Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Hollywood’ Category

 

 

[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

Preface  

Chapter 1   –   The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight 

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?

Chapter 3   –   The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

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

Chapter 5   –   The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

Chapter 6   –   The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Sparticist 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!

Chapter 7   –   The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

Chapter 8   –   Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

Chapter 9   –   Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

Chapter 10  –  National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

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

Chapter 12  –  The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for

Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

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

Chapter 14  –  Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15  –  The 1936 Olympics

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

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

Chapter 17  –  Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

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

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

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

Chapter 21  –  The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Chapter 22  –  Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

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:  ]

 

 

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

 

 

mogv-part-16-cover

 

___________________________

 

Click on a link to go to another part:

 

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

 

See also:

 

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

 

 

_____________________

 

 

Version History

 

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

 

Version 1: Mar 15, 2017 — Created post.

Read Full Post »

patrick-grimm-how-the-jewish-supremacists-wrecked-america-cover

 

[Patrick Grimm wrote extensively during 2007 and 2008 exposing and warning the world about the dangers and machinations of organized jewry and its nation wrecking activities. Here is a two part series that he wrote that lists the numerous ways that they are destroying our countries — KATANA.]

 

 

 

_______________________

 

 

Patrick Grimm

 

There Must Be 15 Ways

 

To Destroy

 

Your Country:

 

 

How the

 

Jewish Supremacists

 

Wrecked America

 

 

 

2007

 

 

I have updated my listing of ways that the Jewish supremacists are wrecking America. This list provides a good introduction to those neophytes just immersing themselves in the world of the anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish supremacist movement, and shows them the countless ways Jewish extremism negatively affects our country. It’s a quick and handy primer to enlighten and educate our people (European-Americans), preparing them for this noble struggle for survival they must choose to fight if they are truly desirous of having a future life upon this planet for their children and grandchildren. Supremacist Jewry is killing us; it is killing our soul, killing our spirit, killing our will, killing our pride and killing our nation. Its policies are killing our people. We must make this clear and present the ugly reality and the unpleasant truth in an easy-to-understand format. I believe this list is a good step in that direction.

 

1.

 

They have destroyed our pride in our history, and a nation that loses its sense of history soon ceases to be a nation.

 

2.

 

They have labeled our beloved Founding Fathers as “racists” and “white slavers, ignoring the great representative republic that these men constructed.

 

3.

 

They have promoted multiculturalism, celebrating every culture — no matter how backward and barbaric — except for Western white European culture. As Jewish Marxist intellectual thug Susan Sontag stated in a poisonous rant “The white race is the cancer of humanity.

 

4.

 

They have driven our Christian faith and heritage from the public square by utilizing their countless criminal cadres of ADL and ACLU Communist lawyers. Our children will soon grow up in a society wiped clean of any vestiges of the Bible, Christ or the cross. However, the menorah is still allowed in the White House for Hannukah celebrations. In fact, the Jewish religion is the only faith that can’t be mocked openly in Hollywood entertainment.

 

5.

 

They have torn our borders open, permitting, indeed cheering, the Third World dregs who will soon replace us as the majority. The Javitzes, the Lautenbergs and Cellers meticulously designed the legislation (Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965) that will genocide us. They have done all this while simultaneously — and with no sense of irony supporting Israel’s “Jews-only” immigration policy.

 

6.

 

They have created, pushed and profited from pornography and perverse entertainment. The “Chosen” make up 90% of all American pornographers. The Hollywood they run has mainstreamed wife-swapping, common law marriages, pedophilia, scatology, licentious sex, drug and alcohol abuse and self-indulgence. Bestiality will be next on the list. In fact, they are already releasing a documentary portraying men who have sex with horses.

 

(more…)

Read Full Post »

eric-hunt-debates-fritz-berg-cover

 

[Ryan Dawson of the Anti-NeoCon Report hosts a long (nearly 4 hours) and often heated debate between Eric Hunt and Fritz Berg on what happened to all the “missing” jews during the alleged “Holocaust” of WWII.

