improve these other races." Races that needed, in his view, "regeneration."

      Now, if Hitler really believed that the Nordic was "the best" -- "superior" -- then why did he just suggest that foreign blood could possibly "mingle well with" or even "improve" the [Nordic-]Germanic race? And why in the world would he wish to further "dilute" the Nordic nucleus in the Germans by encouraging his troops to "mingle with" foreign women throughout Europe (including Eastern Europe)?

      I invite readers to look up photos of Werner Molders, Reinhard Heydrich, Adolf Galland and Werner Baumbach. Compare them and tell me those men are all the same race...either "pure Germans" or 'Nordic archetypes' that match NS propaganda.

      Folks can believe whatever they want to about Hitler's race views and policies, but I stand by my thesis that both were ambivalent in regards to race.

    5. Ms. Yeager,

      I do not support race mixing. Our goal should be to not only preserve the white race, but also our individual ethnicities, and not just a vague population of white peoples. I do not think Hitler supported race mixing at all, and on the contrary I know that he strongly opposed it. But I do not think that was disputed by Mr. Berg. I took his comments as simply refuting extreme accusations hurled at Hitler about race. For example, the idea that Hitler wanted to kill all non-whites, all non-Germans, all-non blonde haired people, etc. Anyone familiar with real National Socialism knows that these charges are ridiculous. But all the same, they still show up in history books and on television everyday. Millions accept these lies as fact, so I took the comments about Hitler not "caring" about race as a response to these popular misconceptions. Obviously Hitler cared about preserving the German people and their racial purity, regardless of any exceptions made for people already living in the Reich. But I did not take Mr. Berg's remarks as questioning that fact.

      The Jewish Question is far from an elementary topic, both in its complexity and its vital importance to our struggle. If anyone begins to forget that, then they need a refresher course. I have listened to your shows and I know that you address such issues in depth. But when we are commenting on sites like this, we should remember that there are visitors here who have little familiarity with these topics and are looking for answers.


    6. "I do not think Hitler supported race mixing at all, and on the contrary I know that he strongly opposed it. But I do not think that was disputed by Mr. Berg."

      ^ Oscar, Fritz's comments on the show very clearly indicate that he was, in fact, attempting to dispute this notion. Have another listen.

  16. Not misinterpreted, Fritz, those are pretty close to your exact words. I said it was posted on your good friend's wordpress website probably not much more than a year ago. But you know how she slaps new sites up and takes existing ones down, rearranges things, making it pretty impossible to find ANYTHING from the past.

    I found your comment very interesting at the time, and I commented on it ... not there, I don't think, but elsewhere.

    So you don't recall, not surprising. But I could ask you if you today believe in Hitler's National-Socialism and you would probably say you don't know what that is. You are all muddled up so I really don't care what you would say about it now. You've already made it clear you are ignorant about Adolf Hitler the man, that you have never read Mein Kampf or much else and are only repeating whatever your good friend says. You should stick with things you know something about or you'll lose whatever respect you have gained.

    And to Veronica, posting long quotes from John Lukacs is a real bore and proof that she cannot answer herself and gets off the hook by finding an "interpretation" in some book she can point to ... rather than sticking to what Hitler himself said, and not isolating a phrase here and a phrase there out of order and context. I am really sick of this because there is no honest response from Clark or Mr. Berg. Just BS.

    Carolyn Yeager

    1. Yes, Ms. Yeager, you're the only one in the world who can speak on Hitler's race views.

      You dismiss **everyone** with whom you disagree. No one but you knows what they're talking about. And when a person does point out Hitler's ambivalence in "Table Talk", you ignore it or dismiss it with allegations about "missing context."


    2. From: V. K. Clark February 26, 2015 at 10:03 PM
      Yes, Ms. Yeager, you're the only one in the world who can speak on Hitler's race views.

      Ms. Yeager answers: No, Adolf Hitler is the only one who can speak on his race views. I go only by what he himself has said as a source. So take your hundreds of schlocky books and stick them up ... in your attic.

      Also, Hitler was never ambivalent about race ... never ... except as a youngster. You have been trying to make that case since 2006 (I suppose), all over the Internet, but you have not succeeded in making it, and you won't.

      Let me remind you of one of AH's most consistently-stated beliefs and rule-of-behavior:
      "If I'm convinced something is true and correct, I have not only the duty to convince others of that, but ALSO the responsibility and duty to stamp out it's opposite … to destroy or uproot it."

      He said this in 1927 and he said it in 1944, and many times in between. Hitler was not a democrat, need I remind you???

      Carolyn Yeager

  17. I was being nice when I suggested that you, Carolyn Yeager, "misinterpreted" something. At best, Clark's words about my words are a secondary source--but now it appears you cannot even find Clark''s words. I suggest you use sources that are more than your "pretty close" recollections, often faulty as with most people.

    As to my views about national-socialism, that is what most of the countries actually have today, including the US and even Israel--but NOT Germany. By that I mean most countries are extremely nationalistic even if they pretend otherwise--and are "socialist" in that they protect large segments of their socieities.

    As to my putting more blame on the US than on Britain for the terror-bombing of civilians, I stand by that because NO American cities were ever bombed by the Axis (Hawai was ONLY a "territory" and Pearl Harbor was a military target) and yet America incinerated nearly all Axis cities. Britain's bombing of Germany was almost wholly financed by America starting with Lend-Lease in 1941 long before Pearl Harbor.

