Thanks for clearing this up, Keith. I was beginning to think you believed in, and parroted, Jewish propaganda designed to undermine the growing interest in Hitler and National Socialism. This article proves beyond doubt that you are in no way aligned with the interest of Jews in undermining revolutionary politics seeking to overthrow their hegemony over European peoples. Good work!
I don't see it as that at all. Keith is just correctly pointing out a flaw in the claims being made. Whether that supports unrelated things wasn't the point. If anything, Keith, like myself, finds the recent increase in Hitler fans to be problematic. Because it's riding on a considerable amount of misinformation, which he has written several articles about. For example debunking the mountains of false claims in Europa The Last Battle, which even the creators admitted to.
I get people wanting to push back against mass migration and demographic replacement. Hitler stands as the primary example of taking one's country back, so to speak.
But given that he also murdered several hundred thousand of his own people in the Aktion T4 and related euthanasia programs before we even get to the Holocaust, along with all the political assassinations, you have a morally bankrupt regime from the foundations on up. Then we get to the economic problems... the socialist system built on debt that was never sustainable, and was collapsing before the war even started, with Goering admitting that war was necessary to keep from collapsing by plundering and enslaving foreign nations. The system itself was built on hidden debt through MEFO bills, etc. And of course forcing people to go eat in the streets from giant shared soup pots to force the ideology of all being equal etc as part of their socialist ideology.
It's not that they didn't have some good ideas, or weren't responding to some very real threats. It's a lot of the ways they responded and their actual policies that make them not even technically good examples to follow even if we ignore the genocide of millions.
Nationalism doesn't need National Socialism and in fact would be better without it.
Wow, you really make some great points there! I've actually never heard of the Holocaust before. I did hear in passing something about Hitler killing six million Jews using poisoned gas, although I did watch Shindler's List and there wasn't any gassing in that. I guess that any economy which doesn't rely on Jewish debt slavery is going to collapse eventually. Jews really are the pillar on which our European economies must ultimately rest. Not much you can do about it really! Oh, well.
You seem pretty educated on the National Socialist regime and the Holocaust. I've never really looked into the Holocaust in great detail. I heard that in some of the camps Hitler used diesel exhaust to gas millions of Jews. Is that right? It does seem pretty sick.
Most Jews were killed by shooting them. Next was hydrogen cyanide from Zyklon B. Next was gassing with carbon monoxide. Gasoline engines were used because they have 10x to 30x more CO than diesel. Early erroneous reports of diesel engines, like claims related to Treblinka, were corrected by historians years ago. Many others simply died of starvation, disease, and overwork from forced labor.
Have you ever actually looked into this seriously? Or just tried to find info that told you shay you wanted to hear? For example do you only learn things from social media, maybe having been motivated enough to read revisionist literature, or have you actually looked at what the credible responses are to your arguments?
For example have you ever wondered if the processing rate of a traditional crematoria building was actually a limiting factor in the way Holocaust deniers claim? Have you tried to find out how the Nazis attempted to destroy so many bodies at the end of the war when petrol was scarce?
Serious questions. You seem to act as though I'm unfamiliar with revisionist arguments, despite almost a decade on Gab as a White Nationalist with thousands of followers. You act as though I've never watched the Greatest Story Never Told, or One Third of the Holocaust, etc. That I'm unfamiliar with Fred Leuchter, David Irving, Ernst Zundel, etc.
That's interesting. But I thought the only eye-witnesses to the gassings in Treblinka and those other camps said that a diesel engine was used (an engine from a Russian tank). Did they find new witnesses? Raul Hilberg said the deaths broke down like this:
1. No, the Zündel trials did not “admit that there is no evidence any Jews were gassed.”
This is a complete fabrication.
This claim originates from neo-Nazi pamphlets and revisionist forums, not from anything stated by the judge or any Canadian court.
The actual legal outcomes:
• Zündel was convicted in 1985
Under §181 (“spreading false news”).
His conviction was overturned on procedural grounds — not because the court concluded the Holocaust didn’t happen.
• The 1988 retrial
He was acquitted again on technical and constitutional issues related to the false-news statute and jury handling — not on factual findings about gas chambers.
• The Supreme Court of Canada (1992)
Struck down the false-news law as unconstitutional.
