Try to keep this in mind:

Each story, idea or theory - no matter what the source - must be judged or evaluated on its own merits.

Otherwise, you're just attacking the messenger.

Those who think clearly will recognize this shop-worn tactic and conclude that you have no real rebuttal of the material in question. Yes, one should always consider the source, but that, by itself, will not stand as a compelling reason to reject the material under consideration.

In the case of the linked article, it does raise interesting questions related to the source of Hitler's financial support, the existence of a German underground before and during WWII, and FDR's covert machinations to involve the United States in a world war. If there are factual errors contained in this or any other material I post, I would appreciate a factual rebuttal.

There are a number of regulars here who might be interested in reviewing material which relates to the questions of stopping Hitler, preventing the Holicaust, and related issues. They would also profit by factual rebuttals, counterarguments, or comments.

The general idea is to have a discussion, not go ballistic.

S