Who's your favorite Nazi?
Pic related - (sorry for the meme answer - but holy shit did he lead a badass life. He ended up collaborating with the Israeli Mossad for fuck's sake - just look at that shiteating grin).
>>592584
Speer
He was just so sexy and really fucking boring
A good boy who actually dindu nuttin wrong, highest scoring U-boat captain despite being captured in 1941, helped reform the West Germany navy and reached the rank of admiral, gave interviews, and helped some guys developing a U-Boat game
>>592584
Master of propaganda coming through.
All of the DEAD ones
Because the only good german is a dead one
>>592629
meme
>>592629
hello eternal Anglo
A man of movement.
More of a anti commie than a nazi, but still.
A dead one.
>>592584
ADOLF HITLER, BUT BESIDE HIM, ALBERT SPEER.
>>593822
IF YOU WERE NOT THOROUGHLY IGNORANT REGARDING "WORLD WAR TWO" HISTORY, YOU WOULD KNOW THAT GEORGE PATTON WAS SYMPATHETIC TOWARD THE THIRD REICH.
>>593880
Hi there!
You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of 4chan are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!
Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!
Oskar Dirlewanger
Kikes literally make him sound like a cartoon villain
Does anyone really believe the shit they make up to discredit Nazis?
Despite losses, he was an excellent general.
>Who's your favorite Nazi?
fucking /pol/
>>594071
>much /pol/ boogeyman
Eat a dick, commie
>>593822
>>594120
>enemey
eeyyyyyyyy lmeo
I like my Nazis well done.
>>594120
>enemey
Familie please
>>592584
She's the best
>>596278
let me elaborate. She's the only woman to receive the iron cross. Even in the oppressive male dominated world of nazi germany she proves that anyone can overcome prejudice. Hanna Reitsch is the living embodiment of why today's sjw feminist retards are the dumbest people on the planet.
>>596278
>tfw she later got blacked to overcome her guilt
OUT OF THE WAY FAGGOTS, ONLY ONE WHO ACTUALLY MADE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE COMING THROUGH.
>>596319
doesn't matter to me. she still wanted the best for germany.
The only thing she regretted about world war 2 was that her country lost. even on her death bed she thought this.
>>596339
>got blacked
>doesn't matter to me
Typical German cuck.
>>596374
Proof?
how can there be a favorite of them
I liked Rommel, he seemed an honorable chap, but he was no nazi
I can't pick one
>>592612
>goebbels
more like gay*bells am i right?
in all seriousness this guy was a total prick, I prefer Goering. Yeah he was a fucking opiate addict.
Desert fox
>>594029
Poles say it too.
>>594091
Yup, he's from /pol/
>>594091
Who the fuck else would it be?
Normal people don't have a favorite Nazi.
>>597852
Normal people don't give a shit about history.
Rudolf Heß.
>>592584
This multi-Nazi
>>593870
Speer was a traitor.
>>594029
Mentally unstable, but the SS knew how to use him as an instrument of terror.
>>592584
>collaborating with the Israeli Mossad
Disappointing chapter of his life. He was trying to save his own skin.
>>592612
A true genius and loyal to death.
>>596319
I think she was just close friends, if there was a romantic tinge it was minor. But honestly we'll never know for sure. She didn't procreate with the man, so...
>>596334
>only Nazi who did anything positive
Even if you don't like their aims there were plenty of good ones, even after the war.
>>596546
Himmler was a traitor.
>>596612
>in all seriousness this guy was a total prick
Maybe on a personal level (lots of womanizing) but as a politician he was supreme.
>>598657
Good pick. An activist for peace.
>>598697
>Speer was a traitor.
HOW SO, ACCORDING TO YOU?
>>598730
What do you mean "how so"? Have you read his memoirs? If you have then there you have it.
>>598730
Since I know you're the chap who pretends to be NS but instead uses caps lock and posts silly .gif avatars I'll spell it out for you: orders such as the Nero Decree were totally ignored by the likes of Speer. Hugh Trevor-Roper's work "The Last Days of Hitler" details this relationship. Hitler was, sadly, surrounded by traitors for much of his time.
>>598746
THE "NERO DECREE" WAS A FABRICATION BY ALBERT SPEER HIMSELF, AND BY JOACHIM FEST, WITH THE PURPOSE OF USING IT TO AVOID EXECUTION BY THE ZIONISTS AFTER THE WAR.