They did not rule on historical facts at all.
There was never any finding that “no Jews were gassed.”
That is an invention of Holocaust denial literature.
---
2. What did happen: Zündel’s hired witnesses were discredited — including Leuchter
The trials actually damaged revisionist credibility:
Fred Leuchter’s report (the so-called “Leuchter Report”) was found to be scientifically incompetent.
Leuchter was exposed as:
not an engineer
not qualified in chemistry
not licensed in any relevant field
using amateur sampling and invalid methodology
The judge called his testimony “worthless”.
Zündel’s other witnesses—such as “experts” with no credentials in history, chemistry, or forensics—were similarly discredited.
Revisionists pretended that “the court rejected the evidence” when in fact the court rejected their witnesses for being unqualified.
---
3. Not a single court statement ever said
‘there is no evidence of gassings’
What revisionists are twisting is this:
Criminal courts require very high evidentiary standards.
The specific charge in Zündel’s case was not to litigate the Holocaust; it was to determine whether Zündel deliberately spread false news.
Constitutional issues made the statute unenforceable.
Because the law itself was unconstitutional, the court did not evaluate the historical facts to a legal conclusion.
Revisionists turned this into:
> “See? The court admitted no evidence exists!”
Total fabrication.
---
Your claim about the Zündel trials is just factually wrong. The Canadian courts made no finding that “there’s no evidence anyone was gassed.” The trials collapsed because the false-news statute itself was unconstitutional, not because the factual record of the Holocaust was disputed. Even Zündel’s own witnesses were dismissed as unqualified.
Luckily we can read the words of the jewish man who testified in the court case. There's also Canadian news footage acknowledging their admission of no evidence. https://rense.com/general76/test.htm
1. The link you gave (Rense.com) is not a court transcript — it’s a non-credible conspiracy website summarizing a fringe pamphlet
Rense is known for UFO conspiracies, “chemtrails”, fabricated interviews, etc.
It is not an archival source, not a legal record, and not a transcript of Canadian proceedings.
The document you linked is not:
from the court
from CBC
from any news network
from any judge
from any lawyer
or from any historian
It’s literally a second-hand editorial from a Holocaust denial forum, reprinted without verification.
---
2. There is NO “Jewish witness admission that no Jews were gassed” in the Zündel trials
Not in:
the 1985 trial
the 1988 retrial
the appeal
the Supreme Court decision
the court archives
CBC’s reporting
or any Canadian publication
This simply never happened.
Revisionist websites invented the claim by twisting two things:
A) The false-news law was ruled unconstitutional
This means:
> The government can’t criminally punish speech just because it is false.
It does not mean:
> “The Holocaust didn’t happen.”
B) Zündel’s witnesses were dismissed as unqualified
This is reframed by denialists as:
> “The court admitted the evidence doesn’t exist.”
But the court actually said:
> “Your so-called experts have no credentials, no scientific rigor, and no accepted methodology.”
Not remotely the same thing.
---
3. The “Jewish man” you refer to is NOT giving a court admission — it’s a denialist paraphrase with no transcript backing
Revisionists misquote or fabricate statements in three ways:
1. Take a statement like:
“No physical remains from Treblinka survive because the camp was dismantled.”
→ Rewrite it as:
“He admitted there is no evidence anyone was killed.”
2. Take a procedural ruling such as:
“This trial is about whether Zündel spread false news, not about litigating WWII history.”
→ Rewrite it as:
“The judge admitted there is no evidence.”
3. Take a journalist’s description of evidentiary standards and turn it into:
“Canadian TV acknowledged there is no proof.”
This is all sleight of hand.
No transcript has ever been produced that contains the supposed “admission.”
Because it never happened.
---
Rense isn’t a court transcript or a primary source — it’s a conspiracy site summarizing a denialist article. Nothing in the actual Zündel trial transcripts contains an admission that there was “no evidence anyone was gassed.” The court never said it, the judge never said it, and no witness ever said it.
If you believe otherwise, just give the page and line number from the transcript. Not an editorial from Rense — the actual words from the actual court record.
