LeOstrich:
[s][/s]

NoChill:


A good man you say, what is the definition of a good man?.
Can a good man be defined as the man who was victorious in a war thereby making the defeated a bad man? Or can a good man be defined as a man who was no different from his enemy but had to join forces with men just like him to defeat the common enemy of whom they were not any different from?

What is the difference between Hitler, Alexander the Great, King Richard the lion heart, Napoleon Bonaparte and even Joseph Stalin?

But while the laters were victorious in their campaign Hitler was to be earmarked in history as the evil one just because he lost.

Let me tell you a brief history about these me I mentioned.

Alexander the great was a young and ambitious king of Macedonia who first of all conquered and subdued his fellow Greek Nations (more like what Hitler did to Czech and Poland and Austria). Alexander went further to March his army east into Asia conquering and subduing kingdoms and nations killing anyone that stood in his way.

King Richard led the crusades (a "holy war" against the Muslim Arabs where countless numbers of Muslims were slaughtered in Jerusalem and Middle East, these included women and children)

Stalin was no exception though he was part of the allies, he was a brutal and bloodthirsty tyrant and dictator and just like Hitler he killed a lot of innocent people who stood in his way.

So you see the only difference between Hitler and these men was that He was on the wrong side of history because he was subdued and lost.

What am trying to say here is that in war history is written by the victors and it should not be the premise to judge the losers, if we are calling the victors good then the vanquished should also be called good and vice versa because they are all the same.

Take the Nigerian civil war as case study, who was the good guy and who was the bad guy, mind you Gowon killed millions of civilians, women and children in what some called genocide while Ojukwu led these people to their deaths. But who was celebrated at last.

N. B am not a Nazist or a fan of Hitler am just calling a spade what it is.

immhotep:


Long live diversity in Europe

LeOstrich:


Yep, create a world of brown people with only the Jews remaining pure and distinct s as to place themselves as the master race.

Judaism is Jewish supremacist ideology that puts the Jew as the master race.

The hooked nose rat wants to destroy the aryan race and turn the world to one big brazil.

Since the Jew can not fix himself to appear as the master race, the Jew has decided to destroy other races towards propelling themselves as the only true pure race.

As a nigger, I know you have self-hate and that is why you believe that having a mullato child fromm a white woman may improve the nigger but you must know that this comes at the degradation of the aryan race.

EVarn:
Indeed I agree that history belongs to the victorious , and in the case of WW2, both allies and axis operated using the same "evil" methods, but the argument here is whether Adolf Hitler was a good man, he clearly wasn't.

EVarn:
Indeed I agree that history belongs to the victorious , and in the case of WW2, both allies and axis operated using the same "evil" methods, but the argument here is whether Adolf Hitler was a good man, he clearly wasn't.

LeOstrich:


Douglas Reed writes: “The Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party, which wielded the supreme power, contained 3 Russians (including Lenin) and 9 Jews. The next body in importance, the Central Committee of the Executive Commission (or secret police) comprised 42 Jews and 19 Russians, Letts, Georgians and others. The Council of People’s Commissars consisted of 17 Jews and five others. The Moscow Che-ka (secret police) was formed of 23 Jews and 13 others. Among the names of 556 high officials of the Bolshevik state officially published in 1918-1919 were 458 Jews and 108 others. Among the central committees of small, supposedly ‘Socialist’ or other non-Communist parties… were 55 Jews and 6 others.”

Richard Pipes admits: “Jews undeniably played in the Bolshevik Party and the early Soviet apparatus a role disproportionate to their share of the population. The number of Jews active in Communism in Russia and abroad was striking: in Hungary, for example, they furnished 95 percent of the leading figures in Bela Kun’s dictatorship. They also were disproportionately represented among Communists in Germany and Austria during the revolutionary upheavals there in 1918-23, and in the apparatus of the Communist International.”

According to Donald Rayfield, in 1922, the Jews “reached their maximum representation in the party (not that they formed a coherent group) when, at 15 per cent, they were second only to ethnic Russians with 65 per cent.”

The London Times correspondent in Russia, Robert Wilton, reported: ”Taken according to numbers of population, the Jews represented one in ten; among the commissars that rule Bolshevik Russia they are nine in ten; if anything the proportion of Jews is still greater.”

On June 9, 1919 Captain Montgomery Shuyler of the American Expeditionary Forces telegrammed from Vladivostok on the makeup of the presiding Soviet government: “… (T)here were 384 ‘commissars’ including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen, 22 Armenians, and more than 300 Jews. Of the latter number, 264 had come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the Imperial Government.”