>>598782
You have no source to even back that up. Fact remains that Speer was more than willing to sell everything out after the war, anyway.
Look, I know you're mentally unstable, but at least try to make some sense.
>>598899
>You have no source to even back that up.
1. EVERYTHING HAS A SOURCE, OR MULTIPLE SOURCES; HAVING A SOURCE IS NOT EQUIVALENT WITH BEING VALID, OR ACCURATE, OR FACTUAL, OR TRUTHFUL.
2. THERE ARE SEVERAL PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SOURCES THAT SHOW THAT MOST PROBABLY THE "NERO DECREE" WAS A FABRICATION BY ALBERT SPEER, AND BOLSTERED BY JOACHIM FEST.
3. THERE IS NO PROOF OF THERE EVER BEING A "NERO DECREE", OR A DECREE SIMILAR TO IT, ORDERED BY ADOLF HITLER, OR BY ANYONE ELSE, YET YOU UNCONDITIONALLY BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS.
>Fact remains that Speer was more than willing to sell everything out after the war, anyway.
TO WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING?
HOW IS IT A FACT?
>>598939
>2
Okay, source?
Provide something, anything.
>3
>Scorched earth doesn't make any sense
Yeah, okay. You're more delusional than you let on.
Let's say you're correct, even though you're not, but if you were even my your own admission Speer was willing to slander Hitler in order to save his own skin. That is the definition of a traitor.
Get over yourself. Speer was a hack who sold himself to liberal democrats after the war.
>>598972
ANY FURTHER DISCOURSE WITH YOU WOULD BE FUTILE.
>>598939
>no proof
Besides the captured document itself that was translated and submitted into evidence at Nuremberg.
It's in Supplement B of the Red Series if you have a physical copy, like meinself, or the PDF version.
>>598984
Shouty tripfag BTFO.
>>598980
You're an idiot.
Let's take a look at the possibilities:
1. I am correct (which I am based on a variety of authenticated sources, both in German and English), in which case Speer disobeyed one (of many) direct orders from Hitler, in which case he is a traitor.
2. You are correct (you aren't, per usual) in which case Speer fabricated something to bad-mouth Hitler for his liberal democrat friends to help save his own skin, in which case he is a traitor.
You're worse than the people from NSM who claim to be NS. Embarrassing.
>>598939
>>598984
>>599003
can someone screenshot this rekt?
>>592584
>>592629
Now that's a proper thousand yard stare.
>>592584
Can't you /pol/fucks read? This isn't supposed to be a /pol/ enclave board
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>599237
hello reddit
The research he did on medicine propelled science in the 20th century and still can be perceived. His work just shows that modern medical science and ethics can't go hand-in-hand.
>>599247
>everyone in the entire world who isn't a ranting, raving neo-Nazi from /pol/ is literally a blue haired Marxist feminist from Reddit.
Genius level IQ, courageous war hero, handsome, skilled politician and liked by everyone who dealt with him, due to his winning character and friendliness. Unlike other Nazis, he wasn't obsessed with stupid ideas, but primarily cared about power and enjoying life to the fullest.
Out of the leading Nazis, he's probably the one I would enjoy talking to and hanging out with the most. Goebbels was a spineless, pathetic loser, Hitler a raving maniac, Himmler an autist sperglord. Only Göring was a reasonable and affable person. Would shoot up morphine with.
>>599310
Sounds surprisingly accurate.
>>599408
>Goebbels was a spineless
Goebbels wasn't spineless by a longshot.
>>592584
All the gay ones:
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/080515
>>599412
All he did was talk, cheat on his wife, cry and kiss Hitler's ass, changing his opinion on anything whenever Hitler gave the word.
>>592584
Josef Mengele
>>599441
>Gauleiter for the KPD stronghold of Berlin
Yeah, dude was in the shit.
He was the mouthpiece of the Party, which was lead by Hitler, so of course he echoed his boss...that's what his job was. Read Irving's biography of him - it's quite a good read. Goebbels was a die hard to the last breath - fierce and loyal, you have to respect that.
>>599408
>Himmler was an autist
No. He actually wasn't. The "Himmler was an autist" shit started on here and has spread like wildfire amongst the uninformed masses, yourself included.
