Amanpour interviews Brendan Simms on Hitler, the AFD, etc.
Brendan Simms discusses his new biography of Adolf Hitler, and why he thinks the dictator’s main preoccupation was in fact Anglo-American capitalism
Brendan Simms discusses his new biography of Adolf Hitler, and why he thinks the dictator’s main preoccupation was in fact Anglo-American capitalism
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
Never heard of Brendan Simms. I just looked at his curriculum in Wikipedia. He is just another liberal bastard repeating the same old lies. Why would I waste time listening to a mudslinger like him? I can’t believe he is even discussed here at TOO.
Google these words “bolshevik financed wall street”
About 907,000 results (0.50 seconds)
Very poor quality, voice muffled, especially that of Simms. That’s CNN or Amanpour for you.
Speaking of her though, she is still completely brain dead when it come to see the what is calls the “populists” or authoritarians in the former Warsaw Pact countries. IOW, she is grossly overrated. I recall her interviewing a couple of months ago the Hungarian Foreign Minister Szijjarto, when in her stupendous ignorance she took him to task why Hungary closed the parliament at the onset of the Coronavirus pandemic. And when Szijjarto told her that he was just coming from a session of the Hungarian parliament and he is expected to return to it after the interview, she just said “really, I didn’t know.”
“..she is grossly overrated.”
They all are.
Except for Tucker Carlson.
Carlson is an opportunist. He dwells comfortably within an envelope whose edges he never pushes.
Dear Mister de Craon,
Quite true. Although he has far better qualities than many another. Perhaps he is aware of just what occurs in The Land of The Free and The Home of The Brave; just look at what happened to Misses Trish Regan on the television network, Fox Business News. On her news show, “Trish Regan Primetime” the 9th of March, 2020 she called the Coronavirus Disease-2019 an impeachment scam and was first suspended and then fired. Her colleague Misses Lisa Kennedy also lost her show “Kennedy”.
The gentleman who came out and bluntly stated the truth was Mister Grahame Ledger host of “The Daily Ledger’ on One America News calling his report “The Greatest Scam In World History”. Here is an earlier show of his from April 20th, 2020. https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/oan-host-claims-covid-19-death-count-inflated-and-hospitals-are-fudging
No one is going to be completely perfect, but we should take what is positive. I for my part if I had to choose I’d always prefer Mister Ledger to Mister Carlson. And Mister Ledger recently has had to leave One America News. Of course I dislike the absurd usage of the word Fascist but by now one is immune to such philosophical ignorance and lack of historical knowledge. God Bless, Aristo Boho
Yes Pierre. But far better than not being there at all. Listen between the lines.
Perhaps you’re right, Charles, but every time I listen to Carlson, I hear the whistling of the steam-release valve on the pressure cooker as it keeps what’s inside the pot from exploding. In addition, I think that the comment of Howard R, just below, is food for serious thought. Although Iran-Contra never mattered much to me one way or another, I share the gentleman’s other concerns, especially with regard to Abrams, whose cork-like tendency to pop back up to the surface after what seems like each successful drowning is a wonder of the age—and not in a good way.
Many on this site have stated, that they migrated here from somewhere to the left; including KM. I did also, though not as far from the left as some others, given my active front row seat and on the ground observations of realities in the two Berlins.
My sole reaction to the realization, that Kristol was approaching me from the opposite direction, would be to cross the street: or barf. His visage and speech pattern, compared to Tucker’s, would suggest, that the two originate from different species. The kid-next-door v. the slime-ball-K: misrepresented by CNN as a conservative; feigning their delusional journalistic imperative of impartiality/objectivity; while agit-proping their viewers.
America [ We ] are fortunate to have Tucker, rather than him running a major GM dealership.
Iraq was a disgrace: with greasy Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld announcing one day prior to 9/11, that 2.1 Billion Dollars could not be accounted for by Russian Rabbi and CFO of the Pentagon, Dov Zakheim.
My only significant difference from you, Charles, is one of origin rather than opinion. Namely, I was never on the Left or even slightly in sympathy with its concerns. I need hardly add that I think that your respective characterizations of Kristol and Carlson are on the mark, and so too is what you say about Iraq, Rumsfeld, and most of all, Zakheim.
Thus, as I wrote above, I would be glad if you were correct about Carlson, and of course, I understand that neither he nor anyone else could ever plainly name the Jew without forever losing his chair and camera at Fox. Nonetheless, am I wrong to be concerned that, in common with everyone else accorded access to the airwaves, the people he or his masters choose to serve as on-camera experts or authority figures tend to be Jewish to an extent that cannot be explained or justified by reference to certifiable expertise or even raw chance? What’s more, if he has even once said something that, for instance, remotely suggests that Israel ought to be treated as a foreign country, let alone a hostile state, it would come as news to me.