The Jews were especially dominant in the most feared and blood-thirsty part of the Bolshevik State apparatus, the Cheka, which, writes Brendon, “consisted of 250,000 officers (including 100,000 border guards), a remarkable adjunct to a State which was supposed to be withering away. In the first 6 years of Bolshevik rule it had executed at least 200,000. Moreover, the Cheka was empowered to act as ‘policeman, gaoler, investigator, prosecutor, judge and executioner’. It also employed barbaric forms of torture.”

So complete was the Jewish domination of Russia as a result of the revolution that it is a misnomer to speak about the “Russian” revolution; it should more accurately be called the Russian-Jewish revolution.

EVarn:
Indeed I agree that history belongs to the victorious , and in the case of WW2, both allies and axis operated using the same "evil" methods, but the argument here is whether Adolf Hitler was a good man, he clearly wasn't.

LeOstrich:


Not only were Jews the brains behind the Russian revolution and also formed the bulk of active unsurpers, Jewish money from the House of Rothschild was what financed the revolution. Stalin got on a train bound for Ruissia alongside 20 other undesirables equipped with state of the art Tommy Guns from Germany. Their suitcases were also jammed tight with cash and enough gold bars to buy a country.

But why were the Jews the most active revolutionaries? What was it in their upbringing and history that led them to adopt the atheist revolutionary teachings and actions of Russia’s “superfluous young men” more ardently than the Russians themselves? Hatred of Christ and the Christians was, of course, deeply imbedded in the Talmud and Jewish ritual and this also formed the very motive of the Jewish conspirators - the destruction of a Christian Nation.

[b]The Bolshevik Jews did appear to sympathize with Talmudism more than with any other religion. Thus in 1905 the Jewish revolutionaries in Kiev boasted that they would turn St. Sophia cathedral into a synagogue. Again, in 1918 they erected a monument to Judas Iscariot in Sviazhsk, and in 1919 - in Tambov! Perhaps the strongest evidence of the continued religiosity of the Bolshevik Jews was the fact that when the Whites re-conquered Perm in 1918 they found many Jewish religious inscriptions in the former Bolshevik headquarters – as well as on the walls of the basement of the Ipatiev House in Yekaterinburg where the Tsar and his family were shot.

While officially rejecting the Talmud and all religion in general, the revolutionaries did not reject the unconscious emotional energy of Talmudic Judaism. This energy was concentrated in a fiercely proud nationalism, a nationalism older and more passionately felt by virtue of the fact that the Jews had once truly been the chosen people of God. Having fallen away from that chosen status, and been scattered all over the world by the wrath of God, they resented their replacement by the Christian peoples with an especially intense resentment. Roma delenda est – Christian Rome had to be destroyed, and Russia as “The Third Rome”, the Rome that now reigned, had to be destroyed first of all. The atheist revolutionaries of the younger generation took over this resentment and hatred even while rejecting its religious-nationalist-historical basis.[/b]

Afwend:
One cannot deny he was the most popular leader of any modern nation. He was pure and aesthetic. His death was a serious loss to the world, mabey even greater then the death of christ.

EVarn:
Indeed I agree that history belongs to the victorious , and in the case of WW2, both allies and axis operated using the same "evil" methods, but the argument here is whether Adolf Hitler was a good man, he clearly wasn't.

LeOstrich:




While the Jews were wrecking havoc in Russia through their policy of institutionalized starvation in the form of land and food confiscation from farmers - a deliberate policy that led to the starving to death of an estimated 25million Russians, Germany was feeling the pains of economic subjugation from the hands of Jewish globalist bankers who had instigated the worst financial and economic crisis ever recorded even till this day. The Jews not only moved in to buy up all German owned businesses and real estates they also subjugated the once quaint and stoic christian Germans to the most pervasive and degenerate form of modernity. Weimar Germany has been described as probably the most decadent society ever in modern times and the Jews were actively behind promoting debauchery and sexual perversion. It is from this point that men like Hitler rose up and said they had had enough with the Jew rats meddling in their nation's affairs.

You see, at the end of the day, Hitler's greatest sin was his love for his nation and race - he was an ultranationalist protecting Germany and Germans from the Jewish plague. I believe Nationalism is now synonymous with Racism as outlined by the French puppet Macron.

immhotep:

Meanwhile in Jerusalem

LeOstrich:


Why have you switched to Trump? Are you tired f posting your mullato agenda?

Niggers will always be niggers.

Learn a thing or two from Mohammed Ali who was totally against race mixing citing that he is proud of being black and will want his children to black.

https:/6WrNI35VxM

immhotep:

White girl sings "once you go black you never go back":


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSmw7Il2bos

LeOstrich:
[s][/s]

Is this supposed to offend me?