>>599469
>Irving
Ha.....haha.....hahahaha.
Go read Lying for Hitler. Irving is the biggest quack in the historical world.
>>599469
I watched "The Goebbels Experiment" on LSD, that beats your neo-nazi book senpai.
Goebbels was also featured in Kershaw's Hitler biography and looked like a huge sissy whenever he was quoted directly.
>>599499
I've read it, but I've also read Goebbel's diaries which Irving, you know, actually uses in conjunction with archival material. I know Irving makes a great boogeyman, but his works on Goebbels and Rommel are very competent. Hitler's War is hit and miss.
>>599503
>makes some of the greatest speeches of the age such as his Total War speech
>subdues one of the biggest KPD districts into a NSDAP stronghold
>pretty much was a playboy
>loyal to his country until the very end
>big ol sissy because I said so
Nice.
>>599523
>>makes some of the greatest speeches of the age such as his Total War speech
I always found his speeches very awkward and stilted. Who says they were well done? Where does this meme come from? The only person who calls him a propaganda genius is himself, but if you look at the actual impact of his propaganda through SD reports and social studies, it actually didn't really accomplish anything during the third reich. He was competent when it came to organizing election campaigns, which he did not do alone, by the way, but when he ran his own ministry, there really wasn't any success there.
>>599523
>>pretty much was a playboy
The club footed midget didn't lose his virginity until 33. Despite all of his charisma, no woman's loins were inflamed until he achieved the public spotlight.
>>599530
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb62.htm
The reach of propaganda is difficult to assess, obviously, but he was no doubt instrumental in the rise of the NSDAP especially in urban areas, Goebbels helped bring the Berlin Gau wing of the party into line, which was essential for cohesion.
Bytwerk has some good translations of his better speeches and pamphlets, but his obvious contribution was with film and setting that industry up. Very impressive.
>>592637
>Because the only good german is a dead one
>meme
This is actually true.
Germans are like cancer cells.
First they almost kill the whole organism (Europe) themselves included, and tried to push out/kill other normal cells, and now - when they failed - they try to flood healthy organs with muslim pathogens.
This is really the only acceptable answer, maybe Heisenberg if you count him as a Nazi, anything else is masturbatory /pol/-tier WN trash
>>599544
>anything else is masturbatory /pol/-tier WN trash
why? because you said so?
>>599542
>and setting that industry up
Most people would argue that he crashed it with no survivors. Germany went from one of the most important film producing countries to a backwater over the course of his reign.
>he was no doubt instrumental in the rise of the NSDAP especially in urban areas
More like "in the northern areas". The NSDAP managed without him in South Germany. I don't deny his impact before 1933, only that his ministry was more than a waste of resources afterwards.
>Bytwerk has some good translations of his better speeches and pamphlets
I listened to some stuff in German and was not impressed.
>>599558
>Germany went from one of the most important film producing countries to a backwater over the course of his reign.
Obviously Jews and Jewish funding left, along with some big names - same thing happened across the board in science and other fronts, but I'm speaking on a propaganda level.
>More like "in the northern areas". The NSDAP managed without him in South Germany. Again, he provided a huge assess to the NSDAP with his consolidation and propaganda techniques, why you'd doubt this and call him a weenie or whatever is beyond me. He clearly knew his shit.
Don't be dense - when I say the Berlin Gau and the working class areas clearly this means the north. The Munich group wasn't what I was discussing.
>his ministry was more than a waste of resources afterwards.
Subjective, clearly the propaganda machine was churning out success far after 33, even a fool would see the Olympics as an example of this.
>I listened to some stuff in German and was not impressed.
Wow, what an assessment. Clearly you've delved into his work and I should give up.
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goebmain.htm
>>599523
If you've read Lying for Hitler then you must have seen the multiple Goebbels' diary "interpretations" that Irving got wrong. The multiple omissions. Multiple misquotations.
http://www.phdn.org/negation/irving/EvansReport.pdfgo
His work on Goebbels isn't competent in the very fucking least.
Not really a Nazi but Otto Carius or Hans Rudel
>>599544
I support white nationalism just to spite people like you
>>599686
Yes, I've read the obvious anti-NSDAP book. Irving's an "archive rat" is pretty much their insult.
