The Greatest Story Never Told

Is this documentary actually credible? As interesting as it is.

Also, is there any books/valuable reading I can pick up that isnt a muh 6 gorillian billion copy of most books covering the subject?

Reference: thegreateststorynevertold . tv

Other urls found in this thread:

holocausthandbooks.com/dl/22-trcfa.pdf
archive.org/details/TGSNTGERPart2Of3
youtube.com/watch?v=RW8j7czU5m4
amazon.com/Blitzkrieg-Myth-Misread-Strategic-Realities/dp/0060009772
amazon.co.uk/Jewish-Domination-Weimar-Germany-Eckhart-ebook/dp/B00HV52QZE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503152093&sr=8-1&keywords=Jewish Domination of Weimar Germany
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wola_massacre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmiry_massacre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_AB-Aktion_in_Poland
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Lwów_professors
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderaktion_Krakau
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_in_Piaśnica
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pawiak
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_children_by_Nazi_Germany
pamiec.pl/download/49/34899/OperationABKATYNpomniejszona.pdf
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>Also, is there any books/valuable reading I can pick up that isnt a muh 6 gorillian billion copy of most books covering the subject?

Hitler's War for time in office and war-path, '33-'45.

It's not that it didn't happen, but it isn't "no reason" and "6 gorillion" either.

read Shvitti by Ka Tzetnik

here's a book about how Auschwitz wasnt a death camp.

holocausthandbooks.com/dl/22-trcfa.pdf

Have you considered taking individual claims that you want to know whether or not their true, and checking them not with a desire to prove one side but with acquiring truths?
No? Oh okay then

I almost forgot to say: By David Irving (Hitler's War).

Credible? They don't display lies if that's what you are asking, but portrays events in a biased way in favor of Hitler. It's a good watch to balance out the lies created by the Allies and Soviet.

Needlessly conflates Hitler's body count to bajillions of Jews when in fact it was gorillions or less.

It's credible.
Propaganda is known as lying by ommission and this is definately that.
However, every thing else we've ever learned about Hitler and WW2 was Allied propaganda, so it's nice to have some counter propaganda to go with it.
The truth is out there, but not fully on The History Channel or TGSNT

"Icebreaker" by Suvorov will give you another perspective as well, that from Soviet and their plans to draw Germany into a war. It puts doubt on the fact that Hitler attacked Soviet without 'reason'.

Thanks for the reccomendations.

>not being able to discuss issues ever because "google it yourself" is always a solution

here's a download link, take the cinepack with 3 files (8gb)
archive.org/details/TGSNTGERPart2Of3

this is a 6 min clip, kinda tldr, very powerful
youtube.com/watch?v=RW8j7czU5m4
germans could need hooktube, other upload was banned in germany

>Also, is there any books/valuable reading I can pick up that isnt a muh 6 gorillian billion copy of most books covering the subject?

Yes absolutely every book and video talk on youtube by David irving is the most in depth and accurate there is, the guy speaks fluent german spent his whole life in archives reading documents and met most of hitlers inner circle thus the jews have been trying to discredit and destroy him since the late 60s. Seriously do it now go watch david irving churchills war on youtube or any of his other videos and go to his website to download the pdfs of his books for free!

Thanks m8 I will after work aslong as our mummy may doesnt find out

THERE IS LITERALLY A LIST OF SOURCES IN THE FINAL VIDEO'S DESCRIPTION, YOU RETARDED FUCK

>Is this documentary actually credible?

>POLAND STARTED WW2
>THEY MURDERED 6 GORILLION GERMANS PIOR TO WW2
>WE HAVE NO PROOF WHATSOEVER, BUT IT HAPPENED
>BUT HOLOCAUST IS TOTALLY A FAKE STORY
Yeah, "credible".

>the butthurt Pole returns
every time

>Is this documentary actually credible? As interesting as it is.

no. try reading actual history

the fact that you think The History Channel© is the be all end all of WW2 history is really telling

>The truth is out there, but not fully on The History Channel or TGSNT
He literally said the truth will not fully be found on the History Channel.

>Out of arguments
>LE BUTTHURTE
Back to >>>/ledit/.