Eric Hunt, a producer of revisionist videos, in an unexpected change of conviction has recently revised his own revisionist views and now believes that in fact, jews and others were mass murdered in gas chambers and also shot in large numbers in the East.

Fritz Berg strongly supports the revisionist position that no homicidal gassings occurred what-so-ever and that any shootings of jews in the East were legitimate actions taken against partisans and their supporters — KATANA.]

 

_______________________

 

 

ATTENTION READERS!

 

Volunteers are needed to help complete this transcript in a timely manner.

 

Please step forward and do your bit!

 

[90/231 mins, now complete!]

 

Always leave a message in the comments BEFORE starting on a time-slot.

 

 

 

Why Bother with Transcripts?

 

Occasionally, people ask if having a transcript is really necessary (considering all the work involved) when people can just listen/watch the audio/video.

 

Here are some reasons. If you can think of any more or would like to elaborate on the ones here please leave a message in the Comments.

 

Some of the advantages of a transcript are as follows:

You are able to read the whole presentation with full accuracy at the speed that you can read, which is generally a lot faster than listening to the audio or watching the video.

Some speakers, with strong accents or idiosyncratic speech habits, are often difficult to follow.

You can easily scan the text and zoom into what interests you in a non-linear manner.

You can easily quote verbatim from the text when making comments about the text.

You can print out a hard copy for future reference.

When you listen to an audio or watch a video you tend to forget much of the points made, etc. Having it in writing allows you to refresh your memory quickly and accurately.

Transcripts lend themselves to be available off-line and spread via hard copies.

Transcripts can make it easier to create accurate translations of the material which can in turn be used to create video and audio versions.

Video and audio files often become unavailable, for many reasons including censorship (on YouTube, etc.), technical causes due to lack of equipment or power.

Video and audio files are many times larger than a text file of the same material, sometimes hundreds of times larger. In many cases presenting the information in video or audio format has no worthwhile advantage over a text file. Of course there are may cases where the opposite is true.

Other?

That all said, a transcript is often no substitute for an audio/video file and vice-versa. They are complimentary to each other.

 

_________________________

 

Readers, please:

  • BEFORE starting, indicate in the COMMENT section the time slot that you are willing to complete. For example:    >>> I will do 15:00 to 20:00 <<<
  • Every minute of transcription will take you about 15 minutes to complete accurately.
    • Doing even 1 minute is helpful!

  • As a double-check, please look at the COMMENTS to see whether anyone has indicated they are already doing a particular time-slot. (Comments are automatically posted. There is always some delay in the time-slot status being updated in the actual post by me.)
  • Time slots that I know are being worked on will be marked as IN PROGRESS in the post so as to help avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Always check the COMMENTS though.
  • If you have little time, don’t worry or fuss about typos, spelling, punctuation, etc. I can clean it up.
  • If something is unclear put your best guess followed by some question marks, e.g., “He said that xxx ??? thought this, …” Don’t spend time trying to figure it out.
  • Please enter the transcript in the comment section with the times. I will then copy it (after proofing it) into the post.
  • NOTE: Comments with MORE than 3 URLs are automatically treated as SPAM by this WordPress system. So in those cases change the 4th or more URLs from, e.g.: “abc.com” to “abc . com”.
  • Another way to help if you don’t have time to do any transcription is to point out any errors, however small.
  • Remember that old adage, “Many hands make light work“.

Thank you.

 

____________________

 

 

Here is the full Hunt/ Fritz debate on the Holocaust. This is for ANC members This debate is specifically on the question of transit camps and gas chambers. If there were transit camps, then where are the records of where all these prisoners said to have shipped east ended up? If there were gas chambers…

This content is for VIP Subscriber and VIP Subscriber (yearly) members only.

 

http://www.ancreport.com/podcast/holocaust-debate-eric-hunt-vs-fritz-berg/

 

 

Free download of the mp3 audio file  –

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7NKRD5j08vYWU5vbnVvUlBEODA

 

Questioning “The Holocaust” (Eric Hunt’s website):

Debate with Friedrich Paul Berg (Updated with download link)

 

 

Audio files (split into 4 parts) also available here at archive.org:

 Holocaust Debate – Eric Hunt vs Friedrich Berg – Parts 4 of 4

 

 

ANC Report

 

Holocaust Debate

 

Eric Hunt vs Fredrick Berg

 

 

Published on Feb 26, 2017

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

[00:00]

 

 

Ryan: What I thought was going to be a one hour debate, or planned, ended up being about three and a half hours.

OK, this is Ryan Dawson of ANC Report, the Anti Neo-con Report. We’re usually covering the antiwar thing, the anti neo-con material. We often get into “hidden history” and sometimes conspiracy, … Not that wacky Jonestown kind. But today’s topic is one of the more taboo, if not the most taboo topic on the Interwebs, and that’s the “Holocaust“. There’s a lot of exaggerations in both directions about the “Holocaust“. Over exaggerating it, maybe under exaggerating it.

And we have two revisionists on today, one revisionist is Eric Hunt who’s been on the program before. He has recanted some of his views and he will be explaining that. And here to debate him is Fritz Berg, or Friedrich Paul Berg of the website, Nazi Gassings dot com. Also Eric Hunt’s web site, Questioning the Holocaust dot com. And you can see his long, well recanting on that, as well as other information.

So gentleman, I’m going to give you guys the floor. Hopefully I won’t have to jump in too much. I do want to make it clear to everyone that the point of this is to get at the truth where this is never supposed to be something dogmatic and I hope people will refrain from accusations, saying somebody is anti German, or anti-jewish. The idea here is just to get at the truth of the matter, based on the best evidence available.

So Eric, I will start with you, because you were a revisionists who is now revised your revisions and you’re catching some flak for that. So I’ll let you explain your position and then I’ll let Fritz respond.

 

Eric: All right, thanks. First up I’d like to thank Fritz Berg for agreeing to debate. Fritz has never been afraid to defend his views and has debated Roberto Muehlenkamp, who accepts the garssing claims and has repeatedly asked to debate revisionist Fred Leuchter. Surprisingly it’s the revisionists like Leuchter, dodging the debate, not those defending the claims of mass gassing and shooting such as Muehlenkamp. I recommend for listeners to listen to the Berg-Muehlenkamp debates. It is my opinion Mr Muehlenkamp presents entirely logical arguments and overwhelming evidence in favor of mass gassings having occurred. We will likely not be repeating many of the same arguments from those debates here today.

 

Fritz has and is operating in the supposed spirit of the revisionists who claim to desire open debate on the Holocaust and Fritz should be commended. It’s very telling that no other top revisionist scholars, as they claim, has so far agreed to debate me upon publishing my controversial findings in an article titled “The End Of The Line” available to read at: Questioning the holocaust dot com. This exposes the hypocrisy of those claiming they simply desire open debate on the subject. I put forward that this clique of SS mass murder deniers instead want to spread their extreme, indefensible, illogical denialist falsehoods in their safe little echo chambers. I’ve determined the behavior of this community is more consistent with a religious cult like the Jonestown cult you mentioned in your opening, than something claiming to be related to science. And I’m hoping to tell people listening not to drink the Kool-Aid.

 

For those who claim to oppose censorship, both Fritz and I have been banned from the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust forums. I have determined even before coming to this conclusion that [that forum] is paradoxically the most closed forum which claims to debate the “Holocaust“. And I have heard Fritz say the same throughout the years. I want to make it clear I’m not here to totally put down, or insult revisionists. One reason revisionists haven’t been debated more often is, because the “Holocaust Industry”, as Norman Finkelstein calls them, really does engage in many hoaxes. “Mini”, I meant to say, mini hoaxes, small hoaxes, propaganda, exaggeration and willingly spreading falsehoods. The blind believers repeatedly defend indefensible and scientifically impossible eyewitness accounts. Often these accounts are forced upon the American public, especially on naive schoolchildren.