>Erreur :
la page demandée n'existe pas
Cool page. Frankly you can buy Goebbels' diaries in German for yourself (edited, naturally) in most bookstores. You're free to read on your own, in addition. I said Irving's book makes for good reading, not that it is gospel truth, as no book on such a topic is - don't get your sidelocks in a twist, Goldberg.
>>593820
Who is this?
>>599718
Anti-NSDAP, ahahaha. That's real good. Yes, Evans is so anti-NSDAP that he spends considerable time researching, writing, giving lectures, etc. about the Third Reich.
No, their "insult" is that he picks, chooses, omits, misinterprets, etc. whatever evidence he can to support his argument. The most obscure the better. Evans had to go to great lengths to discredit his evidence supporting his egregious Dresden casualty figures.
Go back to /pol/.
muh tactic buu strategy
>>599718
http://www.phdn.org/negation/irving/EvansReport.pdf
I'm sorry. I was auto-searching for a selection in the document and it showed up in the search bar. I'm sorry you couldn't see .pdfgo as .pdf and realize the error.
>>599743
>someone talks about the Third Reich
>they must be totally above criticism and clearly have no interests in mind when discussing authors (who were once okay at West Point) they clearly have political difficulties with.
>Go back to /pol/.
Went like once and it was full of idiots like you who are so hell bend on some ideology they think posting pictures of English language books (lol at that Hoess book and the even more edited versions of the Goebbels Diaries) makes them an expert. Your initial idiocy was as follows:
>All he did was talk, cheat on his wife, cry and kiss Hitler's ass, changing his opinion on anything whenever Hitler gave the word.
This is wholly incorrect and is just your own personal idiocy coming into play.I simply suggested a book that is a good read, as is The End and well, that's about all you have to speak of there, but even Junge will demonstrate that Goebbels was clearly not some fuckboy like you are.
>>599748
Why should I have to correct all of your stupidity, exactly?
>>599730
Lauri Alan Törni (later changed his name to Larry Alan Thorne)
>>599758
>>All he did was talk, cheat on his wife, cry and kiss Hitler's ass, changing his opinion on anything whenever Hitler gave the word.
I didn't say that. Another poster.
>Went like once and it was full of idiots like you who are so hell bend on some ideology they think posting pictures of English language books (lol at that Hoess book and the even more edited versions of the Goebbels Diaries) makes them an expert.
And now it comes full circle.
You're upset that I pointed out how full of shit your "good read" is and now you're attacking what's on my bookshelf. Hilarious. I'm sorry your spent time and money reading that garbage.
But, please, feel free to refute anything Evans said when tearing Irving apart. You'd be the first in 15 years to do so. Irving himself hasn't even attempted it because he doesn't have the first clue of how to conduct actual historical research.
>but even Junge will demonstrate that Goebbels was clearly not some fuckboy like you are.
Again, I'm not the person you're attributing the above quote.
>>599774
>You're upset that I pointed out how full of shit your "good read" is and now you're attacking what's on my bookshelf. Hilarious. I'm sorry your spent time and money reading that garbage.
I haven't paid any money for any of those books, only Goebbels diaries in German.
>But, please, feel free to refute anything Evans said when tearing Irving apart. You'd be the first in 15 years to do so. Irving himself hasn't even attempted it because he doesn't have the first clue of how to conduct actual historical research.
What does Irving care, though?
>Again, I'm not the person you're attributing the above quote.
Then what is your problem? Irving isn't perfect, but it's a worth while read if you enjoy his other work, such as those in Rommel.
Relax, Goldberg.
>>593820
I wonder how most americans would react if they found out that an actual Nazi is buried in Arlington
>>599408
>liked by everyone who dealt with him, due to his winning character and friendliness.
Is this a joke?
He was hated by virtually everyone and he would even record his angry rants and force his me to listen to them.
>>599797
Are you talking about Hitler? Göring was universally loved except by people who was competing for power with. He even befriended his guards during the Nuremberg process.
>>599781
>I haven't paid any money for any of those books, only Goebbels diaries in German.
The ones edited by Elke Frohlich? Published 20 years after the American translations and based on the same documents? Sounds good.
>What does Irving care, though?
What does Irving care? Oh, I'm sure the $3.2 million judgement against him might motivate him enough. He's not allowed to give speeches or presentations in some countries. I'm sure he has a lot of financial motivation to clear his name.
>Then what is your problem? Irving isn't perfect, but it's a worth while read if you enjoy his other work, such as those in Rommel.
If you enjoy his other work? Hahahahaha. It's all bullshit man. Hitler's War, The Destruction of Dresden, etc.
My problem is idiots like yourself that suggesting others read David Irving's works. A lot of people come to this board interested in learning and looking for books on a particular subject, such as the Third Reich. Giving them revisionism at it's finest does nothing but taint history.
Seriously, fuck off with your dumbass.
>>599802
>The ones edited by Elke Frohlich? Published 20 years after the American translations and based on the same documents? Sounds good.
Even your Nizkor Project approves, what would the issue be for you, exactly?
Enjoy your inability to read them, however.
>He's not allowed to give speeches or presentations in some countries
Yes, those laws to protect the "truth" sure are great!
>My problem is idiots like yourself that suggesting others read David Irving's works.
Even the Wiki laments that he was, in fact, quite regarded until the Holocaust Industry went full swing:
"Irving, once highly regarded for his expert knowledge of German military archives, was a controversial figure from the start. His interpretations of the war were widely regarded as unduly favourable to the German side. At first this was seen as personal opinion, unpopular but consistent with full respectability as a historian. By 1988, however, Irving had begun to reject the status of the Holocaust as a systematic and deliberate genocide; and he soon became the main proponent of Holocaust denial. This, along with his association with far-right circles, dented his standing as a historian. A marked change in Irving's reputation can be seen in the surveys of the historiography of the Third Reich produced by Ian Kershaw. In the first edition of Kershaw's book The Nazi Dictatorship in 1985, Irving was called a "maverick" historian working outside the mainstream of the historical profession."
But yeah, keep posting your shitty picture of a bookshelf thinking that's really high quality. Hell, you even post that awful "memoir" from Hoess thinking that doesn't come with a huge debate itself. Regardless, people should be allowed to research and read how they want.
Can you be a dense idiot elsewhere? What's your purpose here, exactly?
>>599408
>handsome
>>599802
>>599822
Problem?
>>599816
>was a controversial figure from the start
>His interpretations of the war were widely regarded as unduly favourable to the German side
That directly contradicts your statement that he was highly regarded. Knowledge of archives is nice, but it has little do with being a good historian.
>>599802
>. A lot of people come to this board interested in learning and looking for books on a particular subject, such as the Third Reich.
>>599852
Being controversial doesn't make on a bad historian, of course not hating the baddies is problematic, especially for Jews, like Lipstadt and probably the poster here.
>>599852
"As a military historian, Irving has much to commend him. For his works of military history Irving has undertaken thorough and painstaking research into the archives. He has discovered and disclosed to historians and others many documents which, but for his efforts, might have remained unnoticed for years. It was plain from the way in which he conducted his case and dealt with a sustained and penetrating cross-examination that his knowledge of World War 2 is unparalleled. His mastery of the detail of the historical documents is remarkable. He is beyond question able and intelligent. He was invariably quick to spot the significance of documents which he had not previously seen. Moreover he writes his military history in a clear and vivid style. I accept the favourable assessment by Professor Watt and Sir John Keegan of the calibre of Irving's military history ... and reject as too sweeping the negative assessment of Evans .... [Richard Evans, a historian who testified for the defense, had stated that Irving has had "a generally low reputation amongst professional historians since the end of the 1980s and at all times amongst those who have direct experience of researching in the areas with which he concerns himself"; although not noted by Judge Gray, Evans also reiterated Lipstadt's charge that Irving was not a historian at all.] But the questions to which this action has given rise do not relate to the quality of Irving's military history but rather to the manner in which he has written about the attitude adopted by Hitler towards the Jews and in particular his responsibility for the fate which befell them under the Nazi regime."
>>599816
Aber ich kann ganz gut lesen
But it's obvious now that you're an Irving shill. Carry on.
>>599863
>especially for Jews, like Lipstadt and probably the poster here.
It wasn't hard to get you to show your true colors.
I'm the "poster here". I hate Jews as much as the next guy but fuck, even I'm not so stupid to ignore history to have it fit my agenda.
>>599896
>Aber ich kann ganz gut lesen
Wow, what an amazing testament to your skills.
>But it's obvious now that you're an Irving shill. Carry on.
I always will; you're the one who is anally devastated at the idea.
