[Right Wing Professor]

I suggest anyone interested in the provenance of Table Talk, and in particular the English translation produced by Trevor-Roper, consult this link, which appears to be well-substantiated and thoughtful. In particular it shows convincingly that the Trevor-Roper version of Table Talk was not in fact a direct translation of the Bormann Vermerke (Bormann's edited notes) but a second-hand translation of the French version by Genoud. Genoud was a Nazi sympathizer, claimed to have worked closely with the PFLP for the destruction of Israel, and financed the defense of terrorist Carlos the Jackal. He donated allegedly half the proceeds of the salke of the work to Hitler's sister. Mr. Carrier draws the following conclusion.

Numerous other evidence like this confirms the general conclusion: the published English is from the French, not the German. This means that Stevens and Cameron must have lied to or misled Trevor-Roper, claiming they had translated Genoud's German manuscript. Moreover, the ultimate source for the doctored quotations is Genoud. The immediate and most important conclusion is that the Trevor-Roper edition, the only English version in print, is worthless. No one who quotes this text is quoting what Hitler actually said

I have myself taken steps to obtain the two published German language versions of the Table Talk; the Jochmann version of the Bormann Vermerke; and the Picker version of the notes that he and Heim took. Since I have a good reading knowledge of German, I will be able to report first hand on whether the anti-Christian quotations pasted here by Mr. Hill actually appear in the originals. I will report back on this piece of research, and publish it on my blog.

Two final notes: everyone should remember that Hugh Trevor-Roper also endorsed the authenticity of the fake Hitler diaries in 1983. However, the Trevor-Roper version of Table Talk does have the endorsement of David Irving. So it is clear that it does appeal to historical revisionists.

[Sam Hill]

"I suggest anyone interested in the provenance of Table Talk, and in particular the English translation produced by Trevor-Roper, consult this link, which appears to be well-substantiated and thoughtful."

You mean the Freedom From Religion Foundation? LOL

You are a preposterous blowhard.

Do you realize how many people are listed throughout as being present during these discussions?

Generals, the "Mountain People" (secretaries, etc.), diplomats, et al. And again, many of these people subsequently wrote books or gave interviews or worked with historians.

No one. NOT ONE PERSON has ever suggested that these remarks were inaccurate.

There would be no reason on Earth for Heim or Picker to allow their notes to be misrepresented or twisted. In fact, they could have gotten some lucrative book contracts, if they had taken this stance.

YOU are the revisionist. And you are a true pig to keep trying to somehow tar my position with David Irving's revisionism. Irving and the rest of the Neo-Nazis do contend that Hitler was a good Christian. So you are taking the Neo-Nazis position, you asshole.

You are poisoned by your hatred of Christianity. Maybe you've inhaled too many chemicals. But you are clearly insane on this subject, and probably others.