One of the most common claims that desperate promoters of the ‘Holocaust’ myth like to bring forth when confronted with the primary documentation that suggests that the ‘Holocaust’ is a myth based on a mix of wartime black propaganda and rumour is the claim that Hitler himself ‘confirmed’ that ‘if there was a war he would exterminate the jews’.
Recently Rabbi Jeffrey Salkin made just such a nonsense claim in his column ‘The Many Forms of Holocaust Distortion and Why J. D. Vance Remarks Matter’ at ‘Religion News’ (1) that I wanted to address separately from my length debunk of his nonsensical attempt to create a ‘system’ to ‘categorize Holocaust Distortion’, (2) because it is a common enough false claim in and of itself and thus needs to be addressed separately.
Salkin writes that:
‘To quote my friend Peter Himmelman in his Substack:
Hitler (may his name be erased) himself was explicit about what the war was for. In his speech to the Reichstag on January 30, 1939, he declared that if war came, its result would be “the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe.” This was not metaphor. It was demonic prophecy, a warped but deeply held theology, the articulation of a destiny he believed necessary to redeem the world.’ (3)
The problem of course is that Himmelman and Salkin’s claim is just moronic rubbish that relies on reading Hitler’s speech of 30th January 1939 completely out of historical context and to replace Hitler’s meaning with their own claim of ‘what Hitler meant’.
The German historian of the Third Reich Hans Mommsen – building on the work of other historians of the Third Reich like Yehuda Bauer and Ian Kershaw – commented on how nonsensical these sorts of claims are in a widely-cited journal article in ‘History and Memory’ in 1997.
He began by first explaining how:
‘The most widely known quotation from Hitler’s public orations is taken from his speech in the German Reichstag on 30 January 1939. Referring to the Jewish question, it contains the macabre prophecy: “Today I will be once more a prophet: if the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevizing of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!” This statement has been taken as evidence that in early 1939 Hitler already intended to exploit the conditions of a future war to annihilate the Jews, at least those under German rule.’ (4)
So far so good, but as Mommsen goes on to explain: Hitler obviously had no intention whatsoever of ‘exterminating the jews’ at this point in history even according to the orthodox ‘Holocaust’ interpretation and was in fact explicitly referring – and only referring – to the problems he had encountered with the mass voluntary deportation of the jews in Germany and Austria to other countries especially North and South America.
He writes how:
‘However, it seems to me that in order to analyse this statement – which was unprecedented in its harshness -it should be read within the immediate political context and the particular conditions that prevailed at that time. First of all, Hitler’s threat did not occupy a prominent place in his rather lengthy speech, which celebrated his seizure of power and was largely devoted to the “party saga” (Parteierzaehlung), a subject that usually comprised considerable parts of Hitler’s speeches and did not vary in content. It was only in the last part of the speech after he had spoken for over two hours, that Hitler raised the issue of Jewish emigration. The context was the still ongoing negotiations between Hermann Goring and George Rublee, the American chairman of the Intergovernmental Committee for Refugees, on a plan for the emigration of Jews from Germany. Thus, the threat against European Jewry was made in relation to the aim of accelerating the Jews’ departure from Germany. The process was being stymied by the increasingly strict stipulations on the part of the potential host countries, who insisted that immigrants arrive with an adequate amount of foreign currency for their subsistence; put differently, to avoid the likelihood of their becoming a public charge.’ (5)
As well as how:
‘It is in this context that Hitler’s remarks in the Reichstag should be understood. The Fuhrer referred indirectly to the pending Rublee-Wohlthat negotiations, complaining that “third countries suddenly refuse to receive Jews, using all possible excuses,” and asserting that there was “enough space for settlement” in the world to dispose of the Jews and that an understanding between the nations on this issue was long overdue because Europe could “not become pacified before the Jewish question has been settled.” At least, he declared, the German government was ultimately resolved to get rid of the Jews, who would have to learn to make their living like all other peoples through ordinary work. It was after these declarations, which were targeted at the Western governments and sought to gain their support for the emigration of German Jews, that Hitler made his much-quoted threat against “the Jewish race in Europe.” His formulations should be perceived in the context of the volkisch anti-Semitism that had been virulent in Germany since the Wilhelmine period. The notion of using the Jews as hostages in order to prevent the Western powers from inflicting damage on Germany was familiar to the fanatical anti-Semites of that era.’ (6)
With Mommsen then summarizing how:
‘The notion that Hitler’s speech of 30 January 1939 constitutes incontrovertible evidence of his intention to eventually solve the Jewish question by the use of violence has repeatedly been assessed in the literature. In the context in which it was made, however, it rather indicates that at that time Hitler did not perceive any other solution than the enforced emigration of the Jewish population, including resurrecting the idea of settling the Jews in Madagascar, a suggestion that had been raised again by the Polish side.’ (7)
Further Mommsen is at pains to point out that Hitler later uses exactly the same language – and refers back to this statement (which Hitler deliberately misdating to 30th September 1939 rather than 30th January 1939 for the purposes of good propaganda so as to seem prophetic for both his contemporary audience and for posterity) – at the beginning and the height of the so-called ‘Holocaust’ (i.e., ‘Operation Reinhard’) and even then he clearly still does not mean actual ‘extermination’ since he refers to solving the jewish question ‘at a future date’ not at the moment when – according to the orthodox ‘Holocaust’ narrative – the Third Reich was allegedly engaging in a mass extermination operation ‘to solve the jewish question’.