With respect to the last point, back in the eighties and nineties, Rowland Evans and Bob Novak (the latter a Jew who converted to Catholicism) said these and similarly critical things about Israel on air all the time. I don’t deny that times have changed for the worse, but wouldn’t you agree, my friend, that someone, somewhere, has to find the fortitude to embrace a standard of public conduct whose prime characteristic is something other than rank timidity?
You omitted to chide me on an unforgiveable matter.
As we can all recapture on an extant CBS clip, Rumsfeld did not announce a missing 2.1 billion dollars, but, rather 2.1 TRILLION, one day before 9/11, which, by Jewish luck, destroyed Zakheim’s Accounting Offices in the Pentagon; along with many of that office’s staff.
As I commented here contemporaneously, Rabbi Zakheim thereby slightly altered the International Accounting Principles. Which, in turn, were applied by three major accounting firms, who, after collecting several hundred millions for fees from the taxpayer, threw in the towel in disgust.
With characteristic Jewish honesty, Z assured Congress that great progress was being made in cleaning up the DoD accounting
cesspool. I don’t know, whether that included his selling fit US fighters at scrap prices to Israel.
He was also boss over Snowden and the Ebola expert, who perished, with her daughter, in the ” German Air ” flight from Barcelona to Duesseldorf, which could have been brought down due to Ebola disclosure reasons, by his Systems Planning Corporation’s product called the Flight Termination System, which over-rides all pilot commands and on board functions, including the locking of the cockpit door from inside, thus excluding the ” unhappy, suicidal ” captain’s peeing-absent co-pilot. The Rabbi needs a book written about him, or at least a full treatment here.
There is nothing to chide you for, Charles, and even if there were, I would be disinclined to be the one to do it. Zakheim’s depravity and criminality are not matters that rise or fall with the addition or subtraction of three zeros to the left of a decimal point.
Were you yourself to act upon the second suggestion you make in the quoted sentence, I would not be alone, I think, in welcoming it wamly.
PIERRE DE CRAON– Perhaps you want Carlson to say “Jews are behind everything wrong with our society; therefore they should all be shipped to the Jewish State”? And after he’s finally removed from his enviable position of influence and replaced by someone much more satisfactory to our foes, you’ll be able to say, “Yes, Carlson is a trooper”?
Our movement is on crutches and you expect it to win a marathon.
Carlson is the most watched political commentator in the USA, and he’s saying very important things, even radically valuable things. He’s
*said that immigration–and not just illegal influxes–have made America divided, dirty and poorer;
*called Mexico a hostile foreign power, in that it allows its people to invade us;
*called the Afghan war a pointless stalemate and is against these endless wars for Israel, whether or not he says they’re for Israel;
*supported the construction of an anti-migrant wall on the Southern border;
*declared that “white supremacy” is a hoax, which it is;
*defends Whites in attacking anti-White racism now rampant in the West– ALL his attacks on racism being made in the context of the latest outrage of unequal treatment of Whites;
*opposed the overthrow of Assad;
*been credited with dissuading Trump from attacking Iran after Iranians shot down a US drone;
*been credited with persuading Trump to cut funding for “Critical Race Theory” seminars–White-guilt programming–calling it idiotic and evil….
—among other things.
No one else is doing so much while reaching so many people. And yet outside of Richard B. here, and myself now, the posters here are next door to hostile toward TC. For my part, I hope that the talk of his running for president in ’24 isn’t just talk.
P.S. It’s been remarked here that Carlson backed the Iraq war at first. That he did, but has reproached himself publicly for doing and said he won’t make such a mistake again.
Please extend me the usual courtesy of reading what I have written before you tell me what I want Carlson or anyone else to say.
For the rest, you are welcome to congratulate yourself to the limits of your imagination for being a Carlson fan. As I remain as unpersuaded by your sneers as by the reasoned and reasonable arguments of others, I shall adjust to living with your displeasure.
You mean the Tucker who worked for Bill Kristol’s ‘Weekly Standard’ as a trust fund kid and shilled for the Iraq war and annihilation of Iran and covered up Iran-contra and Elliot Abrams crimes. That Tucker?
Reading this rubbish on a page would, I think, have been significantly less revolting than the experience of seeing and listening to it. Hearing the fool Amanpour—an unthinkingly self-confident exponent of the Jew-owned media’s privilege of lying about effectively everything—smugly declare her agreement with Angela Merkel that Germans are to be considered a stigmatized, suspect people ad perpetuum and then hearing the much more menacing (not least because more composed) Simms complaisantly agree with both of these horrid women triggers a futile, albeit righteous, impulse to effect their summary execution.
I might take comfort from the clumsiness with which Amanpour et Cie fail to conceal their malice and their dishonesty were it not for the fact that a large majority of our white brothers and sisters march in lockstep with her and similar mouthpieces for the (((international dictators of thought))). If the authorities should declare next week that covid masks need to cover the eyes as well as the nose and mouth, will we be able to count on even 10 percent bridling?
