Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
ThePunisherNL
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:08 pm

Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby ThePunisherNL » 2 years 1 day ago (Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:26 pm)

I have recently purchased Hitlers table talk 1941-1944 and i must say it is a very interesting read. The amount of information about hitler,s world views and thoughts on events that happened in WW2 is astonishing. My question , is the information and conversations in this book about hitler reliable and legit? There are tons of so called biography's on Hitler that have been proven fake. So naturally i am very skeptical about this one aswell.

I have not come across anything in the book about Hitler saying anything about the so called "holocaust" or exterminating the jews. So that is already a good sign. But Hitler talks alot about Christianity in a bad way. While i always had the idea of Hitler as a Christian man.

If any of you have read this book then what is your opinion on it? is the information reliable? which sources were used in the creation of this book?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10065
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby Hannover » 2 years 1 day ago (Thu Jul 05, 2018 6:26 pm)

I suggest:
Genoud, Heim & Picker’s Hitler's “Table Talk”: A Study in Academic Fraud & Scandal
Veronica Clark
https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880

Tons more:
https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relev ... rauschning

- Hannover


Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the ridiculous 'holocaust' storyline is the message.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

ThePunisherNL
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:08 pm

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby ThePunisherNL » 2 years 10 hours ago (Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:33 pm)

Hannover wrote:I suggest:
Genoud, Heim & Picker’s Hitler's “Table Talk”: A Study in Academic Fraud & Scandal
Veronica Clark
https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880

Tons more:
https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relev ... rauschning

- Hannover


Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the ridiculous 'holocaust' storyline is the message.



Thanks for the information Hannover. i will look into it.

King Leonidas
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 3:32 am

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby King Leonidas » 1 year 11 months ago (Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:18 am)

atleast what irving said is that there is some manufactured lies in there

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby Hektor » 1 year 11 months ago (Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:29 am)

Well, it's at least hearsay at most made up. In short: It doesn't have probative value. Doesn't hinder the myth makers from using it.

christianbethel
Member
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:17 pm
Location: Miami, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby christianbethel » 5 months 1 week ago (Thu Jan 23, 2020 7:35 pm)

Last time I checked it was described as having "real quotes mixed with fake quotes."

User avatar
ServantOfAhuraMazda
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2019 7:34 am

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby ServantOfAhuraMazda » 5 months 1 week ago (Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:00 am)

It's worthless. Nobody has ever shown original german manuscript.
"Thou shalt love God in all living things, animals and plants."

- Alfred Rosenberg

User avatar
HMSendeavour
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: Antipodes
Contact:

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby HMSendeavour » 4 months 1 week ago (Sat Feb 22, 2020 2:59 am)

Hektor wrote:Well, it's at least hearsay at most made up. In short: It doesn't have probative value. Doesn't hinder the myth makers from using it.


You'll find that there's mixed feelings about the English edition. Many claim the best edition is the Picker German edition from 1980, but that edition is abridged (I wonder why). And in any case, the original German notes haven't been found. However, I don't know the full details, Irving in responding to the critique of 'Hitler's War' by Martin Broszat (the essay responding to Irving can be found in the compilation volume "Aspects of the Third Reich", which came out in the mid 1980s IIRC) has said that his critique of the Table Talks used in the book were invalid because Irving didn't use the printed volume but instead the original German manuscript. But again, that's not the original notes.

Weidenfeld choked, but did as he was bidden (Weidenfeld later denied this story). Genoud allowed me privileged access to the original German documents for Hitler's War. Other scholars like Martin Broszat and Charles Syndour were unfamiliar with the German texts, and jealously accused me of misquoting when I produced my own translations of the notes, but that is another story.

Source: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/Table_Talk/Picker.html


Irving here says "notes". It might be worth an email to him. He will reply, but it just might reveal nothing or he'll tell you he's busy as he has done to me on many an occasion.
Now what does it mean for the independent expert witness Van Pelt? In his eyes he had two possibilities. Either to confirm the Holocaust story, or to go insane. - Germar Rudolf, 13th IHR Conference

User avatar
NLH
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:28 pm
Location: England, UK

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby NLH » 2 months 2 weeks ago (Sun Apr 19, 2020 5:21 pm)

Hannover wrote:I suggest:
Genoud, Heim & Picker’s Hitler's “Table Talk”: A Study in Academic Fraud & Scandal
Veronica Clark
https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880

Tons more:
https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relev ... rauschning

- Hannover


Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the ridiculous 'holocaust' storyline is the message.


The problem with "Veronica Clark" is that she subscribes to the Christian Identity, and is the author of a number of dodgy books with questionable research and validity. Now, the reason I mention the CI business is that predominantly those that say Hitler's Table Talk is fake are Christian, and what is the one theme running throughout Table Talk? Yes, the anti-Christian sentiment. A lot of low-IQ Christian fundamentalist CI advocates vehemently lambaste Table Talk. I wonder why.

Here is what I Arthur Kemp has said of Clark's diatribe.. He publishes his own edition: https://ostarapublications.com/product/ ... able-talk/

I gave it a read over, and it is the more of the usual: namely, slanderous and ad hominen attacks on Genoud, Irving, etc, rather than any accurate or verifiable refutation of the Table Talk text.