Thank you for researching this - it‘ll be interesting to see how the research is presented in King's paper after peer review, with such a seemingly glaring issue being glossed over for the 'documentary'. Unfortunately, the media hyenas and the public aren’t likely to let go of such a sensational reason to disparage Hitler for another few decades. I‘ll be sure to mention your article when this topic is inevitably brought up during my family Christmas dinner!
Your breakdown of the PROK2 genetic inheritance patttern is spot on. The distinction between monoallelic and biallelic mutations matters more than most people realize when interpretting genetic studies. Its a good reminder that popular science journalism often simplifies complex genetic mechanisims into soundbites. The idea that single-copy carriers can be completly asymptomatic really undermines the entire claim.
Great article, Keith. One other thing that comes to mind is the claim of E1b being unique to Hitler's family. That would only be the case if they did full sequences on the Y chromosome and went much further down the "tree" identifying a number of SNPs unique to Hitler's family.
Even E1b1b, as reported by the highly unethical study done 15 years ago, is found in 7 to 8% of German men. It's a very old haplogroup, originating tens of thousands of years ago. They've been in Europe for well over 10,000 years.
Further, genetic researchers moved to SNP based naming rather than the old alphanumeric hierarchical naming scheme years ago (more than a decade now.) For example instead of E1b1b, we would write E-M215.
So to support their claim they would have to have done full sequences on these people and the sample to identity SNPs unique to their family lineage, far downstream of E1b, which is over 40,000 years old, or E1b1b/E-M215 which is over 20,000 years old and has been in Europe for 12,000 to 15,000 years.
Yes, it's more rare than groups like R1b in Europe, but as written it's certainly not unique to his family. Again, we'd need more detail. I'm hoping they provide that detail in a published paper.
You seem to be well clued up on it all. Why do you think Keith ignores the lack of evidence as to the DNA sample actually being hitlers, and instead just runs with it?
I'm not sure Keith is actually that knowledgeable about genetics? His article could be written on following a hunch about a sensationalized claim about such a historically controversial figure, just reading the papers, etc.
My comments about the Y haplotype are less obvious and follow from my own genetics research. It would be much less obvious to a normal person.
As a side note, the issue of Hitler's Y DNA being used in the past to claim he had Jewish ancestry is similar to the false claims being made in recent years about Columbus.
But as for the couch sample, if they did actually full sequence these people, or do a couple and then create a panel of SNPs that were apparently unique to that family line and confirmed the sample shared a much more precise Y haplotype, bringing it well within the genealogical time frame (looking a male line cousins etc that only differed by 1 or 2 SNPs) then I think it would be much more solidly confirmed.
It all depends on exactly how those Y tests were done and how good the coverage was, etc.
I think they said they planned on getting this work published and peer reviewed, so we'll see what potentially comes out.
"The piece of the couch was taken by United States Army Colonel Roswell P. Rosengren, who served during most of World War II as public information officer for General Dwight D. Eisenhower, said Bill Panagopulos, president of Alexander Historical Auctions. A few days after Hitler committed suicide by a pistol shot to the head, Rosengren and a few fellow American officers were let into the dictator’s air raid bunker by the Soviet forces, which controlled that portion of Berlin, Panagopulos said. Rosengren used the opportunity to take a section of the couch, along with a few other items from the bunker.
Both Panagopulos and Dorr are confident the artifact is from Hitler’s couch. The auction house provided records of all the previous owners of the piece and a notarized letter from Rosengren’s son. The patterns on the fabric also match photos of the “suicide sofa” featured in “LIFE” magazine after Hitler’s death, and several independent consultants studied the artifact to confirm its authenticity, Dorr said."
Colonel Rosengren who originally obtained the piece from the couch has no evidence of Jewish ancestry.
Is it plausible they waited until 2025 to check his dna to see if he had a micro penis? I call WALOB. Oooh look we’ve got hitlers DNA. Bollocks you have. America kept it? But deleted all moon landing data. Fuck off.
Keith adds so much importance to whether he had a small dick or not but completely ignores the lack of evidence for the DNA sample itself. It was found by a jew, a trustworthy individual no doubt.
Aye, it’s biggest load of shit I’ve ever heard. Firstly the preservation of such an artefact. Really? Did they swab Saddams crotch? Gaddafis arse crack? Secondly they could have been more original. Micro penis? What else? A slack arse and a collection of poppers?!