>>599902
>I hate Jews as much as the next guy but fuck, even I'm not so stupid to ignore history to have it fit my agenda.
Sure you do, Goldman, if you actually read about the trial you'd know the following:
>>599867
Irving was on trial more or less for offending Jews and not painting history black and white to serve their agenda. His ability as a historian is not in question, but rather his "attitude"
>>599912
>Irving was on trial more or less for offending Jews and not painting history black and white to serve their agenda. His ability as a historian is not in question, but rather his "attitude"
IRVING WAS THE FUCKING PLAINTIFF
No one brought suit against him.
>>599923
>IRVING WAS THE FUCKING PLAINTIFF
Actually he was on both sides; there have been multiple trials. Regardless, the quote cited demonstrates he was judged not based on his historical abilities, but rather his attitudes. Hard to understand, I know.
>>599931
>Actually he was on both sides; there have been multiple trials.
If we are talking about civil cases where Irving was involved as anything other than a witness I can see only one. Irving vs Penguin Books.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving
Obviously that is just the Wiki page but unless you have evidence of others....
>>599931
We're obviously discussing the Irving-Lipstadt trial because that was the only one that Evans (which has been cited multiple times above) was called as an expert witness.
Goddamn, you are grasping for straws.
And yes, he was primarily judged on his historical abilities in the Lipstadt trial. That's why Evans, Wachmann, Longerich, Browning, van Pelt, etc. were called to analyze his fucking historical abilities.
Irving got a kick out of being the "maverick" of Nazi Germany. Finally, he kicked the wrong nest and the actual experts of Nazi Germany showed just how much of a quack he was.
And, as Evans notes in his book, Irving chose to file suit in England because their civil courts place the burden of proof on the defendant and not the plaintiff. He fully expected Penguin Books to back down.
Now, again, go fuck off.
>>599949
Zündel trial.
>>599961
He was a witness in the Zundel trial.
>>599958
Why so pissed, Goldman? The quote clearly demonstrates that the views of Irving, not his methodology and his ability, especially as a military historian (his work on Rommel is among the top of the field).
>>599976
For the defense, yes, he was a part of their team.
Don't worry, the Jews still won.
>>599961
Irving was called as an "expert witness" in the Zundel trial. So was Fred Leuchter. This back fired because Dr. James Roth gets called to trial and basically shows how full of shit Leuchter's findings were.
>>599981
I'm actually a 3rd generation German, friend.
>"Not one of [Irving's] books, speeches or articles, not one paragraph, not one sentence in any of them, can be taken on trust as an accurate representation of its historical subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about. ... if we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian".
>>599981
Evans was hired by the defense to analyze Irving's historical abilities and methodology. He wrote a 700+ page report (that's linked above) and later a book about how full of shit he was.
I mean he gave example after example after example after example of how full of shit he was.
>>599983
Roth's comments have been dealt with on revisionist forums countless times, this old tired argument is even beyond 4chan.
>>599990
>I'm actually a 3rd generation German, friend.
Wow, want a metal, Schlomo?
From "Evil Takes the Stand"
Wow, which one of the Chosen paid for this one?
If you think an article calling a person Evil is okay, and then say Irving is bad because he has his own opinions then that's pretty comical.
>>599981
>For the defense, yes, he was a part of their team.
>Don't worry, the Jews still won.
Well yes, because they proved their case. And just to point out I said...
>If we are talking about civil cases where Irving was involved as anything other than a witness I can see only one. Irving vs Penguin Books.
In a discussion about when Irving was "on trial". You are not "on trial" if you are just a witness.
>>592584
>Who's your favorite Nazi?
The dead ones.
>>600009
Sorry I confused you, but Irving has been on both sides of cases in his life. Again, don't worry, the Jews won so you can sleep sound.
>>600016
You didn't confuse me. You ignored what I said and responded with silliness indicating you have a problem with reading and writing.
>>600018
Just as God intended
>>600024
It seems I have, my apologies for not spelling everything out for you.
>>600030
This is your reply.
>>600034
Wow, how'd that multiculturalism turn out for you?
>>600034
Ah ha, at last, you have exposed ur TRU COLORS
LOLOOL
See how dumb it looks?
>Muh 3rd generation "German"
Laughable.