    I have never pretended to be an "expert" on Hitler--but, for you to insist I have "never read Mein Kampf or much else" about Hitler is just plain silly. I have written a lot about all these subjects.including Hitler on my website and in various discussion forums for decades which even you can surely find and quote accurately.

    You even went out of your way to criticize V K Clark for referring to and quoting from Lukacs, one of the world's long recognized experts on Hitler. Boring--I don't think so. Clark has a lot to say entirely on her own but she backs that up with solid references, if possible. The real BS comes consistently from you, Carolyn Yeager! .

    Friedrich Paul Berg

    1. If you truly believe that the Jewnited States is in any way National-Socialistic then you are sick. Your dishonest usage of the term to refer to forms of "nationalism" and "socialism" which do not have any metaphysical similarities (only semantic) with true National-Socialism is repugnant. The obvious inference that goes along with using the terms together in such a fashion is deceitful and blatant.

  18. Need to add that John Lukacs is a Jew. So Fritz' "good friend" uses a Jewish source, without identifying it as such, to back up her beliefs about Adolf Hitler, while Fritz tells us that Jews are our only problem and need to be expelled from "our communities," just like the National Socialists did. It's really rich.

    Carolyn Yeager

    1. Hitler **personally** declared hundreds upon hundreds of mixed-race Jews "German-blooded."

      Indian-German mixed race children were also declared "Aryan":

      Oh, wait, that's right. You refuse to acknowledge Hitler's duality about Jews and mixed-race people. I almost forgot!

  19. I n-e-v-e-r claimed anywhere, ever that "Jews are our o-n-l-y problem," Don't you even know how to read, Carolyn Yeager--or isn't that important enough for you. Too boring, perhaps?

    I did not know that Lukacs is, or was, a Jew--but, he is still a recognized "expert" on Hitler. If he is or was Jewish, that gives his statements about Hitler an extra degree of credibility for some issues. For example, if Lukacs claims there is no documentary evidence of a plan to exterminate Jews--that means much more by itself than if I say the same thing.

    Friedrich Paul Berg

    1. Okay Fritz, you wrote above, on February 22, 2015 at 6:03 PM:

      "Our real enemies are the Jews--even if they pass for white! Wake Up. morons! Jews are the r-e-a-l and ultimate racists."

      Sorry I said "only" instead of "real" but it has the same meaning for the context..

      You did not know that Lukacs was a Jew, but now that you do it doesn't make any difference to you. And you even now attribute to this Jew more credibility than for lesser goyim like you and me! A Jew is better able to judge Adolf Hitler's racial views than a German who respects Hitler. I certainly don't agree, nor would many, many others.

      Here is more about Lukacs' qualifications to interpret Hitler for us:

      "By his own admission a dedicated Anglophile, Lukacs’s favorite historical figure is Winston Churchill, whom he considers to be the greatest statesman of the 20th century, and the savior of not only Great Britain, but also of Western civilization. A recurring theme in his writing is the duel between Winston Churchill and Adolf Hitler for mastery of the world. The struggle between them, whom Lukacs sees as the archetypical reactionary and the archetypical revolutionary, is the major theme of The Last European War (1976), The Duel (1991), Five Days in London (1999) and 2008's Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat, a book about Churchill’s first major speech as Prime Minister."

      As to your comment at your "good friend's" blogsite, it can't be found because it's no longer available ... unless perhaps I had Sherlock Holmes handy to help me. But you also added in that comment what you have just said once more above (February 27, 2015 at 1:53 AM):

      "As to my views about national-socialism, that is what most of the countries actually have today, including the US and even Israel--but NOT Germany. By that I mean most countries are extremely nationalistic even if they pretend otherwise--and are "socialist" in that they protect large segments of their socieities."

      So, when you think of Hitler's National-Socialism, you see it as no different from "what most countries have today" including the USA and Israel. That's why I say - and I'm right - that you have no understanding of Hitler or National-Socialism. And I"m sure you've never read Mein Kampf ... or much of any NSDAP literature -- you're content to follow your 'good friend' and repeat after her.

      Carolyn Yeager

  20. Carolyn Yeager tries to falsely read things into text, again and again, that are simply not there. She has done that four times in the above post alone.

    1.) in the third paragraph above she says "only" has the same meaning as "real." WRONG! If I had meant "only," I would have used that word instead of "real." When David Irving speak of "el" history, for example, he does not mean that his is the ONLY history.

    2.) In the fourth paragraph above she writes: " it doesn't make any difference to you." WRONG. I never said that either.

    3.) Still in the fourth paragraph Carolyn goes on to say: "And you even now attribute to this Jew more credibility than for lesser goyim like you and me!" WRONG again. Shame on you for being so outrageously sloppy. As hard as it is for you to comprehend with your backwoods brain, one can learn things even from Jews.

    4.) In your final paragraph above you wrote: " see it as no different from "what most countries have today" I did NOT say "no different" at all. There are many "different" forms of national-socialism in my opinion. Is that so hard to understand?. German national-socialism was different from Jewish national socialism, and so on--just as sane people would expect.

    The endless leaps of false logic that you make are pathetic. You should go back to college--a good one this time, somewhere, and start over. Stop wilfully misreading things people say or write. Learn to R-E-A-D !!

    Friedrich Paul Berg


Thanks for reading! Comments are welcome but are not guaranteed to be published. Please refrain from using curse words and other derogatory language. Published comments do not always reflect the views of this blog.