 

eric-hunt-debates-fritz-berg-3178-elie-weisels-flaming-pits

[Image] An illustration of one of Elie Weisel’s sadistic tall tales as described in his mostly fictional book, “Night“.

 

eric-hunt-debates-fritz-berg-elie-wiesels-book-night-cover

 

I’d like to talk briefly about some of the things I’ve done and what I stand behind. Elie Weisel’s fictional tale of walking to the edge of a flaming pit of fire at the entrance of Auschwitz Birkenau, where dump trucks full of babies were dumped alive for no reason other than dramatic effect, during that titular night, is forced upon naive school children.

 

[05:04]

 

These children don’t know the flaming pit never existed, as all eyewitnesses confirm, including Weisel’s own sister. The fire and atrocity invention is just a lame literary device by a Jewish poet to represent entering into the hell of Auschwitz.

 

Realist Report Interview Eric Hunt - 1806 The Last Days Spielberg

 

My exposé on Steven Spielberg’s 1999 Academy Award winning “Holocaust” documentary, “The Last Days” is one for the ages, which I’m very proud of. To investigate in particular that film star survivor, Irene Zisblatt’s false testimony, I did what any skeptical researcher should do. I investigated her claims, bought her book and read it. I found the book to be almost total fiction and saw ways to prove it. I followed the evidence trail to Stanford University to watch her video testimony, recorded for Steven Spielberg’s Survivors of the Showa a Visual History Foundation. In this video testimony Zisblatt seems to invent in real time new fake atrocity stories, one after the other. Zisblatt claims she was selected to become a lampshade, because of her smooth skin! She claims the Nazis tried to change the color of her eyes. Zisblatt claims that Dr Mengele removed her Auschwitz tattoo in excruciating experiments. Despite being on a list of Jews quickly transited through Auschwitz to other labor camps, never given a tattoo. Zisblatt claims to have escaped from inside Auschwitz Birkenau Crematoria III gas chamber. She claims a boy then threw her over an electrified barbed wire fence, naked, onto a train where she escaped. That train would have been at least one hundred feet away from the fence.

 

Realist Report Interview Eric Hunt - 1805 Last Days of the Big Lie

 

Zisblatt’s calling card claim of repeatedly defecating and swallowing diamonds for a year and a half pales in comparison to her other outrageous lies! Steven Spielberg produced other falsehoods in that Oscar winning documentary, including featuring a discredited African American soldier who already falsely claimed to have liberated Dachau in a previous propaganda film, “Liberators”, which was withdrawn from public airing, as a hoax. As a result of sharing Zisblatt’s testimony to the world, rather than have the evidence looked at in a major examination of this outrageous false testimony, shown to children and even the US Congress, I was instead banned from Stanford University libraries!

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 police-raid-and-my-confession-cover

 

[In this 35 minute video Alfred Schaefer, first describes the police raid on his home in Germany for his “forbidden thoughts“, and secondly how he had, in 2014, not yet escaped from the contamination of jewish “control words” and had used words like “Zionism” and “Nazi” without fully understanding their jewish origins, designed to deflect attention away from the jews — KATANA.]

 

 

 

Alfred Schaefer

 

 

Police Raid and

 

 

My Confession

 

 

 

police-raid-and-my-confession-3031-video

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8mBgMaLVPc

 

Click on the above link, or copy the link into your browser to watch the video.

 

Published on Nov 21, 2016

 

YouTube Stats

 

Jan 29 — Views: 2,668 – Comments: 105 – Likes: 192  Dislikes: 5

Jan 13, 2017 — Views: 2,473 – Comments: 107 – Likes: 177  Dislikes: 5

 

 

 

YouTube Description

 

 

German Ministry of Thought Control had the “Kriminal Polizei” raid my house to steal all of my computers and storage devices to search for “Forbidden Thoughts”.