I am black! Ode!

It is so sad that the only bragging rights a nigger has is his dik.

immhotep:

Watch this one also, since you are not offended, and you are a black man.

>>>"White Women Say How Much They LOVE Black Men!"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swv-MTn96uY

LeOstrich:


Being a intimacy gadget is not an achievement.

When they say Black men have no self-control this is what you are helping to reinforce.

Other than walk in here with kegs of ignorance, you have typified the stereotypical nigger.

GTFO of this thread with your niggerfied autism

immhotep:

NAZIsm/Hitlerism is basically caused by the white man's fear of race-mixing

"White girl explains why she likes black guys"

LeOstrich:


And Mohammed Ali is a NAZI for objecting to race mixing?

You are an inferiority complexed nigger

https://yWNeIEMY

Afwend:


Trying to fix a broken world, then being forcefully stopped by (((others))) isn't a failure of the man trying to fix it.

SlaveryWorks:


If you’re talking about the holocaust, you need to start doing some digging. You’ll find that there’s no supporting evidence to cooborate the claims that 6 gorrillion Jews were killed. Stop listening to the media, they’re lying to you. They’ve been doing it since you were born. Get educated, take the red pill. Be warned though, you’re here in Nairaland forever.

EVarn:
This new trend where people are rebranding Hitlerism as a virtue is truly disturbing and misguided. While I may personally understand many of Hitler's worldview, I however believe it is wrong to say the man was a good man in the traditional sense.

SlaveryWorks:


Your verification is simply opinion anon.

EVarn:
This new trend where people are rebranding Hitlerism as a virtue is truly disturbing and misguided. While I may personally understand many of Hitler's worldview, I however believe it is wrong to say the man was a good man in the traditional sense.

LeOstrich:




While the Jews were wrecking havoc in Russia through their policy of institutionalized starvation in the form of land and food confiscation from farmers - a deliberate policy that led to the starving to death of an estimated 25million Russians, Germany was feeling the pains of economic subjugation from the hands of Jewish globalist bankers who had instigated the worst financial and economic crisis ever recorded even till this day. The Jews not only moved in to buy up all German owned businesses and real estates they also subjugated the once quaint and stoic christian Germans to the most pervasive and degenerate form of modernity. Weimar Germany has been described as probably the most decadent society ever in modern times and the Jews were actively behind promoting debauchery and sexual perversion. It is from this point that men like Hitler rose up and said they had had enough with the Jew rats meddling in their nation's affairs.

You see, at the end of the day, Hitler's greatest sin was his love for his nation and race - he was an ultranationalist protecting Germany and Germans from the Jewish plague. I believe Nationalism is now synonymous with Racism as outlined by the French puppet Macron.

LeOstrich:


That's the cycle of things.

Ultraconservatism rears its head at the height of decadence.

Hard times make strong men who take hard decisions that will bring about good times.

Good times lead to complacency and debunchry and from there society crumbles.

The rise and fail of empires is tired to this cycle.

Hitler did nothing wrong!

EVarn:
Going through your articles, I simply deduced that we are saying the same thing, albeit from differing standpoints.

I am a nationalist (Macron's so called "globalism" is merely arrogant rhetoric), and I can say I have deep understanding of most of Hitler's worldview, especially as it concerns the Jewish problem. However, the point of contention is whether the end justified the means for Hitlerite Germany.

The need for to neutralize Jewish influence 3rd Reich and across Europe was understandable, but the pogroms that resulted from that decision marked one of the bloodiest period in modern times. This is the basis of my tagging Hitler a terrible leader. While he meant well for Germany, his ultra-militaristic approach and aggressive social policies marred his intentions.

Attempting to liberate Europe by force and make Germany a hegemony through sheer military power was a grossly miscalculated notion. Inflexibility was also an issue, a more flexible leader would have allied with the soviets despite his hate for them, for the sake of his goal. But he broke the neutrality agreement.


So, it's a matter of perspective.

EVarn:
To say Hitler did nothing wrong is pure historical revisionism. Hitler made very bad decisions, for what he thought was the good of his country. I don't blame his for the decisions, I blame the outcome of his decisions; which was millions of both Germans and non-germans dead, economic depression across Europe and ultimately the nuclear arms race.

LeOstrich:
\


Hitler is vilified by the Jewish academia. Jewish media, Jewish hollywood.

The real revisionists are the Jews who have continued to reinforce their lies on Hitler and NAZI Germany.