Our Jewish mainstream media has seen a rise in Mein Kempf sales and now they’re getting desperate. At this point, claiming Hitler received bad fellatio from a Jewish girl & then decided to kill 6M Jews would be more believable.
As someone who has studied his own genome i can tell you that you will get false positives with DNA even if it could prove one thing over another it doesn't paint an absolute picture. I was diagnosed with ADHD and ASD but on my test it showed average score of ADHD & higher rate of dyslexia so i needed to be assessed by a psychiatrist.
Given how old the DNA is and the mention of broken genes Hitler already had health problems but i agree its not kallmann syndrome since its unlikely as well him being 'autistic' or 'adhd' without diagnosed in his lifetime.
Hundreds of millions of people saw this claim circulating reported by mainstream media and this is the first article I've seen identifying a flaw in the research that was headline news this week. I'd say that's important.
Sad to see Edward Dutton parrot this most Jewish propaganda. Always with the fixation on genitals. All of a sudden the left are DNA realists, and they want to talk about Hitler’s balls.
Hey this is my job
Tfw stolen aura
Universes collided
Thanks for clearing this up, Keith. I was beginning to think you believed in, and parroted, Jewish propaganda designed to undermine the growing interest in Hitler and National Socialism. This article proves beyond doubt that you are in no way aligned with the interest of Jews in undermining revolutionary politics seeking to overthrow their hegemony over European peoples. Good work!
I don't see it as that at all. Keith is just correctly pointing out a flaw in the claims being made. Whether that supports unrelated things wasn't the point. If anything, Keith, like myself, finds the recent increase in Hitler fans to be problematic. Because it's riding on a considerable amount of misinformation, which he has written several articles about. For example debunking the mountains of false claims in Europa The Last Battle, which even the creators admitted to.
I get people wanting to push back against mass migration and demographic replacement. Hitler stands as the primary example of taking one's country back, so to speak.
But given that he also murdered several hundred thousand of his own people in the Aktion T4 and related euthanasia programs before we even get to the Holocaust, along with all the political assassinations, you have a morally bankrupt regime from the foundations on up. Then we get to the economic problems... the socialist system built on debt that was never sustainable, and was collapsing before the war even started, with Goering admitting that war was necessary to keep from collapsing by plundering and enslaving foreign nations. The system itself was built on hidden debt through MEFO bills, etc. And of course forcing people to go eat in the streets from giant shared soup pots to force the ideology of all being equal etc as part of their socialist ideology.
It's not that they didn't have some good ideas, or weren't responding to some very real threats. It's a lot of the ways they responded and their actual policies that make them not even technically good examples to follow even if we ignore the genocide of millions.
Nationalism doesn't need National Socialism and in fact would be better without it.
Wow, you really make some great points there! I've actually never heard of the Holocaust before. I did hear in passing something about Hitler killing six million Jews using poisoned gas, although I did watch Shindler's List and there wasn't any gassing in that. I guess that any economy which doesn't rely on Jewish debt slavery is going to collapse eventually. Jews really are the pillar on which our European economies must ultimately rest. Not much you can do about it really! Oh, well.
Now try making a grown up straightforward comment.
You seem pretty educated on the National Socialist regime and the Holocaust. I've never really looked into the Holocaust in great detail. I heard that in some of the camps Hitler used diesel exhaust to gas millions of Jews. Is that right? It does seem pretty sick.
I thought I'd already answered this.
Most Jews were killed by shooting them. Next was hydrogen cyanide from Zyklon B. Next was gassing with carbon monoxide. Gasoline engines were used because they have 10x to 30x more CO than diesel. Early erroneous reports of diesel engines, like claims related to Treblinka, were corrected by historians years ago. Many others simply died of starvation, disease, and overwork from forced labor.
Have you ever actually looked into this seriously? Or just tried to find info that told you shay you wanted to hear? For example do you only learn things from social media, maybe having been motivated enough to read revisionist literature, or have you actually looked at what the credible responses are to your arguments?
For example have you ever wondered if the processing rate of a traditional crematoria building was actually a limiting factor in the way Holocaust deniers claim? Have you tried to find out how the Nazis attempted to destroy so many bodies at the end of the war when petrol was scarce?