This has been a long and ongoing effort by "right wing" Christians to claim that Hitler was a Christian -- despite the fact that TT reveals he actually despised Christianity as Jewish babble.

In summary, I don't see anything in that article which actually shows that TT is a fabrication. Instead all I see is rehashed attacks on the brave people who dared rescue the manuscript for posterity, even if it doesn't fit the agenda of some.
"Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."
- Kitty Hart-Moxon, Jewish Holocaust Survivor.

June 1998 testimony, USC Shoah Foundation, Visual History Archive.
Part 2 - YouTube - 1:21:42

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10065
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby Hannover » 2 months 2 weeks ago (Sun Apr 19, 2020 6:40 pm)

I think you're way off base by calling Christian Identity groups names. They have their beliefs and have every right to them.

More importantly, I ask you to point out specifics in what Hitler supposedly said vs. the specific criticisms of them that you find problematic, and tell us why you reject such criticisms.

Let's stay on topic here.

Thanks, Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
ServantOfAhuraMazda
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2019 7:34 am

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby ServantOfAhuraMazda » 2 months 2 weeks ago (Mon Apr 20, 2020 7:24 am)

Hitler's anti-Christian sentiment has been talked of by many of the members of his inner circle. Christian National socialists are trying to push their own agenda, but I have to also express objections to the authenticity of this book.

I haven't read through all of this book, yet, but I have found something rather startling.

Of all the Slavs, the Czech is the most dangerous, because he's a worker. He has a sense of discipline, he's orderly, he's more a Mongol than a Slav. Beneath the top layer of a certain loyalty, he knows how to hide his plans. Now they'll work, for they know we're pitiless and brutal. I don't despise them, I have no resentment against them. It's destiny that wishes us to be adversaries. To put it briefly, the Czechs are a foreign body in the midst of the German community. There's no room both for them and for us. One of us must give way.


Here Hitler speaks of Czechs as a foreign body of a mongolian origin. Not only does this contradict what he says later, but it is also in contradiction with the racial theories of the Third Reich.

We'll settle the Czechs' hash if we follow a consistent policy with them, without letting this policy be influenced by accidents of persons. Since the Battle of the White Mountain, in 1620, and until 1867, the Austrian State pursued this policy towards the Czechs. Thus the Czechs ended in being ashamed of speaking their own tongue. A great part of the Czechs are of Germanic origin, and it's not impossible to re-Germanise them.


Suddenly Hitler speaks of Czechs as of Germanic origin. This is in accordance with the nazi racial theories but also with the well known plans of the Germanization of the Czech nation. Racial education stressed the fact that there is no such a thing as a Germanic or Slavic race. They divided Europeans (Aryans) into five main races: Alpine race, Nordic race, Dinaric race, Baltic race, Mediterranean race.

It is not possible to generalise on the extent to which the Slav races are susceptible to the Germanic imprint. In point of fact, Tsarist Russia, within the framework of her pan-Slav policy, propagated the qualification Slav and imposed it on a large diversity of people, who had no connection with the Slavonic race. 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. Turning to the Croats, I must say I think it is highly desirable, from the ethnical point of view, that they should be Germanised.


Again, Hitler speaks of the Mongolian origin of the Czech peoples. What is interesting is that he plans to Germanize the Croatians who are of the Dinaric race. It seems quite odd that he wishes to Germanize the dinaric Crotians while calling the Czechs Mongolian. Czechs have intermingled with Germans for centuries and even today many Czechs bear German surnames. Many Czechs are of the Nordic race and as such would have been (and were) regarded as very valuable racially.

I have examined certain projects for Vienna, but they demand a financial backing from the Reich which I do not consider should be accorded to any city but the capital of the Reich. Any other decision would be wrong. Vienna must, of course, be cleaned up and cleared of slums; and this will be done. I have already cleared the Jews out of the city, but I should like to see the Czechs go, too.


Yet again Hitler shows animosity towards Czechs. What would be the point of clearing them out, if he planned to Germanize them? Not only does it make no sense from the point of their racial theories, but I would also like to note that Hitler's best friend from youth August Kubizek, who wrote the book The young Hitler I knew, was of Czech origin.

In summary, Hitler as presented in this book is not only contradicting himself, but also well known and well documented plans and racial theories of the Third Reich.

I have merely skimmed through this book. I believe anyone with good knowledge of the Third Reich can easily find many dubious statements.
"Thou shalt love God in all living things, animals and plants."

- Alfred Rosenberg

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10065
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Is the book Hitler's Table talks 1941-1944 reliable?

Postby Hannover » 2 months 2 weeks ago (Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:28 pm)

Servant, indeed, you have pointed out absurd contradictions in this piece of propaganda which demolishes those with the irrational Hitler Derangement Syndrome. The attempted "talks" forgeries are simply bizarre, laughably so, and meant for those who have no clue.

And once again, there are no original German manuscripts to review.

Only lies require forgeries.

Best, Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests