[ John Friend of The Realist Report interviews German-Canadian activist Monika Schaefer on her awakening to the destructive activities of organized jewry and its ongoing plan of genocide against Whites. Having spent her entire adult life involved in various environmental causes it was only in the last few years that she  became aware that 9/11 was an “inside job” carried out by organized jewry.

One thing led to another, and she then became aware of revisionism and that the “Holocaust” is a diabolical hoax perpetrated by the usual suspects against Germans in particular and Whites in general.

She went public with her views in June 2016 with the release of a short video titled, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust“. Despite being a prominent, well-respected individual of long-standing in the “Gingerbread Town” of Jasper, Alberta, she has faced social ostracism and a process of “ritual defamation” from leading members of the community — KATANA.]

_________________________

The Realist Report

On this edition of The Realist Report, we’re joined by Monika Schaefer, a courageous activist and truth-seeker openly exposing the fake Jewish “Holocaust” narrative and other extremely controversial topics. Monika’s brother, Alfred, was recently a guest on The Realist Report.

In this podcast, Monika and I discuss her background, education, and upbringing before moving on to address her awakening process to the lies endlessly promoted and perpetuated by the mainstream mass media, Hollywood, modern educational establishment and virtually all Western governments pertaining to the alleged Jewish “Holocaust” during WWII. Monika gives us her take on the fake “Holocaust” narrative and offers her perspective on Adolf Hitler and National Socialist Germany.

We also address a number of other important topics in this podcast, including the reality of Jewish power and influence in the Western world, the systematic promotion of policies designed to genocide the White race, 9/11 and the “Global War on Terror,” and related matters.

Check out Monika’s website and her great video Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust:

The Realist Report.com
https://therealistreport.com/the-realist-report-monika-schaefer/

DOWNLOAD AND LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW HERE:

The Realist Report

Interviews

Monika Schaefer

Published on May 17, 2017

TRANSCRIPT

(89 mins)

[00:55]

John: All right folks, welcome back to another edition of The Realist Report. This is your host John Friend. The website is The Realist Report dot com, where you can find an extensive archive of these podcasts, as well as other radio broadcasts I’ve participated in. You can also find all of my articles and blog posts, a contact page with my personal email address, my Twitter feed — which is embedded on the right hand side of the website, and all sorts of other useful information and links. I am a regular reporter for American Free Press, America’s last real paper. And I also contribute to the Barnes Review, a bi-monthly history magazine, affiliated with American Free Press. Both publications are worth subscribing to and I highly encourage listeners to do so, if they are not already. Visit American Free Press dot net and Barnes Review dot org, for more details.

All right, with that said, I’d like to introduce my special guest this evening. Monika Schaefer is joining us for the very first time. Monika is a courageous activist and truth seeker who has openly and quite publicly challenged a number of taboo topics in modern Western society, including the fake jewish “Holocaust” narrative, which is endlessly promoted and perpetuated by the educational, media and political establishment, here in the West.

Monika, thank you so much for joining me! How are you this evening?

Monika: Hello John! Thank you so much for having me on! And I am doing very well, thank you, very much. And I honestly thank you for all the good work you do! Yeah, I’ve been listening to your podcasts for a while and reading some of your articles. And I think you do excellent work!

See here for the interview with Alfred Schaefer.

John: Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. And, you know, it’s funny I feel like I know you although we’ve never actually spoken. Maybe it’s, because I’ve interviewed your brother Alfred a couple times now, here on The Realist Report? And I’ve seen some of your video, a couple which we’ll talk about in this podcast. Yes, but I don’t know, I just have this strange feeling that somehow we know each other but, I know we actually don’t. So, it’s great for you to finally be here and, you know, we can kind of get to know each other in real life I guess, or at least over the Internet, as best we can.

Monika: Yes, and I had that sensation too! Yes, that’s right, just from listening to your talk with a number of people and so, it does feel like we know each other probably, because we’re on the same page on a lot of these issues, I think.

John: Yes, I think so. And your brother’s always great talking to. I actually recently interviewed him just a couple of weeks ago. And we dealt with a number of topics that I’m sure we’ll be getting into, in this podcast. So I guess, just to get started, could you tell us a little bit about your background, your education and your upbringing. And perhaps, maybe your professional experience, if you feel that is relevant. Let’s kind of start there, just kind of introduce yourself, please.

[04:27]

Monika: Sure. I grew up in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and my parents came from Germany in the early 50’s. And I was born in 1959, the fourth in a family of five children. And we grew up in a very, I would say, traditional German household, you know, the way we celebrated certain times of year, in a very German style. Like Christmas we had the real candles on the tree and that kind of thing.

And something that I really feel, that affected us deeply was our parents’ love of nature. Even though we grew up in the city we were very, very connected to the natural world. We had a huge vegetable garden always, and we put great value on going for walks, like as a family. We would go for walks in the river valley and just really appreciate nature. That went very, very deep.

Transcripts of Red Ice Radio’s interview are here: Part I and Part II

And yeah, as I was growing up, learning in school, the usual things that we were learning in those days, in the sixties and seventies. And I had, like Germar Rudolf — and you interviewed him recently — and he talks about his very developed sense of justice. I could relate to that when he spoke of that. I feel that applies to me, too. I started to become an activist in environmental things and social justice things, very, very early in my life. Like during my teen years. And then all through my adult life I was very much an activist. And it was always on environmental things and also peace issues.

But, I have to say it wasn’t until about 2011, I started to really understand how the world was working. But before that, I’ll just talk a little bit about my activism. I actually did get involved in politics. I ran as a candidate for the Green Party of Alberta first and then the Green Party of Canada, in several elections. I just felt that the Green Party was the one political party whose principles and values meshed with my own!

But that has now changed drastically! In fact, Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party Canada, she did a very public condemnation of me last summer, after my video! And this is why we’re talking today, you and I, on this podcast. The video that I created, and my brother produced it, is called, “Sorry Mom I was Wrong About the Holocaust”. And it’s a very short video, under six minutes. And in it I basically tell the world that the “Holocaust” is a lie! And that unleashed a set of events in my life that basically has changed my life! [laughing]

Elizabeth May’s betrayal of her stated “principles” (click image to enlarge)

John: Yes, I can only imagine. You know, real quick, I hate to interject, but let me just make two brief comments. Number one, I actually have never interviewed Germar Rudolf.

Monika: Oh!

John: Although I would love to, I would really like to. I just, I never have. I’ve heard him be interviewed a number of times. I know he’s been on Dr David Duke’s program every once in a while. I’ve also heard him interviewed on Jeff Rense’s radio program I believe, and Red Ice Radio.

Monika: It was the Red Ice Radio.

John: Yeah OK.

Monika: I mean, you know, I was mixed up John.

John: No, no, it’s totally fine. I just wanted to state that for the record. I’ve never interviewed him although I would love to. I think we’d have a great conversation, he’s really, I mean, the expert when it comes to the “Holocaust”.

One other comment I wanted to make; you had said how you, ever since you were a child really, and it’s probably a result of your upbringing, but also maybe something innate in you. You have this very, deep sense of truth and justice, and you just sort of want what’s right. And want to pursue the truth wherever it leads. And that’s exactly the type of person that I am! It’s maybe hasn’t been the wisest thing to do, considering the world we live in. But it’s just something that I just have to do.

Again I think it’s something that is innate in myself, in maybe certain other people, like yourself. Do you think that this is something that’s maybe more prevalent in certain people, or something that’s kind of instilled, or innate again in certain people, rather than others?

[09:47]

Monika: Oh my goodness, that’s a big question! I think a lot of people have this sense of justice and wanting to do what’s right. Perhaps some of that gets, I don’t know, squelched out of us. Maybe it’s in our education system and it’s a very demoralizing education system that we have. And there are certain things that create, well, or work towards “anti-creative zombism” if you want to call it that, in our education system. That maybe kicked that out of us? But anyway, … I think a lot of people power have it but we are fed wrong information, then we can’t even seek justice. We don’t know what justice is!

And so, psychological warfare is something that I do want to talk about. And that is the most dangerous weapon being used against us and that can ruined any, you know, sense that we can seek justice. People can still have that desire for who are doing what’s right and doing what’s just.

But what I’m experiencing, for example, in this “ritual defamation” that’s being done against me, is that probably a lot of people who are treating me very badly, think that they are doing the right thing! Some of them probably know very well that they are not and that they are actually, you know, deceivers and liars, but I think a lot of the people just get swept along, thinking that they are being righteous, when they are treating me badly, because I have done a “taboo” thing and that is, I have challenged this story, the “Holocaust” myth.

Elements of a Ritual Defamation (click image to enlarge in new window)

John: Yeah, I think so. And I think certainly our modern hyper-capitalistic, hyper-individualistic society, you know, it doesn’t reward this sort of behavior this sort of sense of honor and truth and justice. You’re not going to get very far if you’re this type of person, at least it seems like it. The system is kind of designed that way, any ways. There certainly are exceptions and it’s not impossible to operate in a system and still have this sense of truth and justice. But it does make things very challenging. And so, that’s one point.

Then also, I think you’re right as far as, you know, sort of psychological warfare is concerned. I think there is an attack on our minds and really, you know, the way the media works and the way the educational system works. It’s designed to attack this and to undermine this. And it’s very sad! It’s very, very harmful, it’s been very detrimental to our society, certainly.

Monika: Absolutely! I mean, I think that the teachers in the schools, when they are teaching wrong things to the children, the teachers just don’t know that. They are also indoctrinated and mind contaminated by the books that they have read and by the education they received. So it’s generation after generation that gets deceived. But that is the worst weapon of all, because what happens is we become agents of our own destruction.

And that is something that is written in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That the “goy” will become, “agents of their own destruction”. And that is just the most tragic aspect of all of this! It’s a much worse enemy to have, you know, psychological warfare and the “chameleon within the gate”. You know, that is destroying us, within our own societies by giving the wrong curriculum and bad curriculum and teaching the wrong things to the children. Teaching lies, basically. That’s a much more dangerous enemy then the enemy comes with the cannons or the guns and the open warfare. I mean, that might be destructive in the moment and it might lead to the death of people and destruction of places, however, people can recover from that.

Now with psychological warfare, that’s difficult, really. Can we recover from that when we have been so misled and contaminated and our minds have been polluted and our spirits have been crushed?

[14:43]

John: Indeed. That is very well said. You’re totally right about that.

And the last part I did, I spoke with Pete Papaherakles, and we were talking about the “Trivium” of education. And, you know, basic logic and critical thinking. And sadly our society these days, people just really don’t know how to use their brain. They don’t know how to evaluate information. They don’t know how to discover what the truth actually is. And that’s really a big problem! It’s that, you know, you try to talk about a subject like the “Holocaust”, for example, and you just ask someone, … And this is what I do regularly, you know, when this comes up, like in a personal conversation, or like, if I’m talking to a friend, or something, I’ll just say:

“Why do you believe the ‘Holocaust’ narrative”?

I mean, what evidence and proof is there to demonstrate that this actually happened? Let’s examine that evidence and see if it stands up to scrutiny. And, you know, it’s very difficult for people to do these, like simple things. And I think there’s reasons for that. I think, you know, most people again, simply really don’t know how to think critically and use their brain to evaluate information.

But also, I think a lot of the, … Certainly when it comes to the “Holocaust”, but also other very traumatic events, game changing events in our history, but especially the “Holocaust”, the propaganda used to promote, to perpetuate this myth, is very exploitative. And it really is a form of psychological warfare, you know, again another topic we can talk about, and a topic that I spoke with your brother about.

The Trivium Method Summary Chart (click image to enlarge)

So I mean, I think there’s multiple factors at play here, but those are really the two main ones. As you know, most people simply just don’t know how to properly use their brain, to use the “Trivium”, to use critical thinking. And also the propaganda associated with a lot of these events is systematically designed to exploit us on very base emotional and psychological levels.

Monika: Yes! You’re hit the nail on the head. So it not only are people not able to use logic, but this subject is absolutely taboo to even question. So, I’ve had people tell me, even if they were trying to remain friendly to me, they would say:

“Well Monika, this topic is it just off-limits! I’m not going to discuss the ‘Holocaust’ with you! I’m not going to debate it with you! But I’ll still, you know, be your friend.”

But I mean, those people, they kind of go by the way side anyway. They’ve been more and more affected in this small town of 5,000 people. It has gotten worse, not better, over the year. But this topic is, … You just cannot debate it! Because we’ve been trained that if you even question it, then you are automatically “a hater”!

I mean, this is bizarre! There is no logic in that, John! Like, how can that even make sense, that if you say that there was no deliberate extermination plan, and that means less people died, that you are a hater! ? Now to me, that is the most bizarre leap of logic, you know? Can you explain that?

John: No you can’t explain it logically, because it’s not a logical argument. It’s a ridiculous argument and there’s no logic involved at all. It’s all pure emotion, all emotion.

Monika: Yes, that’s right.

John: And that’s the thing, that especially the holocaust. But I mean, other events as well, 9/11, for example. Although I do think that the fake “Holocaust” narrative and, you know, World War Two generally, you know, this idea that Hitler was this evil monster, who wanted to take over the world. And he had, you know, his master race and all this other nonsense. This is really, you know, sort of the most taboo and most controversial topic in all of society.

And, of course, it relates directly to jews, so if you start talking about Jews your equated with Hitler, you’re equated with the Nazis and you’re a racist, you’re anti-Semitic and all these other weaponized buzzwords are thrown at you. Again, logical fallacies, all of them! You know, none of this is factual.

Monika: All of it!

John: Yeah, exactly!

[19:23]

Monika: It’s the biggest weapon yet! I mean, if it wasn’t for this success this big, huge, mess of the “Holocaust”, there’s no way they would have had the audacity to do something like 9/11.

And 9/11, I mean, that was actually what triggered me to wake up! And it didn’t happen right away. I kind of knew something was wrong with it, but it wasn’t until about ten years after 9/11, that I started to investigate it and figure it out. And that was a really hard door to go through, because it just meant that, they’re lying to us! Like that’s a huge thing to lie about, right?

That’s not just a little money scandal. I mean, you always hear about little scandals, this and that, that seem big when they talk about them, like political scandals. But, you always just think, okay, well, they have corruption in this and that, but you just can’t imagine they would lie about something so big. But once you figure that out, that turns your world upside down!

Organized jewry Did 911

And it was after that, that I started to figure out the “Holocaust”. And at first I really resisted it. I mean, that just, how could there be such a big lie? How could that be?

And just to go back to what I briefly said in my video. It was an apology to my parents. To my mother in particular. Because when I was a teenager, and again this comes back to this deep sense of justice that I had, and we were learning all those horrors about Hitler and the “Holocaust”. And so, there I was, telling my mother, saying things like:

“Mom, why didn’t you stop this from happening? If you had just got together with all your friends and your relatives, you could have done something about it!”

I mean, that was ridiculous, to say such a thing! But there I was, holding her to account, you know, she was culpable! And I’m sure that there was a whole generation of us that, you know, it caused a real generation gap. A rift between the generations of Germans. That, oh! These parents of ours, or the grandparents, oh, they were monsters, you know! Like this what happened.

And so, there I was, reprimanding, or holding her to account for not having tried to do more! I mean, she was just a teenager in a war anyway, so that was pretty ridiculous just on that count. And then all these years later, and this is after both parents have died, that I figured it all out and I just regretted that so much! And I told Alfred one day on the phone, I said:

“Boy, I wish I could say sorry!”

And he just grabbed onto that and said:

“Oh! Yes! That’s very significant!”

Yes, so then, …

John: “That’s the video we’re making right there! Do it!”

Monika: Yeah, exactly!

John: Well, you know, speaking of your video. At least on Alfred’s channel, I don’t know if this is, I’m sure it’s been viewed on other channels. I’m sure you can find this exact same video on other channels. But just on his channel alone, it’s been viewed over 130,000 times! So this has made quite an impact. And this was, June 17th, 2016. So, a little under a year ago.

And it’s a short, very powerful video. I’d assume most people listening to this podcast have seen the video, but if you haven’t, I will have a link to it. In fact, I just embed it in this post, you’ll find it right on my website. It’s six minutes total, just under six minutes. Take the time to watch it. It’s very good, it’s very powerful, it’s very just straightforward and like, look “Sorry Mom, I was wrong and here’s why. And here’s why it’s important!” And it’s very good. And yeah I just really like this video, especially when it first came out. And again, it made quite a splash, you know, all these waves, …

Monika: Yeah, It struck a chord John, because there are other people who went through that similar experience. Like what I said, that they were disgusted with their parents’ generation. Which is just such a sad thing that has been done to the German people.

Okay, about the video, you mentioned, that this is just on Alfred’s site. You’re right there’s a lot more views even then that. Because I made a German version, an original German version, I speak German fluently. So that is called, “Entschuldigung Mama, ich hatte Unrecht was den Holocaust betrifft” in case you have German listeners. So you could look that up too.

And then also the English version was translated into three languages, within the first four days. Not that we did this, others did this. So, French Spanish and Swedish, I believe. And then these people sent us the links to those at the time. People are just kind of, … Like I say, it really struck a chord. It was just brief, it’s short, so it’s easy to watch and this thing, you know, about the parents and just saying sorry to Mom, you know, reprimanding her for not doing anything to stop these things! And then figuring out it’s all a lie! Oh my goodness!

John: Now, I’m curious. There’s quite a substantial population of Germans in Canada, correct? That came over right after the war?

[25:02]

Monika: Definitely! Yes. Lots of Germans in Canada.

John: I’d imagine, maybe even more so, than that came here to America. I don’t know that for sure, but it seems like there’s quite a few that came over directly after the war?

Monika: Yes. Yes and through the fifty’s too. When my parents came I think there were a lot of people coming from Germany. And my parents came in 1951 and 52, respectively. Yes, I think that’s a lot of people left Germany. I mean, Germany was destroyed and also you had the expellees from the eastern territories. The eastern, you know, like Sudentenland, East Prussia. All these different territories that were German for hundreds of years and then, you know, Germany got shrunk after World War One. And World War One led directly to World War Two. These are things have learning a lot about now. I’m really going on a big education, a big learning curve. And I met some of those expellees, people who were forcibly expelled. And this is a story that we certainly did not learn about in school. I think probably a lot of your listeners do understand about this, but millions of Germans died AFTER World War Two was over!

German territory lost in the 20th century (click image to enlarge).

And many of them died as they were being pushed out of those eastern territories. And many were murdered, many starved, many women and girls, you know, many young girls up to old women were raped. It was brutal what they went through. And I met a few German expellees who were children at the time — when I went to Toronto last summer to speak there — and I have to say that was just so impacting on me. I mean, it was a very impactful experience for me to meet these people!

John: Right, I can imagine. Now, of course, you had mentioned you guys weren’t really taught anything like this. This perspective, the German perspective of World War Two? I’m assuming anyways, when you’re growing up in Canada, your parents didn’t talk about it?

Monika: Well, there were some things that my parents did talk about, but I don’t remember the stories of expellees. But what my mother did talk about, over and over again, was Dresden. She wasn’t there, but she knew all about it. And Dresden was the real “Holocaust”! The “Holocaust” of German civilians, women, children and injured soldiers there in hospitals. And also war refugees. The city had no military installations. It had no military targets there. And it had the most beautiful architecture!

And actually the German people started to believe that, oh, nobody would ever bomb the city! And it was there for most of the war. But then in February 1945, February 13th, I believe, it started, or maybe it started on the 11th, I’m not sure now [The bombing started at 10:14 pm, on Tuesday the 13th] . The bombing began and it was incendiary bombing. It was purposely to start fires. And many, many, many people died there! And then they paused [the bombing] and then people, as they were coming out of, you know, the bunkers and whatnot, if they survived at all, they were getting stuck in the molten pavement. And then the bombing started again. It was just brutal! It was pure and utter revenge and hate from the allies! And they knew this city was full of refugees and women and children, and that it was there was no military there.

John: Right.

Monika: It was absolutely a crime! And crime against humanity! And, of course, there were other cities as well which were bombed like that too. But Dresden is the one that my mother talked about when we were growing up. And yeah, I didn’t learn about the people who were expelled.

John: Well Monika, as you know, “Germany had to perish!” Which is actually the title of a book.

Monika: Yes.

John: Written by a jew! This is the thing that’s so amazing! When I was really getting into this information, it became more and more clear, the more research that I did that literally the entire official narrative of World War Two is truly the exact opposite.

Monika: Absolutely!

John: I mean, it’s very easy to demonstrate this. I mean, we have multiple sources of jewish individuals in America, in Russia, literally calling for the extermination, the annihilation, the genocide of the German nation. The destruction of the German nation, of the German people! Openly calling for this! In books they wrote, in policy papers that they, you know, put in front of governments and have them implement essentially. In propaganda, I mean, you name it, we can go on and on. There’s many sources that demonstrate this.

Monika: Yes.

John: And yet, you can’t find one single legitimate source demonstrating that Hitler, or the National Socialist government wanted to, let alone, implement it, a systematic plan to exterminate, to murder European jews! It’s just not even true at all! There’s nothing to substantiate it, aside from jewish propaganda, jewish lies.

[30:50]

Monika: Yes, that’s exactly right! Everything has been turned on it’s head! I mean, in the beginning when I was starting my learning about all of this, you know, I realized some things were upside down and turned on their head but, you know, people would say, “Yeah, everything’s on it’s head!” And I would say, well maybe that’s just a figure of speech. But it really is that way! The more I learn, the more I realize that everything is on it’s head, upside down, inverted!

But thank you for bringing up that, “Germany Must Perish” book by Theodor Kaufman. He wrote that in 1941. And it literally is a genocidal plan, where all the German people should be wiped off the face of this earth! And supposedly through a humane method of forced sterilization. Now, why I wanted to bring this up, and thank you for already bringing it into the conversation, is that I wanted to talk briefly about Arthur Topham.

Now Arthur Topham is now silenced by law! He has been sentenced after a ten-year ordeal with the criminal justice system in Canada for this spurious hate speech, under these “hate speech” laws in the Criminal Code of Canada. And he had a website called, “The Radical Press”. And it actually started out as a paper, a hard copy magazine in the late 90’s and then he went online. And it went only online for a number of years. And he it was dragged through the court system for ten years. And it was just utter harassment and basically jews who didn’t like the things that he was exposing. The truth that he was talking about and the lies that he was exposing.

Now he ended up getting convicted by a jury. Guilty on one charge and not guilty on the identical charge, but for a different time period, for publishings on his website. And in Canada the jury cannot divulge what exactly was the rationale for the guilty verdict.

But, we can surmise that it was for the parody that Arthur Topham did, called, “Israel Must Perish”. But this was not his words. What he did, is he took the book “Germany Must Perish” and he took a section of that and he duplicated it, word for word. But, he replaced the title, the word “Germany” with “Israel” and replaced “Germans” with “jews”. And basically this was drawing attention to the genocidal original book “Germany Must Perish”.

And he did make it clear that this was a satire, that the books were side by side on his website. And there was a preface that talked about satire. And this was all explained in the court. I was there for part of it, and evidently the jury was overwhelmed by, I guess, the indoctrination that we’ve all been subject to and this was all just too much for them. But he was found guilty.

Now, what I really want to tell your listeners and just make sure that this is clarified, is the lies that they now tell about Arthur Topham in the press, when he cannot defend himself. Because if he did, he would go straight into jail. He’s now on, basically house arrest. So he’s not in jail, even though he’s been sentenced. But part of the sentencing is that the website came down and he’s not allowed to speak publicly. So, when they say lies about him, for example, that they will say that Arthur Topham calls for the sterilization of jews. But [because] they don’t put it into context of this parody, this satire of “Germany Must Perish”, then that is a lie! That is an outright lie! And I want to set the record right here!

[35:16]

John: You know, I’m glad you have been able to do that, because as you mentioned Arthur can’t even speak for himself. It’s ridiculous!

Monika: Exactly! So anyway thank you for the opportunity to set that straight that, you know, here they are lying about Arthur Topham when he can’t even speak in public. And they darn well know that, so it’s just absolutely malicious!

John: It truly is. And speaking of malicious activities carried out by governments against truth seekers, like Ernst Zundel, I just wrote an article for American Free Press, and it should be published — let’s see today is Wednesday — it should be published in this week’s edition. So, I think they publish on Friday, Friday morning. So it should be in the upcoming edition of American Free Press. And it’s about Ernst Zundel. Who, I’m sure you’re familiar with?

Monika: Absolutely!

John: Right. Yeah, he lived in Canada for a number of years. I’m sure most people listening here are familiar with Ernst Zundel. If you’re not, simply Google the man. He’s a legend, he’s a hero. He’s been through a lot..

Monika: Yeah, in fact, one of those three videos at the end of my six-minute video, I put three recommendations to the listener. Just, you know, I thought, OK I’ll just give the listener something that if this is all really blowing their mind, and they want to know where am I coming from, and I give three titles of videos. The first one is called, “Off Your Knees Germany!” And it’s Ernst Zundel. The story of what he went through in the courts. And it was one of the first things that kind of caught me turning my mind around the “Holocaust” story, was watching that video. It’s ninety minutes long, so an hour and a half. And I would say, you know, it’s going to be a very, very worthwhile ninety minutes.

Video: Off Your Knees Germany!

John: Right. Oh yeah, I’ve seen it. It’s great, I think I’ve watched all of the, you know, major documentaries that they put together. And they are certainly worth watching, for sure! Very eye-opening, very revealing, very informative.

And I mean, if you’re not outraged after seeing those and just understanding what they’ve gone through, you know, what Arthur Topham has gone through, what many people have gone through. People are being persecuted all over the world for challenging the fake “Holocaust” narrative! That’s absolutely ridiculous!

But speaking of Zundel, the article that I wrote was about how he was just denied entry into the United States. Was deemed inadmissible! By the United States federal government. In particular I think it was the Office of Appeals, I believe, of the Department of Homeland Security. And they cited his revisionist activities, his educational activities, his political views. Which are all very well documented and very scholarly sourced and entirely legitimate perspectives that he’s offering. And yet, he’s deemed inadmissible. Meanwhile, we have millions of illegal aliens overrunning our country. Our government is systematically facilitating refugee resettlement of people we don’t even know who the hell they are! You know, just washed up on our shores and we’re supposed to give them free everything. Free housing, free, you know, education, free health care, welfare, you name it, it’s I mean, it’s so incredible what is going on! It’s like I can’t even comprehend it sometimes.

The Washington Post: Ernst Zundel Barred from the US.

Monika: Yeah. Well, there we see the agenda of who is actually running the country. I mean, I think it was Ariel Sharon, or was it, you know, basically just said:

“Don’t worry about what Americans think about this, or that, that we are doing. We run America and they know it!”

John: Yes.

Monika: Anyway, [about] Ernst Zundel being kept out, are they actually citing his political views? Because it’s not six case then, that’s the end of the First Amendment. And then [word unclear] in the United States, freedom of speech, is it not? I think that it’s incredibly, like it’s very scary, if that’s what’s going on. The United States was still kind of, you know, we’re looking to you guys down there for keeping some semblance of being able to speak freely still. But, you know, this is really, really bad. Somebody being kept out for their political views.

[40:03]

John: Yeah. Absolutely! Yeah and like this is basically openly admitted in the ruling that they released. And it’s interesting, because this was reported on by The Washington Post, back in April, almost a month ago. And in the appeal here it was essentially, he was denied entry and then they were determining if they could grant him a waiver. Which they did not. They ended up denying even a waiver. I mean it’s amazing. His wife is American. Ingrid is an American citizen and has been living here for a very long time. She lives in Seattle, I believe.

Monika: Yes. She can’t go to Germany, because she would be thrown in jail immediately there. And he can’t come to the States. So they end up going elsewhere to meet, you know. It’s really, really sad!

John: I mean, it’s very, very sad, absolutely tragic. In the ruling here they say, you know, when they go to deny the waiver, the negative factors in his case include his long history of inciting racial, ethnic, and religious hatred. It also goes on to say the record shows that the applicant, Zundel, is a historical revisionist and denier of the “Holocaust”! Distributing writings, books, tapes, videos, and broadcasts to promote his views. The record further indicates that these publications agitated for aggressive behavior against jews!

Monika: Oh my goodness!

John: Right, yeah. All of these, I mean, it’s true that he absolutely was a historical revisionist and “Holocaust denier”, I guess. I don’t really like to use that label.

Monika: Neither do I. So that basically says:

“Oh! That’s illegal in the United States!”

John: Right. Now get this. They also say this the applicant has been a leader in these activities for decades. Which is true. And has shown no regret, or remorse for his actions!

Monika: Of course, not!

John: Exactly. That’s a thing. It’s like:

“Oh maybe, perhaps, if he were to bow down to the jews, beg for forgiveness, renounce his views, say the “Holocaust” is true.”

 

Maybe, just maybe they would let him back in. But no. It’s so outrageous!

Monika: The thing with the laws, this is the part I am absolutely dumbfounded that people don’t wake up to this absurdity! That if there are laws to restrict you from saying certain things, then doesn’t that raise a red flag for people? Doesn’t that show them that there’s something to hide? That maybe there’s something that they’re lying about?

But no, that really gets me. I think that alone should tell people that there’s something wrong with the official story. You know, it’s exactly the opposite for some people. Because when I raise this issue about the laws, it’s incredible that some people will say:

“Well you see? See, you’re wrong! The laws prove it! You’re wrong!”

Now isn’t that bizarre? That’s kind of a circular thing, … I mean, you could make any kind of a law, like, “stop breathing” and then if you breathe:

“Oh! See! We’d better throw you in jail! You just broke the law!”

I mean, it is just that absurd!

John: I mean, I agree. It’s totally is, it’s ridiculous!

You know, Monika, I wanted to get back, … I wanted to talk about, basically, what led you to start questioning the “Holocaust”? And kind of like, your wake up process, so to speak, and maybe you could describe like some other topics that maybe you researched, or what led you to start questioning, you know, doing research into the fake “Holocaust” narrative?

Monika: Well, I have to credit my brother for basically introducing me to this notion and this idea. And so I was visiting over there [Germany] and I think, 2013, Christmas time. And this was, you know, already a couple of years after figuring out 9/11 and what a lie we have been told about that.

John: So, is it fair to say that 9/11 was like your big, sort of wake up call? What led you to question everything?

Monika: Yes.

John: Okay, and that’s exactly how I was. I mean, before I was really getting into 9/11 I was very anti-war and I totally recognized how corrupt the government was, how corrupt the media was. I knew we were being lied to. I was sort of aware of these sort of broader systemic issues. How corrupt everything was. I just didn’t really understand the extent of it. How deep it actually went and I certainly didn’t understand who was truly behind it all.

Monika: Exactly!

[45:00]

John: And once I woke up to 9/11, … Yeah and that’s seems like that’s pretty common for a lot of people. They start questioning 9/11 and then everything opens up to them.

Monika: Yes. No, that is interesting, that’s interesting about that John. And there are definitely a lot of people for whom 9/11 was that door that they first went through and then started uncovering these other truths. But, you know, in this journey of mine over this past year, many people have contacted me from all over the place and so I’ve struck up some dialogues with a lot of different people. And what has surprised me is that for quite a few people, other things woke them up.

Like, for example, some people who started learning all about our financial system and how deep and corrupt that was, because of things that happened in their personal lives that, you know, they got basically the bad end of a deal. And then they started digging and looking into that. And for others it was actually the topic of just why is everything against White people? And this is sort of the taboo subject that we could get into, but for me that was not a starting point at all. It is now what I’ve kind of come to understand is that, oh, this end goal is to basically get rid of us and replace us.

John: Right, right!

Monika: And, oh my goodness that didn’t come into my realization until well after I started figuring out all these other things. The “Holocaust” is the ultimate weapon to use against us. Because you see, there’s this thing that people will have this weird logic that says, oh well, if you are denying that this “Holocaust” happened, then the next thing that happens is you’re going to just want to kill everybody! Like you’re going to do a “Holocaust” again, or something like that. Like this is the logic that’s being used against us. So it’s the ultimate weapon! Meanwhile, it’s the opposite that is happening.

John: Yeah!

Monika: And I mean, there’s lots and lots of evidence of that. And one of the really clear quotes that I have used is Noel Ignatiev. And you probably have that on your page of quotes there., but I mean, I’ll just read this, I have it in front of me here.

Noel Ignatiev, a, quote, unquote, “respected Harvard professor”, he says:

“The goal of abolishing the White race, is, on it’s face, so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition, other than from committed White supremacists!”

OK, I finished the quote, so think about that. So, if you merely don’t want to be destroyed then you are a White supremacist! Can you imagine this being said. Japanese people who wish to see their culture and their traditions preserved and who wish to see Japanese grandchildren?

“Oh they must be Japanese supremacists!”

Or can you imagine this being said about, maybe. Let’s just pick a country and in Africa, like Senegal. The Senegalese people, if they don’t want to be destroyed:

“Oh well, they must be black supremacists!”

I mean, that’s absurd.

John: It’s truly absurd! You’re totally right. And see like a basic observation like that. It’s so obvious that what you’re saying is true. And yet this is very rarely pointed out to people. I mean, you have to point out a basic observation like to get people to start even thinking and in many cases they still can’t even do it.

Monika: Yeah. And also is this conflating of different concept. So, if you have pride in your people and you love your people, you could call it, you know, maybe nationalism, White Nationalism, or whatever., but people will instantly just say, White supremacist! And if you correct them and say, no, no, no! Like how about nationalist, or nationalism, or that you have pride. No! That’s a White supremacist! Like this is this instant leap that people will make, because they’ve been trained to make that leap. They’ve been trained by our media and all the movies and the indoctrination. I mean, that’s basically, you know, how we’ve been poisoned in the mind.

[49:34]

John: Right! No, you’re right! It is a mind poisoning. You’re exactly right, that’s best way to describe it I think. Well, jews have always, jews and communists and Marxists and those are all pretty much the same thing! Because if you’re a Marxist, or a communist you’re basically, your mind has been poisoned by jews. And I mean, Marxism and communism really are in my view rational coherent political philosophies. They’re jewish schemes to destroy White Christians societies.

Monika: Yes.

John: And to take all our wealth to create this jewish plutocratic elite that dominates and controls societies. And that’s certainly what we have in the United States. But jews and communists and leftists, they’ve always tried to attack any form of White racial identity. I mean, going back to the late 100s, early 1900s. And they weren’t as successful back then, because White people were still sort of healthy, you know, spiritually. They could think properly, at least most of us. But really, I think a lot of this is a result of the fake “Holocaust” narrative! And the official narrative of World War Two. See, this is a point that I was speaking with your brother about, and I try to emphasize this, you know, when I talk about these subjects, because I think it’s so important. The official “Holocaust” narrative, and I think it’s so important to the White struggle and a lot of people dismiss this, or downplay it, or think it’s unimportant. When in my view it’s absolutely central to our struggle, dealing head on, not only with the fake “Holocaust” narrative, but all of World War Two.

The real holocaust, the fire-bombing of German cities (click image to enlarge).

Monika: Yes.

John: You know, being able to say, look, Adolf Hitler was not this evil monster, in fact, he was like the most righteous, honorable leader that we’ve seen in generations! I mean, we should be able to say that openly and proudly.

Monika: Yes.

John: And not even hesitate, not even flinch! Anyways, the point that I was trying to make is the “Holocaust” narrative discredits and truly delegitimizes White, or any form of White racial identity. And I mean, it’s not the only thing that delegitimizes and discredits White racial identity. I mean, the jews have literally pathologized White identity through Cultural Marxism. If you identify as a White person and you concern yourself with the interests of White people, broadly speaking, you’re considered this irrational bigot who hates jews and is a racist White supremacist!

Monika: Yes.

John: But a lot of this goes back to the “Holocaust”. So on the one hand it really serves to delegitimize White identity, on the other hand, it’s used to strengthen jewish identity! And there’s public opinion polls done by jews, done by, you know, sort of legitimacy organizations like, PEW research center. They do polls on jewish identity and how do jews identify, what is the central factor in jewish identity. And would you believe it’s the “Holocaust”! I mean, it really is. So it strengthens jewish identity, and it is also created this enormous economic, political and social racket! Think about all these “Holocaust” museums, think about all the money the Jews get from this fake story, think about all these fraudulent books that have been written about the “Holocaust”, all these memoirs, all these documentaries, all these Hollywood films. I mean, it truly is a gigantic racket!

Monika: Yes, John! You have hit the nail right on it’s head with what you’re saying here. So this identity thing, that is exactly right! That’s the biggest identity thing for the Jews is the “Holocaust”. But also that they have been persecuted through the ages. They’ve always been persecuted, they’ve always been, you know, a hated! This is their identity. They’re taught that from the day they’re born. And I think that most jewish people, street level jewish people kind of get a double dose of indoctrination, but this is their identity, so that’s what they are taught right from when they’re born.

I do have, you know, a very nice friend who is really trying her best to wrap her head around what I’m saying. And she asks very intelligent questions and so I take a lot of time in trying to answer her. And one of the things she says is that, you know, she has a jewish friend and has relatives that she lost in the war and so, and this thing about being persecuted. Like that is how she identifies and that is exactly it! That’s their identity. But here’s the thing that I like to tell people a little story. It’s a little allegory for this persecution. It is true that Jews have been kicked out, you know, we know it probably at least a 109 times from different countries, or regions during the last two thousand years. But there’s a missing part of the picture that we’re not taught about that.

[55:09]

So, let’s say John, you go you like to the pub quite often, the bar, and you come home one evening and you’re very upset, because the bouncer kicked you out. And I sympathize with you. And the next evening you go to another bar and then you get kicked out again, and you come home and you complain that that bouncer was just unfair as well, and, you know, and it was just completely uncalled for! And again, I might sympathize with you. And the third night go to a another pub and you’re kicked for the fourth, fifth, tenth time! Your kicked out from different places and each time you’re crying about being discriminated against! And those bouncers are treating you so unfairly! And they are just so hateful towards you. And I am getting really skeptical about what’s going on. And I might just ask you, very politely, what is it that you are doing to get yourself kicked out? And then you say, really angrily:

“Oh! Those people just hate people with”, I don’t know, XYZ “And they are all anti-XYZ!”

And then you start lobbying to make laws against anti-XYZism. And that’s basically the story!

I mean, really, can people just say, well what is it that Jews have been persecuted for, all these thousands of years? Is it maybe that they’ve been doing things wherever they go that wasn’t good? I mean, Jesus Christ kicked the moneylenders out of the temple. And I mean, one could believe that story, or not believe it, maybe it’s also a metaphor, or an allegory, but there it is. That’s the story that the money lenders were kicked out of the temple.

John: Right exactly. Well, see that’s the thing. Dealing rationally and truthfully about jews, and their agenda, and their criminal activities, and their subversive activities, I mean, this is considered anti-semitism! Like literally, telling the truth about the jews, stating basic facts as you mentioned. You know, they literally — we can document this — they literally have been thrown out of over one hundred countries, just in modern history!

Monika: Yeah!

John: Bringing this up, talking about the reality of jewish supremacy and jewish power in the United States, in the Western world in general, the reality of, you know, the Israeli occupation of Palestine. I mean, the terrorism they have committed, the false flags, and all the criminality. I mean, we can go on, and on, and on, and yet, … We could easily document all these things. In fact, what I try to do on my website, by using jewish sources, from explicitly jewish news outlets that document this, and talk about this. And in some cases brag about it. And yet if you bring it up you’re called an anti-Semite!

Monika: Yeah, isn’t that bizarre!

John: I mean, it’s like, it truly is the most Orwellian thing you could think! I mean, this is George Orwell in reality. This 1984 scenario. You can’t even tell the truth, like literally tell the truth using explicitly jewish sources, to make your point, without being demonized. It’s so childish! It’s, I mean, I don’t know it’s really puzzling to me.

Monika: Yeah. Probably most of your listeners know this, but it’s just something I learned pretty recently. But George Orwell, he was actually an M-16 agent and so he knew! And this was his warning to the world. When we read them when we were teenagers, we saw that this was just really, you know, horrific science fiction. That it had no bearing on reality, but he knew! And he was trying to give the world a warning.

John: Right. I think so. Yeah, I’ve heard that he was connected to British Intelligence, although I can’t say I’ve totally verified that for myself. Either way, the book is certainly worth reading.

Monika: Definitely!

John: Yeah, it’s good piece of literature.

[59:40]

Monika: So one of the things that people always say, well, besides saying:

“We’re not going to debate this with you. And there’s no way you can’t talk about this. This is off-limits, a taboo subject”.

But, if they do say anything about it, they’ll say:

“There’s mountains of evidence! Mountains of evidence! It’s the most well documented event in the history of mankind!”

And then, they’ll also say:

“And there’s all those eyewitnesses. And what about the survivors?”

Okay. So first of all, about those “mountains of evidence”. But they don’t present those “mountains of evidence”! They just keep repeating that mantra. And then when you do look into the evidence, it’s actually the opposite.

You know, I just read a book called, “The Great Holocaust Trial” by Michael Hoffman and that is about the 1985 [trial], that’s the first of the two Ernst Zundel “Holocaust” trials that took place in Toronto, in Canada, in the 80s.

[Image] The Great Holocaust Trial by Michael Hoffman — back cover (click image to enlarge).

And I mean, reading that book, that should be mandatory curriculum in the schools! But I’m sure it would never be allowed into the schools, that book. Because what came out in that trial was just most astonishing! You know, evidence and evidence that basically the “Holocaust” did NOT happen as they say it happened! And, you know, there were reports in the media, but the thing is, even though there were reports in the media that they were reporting what was going on, and yet the way they reported it, I as a young woman in my early twenty’s at the time, it was kind of background noise for me. And I just kind of assumed that Ernst Zundel, he must be a bad man, or something. But I didn’t really pay much attention to it, and I regret to say that.

Perhaps if I had paid more attention to what they were actually saying, I might have looked into this more deeply. But, because of how they were portraying him in the mainstream media, he was just kind of a bad man in my mind. So you see, this is how they can do it. Even when they were kind of forced to report what was being brought out in the trial.

Stuff like, you know, Raul Hilberg, the main jewish “Holocaust” historian of the time. He was the main witness for the prosecution side. I mean, when it was brought into the court that there were no documents that said that there was a plan for the extermination of the jews. There was not a single document to that effect and he actually said in the court.

“That yes, it is incredible! There was some kind of ‘meeting of the minds!”

John: Exactly. So he’s literally conceding points to the revisionists, openly in court. Yeah it’s amazing! I haven’t read the book, I should. Gosh, I really should sit down and read it. I’m familiar with the book you’re talking about, by Hoffman.

Monika: Yeah. It’s easy to read, it’s very short. It’s a skinny book. A new edition came out that’s longer. I haven’t read the new editions, so I think he probably adds stuff. I’m not sure exactly. I have it in my possession, I haven’t read it yet, but maybe he adds about the next trial? I don’t know.

But then, the other part of it, about the eyewitnesses. That is just a conversation stopper, because people feel worried that they’re going to insult the memories or, you know, something about that like. That’s how we’ve been trained to just, you dare not, …

John: Disrespect the dead. Yeah, exactly! This is like a psychological aspect of the “Holocaust”. It’s the survivor testimony, as well as the photographs.

Monika: Yes! And the photographs!

John: Yes, that is what I get a lot, is, people can’t even talk about it, like, we just can’t talk about this, sorry. Or, bring up the survivors as you mentioned, or they’ll bring up the photographs.

“Oh, well, what about all these dead bodies?”

Well, how does that prove that there was a “Holocaust”? Think about it, what does that prove?

Monika: Exactly! What does that prove? How does a pile of dead bodies prove gas chambers? And secondly, who are those dead bodies? In some cases those dead bodies may not have even been, you know, jewish dead bodies. Like they might of, some of them were possibly German dead bodies after the war. Because some of these photographs didn’t come out until years after the war, so.

And I’ve seen some documentation about a lot of doctored photographs, as well. I’m not talking about the piles of dead bodies now, but I’m talking about, where two identical photos are side by side, and the one, there’s been something inserted into it. Like perhaps a hanging body and then, you know, a soldier, a German soldier standing there with a grin on his face. Something, you know, just crazy things, where they just doctored photos and made lies out of them.

[65:04]

Anyway, piles of dead bodies do not prove extermination of jews and gas chambers, especially. And then the survivors, you know, I do have actually a story about an Auschwitz survivor who lived in this little town of Jasper. And we were actually good friends. He liked music and I’m a musician and so we ended up spending times together at sing-a-longs and that kind of thing. And I invited him over to my home — this is when I still believed in the whole “Holocaust” story and I was doing, quote, unquote, “the right thing” and, you know, wanting my daughter to be educated about it and all this. And I had him and his wife over, to give that talk, because he had gone into the schools quite a lot and given that talk about his Auschwitz experience. He did have the tattooed number on his arm and everything.

Anyway, so they came over and we had a nice dinner and after dinner, cleared away the dishes, and then he read his talk and he explained that it was easier that way. So he had a prepared talk that he read, and we listened. And at the end, I just remember feeling some sense of disappointment, because I didn’t really hear any of the details about what we thought had happened in those camps. And remember this was years ago when I still fully believed in the “Holocaust”. Now I don’t think that he was ever purposefully deceiving anybody, and I think he had come to believe all those stories too. And he was a very, very good man.

He’s dead now, so I’m speaking of him in past tense. He and his wife they were lovely, lovely people, and the thing is I think he was a very honorable man, because he didn’t make up stories. So when I see I was slightly disappointed at the end the talk. Because here I had this Hollywood vision, you know, file this way, file that way. And, you know, the lineups of people and just horrible scenes, and that kind of thing. Well, he didn’t describe any of that. Well, he probably didn’t describe any of that, because he did not see that kind of thing.

So, I mean, now in retrospect, it’s just also very, very interesting for me, because I realized, well yeah, he didn’t see those things, because they didn’t happen. Those things that are, you know, Hollywood version of the “Holocaust”. And he didn’t talk about any belching chimneys, or anything like that! He just talked in more general sense of how he ended up in the camp. And he also made several times, made statements about how he did NOT come to hate the Germans — he was Polish, by the way — he did not come to hate the Germans. In fact, he married one, because his wife was a German and he met her after the war in Germany.

And he was also not jewish, so he was Polish, and I think he had worked for the underground, or something like that. And he also says that there were many other people, other than Jews in the camp. He made that very clear in his talks. So in retrospect, when I think of all those things, I think:

“Well, good on you!”

John: Right.

Monika: He told us all those things and, …

John: Well, I think you’re right. I do think that a lot of jews, a lot of quote, unquote “Holocaust” survivors, I think there are a lot of them that really do buy into the fake story that the organized jewish community has created. I mean, the origins of the story it’s really a combination of the jews, the British government, the American government. I mean, they were making up these atrocities stories about the Germans to demonize them and to garner support, you know, to go to war against them, basically. Black propaganda that became institutionalized. So a lot of these people actually do believe the stuff. But getting back to what you’re saying about this guy who was actually kind of like telling the truth, have you seen that video on You Tube called the, “’Holocaust’ survivors who tell the truth”?

Monika: I think I have, yeah.

John: It’s kind of it reminds me of what we’re explaining here. It’s so many people who are legitimate, quote, unquote, “Holocaust” survivors, they provide testimony that’s actually truthful, but basically debunks the official narrative, right? But yet they still believe in it. They talk about:

“Oh, you know, we went into we went into the gas chambers and all of a sudden there was a shower, taking a shower!”

Which is like, I mean, it’s true! Its like, sort of what happened. And a lot of this stuff, lot of the “Holocaust” mythology was basically rumors floating around.

Monika: Yes.

John: And, you know, spreading, you know, how gossip starts, rumors start! This is what it was, and this became institutionalized.

[70:15]

Monika: Absolutely! There were whisper campaigns. These were deliberately begun and deliberately spread so you could call it the “rumor mill”. You know, at that time I think they actually called them “whisper campaigns”, or something like that. And like, you mentioned the black propaganda and, yeah, that was a huge part of the war. Well, first of all you had to get the world to hate Germans and Germany. And that had been going on for decades before World War Two, already. I mean, I think already in the late 1800s, this campaign of hatred towards Germans had begun.

John: Yeah, it certainly had. Monika, we are over an hour now.

Monika: Yes. We have a limited time.

John: Yeah. We wanted to keep it to under an hour and a half. We are about an hour and ten minutes, or so, into this. I do have a couple, sort of big questions I want to ask and I think it’s probably going to take you some time to address them fully. And I definitely want you to do so. The first one is, in these first two they’re kind of related, but the first one is: Based on your research into the alleged “Holocaust” story — I should say the fake “Holocaust” story, let’s be serious, it is fake, …

Monika: Yeah.

John: What are the main conclusions that you’ve come to? Like, if you wanted to make the most important points to someone about the research you’ve done and the conclusions that you have come to. What would you tell them?

Monika: Yeah, well I think that the ultimate goal for Organized jewry, I’ll call it, like the globalists, is to rule the world! One world government! And they’ve been telling us that for quite a while, actually. I remember when I was at university in the 80’s, I remember receiving some kind of postcard, or propaganda material that actually said, “One world government” and was exposing these great ideas about just, you know, having one world government and peace, they said in this in this propaganda literature. And I have no idea who was behind this and what it was and it’s coming.

But anyway, that is the goal for the jews. To have this dominion over all the world and all the wealth, all the gold, own everything, and enslave the rest of us! And I think they want to annihilate a lot of us, and that’s, I mean, the “Holocaust”, that they call a “Holocaust” is a big part of their equation. Because it’s a weapon that you use against us when we start to point out any of the things that are going on. Like with White genocide. And when I first heard that term, I thought, “what are you talking about?” you know. But it really is the goal. And I think it’s because Europeans have stood up to the jews and that they have been the biggest obstacle to jewish domination over the years, that the European people have been able to stand up to the jews over time. And that’s why they are trying to get rid of the European people. So that would be that.

John: Right. Okay, very good. I mean, I certainly agree with you that the “Holocaust” narrative is probably the number one weapon used by the jews to advance their agenda, to advance their interests. To delegitimize our interests and, you know, to discredit the notion that we can even identify as White people and have interests.

So, I totally agree with you and I guess, just to emphasize that, I don’t understand how we could really ignore this issue. How we could ignore, or downplay the “Holocaust”, ignore, or downplay revisionism, and dealing seriously and truthfully with the “Holocaust”, with World War Two, when literally, it is constantly brought up and used by jews as a weapon against us! All day long! Every single day! I could point this out.

Gosh, I wish I had the time to do. I used to kind of do it when I was writing more of my website, but I mean, literally Monika, I’m not even exaggerating! Every day I could highlight and write a blog post, I could probably do three, or four times. Different articles appearing in the jewish press, appearing in newspapers like Times of Israel, the Jewish Daily Forward, Tablet Magazine, the Jewish Telegraph Agency. I mean, just openly talking about the “Holocaust” and using it to advance jewish interests while, again, harming our interests. I just don’t understand how it can be avoided, and I mean, I’m certainly not going to avoid it. But I would argue that it’s very central to our struggle and I think you would probably agree with me.

[75:22]

Monika: Yeah. Absolutely! I mean, I’m kind of laughing at this end of it when you’re talking about it. Yes, every day. You’re right, it’s not a laughing matter. It is so, so serious. But the fact that it is twenty-four seven in all the different media. Like, whether it’s radio, whether it’s movies, whether it’s, well I don’t watch TV, but just anything! It’s always brought up even if in a movie it’s about something completely different, but somewhere in the movie the “Holocaust” will come up, or it will be invoked. And, you know, what is the most ironical thing about it, is some people when they are maybe well-meaning towards me, you know, just say:

“Look Monika, why do you dwell on this thing? That was so long ago, it’s not relevant, it’s not relevant!”

And I just, … [laughing]

John: Yes exactly! That’s what I don’t understand.

Monika: How can it not be relevant when there’s this strong reaction against me. That contradicts that statement that they’re making, that it’s not relevant. Of course, it’s relevant! If it wasn’t relevant they would never cared about my video! And I mean, that’s something that I didn’t talk very much, but I don’t want to get into that right now. But that’s this ritual defamation process. And I’ll just briefly say, like, I live in a town of five thousand and I think it’s kind of like a textbook case of where ritual defamation is being carried out. Because this town is kind of like a little bubble. I think if you live in a big city you can move amongst people more anonymously, but you can’t in a town of five thousand.

So, oh my goodness, they have unleashed a storm against me here, but I don’t want to get into that right now. But it’s just been a most interesting thing. And I do kind of make my observations and I, you know, I can write about it and I do write about it a little bit. You’ll probably, maybe make a link to my Free Speech Monika website with this podcast this, I would assume?

John: Absolutely!

Monika: You had a another question for me and so I’d love to hear what that was.

John: Yeah, now that you brought that up that was actually something I wanted to talk about, if you mind? Just addressing that briefly. Just the reaction you have had amongst people you know, amongst friends, neighbors. Because I mean, we sort of have, … I don’t want to say similar experiences, I guess it is kind of. I mean, I’ve been doing this very publicly for a long time. I wouldn’t bring it up with people. People would have to find out on their own, simply by googling me, as if that’s like a very difficult ask to do. But, you know, I didn’t really bring it up and it’s caused a lot of problems professionally and with friends, other relationships.

So I guess, I’m just curious about your reaction, … You live in a small town. I don’t live in a small town by any means. But could you maybe just give us some insight into your experience and sort of what’s happened to you with your friends, or acquaintances?

Monika: Yeah. I mean, I still have some friends! I’m happy to say. And there are people who have stuck by my side through thick and thin, even if they don’t get into this topic, or don’t research it, so they probably don’t even agree with me. But they have remained my friend. So I don’t want to make it sound like I have zero friends here in this town.

However, the general sentiment against me is just, it’s visceral. And I am banned from certain places. The most active venue for music and happenings, happens to be the Legion [Jasper Royal Canadian Legion], and Legion is this is, I guess they operate sort of like a private club, and they have banned me from entering. And a lot happens there, like a lot of live music. I used to be in there a lot, not just listening to musicians who are coming through town, but also playing there a lot. So that’s off-limits for me now.

Jasper Royal Canadian Legion in a foolish act of exclusion, bans Monika Schaefer from entering its premises, thus throwing its reputation into the gutter.

John: That is so pathetic! Wow!

[79:43]

Monika: It is! And last summer I didn’t get a busking license. I was not allowed to have a busking license. Busking is when you put your case out in front of you when you playing music like, in a public place and then passers-by can throw a coin in if they want, if they like your music, or whatever. They can show their appreciation by throwing some money into your music case. And this was the first time that busking became a sanctioned activity in Jasper and I was the one who lobbied for it, years already. And then ironically, I was denied a busking permit last summer, for my, quote, unquote, “my political, non-inclusive views”! Like this is just unbelievable and, you know, when I, …

John: Non-inclusive! They’re the ones excluding you!

Monika: Exactly! And John, just to give some background, I have given my music voluntarily to this town for thirty-five years, basically. The whole time I’ve been living here, in terms of playing at fundraisers, or playing in the schools, or playing for the seniors, or playing all over the place for free, because I just have the enjoyment of doing that. But I also play professionally and teach and all that. But I had been giving and donating that my time and my music for decades.

And then when it came time to get a busking permit they denied me that. Now, we’ll see how that goes this summer, but that’s still a question mark, I have to say, so I can’t report on that yet. But anyway, so there’s a bunch of other things that happened. All kinds of hate letters to me in articles in the main weekly paper. There’s two papers here and both have had their sort of different things in the papers about me. And one paper, the main one, the weekly one, oh my goodness they are treating me with such hostility! And I have not had the right of reply, basically in terms of this subject, at all. And yet they can write all kinds of slanderous things about me. So, it has had it’s effect. People sometimes, they look at me with fear and then I just greet them in a friendly way and then the fear dissipates.

But actually some of the worst is the young high school kids. And I live right across from the high school and I’m telling you sometimes they yell things at me that are just, … And they only do this when they’re in groups. I haven’t had, you know, people do this when they’re by themselves facing. One time I turned around when there was a group of them behind me are on bicycles — I was on my bicycle — and somebody shouted something like, I don’t know, “Nazi!” or “Hitler!” I don’t know what they shouted, just something very hostile. And I turned around and faced them and I said:

“Do, you know, what you’re talking about?”

And they had fear in their eyes! I tried to engage them, but that was impossible and then they zoomed off ahead and turned off and said:

“You can’t follow us! You can’t follow us to the Legion!”

[laughing] I mean, I was just kind of laughing and I could hear them, squeals of laughter, like I could hear them blocks away!

And then there’s other times when people drive by and they stick their heads out the window and just shout obscenities at me! I mean, it’s just absolutely crazy! This kind of thing! But I have to say there are others who, they greet me in a very friendly way. There isn’t anybody in this town and doesn’t know about this controversial issue, since this happened to me and me bringing all up, I guess, what that video. But, you know, when I’m seeing people downtown, or in a grocery store, I don’t bring this up! In fact, I don’t want to bring it up, because I just want to live normal and I greet people and talk about other things like, you know, talk about mundane things, or talk about music, or gardening, or whatever. And I just try to be friendly. And I am a friendly person, I’m pretty gregarious and just try to normalize the situation.

And to a certain extent that does work and people see that. They sort of feel relief after I speak about something else, they feel relief and they want to talk to me about, you know, other subjects, or whatever, so that they can see that, okay, she doesn’t just go around her blow horn all day long and start talking about, you know, the holohoax, National Socialist Germany, or whatever!

Anyway it is quite an interesting situation here. There are people who would just dearly love to chase me out of town and they have sent me all kinds of messages to that effect, and hate messages and whatnot. Anyway, I’m sure that anybody who talks about these things openly has that kind of reaction to them too. But I guess in this size of the town it is very interesting, and so I kind of tell a story with that.

[85:08]

John: Interesting. Well I’d love to come hang out with you in Jasper. Where is it?

Jasper, Alberta (click image to enlarge)

Monika: Jasper. Jasper, Alberta, north of Banff. You have probably heard of Banff.

John: I’m sorry, but I have not.

Monika: Yeah that’s okay. That’s okay, but we’re in the Rocky Mountains.

John: You guys are like directly north of Colorado basically. Like if you were to keep following, …

Monika: Following the Rocky Mountains. That kind of goes north-west. Because they go north-west to south-east so, … But, we’re in the same mountain range that the Colorado Rocky Mountains are. That’s the same mountain range and it’s beautiful here! It’s just absolutely beautiful!

John: Oh, I believe it.

Monika: You know, it’s a little bit of a fairy tale town, because it is in it’s own bubble. A friend of mine calls it “Gingerbread Town”, so I kind of laugh about that, and I call it, “Gingerbread Town”. And the people don’t like it when you rock the boat, because they might get a little bit wet!

So, anyway I do have a big smile on my face and I’m doing very well and I’m a happy person. I’m much happier since I figured out the truth about things. Which maybe that sounds strange to people, because it is so dark, these things that we’re learning, and yet it lifts something off your shoulders a little bit. It lifts your spirit. It’s better to know the truth and to do something about it, than to not know the truth. And be bewildered by all the turmoil in the world and the wars! This and that, that is going on, nothing makes sense! Now things make more sense to me. And I can understand things better. And anyway, I’m doing my best to do something about it.

John: God bless you! That’s exactly how I feel! That is literally exactly how I feel. I mean, I just want to know how the world really works and what’s really going on. I think I’ve got a pretty good idea at this point. Now, I’m just trying to do something about it, to make it better. That’s really what this all boils down to.

Monika: Yes! Well it has been such a pleasure talking with you John and I know that when I’ve listened to you talk before, that’s how I felt too. I felt that we were really kindred spirits!

John: Yes. I think so. I completely agree. Maybe one of these days I’ll make it up there to visit Canada. I’ve never been to Canada. I’ve been to Mexico, I’ve been to South America, I’ve been to Europe, but never been to Canada. One of these days I’ll get up there and well have a good old time!

Monika: Oh yeah.

John: We’ll go out and make all sorts of friends in Jasper! [laughing]

Monika: Yeah! Yeah, that’s great! Okay, …

John: Well, Monika I will go ahead, let’s just go ahead and wrap it up. This has been a very good conversation. I’d love to do it again in the future, if your interested.

Monika: I sure would be John! I am sure would be. Let’s stay in touch.

John: Okay, very good! I will have a link over to your website, as well as your video that we’ve been discussing, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust”.

Monika Schaefer, thank you so much. I really appreciate it, I will talk to you soon.

Monika: Thank you John! Bye, bye.

John: Okay, good night.

Monika: Good night.

[88:28]

END

============================================

The Realist Report COMMENTS

Richard May 18, 2017 4:33 AM
Excellent interview, John and Monika. You both come across as lovely, honourable, sincere and well-meaning people – and very brave, too.
Yes, I agree with John that the myth of the Holocaust is the Number One weapon used on a daily basis to brainwash the masses across the world into accepting all the wars and injustice and unfairness and political correctness that the fake ‘elites’ (mostly Jewish) are raining down upon this earth. When Mark Webber (of the Institute for Historical Review) says these days that the Holocaust is basically a non-issue and we should move on and just talk about Israel – oh, my God: how wrong and wrong-headed (out of whatever motive) can he be! The fake Holocaust narrative is THE defining myth of our age and underlies literally ALL the evil that is being perpetrated in the name of a false ‘good’.

Realist Report May 18, 2017 6:57 AM
Thank you Richard! Agree 100% – well said!

Nick Dean May 18, 2017 10:27 AM
On Weber – I’ll ‘third’ that!
Robert Faurisson, Michael Collins Piper and even that mellowest of men, Germar Rudolf, have gone on the record and said Weber is crook.
If it were ever in doubt, just look at the volume of material produced by Rudolf, Mattogno, Graf and so many others, on a shoestring, and generally provided free of charge to the world at vho.org. Meanwhile, IHR is mothballed when it had at least a coupla million dollars, plus ongoing income from well-meaning mainly elderly donators who just didn’t know better.
There are five 45 minute RBN ‘Piper Report’ broadcasts starting here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7VNP8IjL1o
Someone with time on his hands could turn them into a shorter, less discursive, single edit, exposing the enemy’s take-over and driving into the dust of IHR.

Nick Dean May 18, 2017 10:35 AM
On Monika Schaefer, I’ll ‘third’ that.
It’s the smart and principled fraction we most need (and which most need us!) And the Schaefer eltern provided two healthy specimens, indeed.

Russian Limbaugh May 18, 2017 1:59 PM
No event which ever happened in history has been used as the Jewish Holocaust has been used to justify displacement, murder, bombing, imprisonment, etc. of gentiles while giving Jews special privileges above all other races of people.
This is sufficient to conclude if the Jewish Holocaust had really happened then it would not be used in such manner as no other historical event ever was. It is used is such manner because it is a fantasy and not because it really happened as other historical events.

Richard May 18, 2017 4:41 PM
Thank YOU, John. Keep up the great work.

Lou Ryan May 19, 2017 10:03 AM
She seems like a sweet lady.
Unsure of the brother, after listening to a recent podcast, whereupon he stated he enjoyed exposing himself to the police or that he was abducted by aliens during his early teenage years.
Thanks, John.

katana May 20, 2017 3:48 AM
Thanks John and Monika for that.
I’ve started on the transcript here:
https://katana17.wordpress.com/2017/05/20/the-realist-report-interviews-monika-schaefer-may-2017-transcript/

Realist Report May 20, 2017 8:41 AM
Thank you katana, as always. Your hard work is greatly appreciated.

Alfred Schaefer May 20, 2017 1:37 PM
Great interview. You were probably too polite to remind the listeners that these Rabbis not only want to exterminate the white race. They are encouraged by their holy book, the Talmud, to rape our three year old girls. These are the same rabbis that have their foreskin chewed off when they are 8 days old. These rituals ensure that the parasite never fraternises with the host. Raping our 3 year old girls builds an unbridgeable gulf between parasite and host.
The entire history of the “World Wars” need to be seen in the light of being the first big hit of the parasite jew exterminating the White race. We are now seeing the final blow against us, and the holohoax is used as the psychological guilt trip to destroy our defences. The jew is advised through the Talmud, to kill us slowly so that we do not notice. One day the last remnants of the white race will wake up and think, “how the hell did that happen?”….
But, we will do what we can to ensure that it is not the white race that goes down. And we are fighting to win!

Realist Report May 20, 2017 4:54 PM
Thank you Alfred!

Teutonica June 12, 2017 1:38 PM
Dear Monika and John,
Thank you for this great interview! Monika you are hitting the nail on the head in so many areas.
2011 also my search for the truth started, on September 11, in response to another 9/11 documentary.
About a year ago I spoke out publicly in a meeting with just one sentence opposing the Hitler bashing. After that I was rejected by a person who was seeking my friendship before. She did not give me a chance to give her detailed reasons for my one sentence, though I asked her for it, but right out rejected me and forbid me to speak to her. Apparently, she considers me evil and that’s that. Imagine you have a judge like this in court, and there are some like this, and definitely they have them in the “German” courts run by Jews. That’s why they extradite people to Germany to grind them through the Communist Kangaroo Courts in Germany where the judges say: “Truth is not a reason to deny the Holocaust.” Like Monika says and JFK said in his speech about the secret societies that they do not come with weapons by day but with secret machinations. Nothing is open and honest and up to debate. For the encouragement of people, when I found out that it was the Jews and not the Russians that overthrew Russia and executed or slowly killed between 66 and 100 Million people, the fog lifted from my brain and opened all the channels to see other deceptions. I’d like to add to the “people do not know how to use their brain” by saying they also do not want to. I have come to understand that people want to belong to a group, and by indoctrination of a false holohoax, they who believe in it all think alike in this area. “Don’t dare to disturb this group!” You’ll have a bad thing coming! And furthermore, these frightening Hollywood Nazi and Holocaust movies had such an intense emotional impact on children that as adults they still “see” these experiences, like the older generation remembers “Night of the Living Dead.” AND ANOTHER THING IS, PEOPLE WANT A SCAPE GOAT. THEY CAN THEN BLAME “EVERYTHING” ON THAT SCAPE GOAT AND NEVER HAVE TO LOOK AT THEMSELVES. THIS IS A VERY JEWISH CUSTOM INDOCTRINATED INTO THE GENTILES AND GOES BACK TO THE OLD TESTAMENT TIMES. Just think about the fact that in the Muslim religion when a girl or woman gets raped she is ALWAYS BLAMED FOR IT and punished for it. No punishment for the criminal. No wonder, as the Muslim religion is an offspring of the Old Testament. Germany is the scape goat for all of man’s evil, just like Jesus, a German – the Germans lived in all of Palestine – was the scapegoat for all of mankind, for their sin (Jews invading a German homeland and genociding most of them) and crucified because the Jews had already mostly taken over their country. To think other than the group means the person will be either dismissed, abandoned, isolated, and at the very best be allowed in with cold indifference, something no one can handle for an extended period of time. All of these have happened to me, including family members and most friends have departed from me. (Who needs friends like this?!) Like Monika, I was also hoping they would be happy about the Holocaust being a hoax, the contrary happened. They hated me for bringing them the good message of the Jewish author’s book “Tell the truth and shame the devil”; they called me insane, told me to see a psychiatrist, told me to get lost, called me Nazi and peace disturber (their phantasy peace). And most people are not willing to talk about it, yes! 99%, after I spent about ½ hour of my energy telling them the truth in several areas, they told me that they did not believe any of it. In my own family in the U.S., where one can speak the truth at least at home, there have been painful consequences for me. I am only 18 minutes into the talk, and I have so much more to say in response to your talk, but already wrote maybe too much. Thank you both! For more WW2 truth, visit http://www.germanvictims.com

Realist Report June 12, 2017 6:25 PM
Great comment, thank you very much!

Tucker June 23, 2017 4:32 AM
I have gotten way behind on the podcasts that I like to listen to, so only got around to this one yesterday. I was very impressed! Great interview.

Realist Report June 23, 2017 7:41 PM
Thanks!

Mike Stone July 4, 2017 9:02 PM
I really enjoyed listening to this, and I really felt for Monika and the reaction she received after posting her video, which is very good, by the way.

====================================

PDF Notes

Version 1: Nov 2, 2017

* Total words = 15,483
* Total images = 30
* Total A4 pages = 75

Click to download a PDF of this post (4.0 MB):

Realist Report Interviews Monika Schaefer – May 2017 – TRANSCRIPT

Version History

Version 11: Mar 13, 2023  — Re-uploaded images. Added The Realist Report Comments. Improved formatting.

Version 10:: Nov 2, 2017  — Added 3 more images. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 9:: Jun 3, 2017  — Added last 14 minutes of transcript. Added some images. Transcript NOW complete = 89 mins.

Version 8:: Jun 2, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total transcript complete = 75 mins.

Version 7:: May 31, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total transcript complete = 65 mins.

Version 6:: May 30, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Added images. Total transcript complete = 55 mins.

Version 5: May 24, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Added images. Total transcript complete = 45 mins.

Version 4: May 23, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Added images. Total transcript complete = 35 mins.

Version 3: May 22, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Total transcript complete = 25 mins.

Version 2: May 21, 2017  — Added 10 minutes of transcript. Added images. Total transcript complete = 15 mins.

Version 1: Published May 20, 2017  — Added first 5 minutes of transcript.

[Part 17]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormentor, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 17, the lead-up to the German invasion of Poland is described and how Germany was provoked into that act by the Polish, who adopted a murderously belligerent and uncooperative policy towards Germany’s offers of a sensible solution to the Danzig and Polish Corridor issues.

Poland was encouraged in adopting that attitude because of the guarantees and promises made by the British and American war-mongers, such as Churchill, Halifax, Vansittart, Roosevelt and Bullitt who were acting as tools of International jewry to create another World War. This was engineered to finish what their World War I had not accomplished, that is, the complete crushing of Germany and its sovereignty.

Hitler, who knew first hand the horrors of armed conflict, never wanted a war, let alone a World War, yet was forced into one on the day that Britain and France, on the orders of international jewry, officially declared war on Germany on Sep 3, 1939 — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

 The book can be bought at Amazon here: The Myth of German Villainy

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Contents

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 18

War with Poland 

The international jubilation over the peace pact between Prime Minister Chamberlain and Chancellor Hitler resulting from the Munich Agreement, did not last for long. Public opinion outside Germany soon began to cool again and turn against Hitler and the Nazis; the result of the relentless anti-Hitler, anti-Nazi propaganda. Propaganda is a powerful weapon and it was used to its fullest potential to turn public opinion against Nazi Germany, and to create pretexts for war, both in Britain and the United States. This hate campaign was controlled and managed mainly by the Jews who spared no effort to undermine the Nazi regime.

British historian Nesta Webster wrote in her book, Germany and England, published in 1938, shortly before World War II began:

“Britons in the past have not been easily worked up to hate, but this insane hatred of two men, Mussolini and Hitler, is being instilled in them by the Jews and those who benefit by them, and acting like a poison in the life blood of our people.

Germany is under a visible anti-Jewish dictatorship. We are under an invisible Jewish dictatorship, but a dictatorship that can be felt in every sphere of life, for no one can escape from it.

Already the Jews can make or break the career of any man as they please. Once war breaks out we cannot doubt that they will be found in every key position and will hold us at their mercy. Then the real purpose of the world war will become apparent. As long as the Jews do not hold Germany they can never realize their final aim – world domination. Therefore Hitler must be overthrown and Jewish power restored.” (emphasis added)

[Add. image] Nesta Webster’s booklet (33 pp), “Germany and England” (1938).

In this atmosphere of hate, distrust and bellicosity created by the anti-Hitler propaganda, the Western leaders were preconditioned to take the worst possible interpretation of any foreign policy initiative by Hitler. He had been made out to be an aggressive psychopath by the Jewish press and was therefore given no credit for having legitimate claims for Germany.

After the Munich conference, personal control of British foreign policy passed from Prime Minister Chamberlain to his Foreign Minister, Lord Halifax, who thereafter waged a relentless campaign to provoke a war with Germany. Halifax and certain British leaders on both the left and the right joined together to castigate Hitler and the Nazis and push for war. Principle among these was Sir Robert Vansittart, Chief Diplomatic Advisor to the British Government, who made anti-Nazi radio broadcasts.

[Add. image] Robert Gilbert Vansittart, (25 June 1881 – 14 February 1957), known as Sir Robert Vansittart between 1929 and 1941, was a senior British diplomat in the period before and during the Second World War. He was Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister from 1928 to 1930 and Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office from 1930 to 1938 and later served as Chief Diplomatic Adviser to the British Government. He is best remembered for his opposition to appeasement and his strong stance against Germany during and after the Second World War.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Vansittart,_1st_Baron_Vansittart

Vansittart’s radio broadcasts were intended to awake the British public to “The Nature of the Beast” ― to the habits of militarism, aggression and blind obedience which, according to Vansittart, had been inculcated into the Germans since the time of Tacitus, and which made them uniquely dangerous to their neighbors. Vansittart used the metaphor of the butcherbird he had observed years before on the Black Sea, ruthlessly eliminating its unsuspecting prey one by one. In Vansittart’s view, Nazism was no aberration but the logical outcome of German history. Vansittart and the others characterized each foreign policy move by Hitler as a new “surprise” and declared that he could not be trusted and had to be “stopped.” Vansittart’s broadcasts were very effective in inflaming British public opinion against Germany.

In reality, Hitler had made it clear from the beginning of his chancellorship that he intended to reclaim those territories taken away from Germany by the Versailles Treaty. His plan for a single German state that would include all Germans was also made clear from the beginning. “Ein Reich, ein volk, ein fuhrer,” (one country, one people, one leader) he repeated again and again. So far, he had remilitarized the Rhineland, annexed Austria, and annexed the Sudetenland ― all peacefully. The majority German city of Memel had also been returned to East Prussia from Lithuania. The only remaining pieces of the puzzle were Danzig and the Polish Corridor. It was obvious that they were next on the agenda. Hitler had already made that clear. But he also renounced any claim to the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine which had been returned to France at the end of World War I. Hitler stated his plan clearly and then followed that plan, step-by-step, precisely as he said he would do.

Moreover, numerous world statesmen, journalists and academics concurred with Hitler’s demand for reclamation of these German territories, and declared that his demands were both reasonable and just. The Versailles Treaty was based on the “War Guilt” clause which assigned blame for starting WWI to Germany. Revisionist historians had already disproved the war guilt allegation against Germany, so there was no longer any basis for the onerous terms of the Versailles Treaty and it should have been scrapped long before Hitler was elected to office. It was simply disingenuous for Churchill, Halifax, Vansittart, and the other members of the British “war party” to characterize Hitler’s moves as “aggression” or “surprises.” To say that his word could not be trusted was not true.

The Polish Problem

The Versailles Treaty had taken a large swath of German territory, along with its German inhabitants, to create the new sovereign state of Poland. This included a strip of land across Germany to give Poland access to the Baltic Sea, called the Polish Corridor. The main problem of the Corridor was that it split Germany in two, separating East Prussia from the rest of Germany. For Germans to travel back and forth between East Prussia and the rest of Germany, they were required to go around the Corridor by ship. They were not allowed to cross the Corridor. The German City of Danzig had also been taken from Germany and placed under the supervision of the League of Nations as a “free city” for the purpose of providing Poland with her port facilities. Around one and a half million ethnic Germans now lived as second class citizens in this Polish controlled territory.

This territory, along with its residents, had been German for centuries and its people made it clear from the start through countless mass demonstrations that they did not want to be separated from Germany. Danzig had been a member of the old Hanseatic League, and was one of the most German of German cities. It’s population was 96 percent German, and in a plebiscite they voted overwhelmingly to be returned to Germany. The ethnic Germans living in this region were now a minority in a hostile Polish state, under Polish rule, and suffered the same kind of discrimination and repression that the Germans had suffered in the Sudetenland. Germany had a just claim for the return of all of the territory taken from it by force by the Versailles Treaty, and many world leaders openly acknowledged that. A prominent British authority on Germany and German affairs, William Harbutt Dawson, wrote in “Germany Under the Treaty,” 1933:

“… no factor in the life of Europe today offers so grave and certain a menace to peace than the Corridor, which cuts Germany into two parts, and severs Danzig, one of the most German of cities, from the fatherland. Can Europe afford to ignore this menace and allow matters to drift? To do so would be tantamount to inviting and hastening catastrophe, for instead of improving, the conditions in the Corridor after and because of 12 years of Polish occupation, are steadily growing worse.

Because it is now abundantly clear that all the needs of Polish trade, present and future, can be satisfied without the corridor, and because good relations between Germany and Poland, which are so essential to the settlement of peace in Europe, will be impossible so long as that political monstrosity continues. The greater part of the territory should go back to the country to which it owes its civilization.”

Halifax and the “war party,” however, refused to acknowledge the justification of Germany’s claims, and characterized each of Hitler’s revanchist actions as naked aggression and proof of his intent to take over the world. They claimed that he even had designs on Britain itself. There was no basis in fact for either of these claims. President Roosevelt was at the same time, preposterously warning the American people of a possible German invasion of the United States through South America.

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Poland had traditionally harbored hostile feelings towards Germany and for all German people, so Hitler proceeded with caution in attempting to settle this last territorial dispute. He was moderate in his approach and displayed considerable generosity in recognizing Polish interests. British Ambassador to Berlin, Sir Neville Henderson, acknowledged Hitler’s reasonable approach.

“Of all the Germans,” Henderson said, “believe it or not, Hitler is the most moderate as far as Danzig and the Corridor are concerned.”

On October 24, 1938, Hitler had his foreign minister, von Ribbentrop, propose the following four step plan to Polish Ambassador Lipski that would have rectified the injustices of the Versailles Treaty and which should also have eliminated all sources of friction between Poland and Germany.

1.) The return of the Free City of Danzig to the Reich, but without severance of its economic ties to the Polish State. This offer would guarantee to Poland free port privileges in the city of Danzig, as well as extra-territorial access to the harbor.

2.) Germany would make no demand for the return of its former territory, now called the Polish Corridor, but Germany should be allowed to build a highway and a railroad across the Polish Corridor in order to reunite Germany with East Prussia.

3.) Mutual recognition of the location of the borders between Germany and Poland would be permanently settled. In other words, Germany would not demand return of any remaining territory ceded to Poland by the Versailles Treaty.

4.) The German-Polish Pact of 1934 would be extended from ten to twenty-five years. (In the German-Polish Pact of 1934, both countries pledged to resolve their problems through bilateral negotiations and to forgo armed conflict for a period of 10 years. The pact effectively normalized relations between Poland and Germany, which were previously strained by border disputes arising from the Treaty of Versailles.)

In his negotiations with Poland, Hitler could not have been more reasonable.

Kristallnacht

[Add. image] Jewish shops damaged during “Kristaslnacht”.

While these negotiations were going on an unfortunate event known as “Kristasllnacht” (night of broken glass) occurred in Germany which had the effect of further turning international public opinion against Germany. It could not have occurred at a worse time. The trigger for Kristalnacht was the murder of the German diplomat, Ernst vom Rath, in Paris by a young Jewish man named Herschel Grynszpan, on November 9, 1938. Grynszpan’s family, along with approximately 15,000 other Jews who had entered Germany from Poland after 1914, and who were not German citizens, had been expelled out of Germany back to Poland on October 27, 1938. Seventeen year old Herschel Grynszpan, who was living in Paris with an uncle at the time, shot and killed vom Rath inside the German Embassy in revenge for the deportations, though vom Rath personally had nothing to do with it. News of the murder was in all the German papers.

Anti-Jewish feeling was already running high as a result of the Jewish “holy war” against Germany, and the German people reacted angrily over vom Rath’s murder. On the nights of November 9 and 10, gangs of youths roamed through the Jewish neighborhoods breaking windows of Jewish businesses and homes and setting fire to synagogues. Uniformed SA men also participated. The official German position on these events was that these were spontaneous outbursts of angry German citizens over the murder of a German diplomat by a Jew, but the international Jewish press accused Nazi officials, specifically Goebbels, of orchestrating the event.

That seems doubtful, however, because early in the morning following the Kristallnacht events, Dr. Goebbels announced in a radio broadcast that any action against Jews was strictly prohibited and warned of severe penalties for disobeying this order. Numerous people were also arrested for violence against Jews. Government and Nazi Party officials were furious over what had happened because of the negative propaganda against Germany which would obviously follow. Hitler was also furious when he first heard about it and ordered a telex message to be sent to all Gauleiter offices, which read:

“By express order from the very highest authority, arson against Jewish businesses or other property must in no case and under no circumstances take place.”

Unfavorable international reaction was impossible to avoid, and popular opinion of Nazi Germany declined dramatically as a result of Kristallnacht. The British historian, Martin Gilbert, himself a Jew, writes that;

“no event in the history of German Jews between 1933 and 1945 was so widely reported as it was happening, and the accounts from the foreign journalists working in Germany sent shock waves around the world.”

The Times of London wrote at the time:

“No foreign propagandist bent upon blackening Germany before the world could outdo the tale of burnings and beatings, of blackguardly assaults on defenseless and innocent people, which disgraced that country yesterday.”

There was no need to exaggerate what had happened. The violent rampage against Germany’s Jews was truly a disgrace. But in typical fashion, the international Jewish press did exaggerate the event out of all proportion to what actually happened, providing their usual “eye witness” accounts. An orgy of brutal beatings, rapes, and murder of large numbers of innocent Jews all across Germany, as well as extensive damage to Jewish property was alleged. These exaggerated reports had the effect of poisoning international public opinion against Germany, as they were intended to do. Yet, it makes no sense that the German government or the Nazi Party could have orchestrated this pogrom, as the negative publicity resulting from it hurt Germany and the Nazis far more than it did the Jews. Already sensitive to the hysterical anti-Nazi propaganda campaign being waged against them, German officials were being very careful not to create incidents, such as Kristallnacht, for which they could be criticized further. It is more likely that Kristallnacht was a spontaneous pogrom against the Jews, caused by the buildup of hostility over the International Jewish “holy” war against Germany, and triggered by the vom Rath murder.

[Add. image] A New York Times headline.

In the aftermath of Kristallnacht, the world press became overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Jews, and bitterly hostile towards Germany. In France, Britain and the United States, calls for war against Germany became increasingly bellicose as a result of Kristallnacht.*

[*] [For an alternative view on who was behind Kristallnacht please see: The Bizarre Story of Kristallnacht – Part 1 ]

German-Polish Talks Continue

On January 5, 1939, Poland’s Foreign Minister, Josef Beck, met with Hitler at Berchtesgaden. Hitler reiterated to Beck a clear and definite guarantee that Germany would make no claims on the Polish Corridor, and reaffirmed that he only wanted to build a railroad and a highway across it. The following day, January 6th, in a meeting with Polish officials in Munich, von Ribbentrop confirmed Germany’s willingness to guarantee, not only the Corridor, but all Polish territory. This friendly, generous offer was repeated again by von Ribbentrop during a state visit to Warsaw on January 23, 1939. During this state visit von Ribbentrop appealed for a final all-inclusive settlement of German-Polish territorial points of contention.

A settlement in accord with the “four points” outlined above would have taken nothing away from Poland. Danzig was not a Polish city, but a “free city,” supervised by the League of Nations. Germany’s four point offer would have permitted Poland to continue to use Danzig’s port facilities, as before. Germany did not demand a return of its lost territory, now known as the Polish Corridor, only the right to build a highway and a railroad across it in order to reconnect with East Prussia. There was nothing unreasonable in Germany’s demands.

Yet, on March 21, 1939 French President LeBrun and British Prime Minister Chamberlain met in London and proposed a French-British-Polish alliance to contain Germany. This proposal was then sent on to Polish officials, which had the effect of further steeling their resistance to Hitler’s demands. Despite Germany’s best diplomatic efforts, the Poles were now refusing to concede anything.

The popular view today is that an overwhelmingly powerful Germany was threatening and intimidating a weak and impotent Poland, but in reality, that was hardly the case. Poland had a long military tradition and maintained a powerful, well trained army. The Polish army had only recently (1920) defeated the Russian “Red” army. Polish military leaders were not in the least intimidated by the power of Germany. It should be remembered that German armed forces had been reduced to only 100,000 men by the Versailles Treaty, and that Germany at the time of the crisis with Poland was still in the process of rebuilding her military forces. Not only was Poland not intimidated by Germany, she was even belligerent.

These Polish tanks were the equal of anything in the German army.

[Add. image] The Polish tank TP-7, 9 ton.

In October 1930, the influential Polish newspaper, Die Liga der Grossmacht, carried the following declaration:

“A struggle between Poland and Germany is inevitable. We must prepare ourselves for it systematically. Our goal is a new Grunewald (The Battle of Tannenberg on July 15th, 1410 when the Teutonic Knights were defeated). However, this time a Grunewald in the suburbs of Berlin.”

“That is to say, the defeat of Germany must be produced by Polish troops in the centre of the territory in order to strike Germany to the heart. Our ideal is a Poland with the Oder and the Neisse as a border in the West. Prussia must be re-conquered for Poland, and indeed, Prussia as far as the Spree.”

“In a war with Germany there will be no prisoners and there will be room neither for human feelings nor cultural sentiments. The world will tremble before the German-Polish War. We must evoke in our soldiers a superhuman mood of sacrifice and a spirit of merciless revenge and cruelty.”

At around the same time, Poland’s Marshall Rydz-Smigly said:

“Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to.”

 

Edvard Rydz-Smigly, Marshall of Poland

Jews Influence Both Roosevelt and Churchill

As the result of restrictions placed on them in Nazi Germany, Jews involved in theater and the movie business left Germany en masse for Hollywood where they were quickly made welcome by the Jews who ran the motion picture industry. These German émigré Jews then joined the Hollywood Jews in making anti-Nazi movies (usually with pro-Communist undertones) for American audiences. The stereotype Nazi officer, complete with monocle, cigarette holder, arch aristocratic manner, impeccable uniform, erect, arrogant bearing, and an evil sneer or a sinister smile on his haughty face, became a stock character in these movies.

[Add. image] The stereotypical Nazi officer as portrayed by Hollywood Jews.

The mass information and entertainment media in Britain and the United states was almost entirely under Jewish control, so a very one-sided picture of events in Germany was presented to the British and American people. Hitler and the members of his Nazi government were relentlessly smeared as guttersnipes, murderers and psychopaths, in total contradiction of the actual facts, thus public opinion in both countries was turned against Nazi Germany.

In 1940 and 1941 appeared Jewish made, pro-war films such as Charlie Chaplin’s burlesque of Hitler and Mussolini, The Great Dictator, as well as Man Hunt, directed by German Jewish émigré Fritz Lang, The Mortal Storm, A Yank in the R.A.F., Sergeant York, I Married a Nazi and numerous other such movies. These movies were an integral part of the vigorous campaign by various elements to get the United States into a war with Germany.

Once the United States was at war with Germany, the studios churned out one anti-Nazi potboiler after another. An audience today is likely to snicker at such “classics” as Hillbilly Blitzkrieg, Women in Bondage, The Devil with Hitler, I Escaped from the Gestapo, Hitler’s Children, That Nazi Nuisance, Strange Death of Adolf Hitler, Enemy of Women, Hitler’s Madman, The Master Race, The Hitler Gang, Hotel Berlin and Tarzan Triumphs.

[Add. image] Posters for Tarzan Triohphie Des Nazis and Tarzan Triumps starring Johnny Weissmuller. Storyline: “Zandra, white princess of a lost civilization, comes to Tarzan for help when Nazis invade the jungle with plans to conquer her people and take their wealth. Tarzan, the isolationist, becomes involved after the Nazis shoot at him and capture Boy: “Now Tarzan make war!””

A summary of the plot of Tarzan Triumphs will illustrate the flavor of these potboilers. Nazi agents parachute into Tarzan’s peaceful kingdom and occupy a fortress, hoping to exploit oil and tin. Johnny Weissmuller, a slightly flabby but still commanding noble savage, rallies his natives (all of whom are white) against the Axis. “Kill Nadzies!” Tarzan commands the natives. They nod eagerly. The Germans are so despicable even the animals turn against them. Tarzan chases the head of the Nazi troops into the jungle, and, just as the fear-crazed German officer frantically signals Berlin on his shortwave radio, Tarzan kills him. In Berlin the radio operator recognizes the distress signal and rushes out to summon the general in charge of the African operation. While Tarzan, Boy, and Jungle Priestess laughingly look on, Cheetah the chimp chatters into the microphone of the transmitter. Ignorant of the fatal struggle in the jungle depths, the general hears the chimp on the radio, jumps to his feet, salutes, and yells to his subordinates that they are listening not to Africa but to Der Führer.

The roles of the sadistic, sex-crazed, bullet-headed, Nazi “Krauts” in these Jewish made anti-German movies were played by such Hollywood “heavies” as George Siegman, Erich von Stroheim, Walter Long and Hobart Bosworth. Actor Bobby Watson was kept busy throughout the war playing the part of Adolf Hitler.

The American public, inundated with this kind of anti-German propaganda, was brainwashed to hate Germany and the German people. Anything our brave and noble armed forces could do to them was less than they deserved. Bomb their cities, kill their women and children. But destroy evil Germany by all means possible!

British and American Political Leaders

Under Jewish Influence

The political leaders in both Britain and America were also under the controlling influence of the Jews. Both Roosevelt and Churchill had surrounded themselves with Jewish advisors, to the exclusion of almost anyone else, and relied on Jewish money to support their campaigns for office. Jews were 2% of the American population, but of the 15 members of Roosevelt’s “Brain Trust,” 8 of them were Jews. The Jews therefore had control of the political leaders of both Britain and America, as well as control of public opinion in both countries.

A partial list of Jews surrounding FDR included: Bernard Baruch, Felix Frankfurter, David E. Lilienthal, David Niles, Louis Brandeis, Samuel I. Rosenman, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Benjamin V. Cohen, Rabbi Stephen Wise, Francis Perkins, Sidney Hillman, Herbert H. Lehman, Jesse I. Straus, Harold J. Laski, Charles E. Wyzanski, Samuel Untermyer, Edward Filene, David Dubinsky, Mordecai Ezekiel, Abe Fortus, Isador Lubin, Harry Dexter White (Weiss), David Weintraub, Nathan G. Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Benjamin Cardozo, Anna Rosenberg, …and numerous, numerous others, almost to the exclusion of Gentile advisors.

As a consequence, Roosevelt was enveloped in a milieu of Jewish hate and hostility for Germany, to the extent that he eventually became a part of it himself, habitually making malicious anti-Hitler and anti-Nazi remarks in public. These indiscreet public remarks by Roosevelt foreclosed any possibility of amicable diplomatic relations between Nazi Germany and the United States.

Moreover, these Jews were, to a man, sympathetic to Stalin and the Communists and acted essentially as the Soviet Union’s agents within the American government. These Communist leaning Jews proliferated in every branch of Roosevelt’s government and spied routinely for the benefit of the Soviets. Roosevelt warmly regarded Joseph Stalin and referred to him as “Uncle Joe.”

Churchill likewise surrounded himself with Jewish advisors. Churchill enjoyed living high on the hog though he had very little money. He was accused more than once during his long career of taking Jewish money in exchange for advocacy of policies which favored them. Churchill supplemented his salary as a public servant by writing as a journalist and by writing books, though these combined amounts were inadequate to finance his lavish life style. During his “wilderness years,” as he called them, between 1930 and 1939 when he was out of government, though still a Member of Parliament, Churchill was supported by a slush fund set up by a secret anti-German pressure group known as “The Focus.” Focus membership was composed of wealthy British Jews, like Sir Robert Mond, a directory of several chemical firms, and Sir Robert Waley-Cohen, the managing director of Shell Oil, who employed Churchill as their Gentile front man. The American Jew Bernard Baruch also made significant contributions to Churchill’s well being. Churchill’s assigned task was to fight Germany; to start warning the world about Nazi Germany. Churchill was a brilliant orator and a superb writer, and he did his job splendidly.

Jewish money, primarily through “The Focus,” paid for Churchill’s lavish life style, got him into the British cabinet, and eventually made him Prime Minister. From his position as a Member of Parliament, and subsequently as a member of the cabinet, Churchill, doing the bidding of The Focus, began loudly and belligerently berating Nazi Germany and sternly criticized first Stanley Baldwin’s and then Neville Chamberlain’s alleged blindness to the threat to Britain posed by Nazi Germany. He began to clamor for war. Both Roosevelt and Churchill became Gentile front men in international Jewry’s war on Germany.

A German Cartoon of Winston Churchill, depicting him as the paid front man of the Jews. In fact, he was paid lavishly by the Jewish group called “The Focus.”

[Add. image] The two faces of the jewish controlled Churchill.

Churchill, in a speech before the House of Commons on October 5, 1938, said:

“…but there can never be friendship between the British democracy and the Nazi power, that Power which spurns Christian ethics, which cheers its onwards course by a barbarous paganism, which vaunts the spirit of aggression and conquest, which derives strength and perverted pleasure from persecution, and uses, as we have seen with pitiless brutality the threat of murderous force.”

He was, of course, only repeating the super-heated, hysterical exaggerations and outright lies of international Jewish propaganda against Nazi Germany.

Contrary to Churchill’s warnings, Germany had no designs on Britain, whatever. Hitler actively sought an alliance with Britain, which the British rejected. Hitler even offered to provide German military assistance if it were ever needed to protect Britain. Hitler believed, and often stated, that the British Empire, and the Catholic Church, were international institutions which were absolutely essential to world peace and to world stability. Hitler was an open Anglophile who yearned to be accepted by the British and did everything he could to forge an alliance between Britain and Germany. He often said, as many British did also, that the British and German peoples were the same race; the same people actually, divided only by language. Hitler wanted only peace and friendship with Britain.

Hitler was dismayed by the steady stream of invective and hate propaganda directed at Germany by these British war mongers. In a speech given in Saarbrucken on October 9, 1938 he said:

“…All it would take would be for Mr. Duff Cooper or Mr. Eden or Mr. Churchill to come to power in England instead of Chamberlain, and we know very well that it would be the goal of these men to immediately start a new world war. They do not even try to disguise their intents, they state them openly…”

In the post-World War II world, Churchill has become almost God-like in the common mythology about the war, but the common mythology is so far from the truth that even an ardent Churchill sympathizer, Gordon Craig, felt obligated to write:

“It is reasonably well-known today that Churchill was often ill-informed, that his claims about German strength were exaggerated and his prescriptions impractical, that his emphasis on air power was misplaced.”

In “Rethinking Churchill,” 1998, Dr. Ralph Raico wrote:

“For all the claptrap about Churchill’s “far-sightedness” during the 30s in opposing the “appeasers,” in the end the policy of Chamberlain’s government to rearm as quickly as possible, while testing the chances for peace with Germany was more realistic than Churchill’s.”

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

The attitude of President Roosevelt and his entourage toward Germany was even more extreme than that of the British leaders. Roosevelt was predisposed from the beginning of his career in public office to a deep antipathy for the German people in general, probably stemming from the anti-German propaganda of WWI, and there is no doubt that he personally despised Adolf Hitler. According to Professor David L. Hoggan (“The Forced War” – 1961):

“Roosevelt’s hatred for Hitler was deep, vehement, passionate ― almost personal. This was due in no small part to an abiding envy and jealousy rooted in the great contrast between the two men, not only in their personal characters but also in their records as national leaders.”

The public lives of Roosevelt and Hitler had many similarities. Both assumed the leadership of their respective countries at the beginning of 1933 and then proceeded down parallel tracks. They both faced the enormous challenge of mass unemployment during a catastrophic worldwide economic depression. Each became a powerful leader in a vast military alliance during the most destructive war in history, albeit on opposite sides. Both men died while still in office within a few weeks of each other in April 1945. Though there were many similarities, the contrasts in their lives were enormous.

Roosevelt was born into one of the wealthiest families in America, and his life was completely free of economic worry. He, like Hitler, served in the First World War, but in an entirely different way. Roosevelt spent the war in an office in Washington as Under Secretary of the Navy. Hitler was born into a provincial family and grew up in semi-poverty. As a young man he worked as a manual laborer and lived hand-to-mouth. He served in the First World War as a front line soldier in the hell of the Western Front, never higher in rank than corporal. He was wounded several times and was decorated for bravery.

Despite his Ivy League education, his confident, aristocratic manner and persuasive rhetoric, Roosevelt was unable to solve the enormous economic problems existing in the United State which he inherited when he became president. Throughout his presidency, he was never able to reduce unemployment or to get the economy moving again. At the end of his first four years as president, millions of people remained unemployed, undernourished and poorly housed in a country rich in all the resources required for incomparable prosperity. Roosevelt’s New Deal was plagued from beginning to end with bitter strikes and bloody clashes between labor and industry.

The story unfolded very differently in Germany under Hitler. When Hitler became Chancellor, he was faced with all the problems facing Roosevelt, multiplied many times over. Yet, Hitler rallied his people behind a radical program that transformed Germany within a few years from an economically ruined land on the verge of civil war, into Europe’s powerhouse. Germany underwent a social, cultural and economic rebirth without parallel in history.

The contrast between the personalities of the two men was also stark. Hitler tended to be straightforward in his relationship with others and unambiguous in communicating his intentions. He had a conservative sense of Christian morality and was not a liar. Roosevelt put on a front of bon homme, but behind the big smile he was devious and calculating, and he manipulated others by misleading them. He was very probably a sociopath, devoid of a conscience, as many successful politicians are.

Hitler, on the other hand, was truly a man of the people who genuinely wished to elevate the German people out of their “slough of despond” to the realization of their full potential as a people and as a nation.

In contrast to Hitler, there was much of the cynical politician in Roosevelt who may have cared about the people in an abstract way, but he believed that only he knew what was best for them and that they were incapable of understanding such matters themselves. He manipulated the American people through devious and deceitful means, such as lying about his true intentions about taking America to war. He even admitted his devious and contradictory nature. He once said:

“I never let my left hand know what my right hand is doing.”

Roosevelt had worked in the Wilson administration during the First World War and was impressed by Wilson’s boundless idealism, and also by the way he was idolized by people around the world for his high-minded approach to the peace settlement after the war. Like Wilson before him, Roosevelt had an exaggerated, messianic view of himself as uniquely qualified for national leadership, and believed that he had been called upon by providence to reshape the world. He was convinced, as so many American leaders have been, that the world could be saved only by remodeling itself after the United States. Presidents like Wilson and Roosevelt, and George W. Bush most recently, view the world not as a multiplicity of different nations, races, and cultures who must mutually respect each others’ separate collective identities in order to live together in peace. They look at the world from a self righteous missionary perspective which divides the nations of the world into two groups ― those representing “good” on one side (our side), and those representing “evil” on the other (This is known as a “Manichean” world perspective.). They also see America as providentially ordained as the permanent leader of the forces of “good” in the world, with the mission of either destroying or converting the forces of “evil.” (Luckily, this view just happens to correspond to the economic and political interests of those who wield power in the United States.) Nazi Germany, in Roosevelt’s view, represented the forces of “evil,” with whom normal relations were impossible, and with whom one could not even reason; and so, he refused to try. He regarded Nazi Germany with total hostility.

Roosevelt most certainly did not see himself as an evil man, though his actions certainly made him one. He sincerely believed that he was doing the right and noble thing in pressuring Britain and France into a war against “evil” Germany. He was St. Michael the archangel leading the world in an existential struggle against the forces of Satan. The result of his vision of himself as the leader of the forces of righteousness, and his view of Germany under the Nazis as the force of evil in the world constantly threatening the forces of righteousness, produced an atmosphere of war hysteria and war psychosis among those who surrounded him and who ran his administration, to the extent that any utterance or action of this “force of evil,” that is, Nazi Germany, was given the worst possible interpretation, and evil designs were imputed to them however benign their actual intentions. The Jews who surrounded him and advised him, and who hated Hitler’s Germany for their own reasons, fed Roosevelt’s delusions about himself and his role in the world, and validated his Manichean view of the world.

To illustrate the war psychosis which had seized American political leaders during this time, Assistant Secretary of State F.B. Sayre exclaimed to British Ambassador Sir Ronald Lindsay on September 9, 1938;

“…at such a time, when war is threatening and Germany is pounding at our gates, it seems to me tragic that we have not been able to reach and sign an agreement [against Germany].”

To imagine Germany “pounding at the gates” of America in 1938 was totally absurd. Germany lacked the means to pound at the gates of Britain, just across the English Channel. Moreover, Hitler and the Nazis had no motive or reason in 1938 to view America with hostility; only with dismay at America’s baseless bellicosity towards Germany. If anything, it was the United States “pounding at the gates” of Germany.

In this atmosphere of false urgency, America’s Jewish secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., telephoned the Jewish French President, Leon Blum, and suggested freezing German bank accounts in France, in hopes of pushing France into war with Germany. Roosevelt, himself, became increasingly belligerent towards Hitler, and repeatedly made personally insulting remarks about him in public. (Rather like the current war hysteria over Iran, but more extreme.)

William C. Bullitt was the American Ambassador to France at the time, as well as Ambassador at Large to all other European countries. Like Roosevelt, Bullitt “rose from the rich.” He was born into a wealthy Philadelphia banking family and was descended from Jonathan Horwitz, a German Jew who had immigrated to America. Bullitt was especially close to Roosevelt and shared Roosevelt’s enthusiasm for “Uncle Joe” (Stalin) and the Soviet Union, as well as his enthusiasm for war with Germany. Bullitt was used by Roosevelt to transmit messages to other American Ambassadors, including Joseph P. Kennedy, Ambassador to London (father of President John Kennedy), and Anthony Biddle, Ambassador to Warsaw, and those messages consistently expressed Roosevelt’s belligerence towards Germany.

In 1919 Bullitt was an assistant to President Wilson at the Versailles Peace Conference. That same year, Bullitt was sent to Russia to meet with Lenin to determine if the new Bolshevik government deserved recognition by the Allies. Bullitt was impressed with what he saw in Bolshevik Russia, and upon his return to Washington, urged recognition of the new regime. He was very sympathetic to Communist aims. In 1923 Bullitt married Louise Bryant Reed, the widow of American Communist leader John Reed (The movie, “Reds,” starring Warren Beatty, 1981, was about John Reed). When Roosevelt became president in 1933, he brought Bullitt back into diplomatic service. Throughout his career, Roosevelt had consistently maintained close relations with people who were either Communists or Communist sympathizers. In 1938, all U.S. envoys in Europe were subordinated to Bullitt who was based in Paris. Roosevelt bypassed the State Department and frequently spoke with Bullitt directly by telephone, often daily, giving him precisely detailed and ultra-confidential instructions on how to conduct America’s foreign policy.

Bullitt had access to Roosevelt by telephone at any hour of the day or night. Roosevelt and Bullitt were close friends and saw eye to eye on all foreign policy issues, and were especially in consonance in their hostility to Germany. Both were aristocrats and thorough internationalists with a shared view on how to remake the world, and both saw themselves as destined to bring about that grand reorganization. In Europe, Bullitt spoke with the voice and the authority of President Roosevelt himself.

President Roosevelt riding in a car with his “agent provocateur” Ambassador William C. Bullitt

The Polish Ambassador to Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki, reported back to Warsaw that William C. Bullitt had informed him that President Roosevelt was determined to bring America into the next European war. Bullitt predicted that a long war would soon break out in Europe.

“Of Germany and her Chancellor, Adolf Hitler, he [Bullitt] spoke with extreme vehemence and with bitter hatred,”

Potocki reported:

“He [Bullitt] suggested that the war might last six years, and he advocated that it should be fought to a point where Germany could never recover.”

 

[Add. image] William Christian Bullitt, Jr. (January 25, 1891 – February 15, 1967) United States Ambassador to the Soviet Union, 21 November 1933 – 16 May 1936. United States Ambassador to France, 1936–1940. Bullitt was born to a prominent, well-to-do Philadelphia family, the son of Louisa Gross (Horwitz) and William Christian Bullitt, Sr. 

Potocki asked Bullitt how such a war might begin, since it was very unlikely that Germany would attack either France or Britain. Bullitt said that it would likely begin with a war between Germany and some other country, and that the Western Powers would then intervene against Germany. Bullitt predicted an eventual war between Germany and the Soviet Union, which Germany would probably win, but would then be so worn out that it would have to capitulate to the Western Powers. Bullitt assured Potocki that the United States would participate in any such war if Britain and France made the first move. When Bullitt asked about the German-Polish problem, Potocki said that Poland would fight rather than give in to German demands, and Bullitt and Roosevelt were both encouraging Poland in this stance. Potocki attributed the belligerent American attitude toward Germany solely to Jewish influence. He reported to Warsaw again and again that American public opinion was merely the product of Jewish manipulation.

In a report from Washington back to the Foreign Ministry in Warsaw, dated February 9, 1939, he wrote:

“The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful …

… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent.

In their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.

This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean of blood.

In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be subdued by the ‘democratic world.’ ”

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Britain’s Foreign Minister, Lord Halifax, continued to maintain a hostile attitude toward Hitler and Germany, and was determined to provoke a war with Germany. He circulated rumors both at home and abroad which presented the foreign policy of Hitler in the worst possible light. He would have found fault with Hitler no matter which direction he turned or what he did. Halifax dispatched a message to President Roosevelt on January 24, 1939 in which he claimed to have received;

“a large number of reports from various reliable sources which throw a most disquieting light on Hitler’s mood and intentions.”

He falsely claimed that Hitler harbored a fierce hatred for Great Britain. Hitler had, in fact, consistently expressed only admiration for Great Britain and had pursued a goal of Anglo-German cooperation. Regardless, Halifax continued to claim the opposite. Halifax claimed that Hitler wanted to establish an independent Ukraine, and that he intended to destroy the Western Powers in a surprise attack before moving Eastward. He claimed that not only British intelligence but “highly placed Germans who are anxious to prevent this crime” had furnished him evidence of this evil conspiracy. No German had furnished any such thing to him. He made it up. Hitler had not the remotest intention of attacking either Great Britain or France.

Churchill and Halifax were determined to have a war with Germany.

How to explain the desire of these men to have a war with Germany? These men, Churchill, Halifax, Cooper, Eden, Vansittart, et al, were conservative men devoted to the British Empire and to its dominant position in the world. But they were also nervously aware that British power was waning. Churchill had been one of the most vocal advocates for war against Germany before World War I. He, and the others, were now advocating war with Germany for the same reason as before ― Germany was becoming too powerful, both commercially and militarily, and therefore threatened to eclipse the dominance of the British Empire.

These conservative British leaders were devoted to the old balance of power principle worked out after the Napoleonic Wars. Preventing any one power from becoming dominant on the European continent had always been an overriding foreign policy principle of Great Britain.

Germany’s defeat in a war would serve the interests of both Britain and International Jewry. Vilifying Hitler and deliberately misinterpreting his actions and intentions served only as pretexts for a war they were determined to bring about for their own reasons. These advocates of war with Germany were well aware that Britain could not defeat Germany without bringing the United States in on her side, as in World War I. At the same time that they were developing pretexts for war against Germany, they were propagandizing President Roosevelt to make sure he was behind them, though little propaganda was needed, as Roosevelt was already in their corner. To fan the flames, Halifax made the most dire, though unfounded warnings to Roosevelt concerning Germany’s intentions. He told Roosevelt in a telegram that Hitler planned to invade Holland and give the Dutch East Indies to Japan. (Japan needed its oil.) Germany had no such plan. He told Roosevelt that he was certain that Germany would soon give Britain an ultimatum. Halifax added that the British leaders expected a surprise air attack from Germany before the ultimatum actually arrived. He claimed to have knowledge that Germany was mobilizing for such an attack as he was composing the telegram and that the attack could occur at any moment. These were preposterous inventions.

Hitler was preoccupied at the time with the Polish matter and had not given a thought to attacking Britain. But Halifax was determined. He went on to emphasize “Hitler’s mental condition, his insensate rage against Great Britain and his megalomania.” He confided that Britain was greatly increasing her armament program, and he believed that it was his duty to enlighten Roosevelt about Hitler’s intentions and attitudes;

“in view of the relations of confidence which exist between our two governments and the degree to which we have exchanged information hitherto.”

Halifax claimed that Chamberlain was contemplating a public warning to Germany prior to Hitler’s annual Reichstag speech on January 30, 1939, and suggested that Roosevelt should do the same without delay. Chamberlain gave no such warning, but Halifax hoped to goad Roosevelt into making another alarmist and bellicose speech.

Halifax had sent Anthony Eden to the U.S. in December 1938 to spread rumors about sinister German plans, and Roosevelt responded with a provocative and insulting warning to Germany in his message to Congress on January 4, 1939. Halifax hoped for a repeat performance from Roosevelt as a result of his most recent telegram. Halifax was preparing a war propaganda campaign for the British public and such a warning from Roosevelt would feed into his purposes. All of these machinations of Lord Halifax amounted to sheer fantasy, but Roosevelt, already predisposed toward war with Germany, swallowed it whole. Halifax only told him what he already wanted to hear.

Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, another strident advocate for war, sent a message to Halifax stating that;

“the United States Government had for some time been basing their policy upon the possibility of just such a situation arising as was foreshadowed in your telegram.”

This was the Roosevelt administration’s way of informing Britain that it supported the idea of war with Germany despite American public opinion, which was totally against it.

Roosevelt wanted a war to distract attention from his failed economic policies. He also wanted war because he cherished the idea of himself as a heroic wartime president. The Jews who surrounded Roosevelt, such as Henry Morgenthau, Jr., as well as all the other officials in the Roosevelt administration, worked themselves into a fever fantasizing about Nazi Germany’s malevolent intentions.

Henry Morgenthau, Jr.

According to David L. Hoggan, in his paper, “President Roosevelt and the Origins of the 1939 War”:

“…anyone within Roosevelt’s and Hull’s circle who did not declare that Hitler was hopelessly insane was virtually ostracized.”

On January 4, 1939, Roosevelt told Congress that U.S. neutrality policy must be re-examined. He wanted a freer hand to act against Germany. At this same time (the next day, in fact) Poland’s foreign minister, Beck, joined Hitler at Berchtesgaden in an amicable meeting during which Hitler stressed German-Polish cooperation in settling the matter of Danzig and the Polish Corridor. Though cordial, the conversations were unproductive and nothing concrete was settled. Hitler made clear, however, that as Danzig was a German city, sooner or later it would have to be returned to Germany.

The contrast between Hitler’s calm, diplomatic approach in his talks with Polish officials, and the deranged, hysterical, confrontational manner imagined of him by officials surrounding Roosevelt, could not have been greater.

American Charge d’Affaires in Berlin, Prentiss Gilbert, reported back that the situation between Poland and Germany was not as incendiary as Washington officials imagined. He reported to the State Department on February 3, 1939 that Hitler’s basic policy in the East was friendship with Poland. It seemed certain according to Gilbert that Beck would be willing to allow the return of Danzig to Germany in exchange for a 25 year Pact, and for a German guarantee of the Polish Corridor. That is not, however, what Roosevelt and his officials wanted to hear. But had Britain and America stayed out of it, that is most likely what would have happened.

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Meanwhile, what remained of Czechoslovakia after the German annexation of the Sudetenland, soon fell apart, as described in the previous chapter. All that remained of the former Czechoslovakia was parts of Bohemia and Moravia, and on March 15, 1939, with the consent of the Czecho-Slovak president, Emil Hacha, Germany occupied Bohemia and Moravia and proclaimed it a German protectorate in order to prevent its being taken over by the Communists. In any case, Bohemia and Moravia had existed under German rule for most of its thousand year history, so this was nothing new. Czechoslovakia was a new, artificial creation of the Peace Conference after WWI, which now had already fallen apart. The entire region had a German character. Mozart premiered his opera “Don Giovanni” in Prague. Pilsen, Bohemia’s fourth largest city, is known worldwide for Pilsner beer, a German beer. Another Bohemian city with a German name, Budweis, is best known for the original Budweiser beer (the European brand).

Britain initially accepted the German occupation, reasoning that her guarantee of Czechoslovakia was rendered invalid by the collapse of the Czech state. But Prime Minister Chamberlain had been under attack by Churchill, Halifax, Duff Cooper, and Vansittart, among others, for his “appeasement” of Hitler through the Munich Agreement. After Germany occupied Bohemia and Moravia, the attacks on him intensified, and were egged on even further by Roosevelt. Chamberlain became flustered and defensive. In a speech on March 17, he declared that he wished to correct a misapprehension of weakness on his part. He said that Munich had been the right policy, but now Hitler had broken that agreement by occupying Czechoslovakia (Bohemia and Moravia). From that point on, Chamberlain stated, Britain would strenuously oppose, even to the point of war, any further territorial moves by Hitler, no matter how justified.

The occupation of Bohemia and Moravia caused a greater outburst of hostility towards Germany in Washington, D.C., than it did in Britain, or for that matter, in any other capital in the world, though the reason for it is not clear. The occupation in no way affected American interests.

Nevertheless, the head of the German Embassy in Washington reported back to Berlin that a violent press campaign against Germany had been launched throughout the United States. President Roosevelt also pressured Lord Halifax to adopt an “outspoken anti-German policy,” in Britain, as well. Halifax replied by promising Roosevelt that the British leaders were “going to start educating public opinion as best they can to the need for action.” In other words, they would launch an anti-German/pro-war propaganda campaign.

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Ambassador Bullitt informed the Poles that both he and President Roosevelt were counting on Polish willingness to go to war over Danzig if necessary. On March 19, 1939, Bullitt informed the Poles that Roosevelt was prepared to do everything possible to promote a war between the British and the French against Germany. Halifax, meanwhile, was attempting to create a broad anti-German front and an encirclement of Germany by proposing an alliance to include Britain, France, Poland and the Soviet Union. The Poles distrusted the Soviets as much as they did the Germans, and backed away from any such agreement that would bind Poland to the Soviet Union.

Both Lord Halifax and President Roosevelt began to vigorously encourage the Poles in their refusal to accept the German demands regarding Danzig. Bullitt finally told the Poles that he regarded an alliance between Britain, France and Poland, without the Soviet Union, to be the best possible arrangement. He said that British leaders hoped that there would be a war between Germany and the Soviet Union, and that they were not eager to make commitments to the Soviet Union for that reason. The Soviet Union was also becoming ever more distrustful of Britain and France.

On March 26, Bullitt contacted Ambassador to London Joseph P. Kennedy and instructed him to tell Prime Minister Chamberlain that the United States hoped that Great Britain would go to war against Germany in event of hostilities over Danzig. Britain then announced a doubling in size of its army. On March 31, 1939 Prime Minister Chamberlain announced in Parliament a “blank check” guarantee to Poland in event of war between Poland and Germany, that is, that Britain would declare war on Germany if Germany were to invade Poland. France joined Britain and made the same guarantee.

Ambassador Kennedy was appalled at the idea of a war with Germany, and only reluctantly carried out his duties as Ambassador when that possibility was involved. To this extent, he was out of step with the Roosevelt administration, as well as with the British government. Both Roosevelt and Bullitt disliked and distrusted Kennedy and Kennedy disliked and distrusted both of them. In a letter to his wife, he wrote:

“I talk to Bullitt occasionally. He is more rattlebrained than ever. His judgment is pathetic and I am afraid of his influence on FDR because they think alike on many things.”

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Meanwhile, back in the United States, the anti-war movement was growing in strength. One of the leading voices in that movement was that of Hamilton Fish, a leading Republican congressman from New York. Fish made a series of radio speeches to expose Roosevelt’s march to war while claiming that he only wanted peace. On January 6, 1939, Fish told a nationwide radio audience:

“The inflammatory and provocative message of the President to Congress and the world [given two days before] has unnecessarily alarmed the American people and created, together with a barrage of propaganda emanating from high New Deal officials, a war hysteria, dangerous to the peace of America and the world. The only logical conclusion to such speeches is another war fought overseas by American soldiers.

All the totalitarian nations referred to by President Roosevelt … haven’t the faintest thought of making war on us or invading Latin America.

I do not propose to mince words on such an issue, affecting the life, liberty and happiness of our people. The time has come to call a halt to the warmongers of the New Deal, backed by war profiteers, Communists, and hysterical internationalists [meaning Jews], who want us to quarantine the world with American blood and money.

He [Roosevelt] evidently desires to whip up a frenzy of hate and war psychosis as a red herring to take the minds of our people off their own unsolved domestic problems. He visualizes hobgoblins and creates in the public mind a fear of foreign invasions that exists only in his own imagination.”

In another radio address of April 5, 1939, Congressman Fish said:

“The youth of America are again being prepared for another blood bath in Europe in order to make the world safe for democracy.

If Hitler and the Nazi government regain Memel or Danzig, taken away from Germany by the Versailles Treaty, and where the population is 90 percent German, why is it necessary to issue threats and denunciations and incite our people to war? I would not sacrifice the life of one American soldier for a half dozen Memels or Danzigs. We repudiated the Versailles Treaty because it was based on greed and hatred, and as long as its inequalities and injustices exist there are bound to be wars of liberation.

The sooner certain provisions of the Versailles Treaty are scrapped the better for the peace of the world.

I believe that if the areas that are distinctly German in population are restored to Germany, except Alsace-Lorraine and the Tyrol, there will be no war in western Europe. There may be a war between the Nazis and the Communists, but if there is that is not our war or that of Great Britain or France or any of the democracies.

New Deal spokesmen have stirred up war hysteria into a veritable frenzy. The New Deal propaganda machine is working overtime to prepare the minds of our people for war, who are already suffering from a bad case of war jitters.

President Roosevelt is the number one warmonger in America, and is largely responsible for the fear that pervades the Nation which has given the stock market and the American people a bad case of the jitters.

I accuse the administration of instigating war propaganda and hysteria to cover up the failure and collapse of the New Deal policies, with 12 million unemployed and business confidence destroyed.

I believe we have far more to fear from our enemies from within than we have from without. All the Communists are united in urging us to go to war against Germany and Japan for the benefit of Soviet Russia.

Great Britain still expects every American to do her duty, by preserving the British Empire and her colonies. The war profiteers, munitions makers and international bankers [meaning Jews] are all set up for our participation in a new world war.”

The hero aviator, Charles A. Lindbergh, was also a leading opponent of Roosevelt’s war aims, and went around the country speaking out against going to war with Germany. In his diary entry of May 1, 1941, Lindbergh wrote:

“The pressure for war is high and mounting. The people are opposed to it, but the Administration seems to have ‘the bit in its teeth’ and [is] hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in the country are behind war, and they control a huge part of our press and radio and most of our motion pictures. There are also the ‘intellectuals,’ and the ‘Anglophiles,’ and the British agents who are allowed free rein, the international financial interests, and many others.”

Roosevelt’s motives for wanting a war with Germany have long been the subject of debate. As America’s interests were not threatened in any way by Germany, nor would they be served by a war, Roosevelt’s determination to have a war made little sense…, that is, unless one takes into account Roosevelt’s intimate ties to organized Jewry. As Jewish historian Lucy Dawidowicz noted:

“Roosevelt himself brought into his immediate circle more Jews than any other President before or after him. Felix Frankfurter, Bernard M. Baruch and Henry Morgenthau were his close advisers. Benjamin V. Cohen, Samuel Rosenman and David K. Niles were his friends and trusted aides.”

Roosevelt was totally in thrall to the Jews, owed his political career to the Jews, and had so surrounded himself with Jews, almost to the exclusion of all others, that he essentially became one of them. Their attitudes, motives and goals became his. They hated Germany, so he hated Germany. They were determined to destroy Germany, so he was determined to destroy Germany.

In the summer of 1939 Polish ambassador to Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki returned to Warsaw on leave and was astonished at the calm mood in Poland, compared to the war psychosis that had gripped the West. In a conversation with Polish Foreign Ministry Under-Secretary, Count Jan Szembek, about the growing war psychosis that had gripped the West. Potocki said to Szembek:

“In the West there are all kinds of elements openly pushing for war: the Jews, the super-capitalists, the arms dealers. Today they are all ready for a great business, because they have found a place which can be set on fire: Danzig; and a nation that is ready to fight: Poland. They want to do business on our backs. They are indifferent to the destruction of our country. Indeed, since everything will have to be rebuilt later on, they can profit from that as well.” From the diary of Count Szembek.

Poles Murder German Nationals

Within the Corridor

Reports of increased hostilities breaking out between Poles and ethnic Germans in Polish controlled territories created a feeling of urgency in Germany. For several months before Germany’s invasion of Poland, ethnic Poles, protected by the Polish Army, launched a reign of terror against German nationals living within the Polish Corridor. (Formerly part of Germany where Germans had lived for several hundred years.) It is estimated that some 58,000 German nationals were killed during this period by marauding mobs, encouraged by the Polish government. The German government lodged dozens of formal complaint with the League of Nations, but with no results. Hitler became increasingly distressed about it and said to the British Ambassador Sir Neville Henderson on August 25, 1939:

“Poland’s provocations have become intolerable.”

Typical of these massacres was that which occurred in the German town of Bromberg, in the Polish Corridor. In this massacre, called “Bloody Sunday,” 5,500 ethnic Germans were slaughtered like pigs. Children were nailed to barns, women were raped and hacked to death with axes, men were beaten and hacked to death. 328 Germans were herded into Bromberg’s Protestant church, after which the church was set on fire. All 328 burned to death.

[Add. image] William Joyce, aka, “Lord Haw Haw” and a book on his radio work for the German war effort.

William Joyce, nicknamed Lord Haw Haw by British propaganda, became a German citizen and took up Germany’s cause against Poland. He described the horrible conditions of the Germans who lived in the former German territory which was now a part of Poland, in his book, “Twilight Over England.” The following is his description of what happened in Bromberg:

“German men and women were hunted like wild beasts through the streets of Bromberg. When they were caught, they were mutilated and torn to pieces by the Polish mob… . Every day the butchery increased… . Thousands of Germans fled from their homes in Poland with nothing more than the clothes that they wore.. On the nights of August 25 to August 31 inclusive, there occurred, besides innumerable attacks on civilians of German blood, 44 perfectly authenticated acts of armed violence against German official persons and property.”

According to historian John Toland in his book “Adolf Hitler,” when Hitler first learned of the Bromberg slaughter, at first he refused to believe that such a number had been killed, but, when Berndt (the German public official who had brought the matter to his attention) replied that it may have been somewhat exaggerated but something monstrous must have happened to give rise to such stories, Hitler shouted:

“They’ll pay for this! Now no one will stop me from teaching these fellows a lesson they’ll never forget! I will not have my Germans butchered like cattle!”

At this point, according to Toland, the Fuhrer went to the phone and, in Berndt’s presence, ordered Keitel to issue “Directive No. 1 for the Conduct of the War.” That may well have been the actual trigger for the war, though the causes of the war were multiple.

Murdered Germans before their burial in the Protestant cemetery of Bromberg.

German woman weeping over the murder of her husband in Bromberg by marauding Poles.

[Add. image] The German Catholic Priest of the Church of the Sacred Heart, Bromberg, in silent prayer before the bodies of murdered Bromberg Germans.

On August 24, 1939, a week before the outbreak of hostilities, Sir Horace Wilson, advisor to Chamberlain, went to Ambassador Kennedy with an urgent appeal from Prime minister Chamberlain to President Roosevelt. He wanted Roosevelt to “put pressure on the Poles” to open negotiations with Germany in order to avert a war. Chamberlain was already regretting Britain’s “guarantee” to Poland. Kennedy telephoned the State Department and said that the British;

“felt that they could not, given their obligations, do anything of this sort but that we could.”

Roosevelt rejected Chamberlain’s plea out of hand. When Kennedy reported this back to Chamberlain, Chamberlain, according to Kennedy, said:

“The futility of it all, is the thing that is frightful. After all, we cannot save the Poles. We can merely carry on a war of revenge that will mean the destruction of all Europe.”

Kennedy sent a telegram to Roosevelt urging him to intervene on behalf of peace. “It seems to me,” Kennedy wrote;

“that this situation may crystallize to a point where the President can be the savior of the world. The British government as such certainly cannot accept any agreement with Hitler, but there may be a point when the President himself may work out plans for world peace. Now this opportunity may never arise, but as a fairly practical fellow all my life, I believe that it is entirely conceivable that the President can get himself in a spot where he can save the world.”

 

Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr., U.S. Ambassador to Britain under Roosevelt.

Roosevelt rejected Kennedy’s efforts and called Kennedy’s plea;

“…the silliest message to me that I have ever received.”

Roosevelt told Henry Morgenthau that Kennedy was a;

“pain in the neck.” “Joe has been an appeaser and will always be an appeaser,”

Roosevelt said:

“If Germany and Italy made a good peace offer tomorrow, Joe would start working on the King and his friend the Queen and from there on down to get everybody to accept it.”

Angered by Kennedy’s stubborn attempts to prevent a war in Europe, Roosevelt essentially instructed him to cease and desist, and told him that any American peace effort was completely out of the question. Kennedy resigned shortly thereafter under pressure.

Deep distrust was developing between the British government and the Soviets. The British had made strong efforts to create a mutual pact against Germany that would include Britain, France, Poland and the Soviet Union, and had finally obtained the Soviets’ agreement to a joint declaration. But when Chamberlain gave his blank check guarantee to the Polish government, he did it without consulting the Soviets. The Soviets were bewildered that the British would go ahead with a new plan without consulting them, and took it as an insult. The Soviets were already convinced that France and Britain were scheming against them. The Poles, for their part, were deeply distrustful of the Russians, and the British/French guarantee of Poland strengthened Polish resistance to Soviet participation in any kind of alliance in which they themselves took part. The British/French guarantee antagonized the Russians but at the same time did not have the effect of restraining Hitler.

Unable to reach a collective agreement with Britain and France against Germany, the Soviets began to fear that they might face a war with Germany alone, so they began searching around for a change of policy. On May 3, 1939, Stalin fired Foreign Minister Maksim Litvinov, who was Jewish and an advocate of collective security with Britain and France, and replaced him with Vyacheslav Molotov, who soon began negotiations with the Nazi foreign minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop. The Soviets, at the same time, continued negotiations with Britain and France, but in the end Stalin decided to reach an agreement with Germany. In so doing, he hoped to avoid a war with Germany until such time that he could re-build the Soviet Military which had been severely weakened by the purge of the Red Army officer corps in 1937. For his part, Hitler wanted a nonaggression pact with the Soviet Union so that his armies could invade Poland without winding up in a two front war. After the Polish matter was settled, Hitler believed that he would then be able to deal with Britain and France from the stand point of a fait accompli regarding Poland. Hitler did not believe that Britain and France would follow through on their guarantee to Poland and actually declare war on Germany. It made no sense to him that they would take such a step when they were manifestly in no position to act upon it.

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed in Moscow on August 23, 1939. Formally a nonaggression pact, the agreement also included a secret provision to divide Northern and Eastern Europe into German and Soviet spheres of influence. Poland was to be divided between Germany and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was to take back the region of Poland that it had controlled since 1772. The Baltic states, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and the Hertza region (on the Romanian border in Southern Ukraine), were ceded to Soviet control.

Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov signs the Nazi-Soviet Non-aggression Pact while German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop and Stalin look on.

The news of the Pact was met with utter shock and surprise by government leaders and media worldwide, most of whom were unaware of the negotiations which had been going on between the Soviet Union and Germany. They were aware only of the ongoing negotiations between the Soviets and Britain and France. Jews around the world, who looked upon the Soviet Union as the base of International Jewry, were particularly shocked by the agreement. They saw it as a sell out by the Soviets. In reality it was only a ploy to buy time by both Stalin and Hitler, and neither side saw it as permanent.

During the months leading up to the outbreak of war, Polish armed forces repeatedly violated German borders. Numerous altercations occurred between Polish irregulars and regular or auxiliary Germans all along the Polish/German border; in each case, on German territory. Poland in 1939 was highly militarized with an army larger than the German army. Moreover, Poland’s new leaders were military men with an aggressive attitude towards Germany. Poland even underwent a partial mobilization in March, 1939, and on August 30, 1939, ordered a total mobilization. (According to the Geneva Convention, mobilization is equivalent to a declaration of war.) On August 31, 1939, Polish irregular armed forces launched a full scale attack on the German border town of Gleiwitz.

The next day, September 1, 1939, German forces invaded Poland. On that same day, Hitler addresses the Reichstag.

“For months we have been suffering under the torture of a problem which the Versailles Diktat created ― a problem which has deteriorated until it becomes intolerable for us. Danzig was and is a Germany city. The Corridor was and is German. Both these territories owe their cultural development exclusively to the German people. Danzig was separated from us, the Corridor was annexed by Poland. As in other German territories of the East, all German minorities living there have been ill-treated in the most distressing manner.

… proposals for mediation have failed because in the meanwhile there, first of all, came as an answer the sudden Polish general mobilization, followed by more Polish atrocities. These were again repeated last night. Recently in one night there were as many as twenty-one frontier incidents; last night there were fourteen, of which three were serious. I have, therefore, resolved to speak to Poland in the same language that Poland for months past has used towards us. This night for the first time Polish regular soldiers fired on our territory. Since 5:45 a.m. we have been returning fire, and from now on bombs will be met by bombs. Whoever fights with poison gas will be fought with poison gas.”

The invasion of Poland occurred one week after the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed. On September 3, 1939, to Hitler’s great surprise, Britain and France declared war on Germany, though they totally lacked the means of intervening in Poland.

On September 3, also, Winston Churchill was returned to the cabinet by Prime Minister Chamberlain as First Lord of the Admiralty, the job he had had in WWI. Churchill’s bellicose warnings against Hitler leading up to the war now made him seem prescient and far sighted to many. On September 17, the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the other side. The Soviet invasion of Poland produced no reaction from Britain and France, though the Soviets had done precisely the same thing the Germans had done, albeit, without Germany’s justification of reclaiming lost territory. This gave the lie to Britain’s reason for declaring war on Germany.

Germany’s invasion of Poland provided only Britain’s needed pretext for war. It was not a casus belli. The war with Poland ended on October 6, 1939, after which Germany and the Soviet Union divided and annexed Poland.

As in interjection, we shall mention here the reaction of Poland’s Jews to the Russian invasion of Poland. Jews throughout Europe saw the Soviet Union as “good for the Jews,” and were very favorably disposed towards the Soviet Union. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, in his book “Two Hundred Years Together,” wrote that when the Soviets invaded Poland:

“Polish Jews, and the Jewish youth in particular, met the advancing Red Army with exulting enthusiasm” (as they had also done during the Soviet invasion of 1919).

The enthusiastic welcome of the Soviet invaders by Poland’s Jews angered Polish patriots and became a major aspect of Polish anti-Jewish attitudes in later years. Jews welcomed the Soviet troops in the very same way when they later invade Lithuania, the other Baltic States, and other central and east European countries. After the war when the Soviet Union took control of all of Eastern and Central Europe, all-Jewish regimes were installed in each of these countries.

Hitler’s invasion of Poland is known as the beginning of World War II, though that is not what Hitler intended. Hitler did not even want a war with Poland, much less a world war. Hitler had made every attempt to settle diplomatically the dispute with Poland over the return of Danzig and a highway across the Polish Corridor. In fact, Hitler wanted more than to simply settle the dispute with Poland; he wanted an alliance with Poland in his anti-Comintern pact against the Soviet Union, which he had already concluded with Japan. Poland saw the Soviet Union as her enemy and the anti-Comintern pact would actually have served Poland’s interests. They were foolish, indeed, to have rejected it.

The Poles had stubbornly refused to negotiate with Germany for a number of reasons. First, the Poles and the Germans had shared a mutual hostility for centuries. The military officers who ruled Poland were a proud lot with an exaggerated confidence in their military power. Britain, France and the United States all pressured Poland to resist Hitler’s demands; and finally, British Prime Minister Chamberlain had insanely given the Poles an unsolicited war guarantee, promising to declare war on Germany if Hitler invaded, and he talked France into doing the same. From March to August, 1939, Hitler did his best to negotiate a settlement with Poland over Danzig, and his demands were far from unreasonable. But the Poles, confident in their British and French war guarantee defiantly refused. Finally, at wits end, Hitler made a deal with Stalin and the two invaded and divided Poland.

What would it have cost Poland to have concluded a peaceful settlement with Hitler? The German city of Danzig, which was under the supervision of the League of Nations, and did not belong to Poland, would have been returned to Germany. Germany would also have been allowed to build a highway and a railroad across the former German territory, the Polish Corridor, to reconnect with East Prussia. That’s it! A peaceful settlement of the dispute would have taken nothing away from Poland. But the cost of refusing to settle the dispute peacefully was a world war in which millions of Poles were killed, much of their country destroyed, followed by 50 years of Nazi and Soviet occupation. If Poland had yielded, there would have been no World War II, no Cold War, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War, and Eastern Europe would have escaped the horrific occupation and domination by the Soviet Union.

[END of Part 17]

______________________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 14,484

* Total pages = 70

*Total images = 22

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

======================================

Click to download a PDF of this post (3.0 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 17

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

See also:

The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 4: May 5, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 3: Apr 9, 2020 — Updated links to other parts.

 Version 2: Mar 16, 2017 — Improved formatting. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 1:Mar 15, 2017 — Created post.

[Part 16]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, cooly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 16, the annexation of the German speaking area of Czechoslavakia, the Sudetenland, by Germany in 1938 is discussed. The British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain saw it a justified return of formerly German territory back to Austria/Germany despite the opposition from the British war mongers Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Duff Cooper, and Lord Halifax. 

Churchill was determined that Britain would eventually go to war with Germany and his fellow alarmists worked feverishly to bring it about.

“Was he deliberately channeling British power towards the service of the international Jews who were paying him through “The Focus,” or was he deluding himself that he was serving England?“

 — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

 The book can be bought at Amazon here: The Myth of German Villainy

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Contents

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 17

Germany Annexes the Sudetenland 

Czechoslovakia was a creature of the peace treaties following World War One; a new state cobbled together out of some of the remnants of the now defunct Austro-Hungarian Empire. The population of this new state was made up of 7,450,000 Czechs, 2,300,000 Slovaks, 720,000 Magyars (Hungarians), 560,000 Ruthenes, 300,000 Jews, 100,000 Poles …, and 3,200,000 Germans who comprised nearly a fourth of the country’s entire population.

Czechoslovakia was the antithesis of Woodrow Wilson’s concept of “self determination for all peoples,” which, ideally, would have manifested itself in ethnically homogeneous nation states. Combining all of these disparate nationalities into a single state had instability and conflict built into it from the outset. (One wonders why “multiculturalism” is such a popular idea today, since it has proven again and again to be unworkable.)

The light brown area surrounding Bohemia and Moravia was the German area of Czechoslovakia, known as the Sudetenland.  

A prosperous Sudeten German farm

The German population of Czechoslovakia was clustered mainly on its western border adjacent to Germany in a region known as the Sudetenland. These Sudeten Germans or Sudetendeutsche had lived in the region for centuries, and had become very prosperous under the Austro/Hungarian Empire. These industrious, meticulous Germans developed a well ordered society over time, with prosperous farms throughout the region and a highly productive mining and timbering industry. The Sudetenland also became highly industrialized during the nineteenth century and early twentieth century, with huge chemical works, and lignite mines, as well as numerous textile, china, and glass factories. The Sudetenland was the wealthiest and most productive part of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Sudeten Germans were by far the most successful and wealthy ethnic group. This remained true in the new state of Czechoslovakia. Within the Sudetenland, 39 percent of the population was employed in industry with only 31% in agriculture, compared to the rest of the country, where a majority were rural farmers. All the big factories were owned by Germans and controlled by German owned banks.

This region had been ruled for centuries by the German Hapsburgs, so the ruling nationality had always been German and the official language had always been German. Though the Czechs and the Germans had lived together for centuries in this region, formerly known as Bohemia, and Moravia, they had developed separate cultural, educational, political and economic institutions which kept them isolated from each other. The two groups did not mix well, and the region had seen constant strife between the Czechs and the Germans for a hundred years or more. The new artificial country of Czechoslovakia, created by the Treaty of St. Germain in 1919, was now ruled by the majority Czechs, which essentially reduced the 3.2 million Germans to being ruled by their former subjects. The Czechs took great satisfaction in lording it over their former German betters, and conditions for the Germans became very harsh very quickly. During 1919, some 600,000 Germans were uprooted and forced to leave their settlements of centuries, to make way for Czechs who were being moved in by the new government.

[Add. image] Austrians receive the Peace Terms at St Germain Chateau. Dr Carl Renner making his impassioned reply to the Allied Delegates after receiving the Peace Terms, 20 July 1919. Monsieur Clemenceau and President Wilson are sitting at the table in the background.

The Sudeten Germans never wanted to be separated from Austria and included in this newly created country in the first place. Now, their worst fears were becoming a reality as they became a suppressed minority in essentially a foreign country. Claiming the right of self-determination according to number ten of President Wilson’s Fourteen Points, they demanded that their homeland be re-combined with Austria, which was, of course, also ethnic German. The Czech army (now the Czechoslovakian army) was already moving in to occupy the Sudeten region with large numbers of Czech speaking troops. This region had been solidly ethnic German for centuries, and the sudden Czech occupation produced an explosive situation.

On March 4, 1919, almost the entire population of Sudeten Germans staged a peaceful demonstration against the Czech occupation and for self-determination. This demonstration was accompanied by a one day general strike. The Czech army quickly moved in and brutally dispersed the demonstration, killing 54 Germans and wounding 84 others. The Germans were shocked by the brutality of the Czechs, but they were law abiding, so they ended the strike and returned to work, but continued to harbor a seething, smoldering resentment against the Czechs which threatened at any time to explode into violence. These brutal killings of Germans by the Czechs only intensified nationalist and separatist sentiments among the Sudeten Germans. They wanted to separate themselves from Czechoslovakia and re-join Austria or to be annexed by Germany; or barring that, to obtain as much autonomy for themselves as possible. But the Treaty of St. Germain of September 10, 1919 specifically forbade union of the Sudetenland with either Austria or Germany and reconfirmed that it would remain a part of Czechoslovakia. If this decision defies common sense, it must be born in mind that the very purpose of these treaties was to break Germany apart, and to prevent the Germans from re-combining into a European super power. Therefore, the Sudeten Germans would not be allowed to join either Austria or Germany, but would be forced to remain subjects of Czechoslovakia against their will.

To make matters worse, a constitution for the new republic of Czechoslovakia was drawn up in 1920 without Sudeten German participation. The new constitution included provisions which were extremely prejudicial to Sudeten German interests, such as measures to redistribute German wealth to its various other ethnic groups. Land was confiscated from the wealthy German farmers and redistributed to other ethnic groups, mainly Czechs. The government also confiscated one fifth of all paper money to pay for other redistributive schemes, and since the Germans were by far the wealthiest, this fell hardest on them. Policies intended to protect the security of the Czechoslovak state and the rights of Czechs also worked to the disadvantage of Germans, which created local hostilities. Border forestland, considered the most ancient Sudeten German national territory, was expropriated for security reasons. The Czechoslovak government settled Czechs in areas of German concentration in an effort to moderate German nationalism, but the policy produced just the opposite effect. Czech schools were built in German districts for the same reason. Sudeten Germans, in possession of a large number of subsidized local theaters, were required to put these at the disposal of the Czech minority one night a week, which produced another cause for hostility. All efforts were made to dissolve the cohesive German society and to promote their assimilation into the other ethnic groups. All of these measures only further alienated the German population from the rest of the country and increased friction and strife between the Sudeten Germans and the Czechs.

When the Depression hit Europe in 1931, it hit the Sudeten Germans particularly hard, as they depended more than the rest of Czechoslovakia on international trade, especially with Germany. During the depression, the Czechoslovakian government took measures to protect its Czech citizens at the expense of the Sudeten Germans. As a result, the unemployment rate among the industrialized Sudeten Germans was five times that of the rest of Czechoslovakia. Tension between the two groups increased. Fighting broke out. The Czech army and Czech police sided with the Czechs and numerous atrocities were committed against the German population.

In 1931 the Sudeten German Peoples Party was created, led by Konrad Henlein, with the central objective of Sudetenland annexation with Germany. Henlein established communications with the Nazi Party in Germany and sought their support for annexation. After becoming Chancellor in 1933, Hitler openly called for annexation of the Sudetenland and eventually began providing financial support for the Sudeten German Peoples Party to help them towards that goal.

[Add. image] Konrad Henlein at his desk. Henlein was the leading Sudeten German politician in Czechoslovakia.

Though Henlein’s demand had almost unanimous Sudeten German support, it was vigorously opposed by the Czech government. If the Germans were allowed to secede from the Czech state, what about all the other nationalities? The very idea posed an existential threat to the state of Czechoslovakia. Moreover, the Sudetenland held some of Czechoslovakia’s richest resources, large deposits of coal in particular, and also its most productive industries. The Czech government was ready to fight, if it came to that, in order to prevent the loss of this wealthy region.

The Czechoslovakian army was one of the most powerful, well trained and best equipped in Europe at the time and could have withstood a German invasion attempt without outside assistance. The German army had not yet rebuilt itself. Nevertheless, President Benes entered into alliances with France and the Soviet Union as additional insurance, but the Germans saw this as an attempt at encirclement of their country. Even though the Soviet Union had entered the alliance, they asserted that they would not go to war against Germany unless France did also, and France was unprepared for war, so the alliances were essentially worthless.

In 1938 both the British and the French people were very opposed to war, though a belligerent faction among British leaders existed who did want war, including Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Duff Cooper, and Lord Halifax. This group called for war against Germany in the event of any attempt to annex the Sudetenland. Instead of viewing Hitler’s annexation of German peoples into the Reich as a limited goal of pan-Germanism, as was the case, they accused Hitler of wanting to create a super state in order to dominate the world, yet, there was no evidence that that is what Hitler wanted to do. Chamberlain, who was not a part of this group of British war mongers, happened to believe that the Sudeten Germans’ grievances were well founded and believed that Hitler’s intentions in the matter were limited. Both Britain and France, therefore, advised Czechoslovakia to give the Sudeten Germans the autonomy they sought, and then let them decide what they wanted to do. Czech President Benes, however, strongly resisted this proposal.

[Add. image] Czech President Edvard Benes with Czech troops in May 1938.

As the political situation worsened, security in the Sudetenland deteriorated. Armed clashes began to occur between bands of Sudeten Germans and the police and border forces. In a few instances, the Czech army was called out to pacify the situation. Leaders in Germany expressed their concern for their fellow Germans in the Sudetenland. Henlein and his Sudeten German Party then presented the Prague government with an eight point demand. Henlein demanded complete autonomy, ideologically as well as politically, and reparations for damages caused by the “injustices inflicted since 1918” on Sudeten Germans. Despite pressure from London and Paris to accept it, the Prague government rejected these demands out of hand. When fighting broke out in the Sudeten area and rumors of German troop movements across the border were passed around (which turned out to be untrue), the Czechoslovak army mobilized on May 20, 1918. Mobilization at that time was universally seen as a provocation, and war between Czechoslovakia and Germany seemed certain. A war between the two states was even egged on by Winston Churchill and his group.

Prime Minister Chamberlain stepped in and offered to mediate to try to settle the matter peacefully. He sent Vicount Runciman in to work things out between Germany and Czechoslovakia short of war. Runciman was unable to bring the two sides together in any kind of an agreement, however, so he returned to England. Upon his return to England, he presented the following report to the British government which was very sympathetic to the Sudeten Germans:

“Czech officials and Czech police, speaking little or no German, were appointed in large numbers to purely German districts; Czech agricultural colonists were encouraged to settle on land confiscated under the Land Reform in the middle of German populations; for the children of these Czech invaders Czech schools were built on a large scale; there is a very general belief that Czech firms were favoured as against German firms in the allocation of State contracts and that the State provided work and relief for Czechs more readily than for Germans. I believe these complaints to be in the main justified. Even as late as the time of my Mission, I could find no readiness on the part of the Czechoslovak Government to remedy them on anything like an adequate scale … the feeling among the Sudeten Germans until about three or four years ago was one of hopelessness. But the rise of Nazi Germany gave them new hope. I regard their turning for help towards their kinsmen and their eventual desire to join the Reich as a natural development in the circumstances.”

Czechoslovakian President Benes proposed a compromise plan, but it was too little, too late, and Henlein turned it down. He then instructed the Sudeten Germans to prepare for self defense in case of attack. On September 15, 1938 Henlein flew to Germany and met with Hitler. He then issued a proclamation demanding Sudetenland annexation with Germany. Riots and clashes with police broke out in the Sudetenland which were brutally put down by the Czech army. German newsreels showed evidence of widespread atrocities against Sudeten Germans. Hitler threatened to send in German troops to protect them.

Konrad Henlein, leader of the Sudeten German People’s Party, with Adolf Hitler in Germany.

Chamberlain went to Berchtesgaden on September 15 and met with Hitler. During the meeting, Hitler demanded the swift annexation of the Sudetenland by Germany or he threatened to invade in order to protect the Sudeten Germans, whom he claimed were being slaughtered by the Czechs. There was plenty of evidence from outside sources that what Hitler claimed was indeed occurring. Both the British and French governments accepted Hitler’s argument and supported his demand for annexation.

Predictably, however, the war mongering element among the British leadership opposed the settlement. Winston Churchill immediately issued a statement to the press denouncing Chamberlain’s policy:

“The partition of Czechoslovakia under pressure from England and France amounts to the complete surrender of the Western democracies to the Nazi threat of force. Such a collapse will bring peace or security neither to England nor to France. On the contrary, it will place these two nations in an ever weaker and more dangerous situation. The mere neutralization of Czechoslovakia means the liberation of 25 German divisions, which will threaten the Western front; in addition to which it will open up for the triumphant Nazis the road to the Black Sea.”

“It is not Czechoslovakia alone which is menaced, but also the freedom and the democracy of all nations. The belief that security can be obtained by throwing a small State to the wolves is a fatal delusion. The war potential of Germany will increase in a short time more rapidly than it will be possible for France and Great Britain to complete the measures necessary for their defense.”

But Hitler was not satisfied to simply annex the Sudetenland. He wanted to solve Czechoslovakia’s ethnic instability problem once and for all, and insisted that claims of Poland and Hungary for the return of their ethnic minorities from Czechoslovakia also be satisfied.

The Times of London editorialized that Hitler was right and supported the annexation of the Sudetenland by Germany. The editorial also supported the demands of Hungary and Poland.

Churchill, of course, took issue with this editorial of The Times. “In this single paragraph,” Churchill wrote:

“The Times gave support to the most extreme of Nazi demands, the complete cession of the Sudetenland, a demand which, if met, would have condemned Czechoslovakia to disintegration, and placed a majority of the Sudeten Germans under the grim rigors of Nazi rule.”

Churchill ignored the fact that the overwhelming majority of Sudeten Germans demanded annexation with Germany. That same day, the Foreign Office publicly disassociated itself from Churchill.

[Add. image] The Munich Agreement is signed on September 29, 1938. From left to right: Chamberlain, Daladier, Hitler, Mussolini, and Ciano pictured before signing the Munich Agreement, which gave the Sudetenland to Germany.

Chamberlain requested a conference with Hitler which would also include France and Italy to make a final decision on the matter. On September 29, 1938, Hitler met at Munich with the heads of government of France, Italy, and Britain. The Czechoslovakian government was not invited. From this meeting, the Munich Agreement was signed by all present, agreeing to all of Hitler’s demands. The Agreement stipulated that the Sudetenland be ceded to Germany, effective immediately. By this act, 3.25 million Sudeten Germans then became citizens of the Reich, along with approximately 38 percent of the territory of Bohemia and Moravia. Hungary received 11,882 square kilometers of Southern Slovakia and southern Ruthenia along with their Hungarian populations, and Poland received Tesin and two minor border areas in northern Slovakia along with their Polish populations. This was accomplished peacefully, without firing a shot. British historian A.J.P. Taylor wrote:

 

“The Munich Pact…was a triumph for all that was best and most enlightened in British life.”

 

Hitler greets Chamberlain at the Munich conference of September 29, 1938

Chamberlain flew back to London to a hero’s welcome. As he got off the plane, he held aloft an agreement signed by Adolf Hitler which stated the German leader’s desire never to go to war with Britain again.

Chamberlain proclaimed that he had secured “peace for our time.” As the jubilant crowd applauded and cheered, Chamberlain expressed his desire to find a peaceful solution to the Fuhrer’s wish to create an enlarged German homeland in Europe to include all Germans. He then read a further passage in the Agreement in which Hitler stated:

 

“We are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.”

 

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain proclaims “Peace for our time,” after the Munich Agreement permitting the German annexation of the Sudetenland.

Winston Churchill, quite expectedly, took the opposite view. He made a speech in the House of Commons in which he stated that the British Government, in approving the Munich Agreement, had “sustained a total and unmitigated defeat,” and that “a disaster of the first magnitude has befallen Great Britain and France.” Churchill had for some time called for a “Grand Alliance” between Britain, France, the United States, and the Soviet Union to “stop Hitler.”

[Add. image] Churchill with a Thompson submachine gun. Taken during his visit to the coastal defense positions near Hartlepool on 31 July, 1940.

But Churchill was a war monger of the first rank, and his statements about Germany were often inaccurate or gross exaggerations, and intended only to inflame public opinion against Germany. If the cause of World War Two could be pinned on a single person, it should be pinned on him; and if not on him alone, then on him and Roosevelt. He was also an opportunist. Churchill had been an ardent anti-Bolshevist from the start and blamed the Russian Revolution and all that came after it on the Jews. But then, when it suited his purposes, he jumped on the Zionist bandwagon, stating that Zionism ( which advocated the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine) would deflect European Jews away from social revolution to partnership with European imperialism in the Arab world.

In 1936, Churchill became associated with the informal London Jewish pressure group known as “The Focus,” (of which, more in the following chapter). The purpose of The Focus was to “open the eyes of the British public to the one great menace, Nazi Germany.” In reality, Germany was never a threat to Britain, and Hitler had done all he could to win Britain’s friendship. The Focus became Britain’s main contributor to the international Jewish propaganda campaign against Nazi Germany, and Churchill became its Gentile front man. Churchill was useful to The Focus in its campaign to destroy Hitler and the Nazis, and The Focus was useful to Churchill in bringing him back to power after years “in the wilderness,” as he put it. The Focus was lavishly funded by these wealthy British Jews and Churchill, as its front man, lived a lavish life as a result. (Churchill also received an excessively large payment from the Czechoslovakian government, which cast doubt on the genuineness of his opposition to the annexation of the Sudetenland by Germany.)

[Add. image] Winston Churchill speaking at a munitions factory in Ponders End, 1916.

In his role as Gentile front man for the Focus, Churchill began berating the British government for its “blindness to the Nazi threat,” and he especially went after Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain for his efforts to maintain the peace. In his articles and speeches, Churchill greatly exaggerated the extent of German rearmament and distorted the rearmament’s purpose by harping on German production of heavy bombers. In fact, Germany had never focused on heavy bombers, but Churchill used this lie to support his contention that Germany intended to eventually attack Britain. Hitler wanted only peace and friendship with Britain, not war, and said so repeatedly. Moreover, Hitler had made clear that his goal was to reconstitute the German state which had been dismembered by the Versailles Treaty. That plan was no secret to anyone, including Churchill. But Churchill and his fellow alarmists treated each of Hitler’s actions to fulfill that plan as a new and unexpected act of aggression, and further proof of his intent to conquer Europe. Churchill was determined that Britain would eventually go to war with Germany for his own reasons.

While others worked feverishly to avoid war, Churchill and his fellow alarmists worked feverishly to bring it about. Was he deliberately channeling British power towards the service of the international Jews who were paying him through “The Focus,” or was he deluding himself that he was serving England? That question will probably never be answered.

The British publicist, F.S. Oliver, said this about Winston Churchill’s character:

“From his youth up, Mr. Churchill has loved with all his heart, with all his mind, with all his soul, and with all his strength, three things: war, politics and himself. He has loved war for its dangers, he loves politics for the same reason, and himself he has always loved for the knowledge that his mind is dangerous — dangerous to his enemies, dangerous to his friends, dangerous to himself. I can think of no man I have ever met who would so quickly and so bitterly eat his heart out in Paradise.”

Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

German troops enthusiastically welcomed into Sudetenland, October 1, 1938

On October 1, 1938, the German army marched unopposed into the Sudetenland where they were received with jubilation. Czechoslovakia was an artificial and unworkable state created by intellectuals and supported by the victors of WWI. In reality, it had no chance of succeeding, and its demise was no tragedy. The remainder of the country, left over after the Munich Agreement, began immediately to fall apart along ethnic lines. On March 14, 1939, Slovakia declared its independence, followed soon after by Carpatho-Ukraine (Ruthenia). After these areas were gone, all that remained of the former Czechoslovakia were parts of Bohemia and Moravia. The situation was an open invitation for a Communist takeover.

The overwhelming threat to Western Christian Civilization at that time was Communist revolution instigated and supported by the Soviet Union. The Jewish Bolsheviks who controlled the Soviet Union had set up the Communist International (Comintern) for the specific purpose of taking control of all of Europe. They tried taking over Germany in the revolution of 1918 but were defeated by the Freikorps. They had even succeeded for a time in establishing the Soviet Socialist Republic of Bavaria, until also brought down by the Freikorps. They took Hungary briefly in 1919 but were thrown back by forces under Nicholas Horthy. They tried taking Italy in the 1920s but were defeated and driven out by Mussolini. They started a civil war in Spain in 1936 and nearly succeeded in creating a Soviet style Communist dictatorship in that country, but with the help of Mussolini and Hitler, the devout Catholic General Francisco Franco, after three years of bloody war, defeated the Communists and drove them out of Spain. Soviet Russia stood ready with a watchful eye to create and support Communist revolution in any European country that seemed vulnerable.

Czechoslovakia’s capital city, Prague, had a large Jewish population who had built an active Communist revolutionary party, ready at any time to act as the Soviet Union’s fifth column to take control of what remained of the former Czechoslovakia. Hitler made it known that he would not allow this to happen. The new president of Czechoslovakia, Emil Hacha, was himself concerned about this, and wanted to meet with Hitler. Hitler invited him to Berlin for talks. When he arrived at the train station with his daughter, he was met by Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop, who had a bouquet of flowers for the daughter. Hitler had also sent a box of chocolates. During the late night meeting, Hitler harangued Hacha relentlessly, until he finally signed an agreement making his country a protectorate of Germany.

[Add. Image] Emil Hacha meeting with Adolf Hitler.

When Hitler came out of the meeting, he was ecstatic. He told his two middle-aged secretaries; “Children, quickly, give me a kiss! Quickly!” The ladies kissed him on both cheeks. Hitler said:

“It is the greatest triumph of my life! I shall enter history as the greatest German of them all!”

Hitler had every reason to be satisfied with himself. So far, he had brought into Germany the Saar, Austria and the Sudetenland, and now he had made Bohemia and Moravia a protectorate. He had also essentially nullified the Versailles Treaty; and he had done it all through diplomacy, without firing a shot.

That same day, March 15, the German army moved in, meeting no resistance. On March 16, Hitler went to Prague and from the Hradcany Castle officially proclaimed that Bohemia and Moravia were now a German protectorate. Bohemia and Moravia were placed under the supervision of Reich Protector Baron Konstanin von Neurath and German officials manned government departments in a similar capacity as that of cabinet ministers. The Gestapo assumed police authority. Hitler was remarkably considerate of the existing Czech civil servants, allowing most of them to remain in their posts and permitting them to retire with pensions.

[Add. image] German army band playing outside Prague Castle after the German occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939.

Not to have occupied Bohemia and Moravia (the remnants of the former Czechoslovakia), would have invited disaster. Germany stood as the bulwark for all of Europe against the Communist menace. Only Germany held the Communists at bay and prevented them from sweeping over Europe. A Communist takeover of Bohemia and Moravia was out of the question.

Bohemia and Moravia contained 118,000 Jews at the beginning of the German occupation, most of whom resided in Prague. When the Germans moved in, Jews were dismissed from the civil service and placed in an extralegal position. The international Jewish press, of course, reacted with an intensified outpouring of vitriolic hyperbole against the Nazis. But what should Hitler have done? World Jewry was still engaged in a “holy war” against Germany. It would have been idiotic under the circumstances for Germany to retain large numbers of Jews in the Czechoslovakian government who would surely have cooperated with the Comintern to undermine and sabotage German control. Communism was banned and Czech communists, most of whom were Jews, fled the country. Large numbers of Jews who were not overtly affiliated with the Communist Party also left.

Hitler saves Czechoslovakia from the Communists by making it a protectorate of Germany. The sign on the marquee in the Czech city of Brno, reads “We thank our Fuhrer.” He gets an enthusiastic welcome.

As the victors of World War I, Britain and France assumed the role of enforcers of the Versailles Treaty, as well as all other treaties resulting from the war. The United States had withdrawn from Europe and took no such role. Germany had never willfully accepted the terms of the Versailles Treaty, and only signed it under duress. The Treaty had been imposed upon Germany by force, and Germany therefore acknowledged no moral obligation to abide by it. Moreover, the onerous terms of the treaty had been ruinous for Germany, and continued to have a deleterious effect on the lives of the Germany people by the time Hitler came to power. It would have been unreasonable to have expected that the burdensome terms of the Versailles Treaty would have continued in perpetuity, or to have expected Germany to continue to accept them without protest. Sooner or later, they would have had to come to an end, Hitler or no Hitler. Hitler avowed when he assumed the Chancellorship that he would abnegate the Treaty despite Britain’s and France’s determination to enforce it. He believed that the treaty was unfair and unjust and therefore had no moral force, and he was not alone in believing that. Numerous people of prestige and influence sided with Germany in the matter. George Bernard Shaw, for example, had this to say:

“It was evident that Germany needed only a resolute and clear-headed leader to denounce the [Versailles]Treaty; declare her determination to assert her full equality with the Powers, and refuse to be disarmed, plundered and chastised under the pretext of reparations and ‘war guilt’, to rally to him every living soul whose native language was German, and at the same time take a great step towards peace in Europe by proving that neither France nor England nor the United States dare outrage humanity by attempting military occupation of her territory on the model of the old partitions of Poland; in short, that instead of Europe being plunged into war she would be dragged back from the brink of it by Germany.”

Britain and France, against common sense, took the position that any violation of the terms of the Versailles Treaty would be a provocation for war. This irrational position was aggressively promoted by the “war party” in Britain, including Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Lord Halifax, Duff Cooper, Robert Vansittart, and a few others, but just as many believed there was just cause for Hitler’s actions. Hitler continued his defiance of the Treaty, gambling that neither Britain nor France had the stomach for another bloody war.

The intent of the Versailles Treaty was to reduce the size and power of Germany and to keep Germany down. Those clamoring for war with Germany on the basis of justice for Czechoslovakia were being disingenuous and were using the German occupation as a pretext for war.

At the same time that the German occupation of the Sudetenland created consternation among the anti-German elements (International Jewry in particular), Poland’s invasion of Cesky/Tesin in Bohemia aroused no concern whatever. These two territories of Czechoslovakia contained majority Polish populations, and Poland occupied them for the same reason Germany occupied the Sudetenland. Likewise, when, at the same time, Hungary occupied southern Slovakia, which contained a majority Hungarian population, it created hardly a stir. Yet, Germany’s actions were promoted as a cause for war.

Polish tanks invade Cesky/Tesin in Czechoslovakia in 1938. Though Germany was severely criticized for invading the Sudetenland, Poland was not, for doing the exact same thing.

[Add. image] German officers watch as Poland occupies the Czech town of Bohumin.

No one in either England or Germany wanted war except for Winston Churchill and his gang of war mongers and the Jewish war hawks who controlled him. When Prime Minister Chamberlain returned from a meeting with Hitler, he announced to the Parliament that “there will be no war.” While the people in both England and Germany were thanking God and celebrating that fortunate outcome, the scheming war mongers, including Churchill, got to work to undermine it. Inside of a week, the Jewish controlled press began smearing Chamberlain and tearing him down.