He writes that:
‘The episode of the Reichstag speech, however, seems to be put in quite another light by the fact that Hitler repeated his prediction on 30 January 1941, using exactly the same words and referring to his earlier speech which he erroneously dated 1 September 1939. He reiterated this passage on 30 January and 8 November 1942 and alluded to it again on 24 February and 30 September 1942 and on 24 February 1943. While the context differed to some extent, the main argument – that in the long run the European nations, whether they were opponents or friends of the Reich, would cooperate in the struggle against international Jewry – remained the same. In addition, he alluded to his former prophecy whenever he addressed the party on 30 January or 24 February (the latter date being the Partei Grundungstag, the anniversary of the founding of the party). Although some of the allusions were sharpened in conjunction with the ongoing genocide, Hitler preserved the masked language and avoided any direct mention of the mass murder. He continued to depict the solution of the Jewish question in Europe as a task that still lay in the future and, when speaking of the actual steps pursued by the German Reich toward this aim, he would refer exclusively to the anti-Jewish legislation and indoctrination, never to the killing operations as such.’ (8)
Mommsen’s interpretation jives with a literal reading of the Wannsee Protocol of January 1942 – rather than the unproven and almost entirely unevidenced interpretation that ‘deportation and evacuation’ at this top-secret meeting was meant as code for ‘deportation and extermination’ – (9) and that the jews of Europe were being deported/evacuated to concentration and labour camps in the East for the purpose of labour – on which point the Wannsee Protocol is remarkably clear despite ‘Holocaust’ scholars perpetually commenting on it without seeming to have read the document – (10) and to await the future final solution of the jewish question that was still under discussion till near the end of the Second World War.
The central point here is that Hitler’s comment in his 30th January 1939 speech at the Reichstag where he stated:
‘Today I will be once more a prophet: if the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevizing of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!’ (11)
Never referred to the ‘mass extermination’ of the jews but rather the ‘mass deportation’ of the jews from Europe or put another way: the Third Reich intended to ensure that there were no jews left in Europe to act as a subversive fifth column against its people and their national governments and was seeking to achieve this not through ‘extermination’ but rather mass voluntary (and later during the war forced) deportation.
It is that simple.
References
(1) https://religionnews.com/2026/02/03/the-many-forms-of-holocaust-distortion-and-why-jd-vances-remarks-matter/
(2) For this please see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/the-myth-of-holocaust-minimization
(3) https://religionnews.com/2026/02/03/the-many-forms-of-holocaust-distortion-and-why-jd-vances-remarks-matter/
(4) Hans Mommsen, 1997, ‘Hitler’s Reichstag Speech of 30 January 1939’, History and Memory, Vol. 9, Nos. 1 & 2, p. 147
(5) Ibid, pp. 147-148
(6) Ibid., p. 150
(7) Ibid., p. 152
(8) Ibid., p. 156
(9) For the interpretation of the Wannsee Protocol as a ‘code for genocide’ see Lucy Dawidowicz, 1977, ‘The War against the Jews 1933-45’, 1st Edition, Pelican: London, pp. 176-180
(10) For example Eberhard Jackel, ‘Die Konferenz am Wannsee’, Die Zeit, 17th January 1992, p. 33
(11) Quoted by Mommsen, Op. Cit., p. 147
Karl’s SubstackRead More
T1