There is some truth to it and it is worth watching with an open but skeptical mind

Probably the best thing that can be taken away from it is:

>Communist threat to Weimar Germany
>Communist threat to Europe as a whole and how it helps explain Hitler's decision to attack the Soviet Union
>Lack of genocides in Germany's history
>Points out how cartoonishly evil Hitler and others are portrayed in Western propaganda since

Like say showing beat on a puppy when in real-life he was a vegetarian and an advocate for animal rights

>German POW's starved after the war

Everyone should also read "The Bliztkreig Myth" by Jon Mosier

>amazon.com/Blitzkrieg-Myth-Misread-Strategic-Realities/dp/0060009772


It goes into detail on the Allied strategy of mass bombing which failed in the military and strategic sense and instead needlessly kill millions of Germany civilians and caused the starvation of prisoners in German concentration camps


World War II is a lot more nuanced and grey than 99% of people in the West are willing to admit to day, or are ever taught, I should say

The fact that he would even consider the history channel as a player in getting history is what is telling. Read Richard J Evans nigga

It would've been better had it not been 500 hours long. Classic example of an autist who can write but can't edit.

>It goes into detail on the Allied strategy of mass bombing which failed in the military and strategic sense and instead needlessly kill millions of Germany civilians and caused the starvation of prisoners in German concentration camps

yeah, and this is factually wrong. The allied bombing campaign did disrupt german production. Also, the cries of civilian casualites are hypocritical crocodile tears. The war started on september 1, 1939 with Germany bombing the city of Wielun to dust, which had literally no military targets in it.

>Is this documentary actually credible? As interesting as it is.

It shows a lot of events not usually covered by WWII history but also omits any events that makes Germany look bad. Worth watching.

>That pic

Holy shit, is this what passes for a counter to you guys? Jesus wept even at a glance i can see shit that's wrong.

>None of whos leaders were russian.

You absolute spacker, they were pushed by Russian communist jews, the jewish led revolution over in Russia spilled into Germany, it's what Hitler was defending against. Pic fucking related you faggot.

>6 million jobs

Yes he did, he did it through state financing you fucking idiot. Why would he not count minority groups that were not working? Surely it couldn't be because they didn't work right?

>Jews in Media.

Well documented.

amazon.co.uk/Jewish-Domination-Weimar-Germany-Eckhart-ebook/dp/B00HV52QZE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503152093&sr=8-1&keywords=Jewish Domination of Weimar Germany

>Shitty emigration plan

Hitler owed the Jews shit, they didn't belong there, and caused untold misery with their avarice.

>6 million

Figures been revised numerous times.

>Ethnic germans killed by polish communists

True. Again, it's the Germans word against the Good Goy allies. Even poland at the time admited that the Germans in Poland were a inside threat.

This is just at a glance, Good Goy guys, you gotta do better than this. lol

It's worth watching, but it fails to mention or address Generalplan Ost, and the Hunger Plan, which should be a serious gripe with the Nazis on the part of any identitarian, redpilled white man.

6 millions is the propaganda figure. The real one is 25 million.

>Communist threat to Europe as a whole and how it helps explain Hitler's decision to attack the Soviet Union

Yeah, especially the part when Hitler decided to ally with Stalin and invade Poland, the country that saved Germany and rest of Europe from Soviet invasion 20 years ago :^)

See

>The allied bombing campaign did disrupt german production.

Not a degree the degree that it was intended to do

It was a pretty minor disruption in the end

The biggest factor which hampered production was loss of territory in Africa, France, and Eastern Europe, which deprived the German War Machine of raw materials


Allied bombs in WW2, all bombs in WW2, were incredibly inaccurate

>Figures been revised numerous times.

Thegreatestpsyopeversold brought to you by the alphabet agencies. Join one of our affiliate controlled groups today!

>The fact that he would even consider the history channel as a player in getting history is what is telling.
You speak like a nigger.
But anyways, I'm saying TGSNT is History Channel tier history. It's neat, fun, goes down easy, caters to an audience and is liberal with its presentation of events to form a narrative.

>See

See what?


>POLAND STARTED WW2
>THEY MURDERED 6 GORILLION GERMANS PIOR TO WW2
>WE HAVE NO PROOF WHATSOEVER, BUT IT HAPPENED
>BUT HOLOCAUST IS TOTALLY A FAKE STORY

This? This is what you want me to see? It boils down to the Nazis said poland killed Germans, the Allies denied it. That's it. Good fucking lord.

look at the links i provided goddamnit. look at the video for yourself and judge afterwards. or just take a look at the clip... cant be that hard unless you're a leftyfuck or commie

>Nazis said poland killed Germans
No, the """documentary""" pretty clearly claims Poland did it.
Except it actually never happened.

>, they were pushed by Russian communist jews

goalpost moving. Even then, not all of those pushing it were jews.

>Yes he did

[citation needed]

>Well documented.

wow, one neonazi book.

