The Heretics’ Hour: Putting Myths to Rest

February 28, 2011


Carolyn Yeager discusses the real genealogy of Adolf Hitler, and the real relationship between Prescott Bush, Fritz Thyssen and National Socialism. Topics include:

  • “Hitler’s grandfather was a Rothschild” story was invented by an OSS employee during WWII;
  • “Hitler’s grandfather was a Jew named Frankenberger” story was invented by a condemned man;
  • Records show that Hitler’s grandmother was not in Vienna or Graz at the time she conceived her son;
  • There was a relationship between Prescott Bush and Fritz Thyssen and a relationship between Thyssen and the National Socialist Party. But there was no relationship between Bush and the NS Party;
  • There is no link between Bush-Harriman and Auschwitz labor.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Carolyn:


19 Responses to “The Heretics’ Hour: Putting Myths to Rest”

  1. A German on March 1st, 2011 7:10 am

    @Carolyn the picture you picked for this broadcast,
    is this an actual picture of Gordon Duff? ;-)
    Our beloved Duffman ;-)

  2. irma on March 1st, 2011 5:07 pm

    Thanks to you and others I’ve begun to learn the truth about Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. I was wondering if there are any specific books in particular that you could recommend on this subject. I’d greatly appreciate this. Thanks.

  3. Drew on March 1st, 2011 6:30 pm

    Great show. I’ve had Werner Maser’s book on Hitler for quite a while, and his chapter on Hitler’s family history is the most thorough and well-documented one I’ve ever read. After reading this information, if someone still believes that Hitler was a Jew, it can only be because they want to believe it for their own perverse reasons.

    A couple years ago, I sent along some of Maser’s information on Hitler to Henry Makow, but of course he ignored it. Though I’ve posted this information on other sites, it has rarely been commented upon. I guess people really want to believe that Hitler was a Jew or a Rothschild agent–or a crypto-Jewish British agent.

    I suppose people like Henry Makow, Daryl Bradford Smith, David Icke, and Gordon Duff just can’t come to terms with the fact that everything that they claim to be fighting against is exactly what Hitler was fighting against. The only difference being that Hitler didn’t just talk about it–he gave his life for it.

  4. A German on March 1st, 2011 7:01 pm

    Just another fine picture for you both:

  5. Carolyn on March 1st, 2011 7:21 pm

    A German —

    I really wish you would not be inviting or provoking JohnUK to comment on my programs. I can do without him around. Thanks.

  6. Carolyn on March 1st, 2011 7:30 pm

    Drew — thanks for the confirmation. You have stated yourself very well, as usual. BTW, I really like the book you recommended to me by Otto Wagener, though, for others’ information, it’s not listed by him but as: “Hitler: Memoirs of a Confidant,” Edited by Henry Ashby Turner, Jr., Yale University Press.

    I’ve had to stop with it to read Maser’s book, since I got it from inter-library loan, and also wanted to finish Mattogno’s new Auschwitz book. But I really like the first chapters that I’ve read.

  7. Carolyn on March 1st, 2011 7:57 pm


    I am very happy if I can cause some listeners to see AH and the Third Reich in a new light. As Drew has pointed out, so many cannot open their mind about it.

    The books tend to be a bit over the top complimentary, or down in the dirt hateful. I think I would start with memoirs by those who were close to him/worked for him. Such as his secretaries, his valet, his personal pilot, his boyhood friend. These are:

    He Was My Chief, by Christa Schroeder,
    With Hitler to the End, by Heinz Linge
    I Was Hitler’s Chauffeur, by Erich Kempke
    The Hitler I Knew, by Otto Dietrich
    At Hitler’s Side, by Nicolaus Von Below
    The Young Hitler I Knew, by August Kubizek

    The Werner Maser book, “Hitler: Legend, Myth and Reality” is politically-correct-critical of Hitler, but a thorough biography, painstakingly researched.

    If you want to read the pertinent sections of Hermann Giesler’s book, “Another Hitler,” which relate his personal face to face meetings with Hitler during the war years, you can find them at my website,, under “My Articles.”

    Also, JRBooks Online has a large selection of books and articles.

    AND … an excellent Canadian website for both rare books and articles translated into English is Wintersonnenwende Archives,

    Another site that I like that has a great deal of information is Calvin University German Propaganda Archive

    If you have more questions, don’t hesitate to write to me at my email address, or comment further here.

    All the best.

  8. Drew on March 1st, 2011 10:12 pm


    You’re correct in pointing out that the Maser biography is politically-correct–as most books on Hitler are. However, what I’ve found is that, especially if the book is well-researched, the author can’t help but reveal details and facts that completely contradict the official party line on Hitler. Never skip the footnotes–you’ll find excellent facts there that some editors try to bury.

    Maser wrote another book that I think you’d be interested in–titled “Hitler’s Letters And Notes” (Harper & Row, 1974). It reproduces many obscure notes and even marginalia that Hitler wrote down, commenting on various topics. Again, you don’t have to agree with all of Maser’s analysis, but the primary material–written in Hitler’s own hand–is indispensable.

    I’m sure that many of the Jewish “historians” who have written about the Nazis and HItler have come across plenty of material that completely contradicts their official story line. And I don’t doubt that they’ve attempted to hide or destroy that valuable primary material, as they did, for example, during the Nuremberg “Trials”. But in the end, all their nefarious efforts will come to naught. The Lie will unravel thanks to honest and dedicated researchers like yourself.

  9. A German on March 2nd, 2011 12:06 am

    “I really wish you would not be inviting or provoking JohnUK to comment on my programs. I can do without him around. Thanks”

    I can fully understand that! ;-)


    But I like to pull the Commie’s strings.

  10. A German on March 4th, 2011 1:45 am

    Thanks Carolyn for once again clearing this up.
    I can’t believe that there are still idiots out there who believe in these myths.
    Hitler biographs, everything but pro-Hitler, debunked all this Jew-Hitler-stuff 20, 30 years ago.
    And still idiots believe this.

    I think it’s because they want to make it fit their narrow view of the world. If Hitler is a Jew, they can condemn him as everyone else and still be a “right winger”, because then they are the “decent” right. But in reality they’re just idiots. Duffmen.

    Carol, Alois is pronounced Aloh-ease.
    And the change from Hüttler to Hiedler to Hitler is because of the dialect.
    As in today Eastern Germany, as in the Austrian lands, people have difficulty to pronounce d and t differently and b and p diffently.
    For example, a Karantanian wants to say “Topf” (=pot) but pronounces it “Dopf”, because they can’t sense the difference.
    They’re caught in their dialect.
    Also in some German dialects the “ü” transforms into a “i” (eee).
    So they don’t say über, but ieber (eeeber).

    And that’s why they name Hitler made this metamorphosis.
    Hüttler (Hütte=Cabin, shack) there is also the “Eisenhütte” (=ironworks), to Hiedler (ü became ie and tt , d) and then Hitler (eee became i and d again t).

  11. Carolyn on March 4th, 2011 9:20 am

    Thanks German,

    But two things. If Hiedler and Hüttler were brothers and both lived in Spital, they wouldn’t have different dialects. Their father was Martin Heidler, so the Heidler spelling came first. It was son Johann Nepomuk who somehow came up with Hüttler.

    The “t” is a sharp sound; the “d” is a soft sound. The Northern Germans use the “t”, while the Austrians the “d” …. right? So it could come down to a generalized difference between “Hidler” and “Hitler”.

    I don’t think Maser ever said whether these two men could read and write. If they did not, then someone else wrote their names down according to how it sounded to them. Could that be the reason?

    Alois’ *godfather* was a Strones farmer named Trummelschlager, who was illiterate and made a mark for his signature. Alois, of course, went to school and rose to become a Custom’s officer. I find it hard to believe that during the 19th Century there were not schools to attend, even if just for a few years.

  12. A German on March 4th, 2011 3:54 pm

    My dear you don’t understand me.
    Because of the ambivalence of pronouncing and then diffrently writing it down the surname changed.
    It just needed a priest who wrote it diffrently down into the register of the church.
    Of course they had the same dialect.

    But their name was more phonetically in their consciesness, than in written form, than codified.

    And don’t overrate the literacy in those times, even with village schools. Often the children were for a very short time in school, often they had to work at home. Look. even today there’s an illeteracy of 15% in the modern city of Hamburg!
    And until the 1970s many working class children only were only 8 years in school! So “school” in the 1800s, 1900s in a rural area meant almost nothing.

    And so the first Hiedler was Stafan Hiedler 1672
    then his son Johann Hiedler 1725
    then Johann’s son Martin Hiedler 1786

    then Martin’s sons
    Lorenz Hiedler,
    Johann Nepomuk Hüttler
    Johann Georg Hiedler 1792, who later had a child with Maria Anna Schicklgruber: Alois Schicklgruber, later after the legitimation Alois Hitler, Hitler’s father.

    Notice the change from Hiedler to Hüttler came because the first sons were born 1786-1792 and the last son (Hüttler) was born 15 years later!!!
    So it is possible the baptising priest of the last child understood the name Hiedler totally diffrently (he also shared the same dialect and had a d-t and ie-ü problem) and he wrote Hiedler down as Hüttler.

    But the Hüttler version of the name vanished anyways because Johann Nepomuk had only daughters.

    And when Alois was legitimized as a Hiedler in 1860, 70 years after the birth of his father Johann Georg Hiedler, the name was finally codified as HITLER

    So it depended of the dialect and the priest in church who baptised and registered the children in church!
    The surname Hiedler was for long time just a concept in the people’s mind, everyone wrote it down diffrently.

    It’s the same with other old words.
    I’m sure in the 1800s some English words were diffrently written down then today.
    We for example have the word “Alterthum” (=antiquity) in old books, today it is written Altertum.

  13. A German on March 4th, 2011 4:00 pm

    Today Austrians and East Germans know the difference between t and d and p and b, but they aren’t able to pronounce it differently.
    They’re lost in their dialect so to speak ;-)
    Thye write Papa but pronounce it Bapa.
    They cannot help themselves.

    Their dialects are too strong.
    Only people who master High German perfectly are able to pronounce it correctly.

    Just ask Dr. Kriessmann, who’s a Karantanian, that they write Topf but pronounce it Dopf.

  14. Carolyn on March 5th, 2011 10:22 am

    German dear,

    I understand you perfectly well. I brought up the illiteracy question; then you picked up on it.

    If they had village schools [ I had already spoken to Dr. Kriessmann about this] , which they should have at that time, even if they only attended for a few years reading and writing was what they would have learned. Not how to handle a plow. :-) But it could also be a case of partial illiteracy — they could write some, but wrote how it sounded to them.

    Maser doesn’t discuss WHY the brothers spelled their name differently, but I think illiteracy, thus a [new?] priest or some official or even a neighbor or other relative writing down their name for them, remains the best answer. Unless Johann Nepomuk was another of the strong-minded characters in that family tree who did things HIS way. :-)

    You may not have listened to the program carefully. Maser argues persuasively that J. Georg Hiedler was not the father of Alois. Maria Anna married J. Georg in Oct. 1842, 5 yrs. after the birth of her child. If he were the father, they would have married then and she would not have refused to name the father at the child’s baptism. Makes sense to me. She was covering up the real father who was a younger, married man.

  15. Carolyn on March 5th, 2011 10:29 am

    P.S. I think Maria Anna married J. Georg when her son was five years old so that he could have a family relationship with his real father, J. Nepomuk. Now that J. N. was his uncle by marriage, it was ok for the child to go and live in that family.

    These people worked things out on their own and did a pretty good job of it. Power to the people!

  16. A German on March 5th, 2011 11:42 am

    Today I’ve read that the name Hüttler derived from “hutt dweller”!
    These were very poor peasants or servants of farmers who built their hutt into a downhill.
    So they lived very isolated in rural areas.

    And just to give you an idea how common it is in German that the same name has many different versions, I show you the example THE classical German name SCHMIDT!

    Schmidt, derives from the profession Schmied=blacksmith
    and it is written in the following different versions:

    So the H-ie-ü-i-d-tt-t-LER paradoxon is not so uncommon.

    Today the profession blacksmith is codified in the German language as SCHMIED,
    but still all Schmidts, Schmids, Schmitts, Schmitz write their surname in their special way.

    That’s how it is in Germany ;-)

  17. Carolyn on March 5th, 2011 3:39 pm

    German, I’m not arguing about that at all, nor have I. I was going to bring up that they lived in an out-of-the-way area, which can explain some of it.

    But if Huettler is just another spelling of Hiedler, which I agree, note that Hiedler does not mean “hut dweller” and Hiedler was the Father’s and grandfather’s spelling.

    And if they were “hut-dwellers” back in time when they first took on their names, they were no longer that. They were farmers and not servants of farmers.

    My paternal grandmother’s name was Schmidt and we all know there are different ways to spell it. My father’s name was Yeager, originally Jäger, now spelled in America also as Yaeger, Jaeger, and probably Yager too. All based on pronounciation. Usually not in the same family though. But some children will drop the second “n” and the “e” after a vowel in German names to become more Americanized … unfortunately. Now, some well-meaning friends say I should spell my name Jaeger, but I don’t because my family name is Yeager. My grandfather chose that [more likely it was given at immigration!] so I stick with it. Maybe he liked it. I never had the opportunity to ask him.

    Now, I wish I knew your name. haha.

  18. Rob on March 6th, 2011 2:34 pm

    Thanks for covering this Hitler material in depth Carolyn. A very diligent job! There is one foul pakistani muslim mongrel running around on an alleged WN website, whose name will not be mentioned (it’s a site Mishko and Dietrich were originally affiliated with), who claims that Hitler, Eva Braun, Goebbels, and others were jews. He also keeps referring to the book about Hitler’s 150,000 mischling soldiers and tries to make hay out of this. Mind you, this is on a website where if a white guy calls somebody a jew without proof, he is immediately banned. Yet this muslim gets away with his slander time and again and even after others have soundly exposed and refuted his nonsense.

    I think part of the reason American and Brits in particular seem to favor the Hitler was a jew idea, is because somehow it mitigates the disaster they brought upon Germany, Europe, and themselves by destroying Germany. It exculpates them from the gravity of their guilt and allows them to rationalize themselves being duped, by implying it was the Germans who were duped as well. As to the muslims, in their minds, apparently only islam can be a true bulwark against the jews- something which infidels would be incapable of being. Shows you how loony and ungrateful these adherents of this creepy religion are, when they discount the efforts the third reich made in actually wooing islam, and even formed islamic SS units. In the end, they’re just irrational captives of their own warped religious fantasies.

  19. A German on March 7th, 2011 8:37 am

    I think this will be of interest for you Carolyn: