I'm not holding it against him. I'm telling you that because of this and his marxist leanings he did not have the objectivity that other historical researchers and authors might have.

so? what if he was right? we all know about hitler possibly being a rotschild bastard. and the rothschilds are jews of course. hitler being a rothschild spawn makes perfect sense.

No proof exists that Hitler was Jewish in full, nor that he was somehow a Rothschild bastard. And it is Zionists who push this myth. As for him being a Rothschild agent, the only one claiming that is the book by pseudonym Sydney Warburg and even in that book he says only rotten Jewish bankers funded Hitler without proof.

Poole and other researchers looking through actual Nazi and Soviet archives have proven that Zionists funded DAP before Hitler, but nowhere close to the other parties in Germany. Must of Hitler's money came from his book, a few German industrialists, who gave campaign contributions to other parties as well because they were quite unsure of Hitler considering his many socialist policies that attacked capitalism, as well as membership contributions in the millions.

Sutton's book is based on Sydney Warburgs book, and even then Sutton neve claims Hitler was backed by the Bushes or Rothschild agents. I nfact, he actually claims, despite him not actually looking in German archives that Hitler was largely grassroots and much of the moeny came from rural folks, the middle class and membership dues.