>Hitler owed the Jews shit

this doesnt even attempt to prove the point wrong

>Figures been revised numerous times.

no they havent. you are projecting since holocaust deniers always throw out a random number based on literally nothing.

> it's the Germans word against the Good Goy allies

No, its historical reality vs the ramblings of historically illiterate conspiracy theorist. Its funny how you so easily discard the holocaust as a myth, yet accept this meme of polish genocide of germans when literally NO evidence of it exist.

Hitler was funded by the Rockefellers to defeat the Rothschilds

You're as stupid as a communist can be.

>Yeah, especially the part when Hitler decided to ally with Stalin and invade Poland

It was a practical alliance that was useful at the time in helping complete Hitler's original vision of a restored German state that presided over all ethnically German people

However the Soviet Union was always a growing a threat

Making an ally of somebody also can be said to be a way of neutralizing them as an enemy

Considering the hostility from the Western Allies it was good sense to try and close up a future Eastern Front

ESSENTIAL

>It was a practical alliance
>Instead of allying with Poland to neutralize the Soviet threat, let's invade it together with my mortal enemy!
Brilliant strategy, Hitler.

>a restored German state that presided over all ethnically German people

That wasnt Hitlers goal. His goal was to colonize eastern europe, not just to "regain rightful german clay" as revisionist like to claim

Can't ally with a country you want territory from
I didn't say that wasn't also a goal, but it certainly wasn't his first goal

I did, and to this day I haven't found a reasonable explanation for how fast they supposedly cremated 6 gorillion bodies

They didnt cremate all 6 million victims. Why are holocaust deniers so utterly clueless on the thing they are denying? Do you also think all 6 million were gassed as well?

This. It's naive to think it presents the reality of what happened, but it's no more biased towards Hitler than the official narrative is against him, so they both balance each other out.

If Hitler was so great why did he have no choice but to kill himself?

literally because he was a narcissistic drama queen

>Why are holocaust deniers so utterly clueless on the thing they are denying? Do you also think all 6 million were gassed as well?

They are fucking trolls.

They think it's funny, edge kids, nothing more.

>Can't ally with a country you want territory from
So why did he ally with Stalin again?

Where are the bodies buried then? Where are the remains?

Where are the remains of 6 gorillion Germans """murdered""" by Poles prior to WW2?

Try read a book, you lousy troll.

To get what he wanted from Poland and stave off a future threat to be dealt with later (intended to be much later, but that didn't work out)

The Western Allies were already reaching out to the Soviet Union and naturally Germany did not want a repeat of WW1 with two or more fronts


An alliance with the SU keeps one of those fronts closed

However, after Germany has committed forces to the West it becomes clear the SU is even more aggressive than anticipated, BUT, at that moment in time it had several weaknesses and it was judged by Hitler that a big, fast attack could penetrate deep into the Soviet Union and take it out

This was necessary because over the long term, even if the SU didn't join the Western Allies, it was likely to become a grave threat and rival and park itself on Germany's border, having swallowed up Eastern Europe, and from there could swallow up the rest

The attack into Russia came nearly to Moscow itself. It had a reasonable chance of success, but it was a huge risk.


Just speaking strategically and geopolitical Nazi Germany was in an extremely precarious position. She had many, wealthy, deadly enemies. Hitler tried to think long term and take big gambles in the hopes of big pay offs


Obviously, it didn't work

I never endorsed that claim in the first place


I think the Holocaust has a number of inconsistencies about it and plenty of motive behind it (as a talking point of the war in the post-war West and East) that raise enough red flags to warrant investigation... investigation that is illegal in most places

Considering how the numbers have changed over the decades as well as accusations about things like shrunken skulls, Jewish Soap, and lampshades, I think some skepticism of the Holocaust is reasonable

As to whether or not it is an entire fabrication... I apply the same rule to that as I do any conspiracy: the bigger the conspiracy the harder it is to keep secret

where are the bodies buried then schlomo

>I never endorsed that claim in the first place
So you admit that Hitler was the one to start the war, and then committed number of atrocities against Polish nation, effectively murdering millions of its inhabitants?

Because Holocaust wasn't the only crime committed against Poland.

If you answers for those off the cuff questions I'd genuinely like to hear them

Share any information you want with me

I"m more "on the fence" rather than being #holohoax


My opinion based on what I do know is that there has have been lies and exaggerations that inflate the numbers of people who died and circumstances of their death


I do not think the narrative in popular culture, that Jews were murdered in gas chambers, holds up well to critical examination and this view is reinforced by the fact that critical examination of this narrative is actually illegal in most places. A lot of influential parties also have or had good reason to lie or exaggerate on the actual facts.

we wouldn't recommend it so much if it wasn't

I agree he started the war, though I haven't enough knowledge of the alleged crimes against Poland (aside from attacking her) by Geremany to have an opinion about that

...

