Dear Kevin,
Thank you for replying! I wrote that you had ‘never admitted that [you] seriously doubted that “it” occurred as generally described’. So it’s not what you have said but what you have failed to say. Also, publishing someone else’s articles in your capacity as editor of The Occidental Observer is not equivalent to a statement from you.
In 2017, you participated in a videocast of Torah Talk with Luke Ford, a non-ethnically Jewish student of Torah and Talmud. One of Ford’s young students asked you the clearly unexpected question: ‘What are your thoughts about holocaust revisionism?’ I quote your answer word for word:
Yeah, I guess I’m not, uh, I’ve never had any sympathy really, before—I haven’t seen anything that would really, you know, convince me. And I, frankly, haven’t dealt into it very much. My view is that it’s not important for what I’m doing and I don’t think it’s really important—I think what’s really important is the culture of the holocaust, you know, how it’s taught in school, how it’s used to defend Israel, and it’s used as a weapon against people who oppose immigration, and all those things—ah I think those are very important things to discuss. So whether it actually happened, exactly, and all that is something that I don’t think is possible to even go there anymore, is just… just uh… third rail.
Definition of ‘third rail’: A subject that tends to be avoided because of its offensive or controversial nature.
I’d like to insert here that IF it’s not important whether the H. actually happened, how can there be a culture about it that is important? We need to know whether it happened or not—if not, there can be no culture based on it. You were also asked your feelings about Adolf Hitler. You answered:
Oh God, I think that the only term I can use is a disaster. I think that his own personality… got in the way of [the generals] carrying out their strategic military [goals] in World War Two. I think he was, you know, he thought of himself as a general or something. You know, he interfered with policy that should have been left to professionals and I think that that was… horrible, that was a disaster.
There was more, which you can read for yourself at [Carolyn’s site].
______ 卐 ______
Editor’s Note: Read the whole exchange at The Occidental Observer.
9 replies on “Carolyn Yeager confronts KMD”
The Holocaust’s veracity is irrelevant, it is the attitude of the Aryans to this story (real or fake) that is paramount. The Holocaust’s function is contingent on the Aryan’s Christian morality of elevating the foreign victim.
But Carolyn & Co. are Christian or neochristian. These people have ignored my 18 May 2014, ‘Why I am not a neonazi’ that can be read in On Exterminationism, where I say it’s irrelevant to agonise if the holocaust happened.
It’s funny that Carolyn’s commenters at her forum haven’t realised that being NS implies transvaluation. On Exterminationism also quotes this phrase: ‘The WN meme that the Nazis dindu nuffin and dindu mass grave killings is ridiculous and goes against the violent attitude we need to have’.
Well, it is quite easy to tell if the “Holocaust narrative” is true. There is a quote “The truth is like a lion. You don’t have to defend it. Let it loose and it will defend itself.” (The quote is often attributed to St Augustine but that is probably incorrect.)
Before I became more politically involved I never really cared about the holocaust. Stuff happens in war and I cared less about what happened to Jews. Once I learned that there were holocaust denial laws in almost all of Europe (and they’ve tried to pass them in the US as well) then I knew that the narrative was false. Only lies need laws to protect it.
However Adûnâi is correct in that it only really matters how Whites react to the story. Some of us never cared at all. (I suspect I was in the minority there) However the Christian types have an over exaggerated sense of guilt about stuff that’s not their problem.
Nothing will anger Whites more than being lied to, manipulated and cheated. Violence will not be a problem when that becomes apparent to rank and file people. The holocaust propaganda has been used to great effect in the past, but now it’s becoming problematic. The Spartans called it having a Wolf by both ears.
> I think that his own personality… got in the way of [the generals] carrying out their strategic military [goals] in World War Two. I think he was, you know, he thought of himself as a general or something. You know, he interfered with policy that should have been left to professionals and I think that that was… horrible, that was a disaster.
Lol this old myth again. When the Germans went into Russia Hitler wanted to swing south to knock out the Oil supplying the Russians war machine, the Generals wanted to go for Moscow, a largely symbolic victory which wouldn’t have in any way prevented the Russians from continuing the fight. Gen. Zhukov feared the Germans heading South but Stalin was worried about Moscow…
Because Hitler couldn’t convince the Generals his plan was the best one they tried to do both which stretched their manpower too thin. Hitler was right on this issue like he was on many others…but those who continue to be ignorant of the truth surrounding Adolf Hitler keep peddling the lie that he was clueless on waging war.
Since you are a new commenter, please send us an email to [email protected]
The “myth” of the Moscow vs Kiev advance in summer 1941 is known in Armchair Historian circles as “The Eternal Debate”. I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time reading articles and forums about these strategic hypotheses, since Alt History is so addictive to me.
There are conflicting theories by military historians, some based on Russian archives that claim that an advance on Moscow was operationally unfeasible, like in Glantz’s “Barbarossa Derailed” books. I personally don’t trust Glantz, who seems biased towards the Soviets and made a literary career of making the Red Army look good in WW2.
I tend to side with the “Moscow option” of the debate. The best book I can recommend on this subject is Stolfi’s “Hitler’s Panzers East”, where the author theorizes with well-grounded observations on why taking Moscow in 1941 was Germany’s best chance of forcing the USSR into an armistice in 1942.
Hitler did have a problem with some of the top officers because they were mainly aristocrats at the time and they resented having to answer to a “peasant.” People tend to forget how stratified European culture was at the time.
I wasn’t aware that Ms Yeager was christian. That is an important distinction when examining anything connected to Germany during the NSDAP era. The fact that these people deliberately hide their christian worldviews from us means they realize something is wrong with it. What snakes. And I bought her Table Talks CD series too. What is the difference between jewish subterfuge and christian subterfuge? Nothing. The lies I see from a lot of religious people in this scene today is just more evidence the whole scam is a jewish engineered psyops.
Fred, since you are a new visitor, please send us an email.