Serious questions. You seem to act as though I'm unfamiliar with revisionist arguments, despite almost a decade on Gab as a White Nationalist with thousands of followers. You act as though I've never watched the Greatest Story Never Told, or One Third of the Holocaust, etc. That I'm unfamiliar with Fred Leuchter, David Irving, Ernst Zundel, etc.
Be serious, please.
That's interesting. But I thought the only eye-witnesses to the gassings in Treblinka and those other camps said that a diesel engine was used (an engine from a Russian tank). Did they find new witnesses? Raul Hilberg said the deaths broke down like this:
Ghettoisation and General Privation: 800,000
Open-Air Shootings: 1,400,000
Camps: 2,900,000
But you think most Jews died by shooting?
Holocaust? Is that the one where they used gas to kill jews then jews stated in the Ernst zundel case there was zero evidence for any of it.
1. No, the Zündel trials did not “admit that there is no evidence any Jews were gassed.”
This is a complete fabrication.
This claim originates from neo-Nazi pamphlets and revisionist forums, not from anything stated by the judge or any Canadian court.
The actual legal outcomes:
• Zündel was convicted in 1985
Under §181 (“spreading false news”).
His conviction was overturned on procedural grounds — not because the court concluded the Holocaust didn’t happen.
• The 1988 retrial
He was acquitted again on technical and constitutional issues related to the false-news statute and jury handling — not on factual findings about gas chambers.
• The Supreme Court of Canada (1992)
Struck down the false-news law as unconstitutional.
They did not rule on historical facts at all.
There was never any finding that “no Jews were gassed.”
That is an invention of Holocaust denial literature.
---
2. What did happen: Zündel’s hired witnesses were discredited — including Leuchter
The trials actually damaged revisionist credibility:
Fred Leuchter’s report (the so-called “Leuchter Report”) was found to be scientifically incompetent.
Leuchter was exposed as:
not an engineer
not qualified in chemistry
not licensed in any relevant field
using amateur sampling and invalid methodology
The judge called his testimony “worthless”.
Zündel’s other witnesses—such as “experts” with no credentials in history, chemistry, or forensics—were similarly discredited.
Revisionists pretended that “the court rejected the evidence” when in fact the court rejected their witnesses for being unqualified.
---
3. Not a single court statement ever said
‘there is no evidence of gassings’
What revisionists are twisting is this:
Criminal courts require very high evidentiary standards.
The specific charge in Zündel’s case was not to litigate the Holocaust; it was to determine whether Zündel deliberately spread false news.
Constitutional issues made the statute unenforceable.
Because the law itself was unconstitutional, the court did not evaluate the historical facts to a legal conclusion.
Revisionists turned this into:
> “See? The court admitted no evidence exists!”
Total fabrication.
---
Your claim about the Zündel trials is just factually wrong. The Canadian courts made no finding that “there’s no evidence anyone was gassed.” The trials collapsed because the false-news statute itself was unconstitutional, not because the factual record of the Holocaust was disputed. Even Zündel’s own witnesses were dismissed as unqualified.
Luckily we can read the words of the jewish man who testified in the court case. There's also Canadian news footage acknowledging their admission of no evidence. https://rense.com/general76/test.htm
1. The link you gave (Rense.com) is not a court transcript — it’s a non-credible conspiracy website summarizing a fringe pamphlet
Rense is known for UFO conspiracies, “chemtrails”, fabricated interviews, etc.
It is not an archival source, not a legal record, and not a transcript of Canadian proceedings.
The document you linked is not:
from the court
from CBC
from any news network
from any judge
from any lawyer
or from any historian
It’s literally a second-hand editorial from a Holocaust denial forum, reprinted without verification.
---
2. There is NO “Jewish witness admission that no Jews were gassed” in the Zündel trials
Not in:
the 1985 trial
the 1988 retrial
the appeal
the Supreme Court decision
the court archives
CBC’s reporting
or any Canadian publication
This simply never happened.
Revisionist websites invented the claim by twisting two things:
A) The false-news law was ruled unconstitutional
This means:
> The government can’t criminally punish speech just because it is false.
It does not mean:
> “The Holocaust didn’t happen.”