[END of Part 16]

______________________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 6,259

* Total pages = 39

*Total images = 18

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

======================================

Click to download a PDF of this post (3.0 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 16

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

See also:

The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 4: Apr 27, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 3: Apr 9, 2020 — Updated links to other parts.

Version 2: Feb 14, 2017 — Added 8 more images. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 1: Feb 13, 2017 — Created post.

[Part 15]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 15, the fulfillment of Hitler’s dream of uniting Austria with Germany; the subsequent revival of the Austria economy; and the situation with Austria’s jews pre and post “Anschluss” are described.

Austria was a creation of the Paris Peace Treaty and subsequent Versailles Treaty that forbade it from joining up with Germany to prevent Germany from becoming too powerful again. As it became more and more clear that Austria was not an economically viable state, popular support for union with Germany steadily increased and by the early 1930s popular support for union among both the German and Austrian populations was overwhelming.

Jews were mainly resident in the capital Vienna and dominated it through the Social Democratic Party in the early 1930s. By 1932 Englebert Dollfuss, the leader of the Christian Social Party, became the Austrian Chancellor and along with the Social Democratic Party opposed “Anschluss”. The Christian Social Party was now in a four way struggle with the Nazis, the Communists, and the Social Democrats and after a brief civil war the Nazi Party was banned and its leaders thrown in jail.

By 1938 Seyss-Inquart, the Nazi Minister of the Interior, became Chancellor, and the Nazi Party now controlled the government in Austria. When rioting broke out all over Austria over the issue of unification with Germany, Seyss-Inquart sent a request to Hitler to send in German troops to restore order. On the morning of March 12, the German 8th Army crossed into Austria. They faced no resistance whatever, but were greeted by crowds of cheering Austrians instead. The Anschluss was made immediately effective, subject to ratification by a plebiscite, which was passed with a 99% “yes” vote.

Prior to the Anschluss (union), Austria’s economy was in a catastrophic condition with nearly a third of Austrians out of work. The economy improved dramatically resulting in the Austrians seeing Hitler as a miracle worker.

Once Austria had been incorporated into the Reich, Germany’s laws automatically became Austria’s laws, including the Nuremberg Race Laws. The intent of the Nuremberg Laws, as well as the other anti-Jewish laws, was to break the Jewish grip on the economic, cultural, and social life of Germany and to encourage Jewish emigration. By 1940 Austria’s jewish population was down to 40,000 from 192,000

— KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

 The book can be bought at Amazon here: The Myth of German Villainy

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Contents

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 16

“Anschluss” The Unification

of Austria and Germany 

Beginning with his 25 Points speech of 1919, one of Hitler’s overriding goals was the unification of all German people into a single nation-state. Hitler was an Austrian, but always called himself a German, and he considered Austria to be part of Germany. The giant multi-ethnic Austro-Hungarian Empire had been dismembered after World War I by the Paris Peace Conference and Austria was left as a small rump state of 6.8 million people, mostly ethnic Germans. As part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Austria had been an integral part of a relatively self-sufficient economic system, but now, having been carved out of that giant empire and made into a tiny independent state, Austria was no longer an economically viable entity. She had been cut off from sources of raw materials which had been available to her from the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and also from markets for export. Austria was a German speaking, German state, and it would have been only logical for Austria to combine with Germany after the Austro-Hungarian Empire no longer existed. Moreover, there was strong support for that in both Austria and Germany, but the Versailles Treaty specifically forbade it. World War I had been fought primarily to reduce the size and power of Germany, and the Versailles Treaty was designed to prevent Germany from ever becoming a super power again. For that reason, the victors of the war were steadfastly opposed to the union of Austria with Germany.

As it became more and more clear that Austria was not an economically viable state, popular support for union with Germany steadily increased. By the early 1930s popular support for union among both the German and Austrian populations was overwhelming. It was estimated that at least 80 percent of the Austrian people favored unification with Germany, and nearly as high a percentage of Germans also favored it. As a preliminary measure, an attempt was made in 1931 to create a customs union between Austria and Germany to permit free trade and unrestricted travel between the two countries, but the agreement was blocked by outside forces, notably France and Czechoslovakia, who saw it as an attempt to circumvent the Versailles Treaty. With a 25% unemployment rate and a starving population, Austria was desperate to find a means of increasing trade and productivity, but all such attempts were blocked by these outside forces. Union with Germany would have solved all of Austria’s problems, and it would also have partially fulfilled the aspirations of the National Socialists for a single German state.

Austria was politically divided during this period by a struggle between left wing and right wing groups. Traditional, mostly rural Austrians, along with the bourgeoisie, supported the conservative, Catholic Christian Social Party (CS), while the workers and labor unions, mainly in the cities, supported the Social Democratic Party. The Communist Party (KPO) and the National Socialist Party (Nazi) were marginal groups at first. The Communist Party was composed mostly of Jews, but it was small and failed to gain traction in Austria as it had in Germany. Most of Austria’s Jews belonged to the Social Democratic Party, and most of these Jews were avowed Marxists. The leader of the party, Otto Bauer, was a Jew, and Jews filled all of the leadership positions in the party, though the rank and file were mostly Austrian laborers and members of Jewish led labor unions.

[Add. image — Otto Bauer (5 September 1881 – 4 July 1938), the jewish leader of the Social Democratic Party. Bauer died of heart failure in Paris on 4 July 1938, aged 56, just four months after Austria had become part of the Nazi Third Reich.

His sister, Ida Bauer, was a patient of Sigmund Freud, who published a famous case study about her using the pseudonym Dora.]

During the early 1930s, 192,000 Jews were resident in Austria, almost all of them in Vienna. Jews represented 2.8 percent of the Austrian population, but nearly 10 percent of the population of Vienna. The population of Vienna was just under 2 million. Despite their small numbers, Jews totally dominated the capital city. Jews owned two thirds of all newspapers and banks. They owned 60 percent of all large businesses and industries. Over 50% of lawyers, doctors and dentists in Vienna were Jewish, and nearly a third of university professors were Jewish.

Through their control of the Social Democratic Party, Vienna’s largest party, Marxist Jews dominated the city government of Vienna, giving it the reputation of “Red Vienna.” They held a majority of seats on the City Council, and they controlled the labor unions. The Jewish controlled Social Democratic Party was traditionally anti-clerical and given to anti-religious rhetoric, which the Catholic clergy used to label them “godless, Jewish-Bolshevists.”

[Add. image — Englebert Dollfuss, Chancellor of Austria here in Geneva in 1933. Having served as Minister for Forests and Agriculture, he ascended to Federal Chancellor in 1932 in the midst of a crisis for the conservative government. In early 1933, he shut down parliament, banned the Austrian Nazi party and assumed dictatorial powers.]

The conservative Christian Social Party (CS), which had the support of the Catholic Church in Austria, managed to gain control of the Austrian government in 1932 through a coalition with other conservative parties. It’s leader, Englebert Dollfuss, became the Austrian Chancellor. While the Jewish dominated Social Democratic Party (SDP) controlled the government of Vienna, the Christian Social Party (CS) controlled the national government.

By this time, a branch of Germany’s Nazi party had established itself in Austria. The members wore the same uniforms as their German colleagues and adhered to the same doctrines of anti-Marxism and anti-Semitism. They were recruited mainly from the lower bourgeoisie and the peasantry and their main political goal was the union of Austria and Germany. The movement grew slowly and no Nazi had as yet managed to get elected to the national parliament. In the provincial elections of 1932, however, the Nazis won a number of seats in several of the local diets.

After Hitler became Chancellor in Germany in 1933, the Austrian Nazis, led by Dr. Alfred Frauenfeld, began immediately to concentrate their energies to bring about Anschluss, or union with Germany. The Austrian Nazis considered themselves a part of the Nazi movement in Germany, and took their orders from Hitler.

Though Dollfuss had previously favored Anschluss, he changed his mind and decided that the best path for Austria was independence. Dollfuss was a devout Catholic and he wanted to build up an alternative to Nazism — a Catholic, anti-socialist, authoritarian, Austrian movement. He was supported in his opposition to Anschluss by the Social Democratic party under Jewish, Marxist control, but he wanted nothing to do with them either. He was as much opposed to the Reds as to the Nazis.

The Christian Social Party was now in a four way struggle with the Nazis, the Communists, and the Social Democrats. In order to assert control, the Dollfuss regime dissolved parliament, banned the Austrian Nazi and Communist parties, and centralized power in the office of the Chancellor who now had dictatorial powers to rule the country. Many of the Nazi leaders were thrown in jail. A brief civil war ensued in which the Dollfuss government was victorious. A concordat was soon announced with the Holy See (the Pope), which essentially made Catholicism the official religion of Austria.

Dollfuss didn’t last long, however. He was soon assassinated by the Nazis in a failed coup attempt as the political struggle in Austria continued. Kurt Schuschnigg, who succeeded Dollfuss as Chancellor, made up his mind to destroy the Austrian Nazis and immediately began to initiate actions against them, including rounding them up and locking them up in internment camps. The oppressive Schuschnigg regime was not popular with the Austrian people, the majority of whom actually favored the Nazis because the Nazis supported union with Germany. The Christian Social Party (CS) under Schuschnigg, which now controlled the national government, and the Social Democratic Party (mostly Jewish) which now controlled the government of Vienna, became strange bedfellows as they united in their opposition to union with Germany, though in little else.

The Austrian people, on the other hand, were 80 percent in favor of unification with Germany.

On February 12, 1938, Hitler summoned Schuschnigg to his villa at Berchtesgaden in Bavaria to discuss Schuschnigg’s problems with the Austrian Nazis. During the meeting, Hitler was very condescending toward the Austrian Chancellor, and virtually instructed him to lift the ban on political parties in Austria, to reinstate full party freedoms, to release all imprisoned members of the Nazi Party and to permit them to participate in the government. When Schuschnigg indicated reluctance to comply with these instructions, Hitler threatened military action. Schuschnigg had no choice but to comply, as Austria’s military power was no match for that of Germany. Moreover, Austrian public opinion was against the Austrian Chancellor.

After returning to Austria, Schuschnigg, in compliance with Hitler’s instructions, appointed Arthur Seyss-Inquart, a lawyer and member of the Nazi Party, as Interior Minister. He also removed General Alfred Jansa as Chief of Staff of the Austrian Army, also at Hitler’s instruction, because Jansa had expressed his intention to resist any attempted German entry into Austria by armed force. Hitler wanted to avoid any such confrontation at all costs.

But safely away from Hitler’s intimidating presence, Schuschnigg began reverting back to his recalcitrant position on union with Germany and continued to oppose it. He also continued his oppressive measures against the Austrian Nazi Party which advocated union with Germany. The mostly Jewish Social Democrats agreed on very little with the Christian Socialists, but they turned out in force to support Schuschnigg in opposition to union with Germany. Groups of these Social Democrats (mostly Jews) went all around the city of Vienna painting slogans on the sidewalks and on the walls of buildings in support of Austrian independence and against Austrian union with Germany. Austria’s Jews vehemently opposed Hitler and the Nazis, including Austrian Nazis, and they wanted nothing to do with Hitler’s Germany, certainly not union with it. This put them in direct opposition to the Austrian people and served only to inflame the already rampant anti-Semitism in Austria.

In contravention of Hitler’s instructions Schuschnigg immediately announced a plebiscite (a national vote) to be held on Austria’s Independence day of March 13, 1938, to determine whether or not Austria would unite with Germany. He then set out on a tour of Austria to try to whip up patriotic feelings and to persuade the Austrian people to vote for an independent Austria, and against union with Germany.

Schuschnigg’s plebiscite was to be open to all Austrian voters, but was to be restricted only to those over the age of 24. It was Austria’s youth — those under 24 years of age — who were most overwhelmingly in favor of union with Germany. Various other devices were also to be employed to stack the vote against union with Germany. One device he used to influence the vote was to write the wording of the plebiscite in a confusing way so that the voters would be voting for independence while believing they were voting for unification.

Arthur Seyss-Inquart, (L) with Hitler, replaces Kurt Schuschnigg (R) as chancellor of Austria.

Hitler was furious with Schuschnigg and declared that he would not permit the plebiscite to go forward under those circumstances. Hitler described Austria as:

“A country which for many years had no elections at all, where there were no means of determining who were qualified to vote, and then announces an election which is to take place in less than three and a half day’s time. There are no lists of voters,” Hitler said, “there are no voting cards, there are no means of testing a person’s right to vote, there is no obligation to maintain the secrecy of the ballot, there is no guarantee that the election will be conducted with impartiality, there is no security that the votes will be properly counted – and so on.”

Hitler sent an ultimatum to Schuschnigg on March 11, demanding that he step down as Chancellor and hand over all power to the Austrian National Socialists (Nazis), or face invasion. Unable to gain support from either Italy, France or Britain, and with little support from the Austrian people, Schuschnigg resigned as Chancellor. Seyss-Inquart, the Nazi Minister of the Interior, then became Chancellor, and the Nazi Party now controlled the government in Austria.

Rioting had broken out all over Austria over the issue of unification with Germany, so the new Chancellor, Seyss-Inquart, sent a request to Hitler to send in German troops to restore order. Whether they were actually needed or not is not clear, but this was the necessary pretext for German troops to enter Austria. The next day, on the morning of March 12, the German 8th Army crossed into Austria. They faced no resistance whatever, but were greeted by crowds of cheering Austrians instead.

Hitler entered Austria by car in the afternoon of the same day. His first stop was at Braunau, his birthplace. In the evening he entered Linz where he grew up. At both stops, he received an overwhelming reception.

Hermann Goering, who had accompanied Hitler into Austria, made a telephone call that evening back to party officials in Germany, and stated:

“There is unbelievable jubilation in Austria. We ourselves did not think that sympathies would be so intense.”

Hitler then made a triumphal tour through Austria which ended in Vienna. A huge crowd totalling more than 200,000 filled the Heldenplatz (Heroes Square) in Vienna to hear him proclaim that Austrian was now a part of Germany.

“This is the moment of the greatest accomplishment of my life,” he said. “The German Reich, as it stands today, can never be broken by anyone again.”

The Anschluss was made immediately effective, subject to ratification by a plebiscite. Following proper registration of Austria’s voting population, elections were held in both Germany and Austria on April 10, 1938. The Anschluss was approved by the Austrian people with a 99.75% “yes” vote, and by the German people with a 99.2 % “yes” vote.

[Add. image — Austrian “Anschluss” (union) with Germany, March 12, 1938. The Sudetenland territory was re-united with Germany at the end of  September, 1938.]

Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf, “People of the same blood should be in the same Reich.”

Austrians cheer as German troops enter.

Hitler is warmly greeted as he enters Austria. 

Hitler enters Vienna. 

Austrians are overjoyed by arrival of German troops.

Cardinal Theodor Innitzer, a political figure in the Austrian Christian Social Party (CS) declared on March 12:

“The Viennese Catholics should thank the Lord for the bloodless way this great political change has occurred, and they should pray for a great future for Austria. Needless to say, everyone should obey the orders of the new institutions.”

Robert Kauer, President of the Protestants in Austria, greeted Hitler on March 13, as;

“saviour of the 350,000 German Protestants in Austria and liberator from a five-year hardship.”

Karl Renner, Austria’s first post-war chancellor in 1918, announced his support for the Anschluss and appealed to all Austrians to vote in favor of it on April 10.

“Hitler had a plausible case to argue when he claimed that the Anschluss was only the application of the Wilsonian principle of self-determination.” —  Alan Bullock. Historian.

“The crisis of March, 1938 (which led to the Anschluss) was provoked by Schuschnigg, the Austrian Chancellor, not by Hitler.” —  A.J.P.Taylor. British historian.

“He (Chamberlain) had no difficulty in recognizing where this injustice lay. There were six million Germans in Austria to whom national reunification was still forbidden by the Peace Treaties of 1919. Three million Germans in Czechoslovakia whose wishes had never been consulted; three hundred and fifty thousand people in Danzig who were notoriously German.” —  A.J.P.Taylor. British Historian.

“The German Army was invading Austria, or rather was marching in to the general enthusiasm of the people.” – A.J.P.Taylor, British historian.

“The pull of sentiment, language and history, reinforced by the material advantages offered by becoming part of a big nation, was strong enough to waken a genuine welcome when the frontier barriers went down and the German troops marched in garlanded with flowers…. there was a widespread sense of relief, even amongst those who were far from being Nazis.” —  Alan Bullock. Historian.

As might have been expected, Jewish writers took a different view. The Jewish historian William L. Shirer, in his book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, calls the Anschluss “the rape of Austria.”

[Add. image —  jewish journalist William L. Shirer (1904 – 1993) with his 1960 book, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich ]

Hitler later commented:

“Certain foreign newspapers have said that we fell on Austria with brutal methods. I can only say: even in death they cannot stop lying. I have in the course of my political struggle won much love from my people, but when I crossed the former frontier (into Austria) there met me such a stream of love as I have never experienced. Not as tyrants have we come, but as liberators.”

Austrian Economy Revived

Prior to the Anschluss, Austria’s economy was in a catastrophic condition with nearly a third of Austrians out of work. Just across the border in Germany, unemployment had been eliminated, living standards and working conditions had vastly improved, and economic, social and cultural life was flourishing again. Before Hitler became Chancellor, economic conditions in Germany had been the same as Austria’s.

Following Austria’s incorporation into the Reich, conditions also improved dramatically in Austria. Within six months after Anschluss, the total number of unemployed was reduced from 401,000 to only 99,865. By 1940, the unemployment rate in Austria was only 1.2 percent.

By the end of 1938, during which the Anschluss occurred, the weekly income of industrial workers in Austria rose 9 percent. The Austrian GNP experienced a 12.8 percent growth rate in 1938, and 13.3 percent in 1939. Seldom in history has a country experienced such rapid, dramatic economic growth.

Shortly after the Anschluss, Germany’s National Labor Law and its comprehensive social security system were introduced in Austria. Basic rights in the workplace were thereby guaranteed, and workers were protected from arbitrary dismissal. By these measures, relief was also quickly provided to more than 200,000 desperately poor people, and health care benefits were extended to the working class. A large-scale construction program was immediately launched to provide affordable housing. Cultural life was greatly encouraged, with energetic promotion of music, the fine arts and literature. The result of all of this was an increase in prosperity and optimism, but also a jump in the Austrian birthrate. The Austrian people believed that union with Germany was the best thing that ever happened to Austria, and they believed that Hitler was a miracle worker.

According to Professor Evan Burr Bukey of the University of Arkansas, in his book, “Hitler’s Austria,”:

“Hitler enjoyed a frenzied acclimation among the Austrian people seldom seen since the days of the Caesars.”

Austria’s Jews

In 1938, prior to the Anschluss, 192,000 Jews lived in Austria, almost all of them in Vienna, a city of nearly 2 million. In spite of their relatively small numbers, Austria’s Jews wielded vast and disproportionate wealth and power. For this reason, and all the other reasons that Jews have been universally despised by their host populations, Austrian Jews were extremely unpopular with the Austrian people.

Professor Evan Bukey wrote:

“The predominant position of the Jews in an impoverished country only intensified the fear and loathing of the Austrian masses. As we have already seen, Jewish businesses and financial institutions managed much of the country’s economic life. At the time of the Anschluss three-quarters of Vienna’s newspapers, banks and textile firms were in Jewish hands … The extraordinary success of the Jews in the learned professions also inspired jealously and spite. Over 50 percent of Austria’s attorneys, physicians and dentists were Jewish.”

Yet, Jews were only 2.8 percent of the Austrian population. Moreover Jews isolated themselves within a closed society in Austria, with intense in-group cooperation and mutual assistance between themselves, at the total exclusion, and expense, of non-Jewish Austrians. Many of them dressed differently. They were regarded by Austrians as an alien, parasitic elite who exploited non-Jewish Austrians for the benefit of Jews alone.

They also avoided physical work and treated ordinary Austrians with condescension.

According to Professor Bukey, large numbers of Austrians, especially of the Catholic faithful, viewed baptized Jews, as well as all other Jews, with a hatred;

“so tightly woven into the fabric of Austrian society that it constituted a Sorelian political myth, immune to empirical falsification.” (Georges Sorel, a French philosopher averred that “myth” was a powerful motivator in people’s lives.)

Jews on the streets of Vienna prior to Anschluss.

This seething, barely contained hatred of the Jews boiled over on March 11, 1938, as crowds gathered to welcome Hitler into Vienna where he was to announce the Anschluss. Professor Bukey writes that:

“Untold thousands of Viennese took to the streets of their city like mad persons, dragging anyone who “looked Jewish” from vehicles, clubbing and beating victims, desecrating synagogues, robbing department stores, and raiding Jewish apartments. They compelled rabbis to scrub toilet bowls with prayer shawls and stole whatever cash, jewelry, and furs they could find. An SS correspondent would later write admiringly, ‘The Viennese have managed to do overnight what we have failed to achieve in the slow-moving, ponderous north up to this day. In Austria, a boycott of the Jews does not need organizing the people themselves have initiated it.’”

Once Austria had been incorporated into the Reich, Germany’s laws automatically became Austria’s laws, including the Nuremberg Race Laws. The intent of the Nuremberg Laws, as well as the other anti-Jewish laws, was to break the Jewish grip on the economic, cultural, and social life of Germany and to encourage Jewish emigration. After Anschluss, when these laws applied in Austria, the Austrian Jews became disenfranchised overnight. What had taken 5 years to accomplish in this regard in Germany was done within days in Austria.

By March 18 the authorities had closed down the offices of the Jewish community and Zionist organizations in Vienna and sent their officers to Dachau. During the first weeks after the Anschluss, Jews were fired from their jobs in theaters, community centers, public libraries, and universities. Throughout Austria, Jews were arrested and imprisoned.

Local Nazis rounded up Jews in the city of Vienna and forced them to scrub the streets and walls with brushes. The photo below was widely publicized at the time as an example of the cruelty and pointless humiliation Jews in Vienna were subjected to, but there was also a rational explanation for what took place which is not usually reported. Prior to the Anschluss, when Chancellor Schuschnigg was campaigning against Austrian unification with Germany, the Social Democrats in Vienna turned out in large numbers to support him. Most of Vienna’s Jews belonged to the Social Democratic Party, and as Jews, they were fervently against union with Germany. International Jewry, after all, was engaged in a “holy war” against Germany, which included an economic boycott campaign, and an anti-German propaganda campaign in the international Jewish press. This “holy war” had the enthusiastic support and participation of Austria’s Jews. The last thing Austrian Jews wanted was unification with Germany.

In support of Schuschnigg’s campaign, Jewish Social Democrats painted anti-unification slogans on the sidewalks and walls of buildings throughout the city of Vienna. This angered the non-Jewish Austrians, the vast majority of whom supported unification with Germany. It was the Jews who painted the slogans all over the walls and sidewalks, so it was the Jews who were made to scrub them off. That fact was left out of the international anti-German propaganda. The sidewalk cleaning project may well have been humiliating, but it was not without justification; at least an explanation. But it is also true that the Austrian people took unseemly pleasure in the humiliation of these wealthy and formerly powerful Jews as they were being forced to clean up the sidewalks. Crowds gathered, hissed, and spat abuse at them as they scrubbed.

Jews are forced to clean painted slogans off the sidewalks of Vienna. The slogans had been previously painted on the sidewalks by Jews opposing Anschluss.

At the same time, Jewish stores were plundered by SA men who sometimes (cynically but with a pretense of legality) left a receipt. Jewish businesses were Aryanized, that is, Jewish owners were forced to sell their businesses to Austrians, or Aryans, in transactions that were decidedly one sided and invariably a big financial loss to the Jew. The greed in Vienna ran out of control as Austrians stepped on one another to get at Jewish wealth. The American journalist William Shirer, who was Jewish, witnessed all of this and described it as “an orgy of sadism.”

[Add. image — William L. Shirer (February 23, 1904 – December 28, 1993), left, the bureau chief for CBS radio, at the broadcasting center in Berlin in 1939.]

Jews began leaving Austria in massive numbers. In August 1938 the “Reich Central Office for Jewish Emigration” was set up in the Rothschild palace in Vienna, for the purpose of cutting through the red tape and facilitating rapid Jewish emigration out of Austria. SS Captain Adolf Eichmann was assigned there as one of the administrators. By June 1939 the office had aided in the emigration of 110,000 Austrian Jews. An assembly line process was established through which the Jews passed in one day’s time, relinquishing one document (and piece of property) at every step of the way until the end when he and his family received visas out of the country. Eichmann employed the services of the local Jewish leadership to process this emigration — much of it to Palestine.

[Add. image — The Palais Albert Rothschild was a palatial house in Vienna, one of five Palais Rothschild in the city owned by members of the Rothschild banking family of Austria, a branch of the international Rothschild family. In 1954 the palace was torn down.]

In late June, 1939, the remaining Jews, as well as all non-Jews married to Jews, still working in the private sector, were fired from their jobs and “encouraged” to leave the country. By this time, hundreds of Jewish owned factories and thousands of businesses had been closed or confiscated by the government.

The population of Jews in Germany in 1933 was approximately 500,000, and in Austria, 192,000. By 1940 only 160,000 remained in Germany and 40,000 remained in Austria, for a total of 200,000 in Germany and Austria combined. All the rest had emigrated.

Anschluss could now be checked off of Hitler’s checklist of things he had avowed to accomplish.

[END of Part 15]

______________________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 6,188

* Total pages = 34

*Total images = 16

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

======================================

<

div>

Click to download a PDF of this post (4.2 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 15 – “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

See also:

The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 4: May 5, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 3: Apr 9, 2020 — Updated links to other parts.

Version 2: Jan 6, 2017 — Added one image. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 1: Jan 5, 2017 — Created post.

[Very informative interview by Jim Rizoli with Benton Bradberry and the story behind his excellent book that exposes the lies behind our “official” understanding of the events of the 20th century whereby Germany is most wrongly portrayed as the “evil villain“. The truth is the very opposite — KATANA.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc-l5AYu6fg

Click on the above link to watch the video.

NOTE: Commenter mblaineo (see comments section) submitted the full text of the transcript.

I applaud him for his efforts in doing his bit to help bring truth to the public about recent history that is suppressed by our enemies.

This is a German translation of The Blackguard — Winston Churchill. If readers spot any significant errors in the translation please let me know in the comment section.]

[Click to enlarge]

Das Blackguard

Winston Churchill

The Barnes Review — 2012 Januar – Februar

ILLUSTRATION: RICHARD COLE I DRAWN & QUARTERED/NEWSCOM

& KATANA

Der Artikel wird von BROSCHÜRE exzerpiert kühn berechtigt, That Bastard Churchill, von patriotischen Schriftsteller Maj. ME Thurgood. Es wird eine Blasenbildung ausgesetzt werden von Winston Churchill Mangel an Menschlichkeit und Ritterlichkeit im Krieg, seine schlechte Laune und bizarren Gewohnheiten und seine unersättliche Gier nach Alkohol – unten gewaschen mit einer guten Dosis von Christian Blut. Die jahrzehntelange Propaganda haben Millionen von Menschen glauben, Churchill war eine Art eines englischen Retter, wenn in der Tat, der Architekt der Zerstörung des britischen Empire war er.

Von Major MERVYN F. THURGOOD

[Bild] Eine junge Winston Churchill (1881).

Winston Spencer Churchill wurde 1874 als Sohn von Lord Randolph Churchill, dem dritten Sohn des Herzogs von Marlborough, geboren. Die erste Erziehungschule des Knaben war Harrow. Nach dreimaligem Versuch gelang ihm später die Aufnahme zum Sandhurst Military College. Seine Stärke war die englische Sprache. In der Mathematik war er ein Versager, und beim Schulabgang zählte er zu den Schlechtesten seiner Klasse.

[Bild] Winston Churchill trat Sandhurst 1893 als Kavalleriekadetten.

Während seiner Sandhurstzeit wurde er eines schwerwiegenden moralischen Vergehens im “Oscar Wilde Stil” (homosexuelle Betätigung, d. F.) angeklagt. Churchill strengte ein Verfahren gegen den Vater eines der ihn beschuldigenden Kadetten an. Die Klage wurde zurückgezogen, und Churchill erhielt eine Abfindung von 400 Pfund. Kaum war dieser Zwischenfall vergessen, war Churchill in einen Steeplechaseschwindel (steeplechase = Hindernisjagdrennen, d. V.) verwickelt. Als Folge davon wurden er und seine Kumpanen von der Zeitschrift TRUTH angegriffen.

[Bild] Dezember 1894 im Alter von 20, Winston links Sandhurst als Kavallerieoffizier in der 4. Husaren.

1895 verbrachte Churchill zusammen mit einem Freund, Reginald Barnes, sechs Wochen mit spanischem Militär auf Kuba, von wo er tägliche Berichte an den Daily Graphic verschickte.

[Bild] Daily Graphic war eine britische Wochen illustrierte Zeitung, zunächst am 4. Dezember 1869 von William Luson Thomas Firmen Illustrated Newspapers Limited veröffentlicht.

Im Jahr 1895, Churchill und Kameraden Reginald Barnes, nach Kuba zu beobachten, die im Kampf gegen die spanische kubanischen Guerilleros; er den Auftrag, über den Konflikt von der Daily Graphic Schreiben erhalten hatte.

Die Betätigung als Journalist schien ihm interessanter als das Soldatenleben. Er erkannte jedoch schnell, daß die Armee ein gutes Sprungbrett für eine politische Karriere war. So schloß er sich der Malakandtruppe an der Nordwestgrenze Indiens an und beteiligte sich an gelegentlichen Scharmützeln mit den Afridis, die jedoch entgegen Churchills Darstellungen von schweren Kämpfen nur mit Steinen geworfen hatten. Churchills nächstes militärisches Abenteuer führte ihn 1898 mit den 21. Lancers beim Vorstoß Kitcheners auf Chartum nach Omdurman. Auch hier überwog das Schreiben von Berichten für die Times und die Morning Post über seinen militärischen Ehrgeiz.

Lord Kitchener sagte von ihm, daß er zwar Mut habe, jedoch die Armee nur als Hilfsmittel nutzte, und daß er seine Kommandierungen, die für seine Zwecke nützlich schienen, sich über seine Beziehungen durch seine Mutter verschaffen konnte. Von 1899 bis 1900 diente er als Kriegsberichter in Südafrika, und er verstand es, den Ruhm für sich zu begründen, daß er in Gefangenschaft geraten und daraus geflohen war. [1]

[Bild] Winston Churchill (rechts mit den Händen hinter dem Rücken). Picture drei Tage nach seiner Gefangennahme durch die Buren gemacht.

[Bild] Als Churchill aus dem Kriegsgefangenenlager entkommen, ein Fahndungsplakat herausgegeben wurde, mit £ 25 (tot oder lebendig) für seine Rückeroberung.

Im Jahre 1900 wurde er mit 26 Jahren als Konservativer zum Parlamentsabgeordneten für Oldham gewählt. 1904 trat er zu den Liberalen über. 1908 wurde er als Präsident des Board of Trade ins Kabinett berufen. 1910 wird er Innenminister, und 1911 Erster Lord der Admiralität. Man wird an eine Zeile in Gilbert and Sullivans HMS Pinafore erinnert:

“Bleib dicht an deinem Pult, fahre nie zur See, und du kannst Lord über die Königliche Flotte werden.”

 

 

[Bild] Winston Churchill eher genossen Krieg. Im Juli 1914, als Großbritannien vorbereitet für den entgegenkommenden Katastrophe, Churchill, die zum Zeitpunkt der Erste Lord der Admiralität, schrieb seiner Frau;

“Ich bin interessiert, und glücklich ausgerichtet. Ist es nicht schrecklich, so zu bauen?”

Und im Jahr 1916, in einem Brief an David Lloyd George Tochter, gab Churchill:

“Ich denke, ein Fluch soll auf mir ruhen – denn ich liebe diesen Krieg. Ich weiß, es zerschlagen und zerschmetterte das Leben von Tausenden jeden Augenblick, und doch, ich kann mir nicht helfen, ich genieße jede Sekunde davon.”