>>599867
Irving fails to weave sources into theories and just selectively picks whatever suits the narrative he has in his head instead of looking at the sources and working upwards from them. He is consistently unable to interpret what he finds and contextualize it. He completely and utterly fails the most important thing: connection the dots into a picture of the past that encompasses all of them and sheds light on their true meaning. That's why he is a bad "historian".
>His ability as a historian is not in question, but rather his "attitude"
No real historian takes him seriously or recommends his books. They use primary sources he turned up, but all his "conclusions" are basically worthless, because he does not care about the truth in any way. He just wants to show that the Nazis were swell guys who didn't do nuthin.
Also
>get called holocaust denier who lies about history
>sue for libel
>defendant proves in court that he is indeed a holocaust denier who lies about history based on his own statements and work
BTFO
>>600046
Again, you're ignoring the quote in which multiple historians don't doubt his ability as a historian, they only question his views on Hitler and the Jews.
>BTFO by Jews in Europe
How surprising...He was an idiot to think the trial would work, of course.
>>600004
They have not "been dealt with".
>>600039
How did it turn out for you?
>>600055
>you're ignoring the quote in which multiple historians don't doubt his ability as a historian
Well a lot more doubt it than they do support it.
![Martin_Heidegger[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/h2aHxqg.jpg "Martin_Heidegger[1].jpg")
This manlish manly man
>>600055
>you're ignoring the quote in which multiple historians don't doubt his ability as a historian
I disagree with them and I know a couple things about historiography. Reality gives me right as well, since Irving was never part of the academic discourse of anything, as far as I'm aware.
Ultimately it depends on your defintion of historian. Is everyone who writes something about the past and uses primary sources a historian, no matter how truthful and sound his work is? If you apply no standards, then he is a historian, just a rather bad one. In my opinion, you cannot say "his work is good, except he lies often and all his conclusions are what he wants to be true rather than what is supported by his sources". That's not history, the same way free energy and cleansing crystals are not physics.
>>600055
>by Jews
You heard it, boys, truth is a Jewish plot to discredit white men!
>>600058
They certainly have if you actually engage in any sort of contact with revisionism, which I'm sure you don't.
>>600064
>muh dick the post
>>600066
>Well a lot more doubt it than they do support it.
>numbers mean truth
Not quite, again, his ability as a historian is clear, even to the judge.
> It was plain from the way in which he conducted his case and dealt with a sustained and penetrating cross-examination that his knowledge of World War 2 is unparalleled. His mastery of the detail of the historical documents is remarkable. He is beyond question able and intelligent. He was invariably quick to spot the significance of documents which he had not previously seen.
>>600081
But the trial was literally dealing with a well-connected and funded Jew...are you retarded?
>>600088
You act as if "the Jews" just waved money and Irving lost. You can actually follow the whole argumentation and check the facts that prove Irving to by a liar yourself.
>>600076
I'm not the Irving shill on here but Evans does not use his lack of academic qualifications to dismiss him. He actually agrees with an Irving quote in his book Lying About Hitler:
Was Pliny as historian? Was Tacitus? Did he get a degree in some university?
Evans responded:
This was true. Irving could not be dismissed just because he lacked formal qualifications.
>>600088
Lipstadt is a professor at Emory; she is not "well funded". Her publishers were well funded. She hired her own lawyer; they hired theirs.
>>600090
Irving was much too simplistic in his planning, haughty, certainly. CODOH has plenty of information on the trial, too, and a lot of it is critical of Irving's stupidity on that front of neglecting to know his enemy.
>>600083
They certainly have if you actually engage in any sort of contact with revisionism, which I'm sure you don't.
By all means, do tell about Dr. Roth's comments being dealt with. And I hope you're not confusing him with Dr. Green.
>>600083
>>600088
>>600104
>>600106
>By all means, do tell about Dr. Roth's comments being dealt with. And I hope you're not confusing him with Dr. Green.
http://codoh.com/search/?q=Roth&sorting=relevance
Nope.
>>600098
>Was Pliny as historian? Was Tacitus?
By modern standards: no.
Typical retarded neo-nazi argumentation from emotion.
Some spirit healer who knew a couple herbs might have been a doctor 3000 years ago, doesn't mean he would be considered one in our society.
Anyway, I did not dismiss him because he has no formal training, although the lack of it clearly shows in his work.