Surely, for the Jews and for the millions the Jews lead around by the nose, Nationalsozialismus and AH together constitute the gift that keeps on giving. Here we are, seventy-five years to the month after the most cynically pointless wartime abomination in human history, the dropping of two atomic bombs on an already defeated Japan, and brainwashed morons still prattle on with a morally righteous air about how the United States and its equally virtuous Allies—including the Soviet Union—saved the world from the evil Germans, Italians, and Japanese. It ought to be plain to all that any politician, media talking head, or other public figure who refers to Nazis at this point in time is merely giving deferential acknowledgment to the Jews that, when the chips are down, he or she will do whatever they tell him to do.
Dear Doctor MacDonald,
Thank you, for I had not known of this interview last year nor of the historian Doctor Brendan Simms. My copy played clearly.
There’s only one word that is significative for this discussion-interview with Misses Christine Amanpour and Professor Simms: INSIDIOUS. Notice how this filth, the one deliberate, Misses Amanpour, the other a confused establishment academic stooge, Professor Simms, manipulate the story of Adolf Hitler and National Socialist Germany, the way the mass media does with whatever is positive about President Donald John Trump and present European Nationalists, that Nationalism, Race, Tradition and all else of value concerning a European nation, or any nation, wanting its just independent survival and not to be globalist existential without any distinct identity, is hate filled and inhumanly intolerant of one’s fellow man.
Der Führer Adolf Hitler did recognise the dangers of the Soviet Union, but like Il Duce Benito Mussolini, understood that the Capitalist Plutocracy of the Anglo-Saxon world was the financial fulcrum and source of monetary fodder for a nation’s deconstruction and the setting up of a massive warehouse of enslaved human beings named by Communists a Peoples Socialist Republic or similar. Der Führer , Chancellor Adolf Hitler, understood very well what his country’s survival entailed. And remember there would be a most important dovetail that would take place with the defeat of German, Italy and Japan: Capitalism from the Anglo-Saxon world and its finance of Chairman Mao Tse Tung and what would become Red China, and the betrayal of the Chinese Nationalists led by Chang Kai-shek. Well well planed years in advance. Misses Amanpour and Professor Simms speak of intolerance and racial hatred, and the brutality of Hitler’s beliefs for Germany. The following is what they both represent, and I quote from a leading World Capitalist from the Anglo-Saxon world, MIster David Rockefeller, which is proof where quintessentially the aforementioned two hit men of this discourse come from and adhere to: “Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.” An aside: is this or is this not establishment Satanism?
This is exactly why there is only word for the likes of Amanpour and Simms and what they had to say, I repeat: Insidious! And another piece of evidence that proves this, is the original title,
of Simms’ book, of the first edition which is English, “Hitler: Only The World Is Enough”; oh let us shiver in our boots for the big bad Nazis want the entire world to themselves!!! Ergo.the second edition, first edition New York title is not the authentic name: “Hitler: A Global History”. This was confirmed to me by a friend of mine whose friend in turn made an enquiry to Simms about the intended name of this work. I quote what he forwarded to me by Simms;” Dear Sir,
Thank you for your email. The original title was that of the English edition, but a Global Biography’ was thought to work better for a US audience,. The intention is the same. It is quite common for books to have different titles in different countries, as you rightly note.
I hope you enjoy the book!
All good wishes,
Two historical facts which might be of interest to you all: 1. Prime Minister Benito Mussolini did not see Premier Josef Stalin as the major threat but the Yellow Race as in a future dominant Chinese power, just as Colonel Charles Augustus Lindbergh had believed in so many words of his own. Space and time doesn’t allow for the positive, and not unintelligible interest in China that respectively Italian Foreign Minister Count Galeazzo Ciano and Mister Ezra Pound had. I believe you’ll be in accord with me that nothing is ever one dimensional. 2. Doctor John Lukacs who deserves the terms doctor and professor, although I do not always agree with him, stated in his 2006 work “June 1941: Hitler and Stalin” that the former was not actually that keen on attacking the Soviet Union as his military commanders were. An interesting different take on Operation Barbarossa. God Bless, Aristo Boho
Both Christiane and Fareed used to have a mind of their own when they first started a long time ago. Perhaps a higher mortgage changed all that.
Irving speaks of so-called authors of writing an eleventh book, based on their first reading ten others. And of course being unable to read such ten books in the language of their subject matter. I.e. interpretations of interpretations piled upon ignorance of being unable to read data in its original. I.e. the heralded Simms.
With respect, I find it unworthy to give these two nobodies air-time at TOO.
Perhaps I’m wrong, but I’ve assumed that in posting this video, Kevin, motivated by either wry amusement or dismay, meant to show us what the Establishment considers the present-day limit of tolerable Hitlerian revisionism. The intellectual poverty and (im)moral imperturbability of both author and interviewer produce a dialogue marked by pious conformity to the official narrative. Offensive, yes, but not devoid of interest.