B) Zündel’s witnesses were dismissed as unqualified
This is reframed by denialists as:
> “The court admitted the evidence doesn’t exist.”
But the court actually said:
> “Your so-called experts have no credentials, no scientific rigor, and no accepted methodology.”
Not remotely the same thing.
---
3. The “Jewish man” you refer to is NOT giving a court admission — it’s a denialist paraphrase with no transcript backing
Revisionists misquote or fabricate statements in three ways:
1. Take a statement like:
“No physical remains from Treblinka survive because the camp was dismantled.”
→ Rewrite it as:
“He admitted there is no evidence anyone was killed.”
2. Take a procedural ruling such as:
“This trial is about whether Zündel spread false news, not about litigating WWII history.”
→ Rewrite it as:
“The judge admitted there is no evidence.”
3. Take a journalist’s description of evidentiary standards and turn it into:
“Canadian TV acknowledged there is no proof.”
This is all sleight of hand.
No transcript has ever been produced that contains the supposed “admission.”
Because it never happened.
---
Rense isn’t a court transcript or a primary source — it’s a conspiracy site summarizing a denialist article. Nothing in the actual Zündel trial transcripts contains an admission that there was “no evidence anyone was gassed.” The court never said it, the judge never said it, and no witness ever said it.
If you believe otherwise, just give the page and line number from the transcript. Not an editorial from Rense — the actual words from the actual court record.
You think there would be evidence. Weird.
Anyway, stay safe out there. Looks like Ernsts predictions will come true
You still believe that propaganda?
Exactly what part of what I said do you think is false, and what exactly are the sources on which you base that claim?
Stick to the DNA analysis maybe
Why, when I'm clearly better informed than you?
https://keithwoods.pub/p/hitler-kallmanns/comment/179445304
Maybe given your consistent sarcastic promotion of misinformation it is you who might reconsider commenting on things you don't actually understand.
Thank you for researching this - it‘ll be interesting to see how the research is presented in King's paper after peer review, with such a seemingly glaring issue being glossed over for the 'documentary'. Unfortunately, the media hyenas and the public aren’t likely to let go of such a sensational reason to disparage Hitler for another few decades. I‘ll be sure to mention your article when this topic is inevitably brought up during my family Christmas dinner!
Your breakdown of the PROK2 genetic inheritance patttern is spot on. The distinction between monoallelic and biallelic mutations matters more than most people realize when interpretting genetic studies. Its a good reminder that popular science journalism often simplifies complex genetic mechanisims into soundbites. The idea that single-copy carriers can be completly asymptomatic really undermines the entire claim.
Great article, Keith. One other thing that comes to mind is the claim of E1b being unique to Hitler's family. That would only be the case if they did full sequences on the Y chromosome and went much further down the "tree" identifying a number of SNPs unique to Hitler's family.
Even E1b1b, as reported by the highly unethical study done 15 years ago, is found in 7 to 8% of German men. It's a very old haplogroup, originating tens of thousands of years ago. They've been in Europe for well over 10,000 years.
Further, genetic researchers moved to SNP based naming rather than the old alphanumeric hierarchical naming scheme years ago (more than a decade now.) For example instead of E1b1b, we would write E-M215.
So to support their claim they would have to have done full sequences on these people and the sample to identity SNPs unique to their family lineage, far downstream of E1b, which is over 40,000 years old, or E1b1b/E-M215 which is over 20,000 years old and has been in Europe for 12,000 to 15,000 years.
Yes, it's more rare than groups like R1b in Europe, but as written it's certainly not unique to his family. Again, we'd need more detail. I'm hoping they provide that detail in a published paper.
You seem to be well clued up on it all. Why do you think Keith ignores the lack of evidence as to the DNA sample actually being hitlers, and instead just runs with it?
I'm not sure Keith is actually that knowledgeable about genetics? His article could be written on following a hunch about a sensationalized claim about such a historically controversial figure, just reading the papers, etc.
My comments about the Y haplotype are less obvious and follow from my own genetics research. It would be much less obvious to a normal person.
As a side note, the issue of Hitler's Y DNA being used in the past to claim he had Jewish ancestry is similar to the false claims being made in recent years about Columbus.