>I haven't enough knowledge of the alleged crimes against Poland
Let me educate you a little then.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wola_massacre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmiry_massacre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_AB-Aktion_in_Poland
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Lwów_professors
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderaktion_Krakau
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_in_Piaśnica
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pawiak
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_children_by_Nazi_Germany

can you read?

Save, I will look through these another time

To clarify something:

I never stated the TGSNT was a 100% faithful recounting of history. I consider it Third Reich propaganda but like any really good propaganda it has truth in it mixed with anything else that makes the Third Reich look good

I said watch it with an open and SKEPTICAL mind

What about the polish persecution of their german minority in pozan and danzig? Hitler originally invaded to protect them, in a similar way to his annexation of the sudetenlands.

>it has truth in it mixed
Yeah - something like 90% lies and 10% truth.

>What about the polish persecution of their german minority in pozan and danzig?
Well, what about it?
Do you have any citations proving that such thing ever actually happened?

I don't know what the precise breakdown would be, but my point is that it is no less propaganda than the vast majority of WWII content westerners are exposed to and all of that contains truth as well

History is complicated and it is not black and white, ever


You are clearly very biased. Assuming you are actually Polish, I understand it. However in my view we must be as wary of our own propaganda as we are an enemy's

>Is this documentary actually credible?

Nope, its just spouting revisionist bullshit and lies that have been debunked even prior to WW1.

This is the level some of you operate on. You swallow up bullshit that has been proven lies ages ago.

>What about the polish persecution of their german minority in pozan and danzig?

you mean that event that never happened? Stop valuing your feels over objective historical reels

Lmao stay mad you drooling spastic

>asks for proofs
>his proofs are wikipedia

EL EM AY OH

Richard Tedor - Hitler's Revolution is a good starting point. But I know you're a shill so it doesn't matter

nameing a book by a neonazi isnt proof user

>wikipedia
Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, you dense nigger. Even you. So instead question the sources of articles, if you feel the need to.

But in case if you still cried for non-wiki sources:

pamiec.pl/download/49/34899/OperationABKATYNpomniejszona.pdf

>when in doubt, "neonazi!" you shout!

>Richard Tedor - Hitler's Revolution
Well, can you quote the exact part of that book that prooves alleged "Polish persecution"?

Where did it happen? Who was persecuted? Who was the perpetrator? Are there any photos? Source materials? Witnesses?

Dates, names, locations.

You are a neonazi though user, you have a nazi flag. Why do you feel the need to cry as if you are being strawmanned as something you clearly are and arent even hiding? now I ask you again, where is your proof for this claim?

There's a PDF and a chapter on Poland specifically. You can find it in 10 seconds flat.
Richard Tedor isn't a National Socialist.

If you had just spent half a second longer scrolling flags and chose the fascist one, you would have gotten quads and been the belle of the ball

You realize that the claim is that the massacres were happening over a massive period of time right? And I'm not going to fucking spoonfeed you a book, you're so adamantly claiming that your people dindu nuffin, you should be more than happy to read dissenting evidence in its full glory instead of in watered down summaries by internet people.
But your claim was that Mr. Tedor was a neo-nazi. As far as I know he isn't and neither am I. Perhaps you could try to drop your faked calm demeanor because I can practically taste your aura of aggressive smugness behind the screen.

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer.

It has some flaws, but was written before Hitler became a mystical cartoon supervillain, covers the whole history in digestible bits, and sorts out the principal personalities involved.

Consider it a primer that gives you a framework to go from to figure out which specific parts you want to look into further.

>But your claim was that Mr. Tedor was a neo-nazi.

he is. I know who he is user. And you clearly are. Now please post evidence of your claim instead of dodging the question by trying to pretend you arent a neonazi while sporting a nazi flag and shilling nazi propaganda

Its also funny how you lot tend to be these ultra super skeptics concerning the holocaust, yet when something as ridiculous as the polish massacre of germans comes up, you accept it without any proof and call anyone who questions it a shill if they so much as ask for a source.

Isn't that book accused of being filled with Mr Shirer's personal biases against Hitler? He uses a lot of colorful words to describe Hitler does he not. Also a LOT of new information has come out since his time. His works need to be updated to reflect this.

No, it's broadly speaking made up of misrepresentation, ignorance, and a contortion of the established facts while eschewing and downplaying any that contradict the narrative.