Im 1. Weltkrieg entwarf Churchill in seiner Eigenschaft als Erster Seelord den Plan, durch Öffnung der Dardanellen den Russen Unterstützung zu bringen, wobei er vornehmlich seine “Kolonialen” (Australier, Neuseeländer usw.) ausnutzte. Der Angriff auf Gallipoli wurde ein Fiasko und brachte den Ersten Seelord zu Fall. Schwerwiegender und unheilvoller noch waren seine Intrigen bei der Versenkung der Lusitania am 8. Mai 1915.

Er war mit dem damaligen Untersekretär der amerikanischen Flotte, Franklin Roosevelt, in eine Verschwörung verwickelt, durch die Versenkung des Cunardriesen (Cunard = bedeutende englische Reederei, d. V.) Amerika in den Krieg zu zerren. Die Deutsche Botschaft in New York hatte der Presse zwei mal Warnungen vor dem Luxusdampfer ausgegeben, weil er Konterbande und Munition enthielt. Die Deutschen konnten zudem darauf hinweisen, daß die Lusitania in einen bewaffneten Handelsdampfer umgebaut war und daß sich eine Kompanie Soldaten nebst Artillerie und Munition an Bord befände.

[Bild] RMS Lusitania (nach dem alten römischen Reiches Name für die Provinz, die heute den Namen Portugal benannt). RMS Lusitania war ein britischer Ozeandampfer, Inhaber der Blaue Band und kurz größte Schiff der Welt. Sie wurde von der Cunard Line im Jahre 1907 ins Leben gerufen, in einer Zeit des harten Wettbewerbs für den Nordatlantik Handel. Im Jahr 1915 wurde sie von einem Torpedo von einem deutschen U-Boot zu schlagen. Anschließend werden die Munition wurde das Schiff heimlich trägt explodierte verursacht den Tod von 1.198 Passagieren und Besatzung.

[Bild] (links) Die offizielle Warnung von der kaiserlichen deutschen Botschaft über das Reisen auf Lusitania ausgestellt.

(Rechts) Ein Plakat Iren drängen, um den Untergang der Lusitania rächen.

Am 17. April 1915 verließ Liverpool Lusitania auf ihrer 201. Atlantiküberquerung, Ankunft in New York am 24. April. Eine Gruppe von Deutsch-Amerikaner, in der Hoffnung, um Kontroversen zu vermeiden, wenn Lusitania wurden von einem U-Boot angegriffen, diskutierten ihre Anliegen mit einem Vertreter der deutschen Botschaft. Die Botschaft beschlossen, die Passagiere vor ihrer nächsten Kreuzung nicht an Bord Lusitania segeln zu warnen. Die kaiserliche Botschaft platziert eine Warnung Anzeige in 50 amerikanischen Zeitungen, unter anderem in New York:

HINWEIS!

TRAVELLERS die beabsichtigen, an der Atlantikfahrt begeben werden daran erinnert, dass ein Kriegszustand zwischen Deutschland und seine Verbündeten und Großbritannien und seine Verbündeten besteht; dass die Zone des Krieges gehören die Gewässer um die britischen Inseln; dass im Einklang mit Mahnschreiben von der kaiserlichen deutschen Regierung gegeben, die die Flagge von Großbritannien, oder einen seiner Verbündeten, unterliegen Zerstörung in diesen Gewässern, und dass Reisende Segeln im Kriegsgebiet auf den Schiffen von Großbritannien oder ihre Verbündeten, tun dies auf eigene Gefahr.

IMPERIAL Deutsche Botschaft

Washington, D.C., 22. April 1915.

————————————————————-

Es war Routine, daß Linienschiffe von der Südküste Irlands ab von mindestens einem leichten Kreuzer und zwei Zerstörern begleitet wurden. Am 6. Mai erhielt Kapitän WT Turner die Warnung, daß deutsche U‑Boote an der Südküste Irlands gemeldet waren. Er erwartete demzufolge, daß er seinen Kurs um die Nordküste Irlands verlegen dürfe. Normalerweise kümmerte der Erste Lord sich nicht um solche Dinge. Doch Churchill erließ Befehl, die Lusitania ohne Geleitschutz nach Liverpool laufen zu lassen. Er reiste dann nach Paris, wo er sich als Mr. L. Spencer ins Gästebuch eines Hotels eintrug.

[Bild] Commander William Thomas Turner (1856 – 1933) war der Kapitän der Lusitania, als im Mai 1915. Abgebildet sank hier an Bord der Aquitania 1914.

Um 14.12 Uhr des 8. Mai feuerte Kapitänleutnant. Schwieger, Kommandant von U-­20, seinen letzten Torpedo in den Bug der Lusitania.

[Bild] Walther Schwieger (7. April 1885, Berlin – 5. September 1917, Nordsee) war ein Offizier der Kaiserlichen Marine (Kaiserliche Marine) und einem U-Boot-Kommandant im Ersten Weltkrieg, bekannt für seine Rolle in der Untergang die RMS Lusitania.

Die Deutschen konnten deutlich eine zweite Explosion beobachten. Die mit Doppelwänden ausgestattete Lusitania galt als unversenkbar, aber sie verschwand binnen 20 Minuten in den Fluten. In der gerichtlichen Untersuchung wollte man feststellen, daß die zweite Explosion von Kohlenstaub hergerührt habe. Aber spätere Untersuchungen ergaben, daß es kaum Kohlenstaub auf dem Schiff gab und zweifellos nicht vorne am Bug. Diese Explosion mußte also von der Explosion mehrerer Tonnen Explosivstoffe im Vorderrumpf herrühren.

Beim Untergang des Schiffes waren 1.198 Passagiere und Mannschaften ums Leben gekommen, einschließlich 171 einflußreicher Amerikaner. Der Dampfer war nur 10 Meilen von Kinsdale Head, in Sicht von Queenstown, gesunken. Patrouillenboote verblieben jedoch so lange im Hafen, bis jede Hilfe zu spät kam.

Die Untersuchung hatte schwerwiegende Fakten unterschlagen, besonders die Rolle Churchills und die vermutliche von Roosevelt. Churchill war übrigens stets der Meinung, in Roosevelt einen Freund zu besitzen. In Wirklichkeit verachtete Roosevelt ihn zusammen mit seinem zerfallenden Empire.

Genau wie Kitchener ihn beurteilt hatte, benutzte Churchill die Armee wiederum als Sprungbrett als er am 18. Nov. 1915 als Major in die Queen’s Own Oxfordshire Hussars eintrat. Nach seiner Ankunft in Frankreich wurde er Sir John French vorgestellt, der ihm die Führung einer Brigade anvertrauen wollte. Premier Asquith, dem dies zu Ohren kam, war nicht von dieser Idee begeistert. French entschloß sich daraufhin, Churchill zum 2. Bataillon der Grenadier Guards zu versetzen, um Erfahrung im Grabenkrieg zu sammeln. Churchill verbrachte nur fünf Tage bei den Guards. Bei seiner Abmeldung äußerte der Oberst:

“Wir wollen nicht unhöflich erscheinen, aber ich darf sagen, daß Ihr Auftreten bei uns eine Sache war, bei der wir nicht mitzureden hatten.”

[Bild] Churchill, Mitte, in Uniform mit Kollegen.

Churchill wanderte nun von Hauptquartier zu Hauptquartier, in der Hoffnung, doch noch das Kommando über eine Brigade zu erhalten. Diese Sucht zu kommandieren sollte im 2. Weltkrieg zu traurigen Ergebnissen führen. Am Neujahrstag 1916 übertrug man ihm das Kommando über das 21. Batl. der Royal Scots Füsiliere. Während der 3 1/2 Monate dieses Einsatzes lag seine Einheit abseits von gefährlichen Frontabschnitten. So konnte er die meiste Zeit auf seine “parlamentarischen Pflichten” verwenden. Nach dem 6. Mai 1916 sah er keinen Frontdienst mehr. Am 22. Juli 1917 wurde er Munitionsminister. Wieder einmal hatte ihm die Armee gute Dienste geleistet.

Churchill immer gedacht, dass er einen Freund in Roosevelt, der in der Tat verachtet den Mann und seine “dekadenten” Reich hatte.

Churchills politischer Stern stieg und sank über die Kriegsjahre. Seine Nachkriegsbemühungen, die Weißrussen zu unterstützen, fanden bei den kriegsmüden Soldaten wenig Verständnis, die inzwischen von der Aristokratie aller Länder genug hatten. Im Jahr 1922 wurde er zum Kolonialsekretär für den Nahen Osten ernannt. Beeinflußt von seiner aus jüdischen Kreisen stammenden Mutter, spielte er eine bedeutende Rolle bei der Unterstützung der Balfour Declaration, die die mit England verbündeten Araber verriet und eine großzügige Einwanderung von Juden nach Palästina gewährte. In Churchills Augen war der Zionismus eine “mitreißende Bewegung”, und er schrieb:

“Falls in unserer Generation, wie es wahrscheinlich ist, an den Ufern des Jordan ein jüdischer Staat, geschützt durch die englische Krone entstehen sollte, der zwischen drei und vier Millionen Juden umfaßt, so wird ein Ereignis in der Weltgeschichte eingetreten sein, das von jeder Seite betrachtet, gewinnbringend und besonders in Harmonie mit den Interessen des britischen Empire sein wird.”

Jawohl! Er lebte lange genug, um die jüdische Immigration nach Palästina verfolgen zu können, und wie am 22. Juli 1946 die Sternbande (jüdisch-zionistische Terrorgruppe, d. V.) das King David Hotel, Hauptquartier der 6. Luftlandedivision in die Luft jagte, wobei 91 Soldaten, die einst als Befreier in der Normandie abgesprungen waren, getötet wurden.

[Bild] 2. Juli 1946: Das King David Hotel in Jerusalem wurde von Juden bombardiert, tötete 91 Menschen. Menachem Begin geplant die Zerstörung des King David Hotel und das Massaker von Deir Yassin. Ex-Premier, Shamir, war ursprünglich ein Mitglied der jüdischen Terrorist Bande genannt Irgun, die von keinem anderen als Menachem Begin geleitet wurde. Shamir später ging zur noch radikaleren “Stern-Bande”, die viele bösartige Greueltaten begangen.

Am 27. März versuchte Churchill, den Emir Abdulla zu bestechen, den Juden den Zuzug nach Palästina zu gestatten. Aber Abdulla warnte ihn, daß es das Ziel der Zionisten sei, ein jüdisches Königreich in Palästina zu begründen, um von dort nach und nach die Welt zu beherrschen. Die Engländer könnten eines Tages in die Lage versetzt werden, Deutschland und Rußland um Hilfe anzugehen.

Als Kolonialminister empfing Churchill seine ersten Eindrücke, daß die Kolonien selbstbewußter geworden und nicht mehr willens waren, blindlings dem Rufe Englands zu folgen. Doch er zog es vor, diese Entwicklung zu übersehen. Zuerst fragten die Kanadier an, ob es Churchills Absicht sei, den Juden die Regierungskontrolle in Palästina zu überlassen. Churchill antwortete, daß, falls die Juden die Mehrheit gewinnen würden, wie er es wünschte, sie natürlich auch die Regierungsgewalt bekommen würden. Im Jahre 1922 wurde England wegen der Gallipoli‑Halbinsel und der Dardanellen in einen Konflikt mit der Türkei verwickelt.  Am 9. September, die Türken eingegeben Smyrna, und griechische Herrschaft in Kleinasien zu Ende ging. Die 1000 britischen Truppen auf der asiatischen Seite der Dardanellen waren, um zur Halbinsel Gallipoli von Canakkale zurückziehen, aber später durch Aufträge aus dem lokalen Kommandanten blieb.

Sowohl Lloyd George wie Churchill wollten die Türken aus Europa heraushalten. Churchill schickte ein Telegramm an alle Dominien mit der Forderung, militärische Verstärkungen zu entsenden.

[Bild]  Lloyd George und Churchill (1922)

Die Haltung der Dominien zu dieser Forderung Churchills war unterschiedlich. Neufundland und Neuseeland boten ihre Unterstützung an, aber sowohl die kanadische wie die australische Regierung waren ungehalten darüber, daß sie vor Veröffentlichung dieser Forderung nicht einmal konsultiert worden waren. Der australische Premierminister [Billy Hughes] telegrafierte nach London:

“Für eine gute Sache sind wir bereit, alles zu geben, für eine schlechte nicht einen Mann!”

Auch Kanada weigerte sich, Truppen zu entsenden. Churchill gingen nie die wahren Hintergründe dieser Weigerungen auf. Auch später als Premierminister bildete er sich ein, noch immer volle Verfügungsgewalt über seine “Kolonialen” zu haben.

[Bild] Generalstreik, Mai 1956 in Stratford Broadway, England.

Churchill war ein Mann, dem am Los des einfachen Engländers wenig gelegen war. Während des Generalstreiks im Mai 1926 war er Finanzminister und nebenbei noch Schriftleiter der British Gazette. Seine Zeitung war die einzige, die während des Streiks erscheinen konnte. Darin nannte er die Streikenden “den Feind” und verlangte dessen bedingungslose Kapitulation! Seine gewerkschafts‑ und arbeiterfeindliche Einstellung waren der Grund zu ausgedehnten Streiks und Sabotageakten auch in der Rüstungsindustrie. Sie führten schließlich zu seiner politischen Niederlage in den Wahlen von 1945. Als Finanzminister schlug er Vorschläge für die Verbesserung der englischen Schulen und Arbeiterwohnungen in den Wind. Er stellte auch weiterhin eine seiner schlechtesten Eigenschaften zur Schau. Wie in einem Brief von Lord Milner an Herbert Samuel beschrieben:

“Er war immer vorschnell in seinen Entschlüssen, ohne über die nötigen Kenntnisse zu verfügen.”

Als er nicht mehr im Amt war, stürzte Churchill sich in Schulden. Darüber hinaus wurde er noch in Verleumdungsklagen verwickelt. Seinem Privatsekretär, Martin Gilbert, gegenüber hatte er einmal geäußert:

“Gib mir die Tatsachen, und ich werde sie so verdrehen, daß sie zu meinen Argumenten passen.”

Sein Kommentar war Gegenstand von Antony Cave-Brown zwei Bänden, Bodyguard of Lies [Leibwächter, der niemals lebte].

Obwohl er Finanzminister gewesen war, war Churchill unfähig, seine eigenen Finanzen in Ordnung zu halten. Durch seine Trunksucht, seine Schulden und seine jüdische Mutter geriet er an eine Clique und wurde ihr hörig, die später unter dem Namen FOCUS bekannt wurde.

Der Präsident der Anglo‑Jüdischen Association, Leonard Montefiore, erkannte in Churchill das perfekte Sprachrohr für seine Gruppe: Ein Mann mit einem Namen, mit Beziehungen, ein Zionist und ‑ tietverschuldet. Montefiore wandte sich an Churchill wegen der Behandlung der Juden in Deutschland, obwohl die Juden in den meisten Ländern Europas von ähnlichen Mißständen betroffen waren. Churchill sagte der Guppe seine Unterstützung zu, trotz der Tatsache, daß er früher einmal eine anglo-deutsche Entente befürwortet hatte. Die anglo‑jüdische Gruppe nannte sich später Anti‑Nazi‑Council. Es war daher nicht verwunderlich, daß die Nazis und auch das deutsche Volk Anstoß an Fremden nahmen, die sich in innerdeutsche Angelegenheiten mischten.

[Bild] LEONARD G. MONTEFIORE, O .B .E .

Da der Name Anti‑Nazi vielen Engländern mißfiel, wurde er in FOCUS abgeändert. Unter Sir Henry Wickham Steed und dem neuen Namen fanden sich Menschen verschiedener politischer wie ethnischer Herkunft zusammen. Prominente neue Mitglieder waren Sir Walter Citrine vom Gewerkschaftskongreß bis zu Sir Robert Waley‑Cohen, dem Vorsitzer von Shell Oil. Im Verlauf seines Wachstums rekrutierte FOCUS Gewerkschaftsführer wie Manager, Juden und Nichtjuden, darunter Josiah Wedgewood, Sir Henry Strakosch, ein südafrikanischer Minenmillionär und Vorsitzer von Union Corporation Limited, ein in Mähren geborener Jude.

[Bild] Sir Robert Waley Cohen, KBE (8. September 1877 – 27. November 1952) war ein britischer Industrieller und prominenter Führer der Anglo-Judentums.

 Andere Mitglieder waren Dr. Chaim Weizmann, von dem wir noch weiter hören werden, David Ben Gurion, Simon Marks und Israel Moses Sief von Marks und Spencer, Lord Melchett und Nathan Laski, um nur einige zu nennen. Interessanterweise gehörte zeitweilig, obwohl kein Jude, auch Captain Basil Liddell‑Hart, der bekannte Militärschriftsteller, zu diesem Kreis.

Als Churchills Schulden weiter anwuchsen, schrieb er für viele von Juden beherrschte Zeitungen. Trotzdem konnte er seine laufenden Unkosten nicht begleichen. Seine Lage verschlimmerte sich noch weiter, als er für $ 200.000 von der amerikanischen Zeitschrift TABLOID [The Enquirer] wegen einer Diffamierung verklagt wurde. Er musste seine Familienbesitz, Chartwell anzubieten, zu verkaufen. Obige Summe und seine übrigen Schulden wurden von seinem jüdischen Freund Sir Henry Strakosch und anderen Mitgliedern von FOCUS übernommen. Er war jetzt nicht nur an diese Leute gebunden; er kam unter die Kontrolle des Anti‑Nazi-Council, und all seine Reden und Schriften waren nun folgerichtig gegen die Hitlerbedrohung und die schlechte Behandlung der Juden durch die Nazis gerichtet.

[Bild] Chartwell war der Haupt Erwachsenen Haus von Sir Winston Churchill. Churchill und seine Frau Clementine kaufte das Grundstück, befindet sich zwei Meilen südlich von Westerham, Kent, England, im Jahre 1922 (Hinweis: die Menora im Garten ist nicht wirklich da.)

Churchill bestätigte “Milner’s Beobachtung” auch während der Münchenkrise, als er eine Gelegenheit sah, den Krieg gegen Hitler zu starten. Der Ausbildungsgrad und die geographische Position der regulären englischen Armee störten ihn dabei wenig. Sein Plan war, Frankreich und die Dominien seine Schlachten schlagen zu lassen, um schließlich auch die USA in den Krieg gegen Deutschland zu hetzen. Sowohl Chamberlain wie Hore-Belisha kannten den Zustand von Englands Streitkräften, die zu einem solchen Kampf nicht in der Lage waren.

Wichtiger noch, Churchill ignorierte die Tatsache, daß Polen schon rund 10 Jahre mit der Tschechoslowakei in Streit lag. Er übersah, daß, falls Rußland der Tschechoslowakei zu Hilfe eilen möchte, es entweder in Polen oder Rumänien oder beide Staaten einfallen müsse und daß England mit beiden Ländern Verträge zu deren Unterstützung im Falle eines Angriffs hatte. Das Ergebnis wäre gewesen, daß England und Deutschland gegen Rußland stehen würden. Churchill zog ebenfalls die mögliche Handlungsweise des jüngsten Achsenpartners, Japan, nicht in Rechnung. Ferner erkannte er nicht, daß abgesehen vom allgemein starken Wunsch nach Frieden, die meisten Staaten in Stalins Kommunismus eine größere Bedrohung als die von Hitler , und die meisten Hitler als ein Bollwerk gegen Stalin sahen.

Deutschland am Ende war ich von einem Mob von Streitereien, instabile Staaten mit jeweils großen Massen von Deutschen umgeben.

Nichtsdestotrotz verurteilte Churchill Chamberlain, weil er bei der Sudetenkrise nicht zum Krieg aufrief. Aber irgendwie würde er seinen Krieg bekommen und seine Wohltäter zufriedenstellen.

Erst nach der Zerstörung von Deutschland hat er die reale Bedrohung erkennen, als er sagte, um Gen. Hastings Lionel “Pug” Ismay (erste Baron Ismay):

“Wir haben das falsche Schwein getötet!”

Sowohl die Medien und Churchill wählte Chamberlain Aktionen in München falsch darstellen.

Gegen Ende des Jahres 1938 fielen die Polen in die Provinz Teschen (Oktober 1938 Annexion des Olsagebiets, d. V.) ein, während die Deutschen ins Sudetenland einmarschierten, das zu 90% deutsch, aber durch Woodrow Wilson der Tschechoslowakei zugesprochen worden war. Der Rest der Tschechoslowakei wurde von deren Nachbarn, einschließlich Ungarn, aufgeteilt. Alfred Duff-Cooper, ein überzeugter Zionist und Mitglied im Fokus, trat als erster Lord der Admiralität aus Protest für Chamberlain nicht mit, um Krieg mit Deutschland (und möglicherweise Poland) gegangen, über Sudetenland.

[Bild] Churchill und Duff Cooper

Churchill sieht über die Schulter des Alfred Duff Cooper, der Informationsminister. Cooper, Churchills Freund und politischen Verbündeten, wurde wieder in das Kabinett nach seiner sehr öffentlichen Rücktritt als Erster Lord der Admiralität aus Protest gegen Chamberlains Politik auf die Tschechoslowakei gebracht. Später wurde er der Zusammenarbeit mit den Freien Französisch Kräfte und war Botschafter in Frankreich nach der Befreiung 1944.

Gegen Ende März [1939] fielen tschechische Truppen in Preßburg ein und setzten seinen Präsidenten, Pfarrer Tiso, ab. Die Slowakei und Ruthenien (Ruthenen = Ukrainer im Gebiet Ost-Galizien, Nordost-Ungarn und Teilen der Bukowina, d. V.) erklärten nun ihre Unabhängigkeit von dem vom Völkerbund geschaffenen Kunstgebilde, von dem David Lloyd George gesagt hatte:

“Ich kann mir keinen ärgeren künftigen Kriegsgrund vorstellen als daß das deutsche Volk von einem Mob von Kleinstaaten eingeschlossen sein soll, von denen viele aus Völkern bestehen, die in der Vergangenheit nie selbst in der Lage waren, stabile Regierungen zu stellen und die sämtlich große Minderheiten von Deutschen einschließen.”

Aus Furcht vor einem Bürgerkrieg unterzeichnete (15. März 1939), Präsident Hacha ein Abkommen, das Deutschland den Schutz von Böhmen und Mähren übertrug. Ungarische Truppen überschritten die Grenze zu Ruthenien und vertrieben die tschechischen Einheiten. Dieser Wirrwar wurde von der englischen Presse verfälscht oder unterschlagen. Was das englische Volk, die Dominien und die ganze Welt dagegen zu hören bekam, war, daß Hitler die gesamte Tschechoslowakei geschluckt hatte.

Obwohl sämtliche Mitglieder des Völkerbundes zugestanden, daß der polnische Korridor rechtmäßig zu Deutschland gehörte, verfocht Churchill hinter Chamberlains Rücken. die Forderung, daß England wegen Polen den Krieg eröffne, obwohl Austen Chamberlain, der englische Außenminister erklärt hatte, daß der polnische Korridor nicht einen englischen Unteroffizier wert sei! Doch Churchill und Focus erkannten ihre Chance, den Krieg gegen die Nazis zu starten, deren Aufwertung und Besserung des Loses deutscher Arbeiter ihnen und den meisten Westmächten ein Dorn im Auge war. Polens Souveränität war das letzte, was Churchill und FOCUS im Sinne hatten, besonders nachdem Polen sich am Einfall in die Tschechei beteiligt hatte.

Dem englischen und französischen Volk lag nichts ferner als ein neuer blutiger Krieg wegen eines abgelegenen und unbekannten Landes. Doch dank FOCUS und Churchill wurden England und Frankreich und letztlich die Welt in einen Krieg gedrängt, den niemand wollte und der nichts als Unheil bringen sollte!

[Bild] Schlagzeilen, als Großbritannien und in Kürze folgen, Frankreich, erklären Deutschland den Krieg.

Am 3. September 1939 erklärte England Deutschland den Krieg. Churchill wurde zum Ersten Lord der Admiralität ernannt. Er erließ einen Funkspruch an alle Einheiten der Royal Navy: “Winston is back”. Aber die Freude über Churchills Ernennung in der Flotte war nicht groß, zumal Churchill sich benahm, als wäre er auch zum Kriegsminister bestimmt worden. Er fing an, Befehle auch an andere Truppengattungen auszugeben. Sein erster Befehl als Erster Lord erging an die Royal Air Force, die deutschen Kriegshäfen in Wilhelmshaven und Brunsbüttel anzugreifen.

Von 29 Blenheim‑ und Wellingtonbombern verfehlten zehn das Ziel und kehrten um. Eine der Maschinen bombardierte Esbjerg, eine Stadt in Dänemark ca. 170 km vom Angriffsziel entfernt. Drei Maschinen griffen eigene Schiffe in der Nordsee an, sieben wurden von der Flak abgeschossen. Nur acht Bomber fanden das Ziel und griffen das Schlachtschiff Scheer mit drei nicht scharf gemachten Bomben an, ohne Schaden. für das Schiff. Der Kreuzer Emden erhielt einige Treffer. Der einzig wirkliche Schaden entstand durch den Absturz einer der Bomber auf den Kreuzer. Die Treffsicherheit der RAF verbesserte sich nur unerheblich während der nächsten zwei Jahre.

MAJOR MERVYN F. THURGOOD ist Autor Um die Feinde und die Herausgeber der ein Symposium zu dem Zweiten Weltkrieg zu bestrafen. Er ist auch Autor eines viel längere Version dieses Artikels, dass bastard Chill berechtigt, geboren 1923 in British Columbia, serviert Thurgood mit dem Seaforth Highlanders kanadische Infanterie-Regiment.

Winnie the Kriegsverbrecher:

Eine Übersicht über die Gräueltaten von Churchill Bestel

Winston Churchill geplant und Kriegsverbrechen begangen, Wegwerfen die Regeln der “zivilisierten” Kriegsführung, die im Laufe der Jahrhunderte in der westlichen Welt entwickelt worden war.

Auf der Zweiten Quebec-Konferenz (16. September 1944), Churchill und Kollegen Monster Franklin D. Roosevelt nahm die finsteren Morgenthau-Plan, der Dutzende von Millionen von Deutschen getötet worden wäre, was den Deutschen eine erschreckende Bild davon, was “bedingungslose Kapitulation” würde bedeuten, in der Praxis. Deutschen aus Ostpreußen, Oberschlesien und alle westlichen Deutschland beraubt werden, und der Rest würde in separate nördlichen und südlichen Staaten aufgeteilt werden.

Churchill war überzeugt, der Plan würde;

“Britain vor dem Bankrott zu retten, indem sie einen gefährlichen Konkurrenten.”

Die Schätzung, dass Millionen sofort beim Einatmen sterben, und weitere Millionen würden später zu erliegen, in Betracht gezogen Chill fallen Zehntausende von Anthrax-Bomben auf die Zivilbevölkerung und bestellte eine detaillierte Planung für einen chemischen Angriff auf sechs deutschen Großstädten.

Seine größte Kriegsverbrechen beteiligt den Teppich-Bombardierung deutscher Städte, die 600.000 Zivilisten getötet und rund 800.000 verletzt. [Hinweis: rund 40.000 Briten während der Blitz getötet] Churchill angelogen des House of Commons und der Öffentlichkeit und behauptete, nur militärische und Industrieanlagen wurden gezielt, während das eigentliche Ziel war es, so viele Zivilisten wie möglich zu töten.

Tausend Jahre alten Stadtkultur wurde vernichtet, als große Städte, in den Annalen der Wissenschaft und Kunst berühmt wurden, um schwelende Trümmer. Churchill und Roosevelt waren zerstört mehr als Attila.

Dresden wurde mit Flüchtlingen um ihr Leben rennen von der Roten Armee aufgefüllt. Der Krieg war praktisch über. Aber für drei Tage und Nächte, vom 13 bis 15 Februar 1945 regnete britischen Bomben auf den wehrlosen Stadt, tötete 135.000 Menschen oder mehr.

Die Bombardierung von Deutschland und Tötung von Zivilisten weiterhin erst Mitte April 1945 nur zu stoppen, weil es nicht mehr links, um Ziele bombardiert werden.

— JOHN TIFFANY

———————————-

Fußnoten

[1] Hier ist ein kleiner “heroischen” wegen Churchills “Flucht” aus der Buren aus den Seiten 44 genommen – 45 von  Hidden History — The Secret Origins of the First World War [Hidden History – Die geheimen Anfänge des Ersten Weltkrieges] von Gerry Docherty und Jim Macgregor:

Winston Churchill hatte in Südafrika als Kriegsberichterstatter für die konservative Morning Post im Jahr 1899 übergeben und landete in einem Boer Gefangenenkriegsgefangenenlager. Die Geschichte, und es wurde weitgehend seine, leitet sich von Churchills Autobiographie. [57] Nach eigenen Angaben eine Aufklärungsmission an Bord eines gepanzerten Zug wurde er am 15. November 1899 und wurde zusammen mit rund 60 britische Offiziere und Soldaten gefangen genommen, als die Buren angegriffen. Getroffen, um Pretoria, sie in einer alten Schule mit einem zehn Meter hohen Wellblechwand umgeben abgehalten wurden. Churchill gab einen Bericht über die Entgleisung und seine Folgemaßnahmen bei der Herstellung einer “waghalsige Flucht” zu anderen Journalisten. The Daily Telegraph gedruckt eine Depesche von Reuters titelte “Mr. Churchill Mut und Coolness als herrliche beschrieben”. Der Held selbst erstellt.

Was lief nicht gemeldet war, dass nach seiner Internierung Churchill selbst als Nicht-Kombattant der Begründung, dass er Journalist war Kleinanzeigen wollte. Er nutzte seine Verbindungen, um einen Bettelbrief an Alfred Milner am 24. November senden fordern, dass er in einer Liste von Gefangenen einbezogen werden, um freigegeben und sagte, dass er seine Mutter gebeten hatte, um ihn durch Milner zu schreiben. [58] Er legte auch Anfragen nach seiner Freilassung am 26. November und 8. Dezember, [59] und versprach, dass:

“wenn ich entlassen werde ich keine Bewährung, die ich nicht kann erforderlich, um gegen die republikanischen Kräfte dienen zu geben”. [60]

Am 12. Dezember einigten sich die Boer commander-in-chief, ihn freizulassen, und einige Zeit danach Chill wurde nie wieder im Lager gesehen.

Bei seiner Ankunft in der nachfolgenden portugiesischen Hafen von Lourenco Marques Chill weitergeleitet ein fantastisches Abenteuer. Er behauptete, durch die Umzäunung unter den Augen der Wachen Boer geschnitten haben und machte einen gewundenen Weg in die Freiheit. Seine “waghalsige Flucht” wurde legendär. Auf eigene Faust und nicht in der Lage, entweder Afrikaans oder Kaffir sprechen, aber durch die überraschend große Summe von £ 75 (im Wert von über £ 6.000 in der heutigen Währung) gestärkt, machte er die 250-Meile Reise in den sicheren Hafen von Lourenco Marques. Seine Odyssee war würdig jeder griechischen Helden des antiken Mythos. Crossing gefährliche Terrain und Ausweichen der schwer bewaffneten Boer Kommandos, die die Jagd auf ihn, schließlich kam er zu einer Eisenbahnstrecke und sprang auf einen Zug, wie es donnerte vorbei. Dies muss mit erheblichen Schwierigkeiten wurden “zum Teil wegen seiner Schulter ausgerenkt” erreicht haben,. [61]

In einer anderen kriecherisch Konto wird Churchill gesagt haben:

“stürzte sich auf einen Lastwagen, und nach einem qualvollen Kampf gelang hockend auf den Kupplungen zwischen zwei Wagen zu bleiben”. [62]

Innerhalb kürzester Zeit jedoch zwang ihn Durst auf der Suche nach Wasser Sprung aus. Kriecht auf dem Bauch, schleppte er sich durch Sümpfe, bevor er über den Boer Township von Witbank. Er war unglaublich glücklich, an der Tür des “die einzige Familie, für 20 Meilen, wo er nicht übergeben worden” klopfen. [63] Nach drei Tagen im Versteck, die angeblich in der Gesellschaft von Ratten ab einem Bergwerksschacht, bekam er an Bord einer anderen Eisenbahnwagen und selbst unter Wollballen versteckt. Es war der Zug nach Delagoabai, Freiheit und “einer Flamme der Triumph”. [64] Das ist, wie Churchill seine Geschichte erzählte.

