It's an interesting read but I'm sure it was not factually accurate in many aspects because of (((them))). Most of the interesting information is written from Europe so it was good journalism and reporting to a degree but as I said, I question a lot of the accounts.
Pretty much any WWII account is questionable in some regard, that's a given.
The fact that it hasn't been pushed out of existence tells me it's probably a bit off the mark in spots.
Yeah. The first hand accounts of Berlin and German people show the journalists acknowledged how peaceful it was, everyone seemed on the same page and crime was at an all time low while the economy boomed.
He even acknowledged how the Germans believed that Europe would back them and they would make a continental alliance to destroy the Soviet Union. Going so far as to even letting the British escape at Dunkirk and consistently asking for a treaty. Even the US didn't get involved as they considered it or staying neutral but Churchill was hellbent on destroying his Germanic brothers (English is a Germanic language) and ever since Roman times the British and Germans got along relatively until the 1800s.
The biggest mistake in my opinion was the Japanese attack on Hawaii. They should have formed a double border invasion with their Axis allies and crushed the communists in Operation Barbarossa instead.
The author posts a lot of honest journalism about how successful Germany was under Hitler and morale was at an all time high. Then of course everything changed and the author starts talking about the holocaust and other propaganda by the British, French, Soviets and US in the last few hundred pages and you can tell the kike propaganda was running globally and rampant to excuse what was already planned:
The evacuation of jews and illegal occupation of British Palestine for the creation of Israel due to a "holocaust".
Sounds about like exactly what you'd expect.
(post is archived)