- It would be interesting to list revisionist sources on the subject of the First World War. It seems that it's acceptable to publish about it. Supposedly.Since it's not likely that the "First World War Centenary" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World_War_centenary), a propagandic feast, especially in the countries which got actively in the conflict, will allow refreshing views on this historical event to come to the fore.http://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Erster_Weltkrieg#Literatur is a comprehensive list of sources.
Other references about wartime propaganda:http://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Vorgeschichte_des_Ersten_Weltkriegeshttp://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Englands_Blutschuld_am_Weltkriegehttp://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Kriegsschuldfrage_des_Ersten_Weltkriegeshttp://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Raubstaat_England#Die_Einkreisung_Deutschlandshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill,_Hitler_and_the_Unnecessary_War#World_War_Ihttp://codoh.com/library/document/363/#ftn18A recently published article in the mainstream press:http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/questions-of-culpability-in-wwi-still-divide-german-historians-a-953173.htmlOn the interwoven subject of the six million figure and Zionism:http://sv.metapedia.org/wiki/6_000_000_judarhttp://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=6451
We just read about this English website which deals with the subject in connection with the 'official' Oxford historiography.
http://firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com/
http://firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/the-conquest-of-oxford/
From: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
To: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 13:41:27 +0200
Subject: [evola_as_he_is] WW I RevisionismIt would be interesting to list revisionist sources on the subject of the First World War. It seems that it's acceptable to publish about it. Supposedly.Since it's not likely that the "First World War Centenary" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World_War_centenary), a propagandic feast, especially in the countries which got actively in the conflict, will allow refreshing views on this historical event to come to the fore.http://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Erster_Weltkrieg#Literatur is a comprehensive list of sources.
Other references about wartime propaganda:http://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Vorgeschichte_des_Ersten_Weltkriegeshttp://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Englands_Blutschuld_am_Weltkriegehttp://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Kriegsschuldfrage_des_Ersten_Weltkriegeshttp://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Raubstaat_England#Die_Einkreisung_Deutschlandshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill,_Hitler_and_the_Unnecessary_War#World_War_Ihttp://codoh.com/library/document/363/#ftn18A recently published article in the mainstream press:http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/questions-of-culpability-in-wwi-still-divide-german-historians-a-953173.htmlOn the interwoven subject of the six million figure and Zionism:http://sv.metapedia.org/wiki/6_000_000_judarhttp://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=6451It would be a very good thing if the First World War was better understood.
Of course, the causes of the war were very complex and can only be fully comprehended with a good knowledge of European history. J.F.C. Fuller, probably the best military historian of recent times, wrote an indispensable book called The Conduct of War, which considers the roots as well as the events of the major wars of modern times, starting with the French Revolution. His short Armament and History is an excellent supplement to this. For a concentrated and compact look at the war, Basil Liddell Hart's World War I in Outline can also be recommended.
Incidentally, both authors were involved with the circle around Mosley, and in their books they do not pass over or ignore the excesses and stupidities of the Allies. Compared to the new mainstream histories, they are certainly revisionist.
Arthur Ponsonby's Falsehood in Wartime catalogues many of the preposterous lies spread by the Allies about the Germans.
evola_as_he_is@{{emailDomain}}