>>600104
What are you talking about? He should have known that his work is biased shit, and his enemies would be willing to prove it, so he shouldn't have sued?
>>600116
>Typical retarded neo-nazi argumentation from emotion.
Haha, fuck neo-Nazis as much as you Jew stooges.
>>600118
Even Irving supporters more or less agree he didn't have a clue how to defend himself. A slick lawyer would have helped. Poor bastard.
>>600128
>>600126
OY VEY
>>600114
>But there is an unanticipated bomb-blast in terms of statements by James Roth, chief chemist for Alpha Analytic Labs in Malden, Massachusetts, the firm which analyzed Fred's samples. Roth, who likely suffered serious professional repercussions for his original courtroom testimony, comes across in his interview with Morris as someone trying to redeem himself.
>The author recalls attempts to call Alpha Analytic back in 1995 and finding the phone no longer in service. Similarly, a letter mailed to Mr. Roth at his company's address was returned as "undeliverable."
Alpha Analytic Labs is still open. Roth sold the company when he retired in 2003.
https://www.alphalab.com/index.php/companyexperience/directions
I'm not going through each one. That is literally the first I clicked and the first mention of him is bullshit right off the bat.
>>600143
>tried to contact him prior to selling the company and retirement
>still no answer
>LOOK AT THE BULLSHIT
>pages upon pages
K.
Regardless, this thread is being slided, so clearly I win. Thanks and have a nice evening.
>>600153
>suffered serious professional repercussions
>no, he just moved his company
>sold it
>still is a consultant for them
Hahaha, revisionism at it's finest. Cheers, yuropoor!
>>600153
>Regardless, this thread is being slided, so clearly I win.
Ahem.
I wasn't even part of the discussion you appear to be having.
Unless you failed to notice this is a thread of photos of your favourite Nazis.
I'm just posting a few, friend. :-)
>>599543
Jesus the American education system at work here. Nevermind that Hungary, Croatia, Romania, Albania, Finland were all Axis powers up until they sensed defeat, nevermind the 100,000 Spanish troops, the tens of thousands of Norwegians, Swedes, and Dutch that fought along with the Germans.
It was a war to reassert ethnic identity, state, and culture in the face of growing western "pop" culture (which as we see now strips a people of their identity) and Communism.
>>600183
>It was a war to reassert ethnic identity, state, and culture in the face of growing western "pop" culture (which as we see now strips a people of their identity)
You are a fucking retard.
>>600196
Why don't you go watch a movie or something anon. Eat some food from a chain restaurant. Masturbate to porn afterward.
What identity do you have? What connection to the place you live? To your parents? To your grandparents and your ancestors before you?
When someone asks what makes you YOU, what do you say? "Well I am a big x nerd who enjoys gaming and movies" probably.
>>600208
How you move from your personal existential issues to "it was a good idea for ze Nazis to invade Eastern Europe and ethnically cleanse" I have no idea.
>>592592
>boring
He designed some of the greatest architecture ever though
>>600208
Unlike you, I don't feel a pressing need to exterminate the Slavs and Jews in order to defend my identity. I also don't define myself over what I eat or do, so my sense of self is not threatened by having more options for that.
>>600215
Firstly do you hold the Soviets up to the same standard, seeing how they ethnically cleansed areas of Poland and Prussia? That they were rapists and thieves- all well documented? You act as if you have a moral high ground- but then post images of Soviets who are either taking prisoner of or killing Germans. So clearly your presentation of holding moral high ground is mask to hide your personal sentiments, whether they be anti-German or pro-Soviet or pro-Communism. Secondly ethnic cleansing of what part of Eastern Europe? Not the Czechs, or the Hungarians (who were allied) or the Ukranians (many who served in the wehrmacht), maybe the Poles? But if you sympathized with the Poles, then why post pro-Soviet imagery seeing how the Soviets massacred thousands of Poles?
I just get this impression you're here to troll.
>>600240
I completely grasp that the conduct of the Soviets was horrific while they campaigned across Europe to Berlin. I personally think Dresden was a war crime by the Brits. I think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes as well. I agree, the Soviets had designs on chunks of Eastern Europe and were quite happy to ally themselves with the Nazis i.e. Poland in order to fulfill their desires.
None of this makes what the Nazis, based on documented history, did okay.
>>600240
Hi there!
You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of 4chan are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!
Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!