And I say this as someone who broadly sympathises with the Nazis, at least prior to the Holocaust.

Richard J Evans is arguably the leading expert on the third reich and his trilogy is the best info on it

>Nope, its just spouting revisionist bullshit and lies that have been debunked even prior to WW1.
>This is the level some of you operate on. You swallow up bullshit that has been proven lies ages ago.


It's so sad to see Sup Forums in this stage of TOTAL dumbness.

Sup Forums from 2011 would execute every single one of the edgy try hards we got on in Sup Forums2017

Pretty based comment. I have exactly the same opinion as you on this topic.

What do you think of ww2 and what is your political affiliation if I may ask?

>he is. I know who he is user
Woah, that's a hella convincing statement right there. I wonder how I'll ever compete.
>And you clearly are.
I'm as much of a neo-nazi as the average conservative is a neo-conservative.
>trying to pretend you arent a neonazi while sporting a nazi flag
Out of interest, whenever you see someone claim they're a liberal, do you call them a neo-liberal?
>and shilling nazi propaganda
Goebbels may have said that repeating a lie a thousand times makes it true but I highly doubt you're going to be able to reach 1 thousand anytime soon.
>yet when something as ridiculous as the polish massacre of germans comes up, you accept it without any proof and call anyone who questions it a shill if they so much as ask for a source.
I gave a source. You baselessly resort to ad hominem and attacked me and the historian. I'd say you don't really have the moral high ground.

>Interwar Gdańsk
>Germans
>Being a minority

Holy fuck lurk more newfag

>start a war on two fronts
>send jewish nuclear scientists to work on manhatten project
>thought bolt actions better than assault rifles

Yeah he was such a misunderstood genius and everyone teamed up on him unfairly! reeeeee

>I gave a source.

you gave me a book, not a source. What part of the book give evidence for this event user? What exactly is this evidence? And calling a neonazi a neonazi isnt a ad hom. Stop being a "learn muh pronouns" baby and answer my question instead of dodging it. Also, why are you so critical of the idea of the holocaust, while at the same time willing to accept the polish massacre of germans when there is no proof that you can even give me?

confirmation bias much?

It certainly has some bias, but compared to later mainstream works it's practically neutral. It also has the advantage of being the most complete work on the subject closest to the timeframe discussed.

I did say it was a primer, not the definitive end source. It's a good place to start to establish the setting and give an abstract. You have to start somewhere, and even though the book is thicc it does a decent job of sorting out the who,what,where, and why. When the reader moves on to other sources, at least they will be equipped to know who the fuck Von Papen, Blomberg, and Dollfuss were.

>you gave me a book, not a source
The book is the source. The whole thing.
>What part of the book give evidence for this event user?
I'd say Chapter 1 but I could be wrong. Start from there and you should eventually find it.
>And calling a neonazi a neonazi isnt a ad hom
Trying to claim that my source is invalid due to the supposed ideology of the writer is invalid. Not even having a source for your claim that the writer is a "neo-nazi" is even more so.
>Stop being a "learn muh pronouns" baby
So if you were to walk up to a Confederate flag waving redneck and call them a neo-con, you expect to not get sucker punched in the face and possibly beaten to shit by him and his buddies? Good to confirm that you don't really live in reality.
>Also, why are you so critical of the idea of the holocaust
Where did I say I was? I have no comment on the Holocaust.
>while at the same time willing to accept the polish massacre of germans when there is no proof that you can even give me?
I gave you proof, you deny in on the weakest of grounds. A total waste of time it is.

>The whole thing.

I dont know if you've ever taken any sort of english class, but you cant just give a book as a citation. You need to quote the exact part in question that answers our need for evidence. What you are doing is the equivalent of saying the bible is proof god exist.

Again, give us proof and explain why you are super skeptical about the holocaust yet willing to believe in some baseless claim like polish massacre of germans

>but you cant just give a book as a citation.
I can't expect my opponents to be literate? That's a rather low bar set for history debates.
>Again, give us proof and explain why you are super skeptical about the holocaust
You have failed to prove that I question the Holocaust at all, just like you fail to back your slander of Mr. Tedor up.
>yet willing to believe in some baseless claim like polish massacre of germans
There is a basis, and that basis can be found in Richard Tedor's book Hitler's Revolution. Perhaps try reading it?

If you want there is a chapter specially dedicated to Poland. If you downloaded the book in PDF format which can be done in 10 seconds then I'm sure the contents will have link straight to the chapter on Poland. I actually have the expanded 2nd edition so the book you'll read will have a little less information then mine but you'll get the point. The War that had Many Fathers is also a good book for this.