Kontroverse hing um sein Konto wie die Ratten in seiner Bergwerksschacht. Es gab Vorwürfe, dass er egoistisch und schlecht, indem Sie auf eigene Faust und die Schaffung einer solchen selbstsüchtigen Werbung benommen hatte. Glück und entschlossen Gerichtsverfahren jedoch scheinen solche Vorbehalte entfernt haben. Britische Offiziere im Lager, Captain Haldane, Sergeant Brockie und Lieutenants le Mesurier und Frankland fühlte er ihre Chancen der Freiheit ruiniert. Haldanes Ansprüche wurden durch seine Weigerung, vor Gericht auf Churchills Namen in einer Verleumdungsklage gegen Blackwoods Magazine im Jahr 1912. Trotz dieser Gegenteil Stimmen erscheinen gestärkt, seine “waghalsige Flucht” gedreht Chill in eine öffentliche Held und begabt ihm einen konservativen Sitz für Oldham in der Parlamentswahlen nur ein paar Monate später.

___________________________

Versionsgeschichte & Hinweise

Version 1: Veröffentlicht 20. Juli 2015

__________________

Aufzeichnungen

* Google Translate hat für einige Teile des Dokumentes verwendet. Wenn Leser finden keine wesentlichen Fehler bitte lassen Sie mich in den Kommentaren meines Blogs wissen.

* Bilder nicht in das Originaldokument.

* Fußnoten sind nicht in dem Originaldokument.

* Titelbild ist nicht Teil des ursprünglichen Dokuments.

Notes

* Google Translate has been used for some parts of this document. If readers find any significant errors please let me know in the comments section of my blog.

* Images not in the original document.

* Footnotes are not in the original document.

* Cover image is not part of the original document.

__________________

Knowledge is Power in Our Struggle for Racial Survival

(Information that should be shared with as many of our people as possible — do your part to counter Jewish control of the mainstream media — pass it on and spread the word) … Val Koinen at KOINEN’S CORNER

======================================

Versionsgeschichte

Version 2: Jun 3, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 1: Veröffentlicht 20. Juli 2015

[Click to enlarge]

That Blackguard

Winston Churchill

The Barnes Review — 2012 January – February

ILLUSTRATION: RICHARD COLE I DRAWN & QUARTERED/NEWSCOM

& KATANA

THE ARTICLE IS EXCERPTED FROM A BOOKLET boldly entitled That Bastard Churchill, by patriotic writer Maj. M.E Thurgood. It is a blistering expose of Winston Churchill’s lack of humanity and chivalry in war, his bad temper and bizarre habits, and his insatiable lust for alcohol — washed down with a good dose of Christian blood. Decades of propaganda have millions of people believing Churchill was some kind of an English savior when, in fact, he was the architect of the destruction of the British empire.

By MAJOR MERVYN F. THURGOOD

[Image] A young Winston Churchill (1881).

Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born in 1874, son of Lord Randolph Churchill, the third son of the duke of Marlborough. Winston Churchill was educated at Harrow and after three attempts gained entrance to Sandhurst Military College. His forte was English, but he was innumerate and graduated near the foot of his class.

[Image] Winston Churchill entered Sandhurst in 1893 as a cavalry cadet.

While at Sandhurst, he was accused of committing an act of gross immorality of the “Oscar Wilde” type. Churchill brought suit against the father of one of the cadets who accused him, A. C. Bruce-Pryce. The charges were withdrawn, and Churchill received 400 pounds in damages. No sooner was that incident over than Churchill became involved in a steeplechase fraud, and he and his cohorts became the target of a tabloid called Truth.

[Image] December 1894 at the age of 20, Winston left Sandhurst as a cavalry officer in the 4th Hussars.

In 1895, Churchill and a friend, Reginald Barnes, went to Cuba and spent some six weeks with the Spanish forces, sending daily reports to the Daily Graphic. 

[Image] The Graphic was a British weekly illustrated newspaper, first published on 4 December 1869 by William Luson Thomas’s company Illustrated Newspapers Limited.

In 1895, Churchill, and fellow officer Reginald Barnes, travelled to Cuba to observe the Spanish fight the Cuban guerrillas; he had obtained a commission to write about the conflict from the Daily Graphic.

Churchill become more interested in being a writer than a soldier but realized that the army would be a good foundation for political life and joined the Malakand Field Force on the North West Frontier and on occasion enjoined in skirmishes with Afridis, who, despite Churchill’s reports of heavy fighting, only threw stones at the British. Churchill’s next military exploit was in 1898 at Omdurman with the 21st Lancers under Kitchener, advancing on Khartoum. Here again his military energies were directed to writing for the Times and the Morning Post.

Lord Kitchener was to say of him that he had grit enough but only used the army as a convenience and could secure postings that would suit his purpose through his mother. He served in South Africa for part of a year, from 1899 to 1900, as a war correspondent, and his claim to fame was that he had been taken prisoner and had escaped. [1]

[Image] Winston Churchill (right with hands behind his back). Picture taken three days after his capture by the Boers.

[Image] When Churchill escaped from the PoW camp, a wanted poster was issued, offering £25 (dead or alive) for his recapture.

He was elected MP for Oldham as a Conservative in 1900 at the age of 26, but joined the Liberals in 1904 and attained cabinet rank: as president of the Board of Trade in 1908. He became home secretary in 1910 and was made first lord of the Admiralty in 1911. Which of course, brings to mind Gilbert and Sullivan’s HMS Pinafore,:

“Stick close to your desk and never go to sea, and you may be the leader of the queen’s na-vee!”

 

[Image] Winston Churchill rather enjoyed war.

In July 1914, as Britain prepared for the oncoming catastrophe, Churchill, at the time the First Lord of the Admiralty, wrote to his wife;

‘I am interested, geared up and happy. Is it not horrible to be built like that?’

And in 1916, in a letter to David Lloyd George’s daughter, Churchill admitted:

“I think a curse should rest on me — because I love this war. I know it’s smashing and shattering the lives of thousands every moment, and yet, I can’t help it, I enjoy every second of it’.

In his capacity as first lord of the Admiralty, he devised a plan to bring support to the Russians by opening up the Dardanelles by the army, using mostly colonials, the ANZACs. The attack on Gallipoli was a disaster, and it was here that Churchill blotted his copybook. But far deeper and more sinister was his role in the sinking of the Lusitania on May 8, 1915.

Churchill was linked with the then-undersecretary of the U.S. Navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, in a conspiracy to bring America into the war by sinking the Cunard liner out of New York. Twice the German Embassy in New York issued warnings in the U.S. press against sailing on the ill-fated liner, which, the Germans claimed was carrying contraband and munitions and was being converted to an armed merchant ship. It was also known that it would be carrying about one company of soldiers, field guns and ammunition.

[Image] RMS LUSITANIA, (named after the old Roman Empire’s name for the province which is now called Portugal). RMS Lusitania was a British ocean liner, holder of the Blue Riband and briefly the world’s biggest ship. She was launched by the Cunard Line in 1907, at a time of fierce competition for the North Atlantic trade. In 1915 she was hit by one torpedo by a German U-boat. Subsequently the munitions the ship was secretly carrying exploded causing the deaths of 1,198 passengers and crew.

[Image] (Left) The official warning issued by the Imperial German Embassy about travelling on Lusitania.

(Right) A poster urging Irishmen to avenge the sinking of the Lusitania.

On 17 April 1915, Lusitania left Liverpool on her 201st transatlantic voyage, arriving in New York on 24 April. A group of German–Americans, hoping to avoid controversy if Lusitania were attacked by a U-boat, discussed their concerns with a representative of the German Embassy. The embassy decided to warn passengers before her next crossing not to sail aboard Lusitania. The Imperial German Embassy placed a warning advertisement in 50 American newspapers, including those in New York:

NOTICE!

TRAVELLERS intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that, in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travellers sailing in the war zone on the ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk.

IMPERIAL GERMAN EMBASSY

Washington, D.C., April 22, 1915.

————————————————————-

It was normal procedure for all such liners to be escorted from the south coast of Ireland to Liverpool by at least one light cruiser and two destroyers. On the 6th of May, Capt. W.T. Turner received warning of submarines along the south coast of Ireland, and he expected to be diverted around the north coast of Ireland. The first lord of the Admiralty didn’t normally concern himself with such things, but Churchill issued orders that the Lusitania was not to be escorted to Liverpool. He then left for Paris and signed himself in at his hotel as Mr. L. Spencer.

[Image] Commander William Thomas Turner (1856 – 1933) was the captain of the Lusitania when it sunk in May 1915. Pictured here aboard the Aquitania, 1914.

At 2:12 pm on May 8 Capt. [Walther] Schwieger, commanding the submarine U-20, fired his last torpedo into the bow of the Lusitania. He witnessed two distinct explosions, as did others.

[Image] Walther Schwieger (7 April 1885, Berlin – 5 September 1917, North Sea) was an officer of the Imperial German Navy (Kaiserliche Marine) and a U-boat commander during World War I, noted for his role in the sinking of the RMS Lusitania.

The Lusitania was unsinkable and had double hulls, but it went down in 20 minutes. The inquiry stated that the second explosion came from coal dust, but recent investigations indicate that there would be little coal dust, and it was very unlikely it would be in the forward hold, and that the second explosion could only have come from several tons of explosive carried in the forward hold.

By 2:33 pm the Lusitania was gone, taking with her 1,198 of her passengers and crew including 171 influential Americans. The liner went down 10 miles off Kinsale Head within sight of Queenstown (Ireland). But patrol boats remained in the harbor until it was too late to help.

The official inquiry skirted many issues, including the role played by Churchill and possibly Roosevelt. Churchill always thought that he had a friend in Roosevelt, who in fact despised the man and his “decadent” empire.

True to Kitchener’s predictions, Churchill used the army as a convenience and enlisted as a major in the Queen’s Own Oxfordshire Hussars on the 18th of November, 1915. On his arrival in France he was taken to Sir John French, who offered him a promotion to brigadier general, to command a brigade. This did not delight the ears of Prime Minister Asquith, and French decided to send Churchill to the 2nd Battalion Grenadier Guards for experience in the trenches. Churchill only spent five days with the guards. On his leaving, the colonel would comment:

“We don’t want to be in any way inhospitable, but I think it only right to say that your coming was not a matter in which we were given any choice.”

 

[Image] Churchill, centre, in army uniform with colleagues.

Churchill meandered from headquarters to headquarters, looking for a command, hoping to eventually command a brigade. His desire to command would manifest itself with sad results in World War II. On New Year’s Day, 1916, he was given command of the 6th Bn. Royal Scots Fusiliers. During his three and one-half months in command, his unit was in no threat, and he spent most of his time working on his parliamentary duties. He saw no more of the trenches after the 6th of May 1916, and on the 22nd of July 1917, he became minister of munitions. Again the army had served him well.

Churchill always thought that he had a friend in Roosevelt, who in fact despised the man and his “decadent” empire.

Churchill’s political fortunes waxed and waned through the war, and his attempts to support the white Russians received no support from the trench weary soldiers who were now becoming disenchanted with the aristocracy of all countries. In 1922, he became colonial secretary in the Middle East and inspired by his American mother’s Jewish background, played a major role in supporting the Balfour Declaration that betrayed Britain’s Arab allies and allowed massive immigration of Jews into Palestine. He wrote Zionism is an “inspiring movement,” saying:

“If, as may well happen, there should be created, in our lifetime, by the banks of the Jordan, a Jewish state under protection of the British crown, which might comprise 3 to 4 million Jews, an event will have occurred in the history of the world which, from every point of view, would be beneficial and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British empire.”

He would live to see Jewish immigration into Palestine, and on July 22, 1946, the Jewish Stern Gang blew up the King David Hotel, the headquarters of the 6th Airborne Division, killing 91 men who had jumped into Normandy to free the Jewish people.

[Image] July 2, 1946: The King David Hotel in Jerusalem was bombed by jews, killing 91 people.  Menachem Begin planned the destruction of the King David Hotel and the massacre of Deir Yassin. Ex-prime minister, Shamir, was originally a member of the Jewish terrorist gang called Irgun, which was headed by none other than Menachem Begin. Shamir later moved over to the even more radical “Stern Gang,” which committed many vicious atrocities.

On the March 27, Churchill tried to bribe the Emir Abdulla to allow the Jews to immigrate into Palestine but he was warned by Abdulla that the aim of the Zionists was to establish a Jewish state in Palestine and gradually control the entire world, and the British might have to call on Germany or Russia for some help.

As colonial secretary, Churchill got his first indication that the colonies were coming of age and would no longer be blindly subservient to Britain’s call. This he would ignore. First Canada asked Churchill if his aim was to give the Jews control of the government in Palestine. To this Churchill replied that if they become the majority, as he wished, naturally they would take it over. In 1922, Britain, primarily through Churchill, became involved with Turkey over the Gallipoli Peninsula and the Dardanelles. On Sept. 9, the Turks entered Smyrna, and Greek rule in Asia Minor came to an end. The 1,000 British troops on the Asiatic side of the Dardanelles were to withdraw to the Gallipoli Peninsula from Canakkale but later remained by orders from the local commander.

Both Lloyd George and Churchill supported the decision to keep the Turks out of Europe. Churchill sent a telegram to all the dominion governments to “dispatch military reinforcements.”

[Image]  Lloyd George and Churchill (1922)

The dominions varied in acceptance of Churchill’s demand. Newfoundland and New Zealand offered their support, but both the Canadian and Australian governments were furious at not even being consulted before the request was made public, and at the request itself. The Australian prime minister [Billy Hughes] telegraphed London, saying:

“In a good cause we are prepared to venture our all, in a bad one, not a single man!”

Canada would send no troops at all. Churchill never got the true implications of these refusals and later as prime minister, still felt that he had absolute command over his “colonial troops.”

[Image] General Strike, May 1956 at Stratford Broadway.

Churchill again surfaced as one who cared little for the common Englishman. It was during the general strike of May 1926, when he was chancellor of the Exchequer (minister of finance), and editor of the British Gazette. It was only his paper that appeared on the streets during the strike, in which he referred to the strikers as the enemy and demanded unconditional surrender. That same demand would prolong the war with Germany and his anti-union, anti-labor attitude would be the basis for escalating strikes and sabotage in war industries and turn him out of office in the 1945 elections. Again as chancellor of the Exchequer he turned down proposals for better schools and housing for the people Britain. He would continue to display one of his worst qualities: as described by Lord Milner in a letter to Herbert Samuel:

“He was too apt to make up his mind without sufficient knowledge.”

Out of office Churchill continued to run up debts, and, because of Milner’s observation, he became involved in libel suits. Churchill had commented to his personal secretary, Martin Gilbert [Jewish]:

“Give me the facts, and I will twist them the way I want, to suit my argument.”

His comment was the subject of Antony Cave-Brown’s two volumes, Bodyguard of Lies.

Though he had been minister of finance, Churchill could not control his own personal finances and was always in debt. It was through his drinking, debt and his Jewish mother that he became involved and beholden to a group that would eventually become known as Focus.

It first began with the president of the Anglo-Jewish Association, Leonard Montefiore, who found in Churchill a perfect spokesman for his association, a man well known, with connections, a Zionist and in debt. Montefiore approached Churchill with the plight of the Jews in Germany the Jews shared the same “plight” in nearly all countries in Europe. Churchill agreed to support the association despite the fact that Churchill had previously pushed for an Anglo German Entente. The Anglo-Jewish Association later became known as the Anti-Nazi Council. So it was not surprising that both the members of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party (the Nazis) and the German people, as a whole, took umbrage with foreigners of a certain ethnic background, interfering in strictly domestic German affairs.

[Image] LEONARD G. MONTEFIORE, O .B .E .

The name “Anti-Nazi Council” became offensive to many Britons, and the name was changed to “The Focus” under Sir Henry Wickham Steed. The change of name brought many people of different political as well as ethnic cultures together. Some of the new members were Sir Walter Citrine of the Trades Union Congress up to Sir Robert Waley-Cohen, the chairman of Shell Oil. As Focus grew it recruited both labor and management, Jew and non-Jew, including Josiah Wedgewood, Sir Henry Strakosch, a South African mining multimillionaire and chairman of Union Corp. Ltd. and a Jew, born in Moravia.

[Image] Sir Robert Waley Cohen, KBE (8 September 1877 – 27 November 1952) was a British industrialist and prominent leader of Anglo-Jewry.

Other members were Dr. Chaim Weizmann, of whom we will hear much more, David Ben Guirion, Simon Marks and Israel Moses Sief of Marks and Spencer, Lord Melchett and Nathan Laski — to mention a few. It is of interest to note that Capt. Basil Liddel-Hart, the noted strategist and military writer, was a member, though he was not a Jew.

As Churchill’s debts grew, he wrote for many Jewish-dominated newspapers but couldn’t cover his living expenses. To make matters worse, he was sued for libel by the American tabloid The Enquirer for $200,000. He now put up the family estate “Chartwell” for sale. His debts and libel problem were met by his Jewish friend Sir Henry Strakosch and other members of Focus. He was now not only beholden to, but also under the control of this Anti-Nazi Council and now all his speeches and writings were directed against the threat of Hitler and the ill treatment of the Jews by the Nazis.

[Image] Chartwell was the principal adult home of Sir Winston Churchill. Churchill and his wife Clementine bought the property, located two miles south of Westerham, Kent, England, in 1922. (Note: the menorah in the garden is not really there.)

Once again Churchill displayed “Milner’s observation” during the Munich Crisis, where he saw an opportunity to go to war with Adolf Hitler. He gave little thought to the state of training and the geographic location of the British Regular Army, and his only plan was to bring France and the dominions into the war to fight the land battles and eventually bring the United States into war with Germany. Both Chamberlain and Sir Leslie Hore-Belisha knew the true state of readiness of Britain’s armed forces, which were in no condition to fight.

But more important, Churchill gave little thought to the fact that Poland had been at war with Czechoslovakia for some 10 years over the Teschen province. He overlooked the fact that if Russia were to come to the aid of Czechoslovakia, it would have to invade either Poland or Romania, or both, and that Britain had treaties with both countries if they were attacked. The result of which would be that Britain and Germany would be fighting Russia, and Churchill did not consider the possible actions of the new Axis partner, Japan. Nor did he see that, apart from a strong desire for peace, most countries saw Hitler as a bulwark against Stalin.

Germany ended up being surrounded by a mob of squabbling, unstable states with each containing large masses of Germans.

But still Churchill condemned Chamberlain for not going to war with Hitler over the Sudetenland. Only after the destruction of Germany did he realize the real threat when he commented to Gen. Hastings Lionel “Pug” Ismay (first baron Ismay):

“We’ve killed the wrong pig!”

But somehow Winnie would get his war and satisfy his benefactors.

Both the media and Churchill chose to misrepresent Chamberlain’s actions at Munich. But by the end of September 1938, the Poles had invaded Teschen, as the Germans marched into Sudetenland, which was some 90% German ethnically and a product of Woodrow Wilson. The rest of Czechoslovakia was dissected by her neighbors, including Hungary. Alfred Duff-Cooper, a staunch Zionist and member of Focus, resigned as first lord of the Admiralty in protest for Chamberlain not having gone to war with Germany (and possibly Poland), over Sudetenland.

[Image] Churchill and Duff Cooper

Churchill looks over the shoulder of Alfred Duff Cooper, the Minister of Information. Cooper, Churchill’s friend and political ally, was brought back into the Cabinet after his very public resignation as First Lord of the Admiralty in protest at Chamberlain’s policy on Czechoslovakia. He later became the liaison with the Free French forces and was Ambassador to France following the liberation in 1944.

By the end of March 1939, Czech troops marched into Bratislava, Slovakia and deposed the president, Father Jozef Tiso, while Slovakia and Ruthenia declared their independence from the state created by the League of Nations and about which David Lloyd George was to say:

“I cannot conceive any greater cause of a future war than that the German people should be surrounded by a mob of small states, many of them consisting of peoples who have never previously set up stable governments by themselves, but each of them containing large masses of Germans.”

Through fear of civil war, President of the Second Czechoslovakian Republic Dr. Emil Hacha signed an agreement (March 15, 1939) making a German Protectorate of Moravia and Bohemia. Hungarian troops crossed the Ruthenian border, driving out the Czech units. This mess was played down by the British media as well as Germany’s offer of Slovakia to Poland, for the Port of Danzig.

The news that the people of Britain, the dominions and in fact all the world heard was that Hitler had occupied all of Czechoslovakia.

Though all members of the League of Nations agreed that the Polish Corridor rightly belonged to Germany, Churchill would organize a mutiny within Neville Chamberlain’s caucus to demand that Britain go to war over Poland, even though Austen Chamberlain, the British foreign secretary, had said that the Polish corridor was not worth one British corporal. But Churchill and Focus saw it as a chance to destroy Hitler. Polish independence was the last thing on their minds, especially after Poland had invaded Czechoslovakia, for which Churchill demanded war.

The last thing the people of Britain and France wanted was another bloodbath over some distant and unknown land. But through Focus and Churchill, both Britain and France and later the world, would be dragged into a war nobody wanted and that would solve nothing.

[Image] Newspaper headlines when Britain and soon to follow, France, declare war on Germany.

On Sept. 3, 1939, Britain declared war on Germany, and Churchill was made first lord of the Admiralty. He arranged to have a signal flashed to all ships in the Royal Navy, “Winston is Back.” But there was no joy throughout the fleet at Churchill’s appointment. Churchill behaved as though he had been made “secretary of state for war” and began issuing orders to the other armed services. His first act as first lord was to issue orders to the Royal Air Force to attack the German naval bases at Wilhemshaven and Brunsbuttel.

Here is the record; 29 Blenheims and Wellingtons attacked; 10 bombers failed to find their targets and returned to base; one plane bombed Esbjerg, a town in Denmark some 110 miles from their target, three planes attacked their own “men-of-war” in the North Sea; seven were shot down by German flak; eight bombers found their targets and attacked the battleship Von Scheer with three unprimed bombs, doing no damage. They scored several hits on the cruiser Emden, the only real damage being done when a plane crashed on the ship. The marksmanship of the RAF improved very little over the next two years.

———————————-

MAJ. MERVYN F. THURGOOD is the author of To Punish the Hostiles and the editor of A Symposium on World War II. He is also author of a much longer version of this article entitled That Bastard Churchill, Born in 1923 in British Columbia, Thurgood served with the Seaforth Highlanders Canadian infantry regiment.

Winnie the War Criminal:

A Synopsis of Atrocities Ordered by Mr. Churchill

Winston Churchill planned and committed war crimes, trashing the rules of “civilized” warfare that had been developed over the centuries in the Western world.

At the Second Quebec Conference (September 16, 1944), Churchill and fellow monster Franklin D. Roosevelt adopted the sinister Morgenthau Plan, which would have killed tens of millions of Germans, giving the Germans a terrifying picture of what “unconditional surrender” would mean in practice. Germans would be robbed of East Prussia, Upper Silesia and all of western Germany, and the remainder would be split into separate northern and southern nations.

Churchill was convinced the plan would;

“save Britain from bankruptcy by eliminating a dangerous competitor.”

Estimating that millions would die immediately by inhalation, and millions more would succumb later, Churchill contemplated dropping tens of thousands of anthrax bombs on the civilian population and ordered detailed planning for a chemical attack on six major German cities.

His greatest war crimes involved the carpet-bombing of German cities that killed 600,000 civilians and left some 800,000 injured. [Note: approximately 40,000 British were killed during The Blitz] Churchill lied to the House of Commons and the public, claiming only military and industrial installations were targeted, whereas the real aim was to kill as many civilians as possible.

A thousand-year-old urban culture was annihilated, as great cities, famed in the annals of science and art, were reduced to smoldering ruins. Churchill and Roosevelt were destroying more than Attila the Hun.

Dresden was filled with refugees running for their lives from the Red Army. The war was practically over. But for three days and nights, from February 13 to 15, 1945, British bombs rained down on the defenseless city, killing 135,000 people or more.

The bombing of Germany and killing of civilians continued as late as the middle of April 1945, only stopping because there were no more targets left to be bombed.

— JOHN TIFFANY

———————————-

Footnotes

[1] Here is a less “heroic” account of Churchill’s “escape” from the Boers  taken from pages 44 – 46 of Hidden History — The Secret Origins of the First World War by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor:

Winston Churchill had been sent to South Africa as a war correspondent for the conservative Morning Post in 1899 and ended up in a Boer prisoner-of-war camp. The story, and it was largely his, derives from Churchill’s autobiography. [57] According to his own account, he joined a reconnaissance mission aboard an armoured train on 15 November 1899 and was captured along with around 60 British officers and men when the Boers attacked it. Taken to Pretoria, they were held in an old school surrounded by a ten-foot-high corrugated-iron wall. Churchill gave an account of the derailment and his subsequent action in making a ‘daring escape‘ to other journalists. The Daily Telegraph printed a dispatch from Reuters headlined ‘Mr Churchill’s bravery and coolness is described as magnificent‘. The hero created himself.

What went unreported was that following his internment Churchill wanted himself classified as a non-combatant on the grounds that he was a journalist. He used his connections to send a begging letter to Alfred Milner on 24 November asking that he be included in a list of prisoners to be released and said that he had asked his mother to write to him through Milner. [58] He also submitted requests for his release on 26 November and 8 December, [59] and promised that ‘if I am released I will give any parole that I may be required not to serve against the Republican forces‘. [60] On 12 December, the Boer commander-in-chief agreed to release him, and some time thereafter Churchill was never seen again in the camp.

On his subsequent arrival in the Portuguese port of Lourenco Marques Churchill relayed an amazing adventure. He claimed to have cut through the fencing under the noses of the Boer guards and made a tortuous journey to freedom. His ‘daring escape‘ became the stuff of legend. On his own and unable to speak either Afrikaans or Kaffir, but bolstered by the surprisingly large sum of £75 (worth over £6,000 in today’s currency), he made the 250-mile journey to the safe haven of Lourenco Marques. His odyssey was worthy of any Greek hero of ancient myth. Crossing dangerous terrain and dodging the heavily armed Boer commandos who were out hunting for him, he eventually came to a railway track and leapt onto a train as it thundered past. This must have been accomplished with considerable difficulty, ‘partly because of his dislocated shoulder‘. [61]

In another fawning account, Churchill is said to have ‘hurled himself upon a truck, and after an agonising struggle managed to remain crouching on the couplings between two wagons‘. [62] Within a very short time, however, thirst forced him to leap off in search of water. Crawling on his belly, he dragged himself through swamps before coming across the Boer township of Witbank. He was unbelievably fortunate to knock on the door of ‘the only family for twenty miles where he would not have been handed over‘. [63] After three days in hiding, allegedly in the company of rats down a mineshaft, he got aboard another railway truck and concealed himself under bales of wool. It was the train to Delagoa Bay, freedom and ‘a blaze of triumph‘. [64] That is how Churchill told his story.

Controversy hung around his account like the rats in his mineshaft. There were accusations that he had behaved selfishly and badly by leaving on his own and creating such self-seeking publicity. Fortune and determined legal proceedings, however, seem to have removed such reservations. British officers in the camp, Captain Haldane, Sergeant Brockie, and Lieutenants le Mesurier and Frankland felt he had ruined their chances of freedom. Haldane’s claims were strengthened by his refusal to appear in court on Churchill’s behalf in a libel case against Blackwood’s Magazine in 1912. Despite these contrary voices, his ‘daring escape‘ turned Churchill into a public hero and gifted him a Conservative seat for Oldham in the parliamentary elections just a few months later.

___________________________

PDF Version History & Notes

Version 4: Jul 19, 2015 — Added footnote on Churchill’s “escape” from the Boers.

Version 3: Jul 18, 2015 — cartoon image updated

Version 2: Jul 18, 2015 — 2 images updated

Version 1: Published Jul 18, 2015

__________________

Notes

* Images not in the original document.

* Footnotes are not in the original document.

* Cover image is not part of the original document.

__________________

Knowledge is Power in Our Struggle for Racial Survival

(Information that should be shared with as many of our people as possible — do your part to counter Jewish control of the mainstream media — pass it on and spread the word) … Val Koinen at 

KOINEN’S CORNER

======================================

[Part 6]

“I am deeply stirred by the word which Ulrich Hutten wrote the last time he seized his pen: — Germany.”

ADOLF HITLER

January 30th, 1937

The Case for Germany 

A Study of Modern Germany 

by

A. P. Laurie

M. A. Cantab., D. Sc., LL. D. Edin., F. C. S., F. R. S. E.

With a Preface by Admiral Sir Barry Domvile

K. B. E., C. B., C. M. G.

Berlin W 15

Internationaler Verlag

1939

FIRST EDITION ………… JUNE 1939

SECOND EDITION ……. JULY 1939

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED IN GERMANY

DEDICATION

It is with admiration and gratitude for the great work he has done for the German people that I dedicate this book to the Fuhrer.

A. P. L.

TO THE READER

There are two sides to every question. You have read one side in our Press for six years.

This book gives the other side.

A. P. L.

PREFACE

It is a great pleasure to me to introduce the public to Dr. Laurie’s valuable book on modern Germany. He is best known to the world as a brilliant scientist, but he has found time in the intervals of his work to pursue with ardour the task upon which every sensible member of the British and German races should be engaged — namely the establishment of good relations and a better understanding between these two great nations.

Dr Laurie knows full well that this friendship is the keystone to peace in Europe — nay, in the whole world.

He is one of the small group who founded the Association known as “The Link”, whose sole aim is to get Britons and Germans to know and understand one another better. He is one of the most zealous workers in this good cause in the country.

He writes of the National Socialist movement with knowledge and great sympathy.

The particular value of this book lies in the fact that it is written by a foreigner, who cannot be accused of patriotic excess in his interpretation of the great work done by Herr Hitler and his associates. I recommend this volume with confidence to all people who are genuinely impressed with the desire to understand one of the greatest — and most bloodless — revolutions in history.

BARRY DOMVILE

Robin’s Tree

8th May 1939.

“As we advance in our social knowledge, we shall endeavour to make our governments paternal as well as judicial; that is, to establish such laws and authorities as may at once direct us in our occupations, protect us against our follies, and visit us in our distresses; a government which shall repress dishonesty, as now it punishes theft; which shall show how the discipline of the masses may be brought to aid the toils of peace, as the discipline of the masses has hitherto knit the sinews of battle; a government which shall have its soldiers of the ploughshare as well as its soldiers of the sword, and which shall distribute more proudly its golden crosses of industry — golden as the glow of the harvest — than it now grants its bronze crosses of honour — bronzed with the crimson of blood.”

RUSKIN. Political Economy of Art.

“All front fighters fought side by side and went through an inferno. They are all comparable to the heroes of the ancient world. It was the manhood of the nations in their prime who fought and experienced the horrors of modern war.

In another war the flower of the nations’ men and women will have to fight. Europe will be destroyed if the best in all of the nations are wiped out. A new conflict will exceed even the ghastly tragedies of the Great War.

I believe that those who rattle the sabres have not participated in war. I know that war veterans speak and think differently.

They energetically desire to prevent another conflict. I hope that the men who are standing before me can contribute to preserve the peace of the world — a peace of honour and equality for all.

Let us not talk of prestige as between the victors and the defeated. This is my one request: Forget what has divided the nations before and remember that history has advanced.”

Field Marshal GOERING addressing the British

and German war veterans.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER ……………………………………………………………. PAGE

Dedication

To the Reader

Preface

Field Marshall Goering’s Address

I.   DER FUHRER ……………………………………………………….. 11

II.   THE BELEAGUERED CITY ……………………………………. 21

III.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM ……………………………………… 25