1939: New York Times Presented Hitler’s Side of the Story

Most regular readers of this channel know by now that the Sulzberger-Ochs Crime Family has —  ever since buying up the Gentile-owned New York Times on the cheap (post “Panic of 1893”) in 1896 — used its status and influence as “the paper of record” to promote the Globalist agenda. What is less known is the fact that, owing to the generally conservative and patriotic political / cultural realities of decades gone by, the propagandists had to tread carefully as (((they))) went about their dirty business. Today, the Times, if it should so choose, could probably sell the existence of flying Unicorns to their dumb-as-dirt “educated” worshipers. Back in the day, they could not. For that reason, one will find many instances of “the other side of the story” pertaining to this or that issue being presented fully and truthfully — albeit offset by the more numerous poison pills.

The “Times Machines Archives” — which your generous donations help to pay for (hint hint) have proven to be very useful to your favorite Real Historian here when it comes to the never-ending search for all important original-source data. It’s really interesting to note how — when read with a “third eye” and combined with other data — the Jewish-owned New York Times seemed to confirm the version of events presented in the banned and “controversial” book, The Bad War.

Let’s have a critical look at the day-by-day headlines leading up to that fateful and avoidable September 1, 1939 breakout of World War 2, and also those of the first days after the shooting started. Any historian who would dare to merely present this “other side of the story” today — even with obligatory and pathetic “anti-Nazi” qualifiers — would be booted out of Quackademia quicker than Professor Christina Jeffrey was dumped as Congressional historian in 1995 for having, 10 years prior, suggested precisely that in her assessment of a history curriculum she had been tasked with reviewingIt’s amazing.

“The program gives no evidence of balance or objectivity. The Nazi point of view, however unpopular, is still a point of view, and it is not presented.”

These sorts of surprising (by today’s standards, that is) headlines and articles about “the other side of the story” would continue up to and even a few months after Japan’s justifiable non-surprise attack upon the Pearl Harbor naval base in the US territory of Hawaii in 1941. Entire communiques issued by the German, Italian and Japanese Foreign Ministries, as well as statements by Hitler himself, were published — albeit not as frequently nor as well-placed as the dirty lies of Churchill and FDR. It wasn’t until US troops started to physically engage the “Axis” nations that the Times could show its true colors and descend into pure “Yellow Journalism.” But prior to that, the “paper of record” dumped a load of truth gems for anyone with the time, sense of smell and patience to dig them out.

A heartfelt “thank you” to all of “you guys” who — especially in the wake of the Amazon / Kindle ban — have kept me in a position to keep doing just that.


a good read…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s