But as for the couch sample, if they did actually full sequence these people, or do a couple and then create a panel of SNPs that were apparently unique to that family line and confirmed the sample shared a much more precise Y haplotype, bringing it well within the genealogical time frame (looking a male line cousins etc that only differed by 1 or 2 SNPs) then I think it would be much more solidly confirmed.
It all depends on exactly how those Y tests were done and how good the coverage was, etc.
I think they said they planned on getting this work published and peer reviewed, so we'll see what potentially comes out.
What's the ethnicity of the guy who supposedly found the DNA?
Museum curator:
https://www.gettysburgmuseumofhistory.com/gettysburg-curator-blood-stained-piece-of-hitlers-couch-preserves-history/ Erik Dorr's family goes back to 1818 in Gettysburg with no apparwnt hint of Jewish ancestry.
"The piece of the couch was taken by United States Army Colonel Roswell P. Rosengren, who served during most of World War II as public information officer for General Dwight D. Eisenhower, said Bill Panagopulos, president of Alexander Historical Auctions. A few days after Hitler committed suicide by a pistol shot to the head, Rosengren and a few fellow American officers were let into the dictator’s air raid bunker by the Soviet forces, which controlled that portion of Berlin, Panagopulos said. Rosengren used the opportunity to take a section of the couch, along with a few other items from the bunker.
Both Panagopulos and Dorr are confident the artifact is from Hitler’s couch. The auction house provided records of all the previous owners of the piece and a notarized letter from Rosengren’s son. The patterns on the fabric also match photos of the “suicide sofa” featured in “LIFE” magazine after Hitler’s death, and several independent consultants studied the artifact to confirm its authenticity, Dorr said."
Colonel Rosengren who originally obtained the piece from the couch has no evidence of Jewish ancestry.
Geneticist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turi_King - British ancestry.
Historian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_J._Kay - British ancestry.
The two people who ran the unethical 2010 study on Hitler's Y DNA were Flemish Belgians.
Etc.
Is it plausible they waited until 2025 to check his dna to see if he had a micro penis? I call WALOB. Oooh look we’ve got hitlers DNA. Bollocks you have. America kept it? But deleted all moon landing data. Fuck off.
It's so ludicrous 😂
Keith adds so much importance to whether he had a small dick or not but completely ignores the lack of evidence for the DNA sample itself. It was found by a jew, a trustworthy individual no doubt.
Aye, it’s biggest load of shit I’ve ever heard. Firstly the preservation of such an artefact. Really? Did they swab Saddams crotch? Gaddafis arse crack? Secondly they could have been more original. Micro penis? What else? A slack arse and a collection of poppers?!
What a crock of shit …
As you say the timing of it is pretty funny. 2025 when the headlines are full of Epstein and Israel.
Our Jewish mainstream media has seen a rise in Mein Kempf sales and now they’re getting desperate. At this point, claiming Hitler received bad fellatio from a Jewish girl & then decided to kill 6M Jews would be more believable.
Unfortunately most of the geneticists are rabid anti-whites. It's hard to take anything they publish seriously.
The guy who supposedly found it was Rosengren.
As someone who has studied his own genome i can tell you that you will get false positives with DNA even if it could prove one thing over another it doesn't paint an absolute picture. I was diagnosed with ADHD and ASD but on my test it showed average score of ADHD & higher rate of dyslexia so i needed to be assessed by a psychiatrist.
Given how old the DNA is and the mention of broken genes Hitler already had health problems but i agree its not kallmann syndrome since its unlikely as well him being 'autistic' or 'adhd' without diagnosed in his lifetime.
Why is this even important?
Hundreds of millions of people saw this claim circulating reported by mainstream media and this is the first article I've seen identifying a flaw in the research that was headline news this week. I'd say that's important.
Strange. If anything it gives validity to the absurd claim some guy Rosengren found hitlers DNA
who gives a fuck?
Clearly jews do. Not sure why Keith would care though. It's all nonsense
He was on drugs. End of story
Wtf is that?
Sad to see Edward Dutton parrot this most Jewish propaganda. Always with the fixation on genitals. All of a sudden the left are DNA realists, and they want to talk about Hitler’s balls.
Why should the autism and schizophrenia claim have any more credibility than the micro penis one?