This has presented us with a wonderful opportunity to help the “Kriminal Polizei” learn about the induced mental illness that many of them are suffering from.

 

__________________________

 

 

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

[35:12]

 

[00:00]

 

police-raid-and-my-confession-3030-video-title

 

Hello,

 

I’m Alfred Schaefer,

 

In part I of this video I want to tell you what happens to you in Germany if you commit the crime of thinking.

 

You heard me right, the crime of thinking.

 

In Part 2, I wish to make a long overdue confession. But first the police raid.

 

police-raid-and-my-confession-3031-video

 

The “German Ministry of Forbidden Thoughts” sent the “Kriminal Polizei”, which is like the FBI, to raid our house in order to steal all of my computers and storage devices. They suspected “forbidden thoughts” on these devices and were determined to find them. The raid took place on the 18th of August 2016 at 7:00 o’clock in the morning.

 

police-raid-and-my-confession-3032-glaring-hypocrisy

 

The website “Glaring Hypocrisy” phoned me on the day after this raid took place. Here is the beginning of this conversation. You can listen to the conversation in it’s entirety on their web site.

 

police-raid-and-my-confession-3033-glaring-hypocrisy-intro

 

police-raid-and-my-confession-3034-glaring-hypocrisy-intro

 

Glaring Hypocrisy: We only heard about the situation at about shortly before 5:00 pm London time. So, to be clear, when did the raid on your home actually take place?

 

Alfred: Yesterday morning. I was in the shower, and then I heard that the door bell rang. Normally I am always in the shower before Elfriede, my wife, but this time I slept a bit uneasy and I stayed in bed a bit longer and then I was in the shower at 7:00 o’clock when the door bell rang and, …

(more…)

Read Full Post »

colin-liddel-stormerism-cover-ver-3

 

 

[Here’s the transcript of a short YouTube video by Colin Liddell from Alternative Right website on the banning of  the “neo-nazi” group  National Action in Britain. He also discusses The Daily Stormer   — KATANA.]

 

Discussing Stormerism in a Storm

 

 colin-liddel-stormerism-video

 

Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJXthTFF-iA

 

See also his blog post:

 

http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2016/12/video-discussing-stormerism-in-storm.html

 

By Colin Liddell

Published on Dec 15, 2016

 

YouTube Description

 

While cycling along a Tokyo dyke in a storm — as you do — Colin Liddell, the Chief Editor of Alternative Right, discusses a recent debate about Stormerism (the tendency of some Alt-Righters to LARP as full-blown Hollywood Nazis). This is then linked to the recent banning by the British government of National Action, a group that employs Stormerist tactics. He also draws attention to the interesting fact that where Neo-Nazied Stormerist excesses are directly banned by the state, nationalist movements tend to do rather well, and where they aren’t they tend to do badly.

 

Greg Johnson’s “Punching Right” (with butthurt comments by (((Andrew Anglin))) ):

 

http://www.counter-currents.com/2016ed&#8230;

Article by Daniel Barge on the banning of National Action:

http://alternative-right.blogspot.com&#8230;

 

______________________

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

[09:24 mins]

 

[Note: For “stylistic” reasons Liddell chose to record this while riding a bike along a dyke on a stormy day, making it hard to hear some parts. Text has now been updated with the missing parts.]

 

 

Colin Liddell: Hello! Friends, followers and fellow fake fascists of the Alternative Right. This is Colin Liddell, the chief editor of Alternative Right.

 

And, here I am cycling along Tokyo’s flood defenses, on my way to one of my “normie” jobs. And as you can see the weather is a bit inclement today. So, I don’t think I want to talk for too long. But, you know, I’ve been a bit busy to make a video for a couple of weeks, so, and this is the first one for at least two or three weeks, I think. And it’s been a very kind of eventful sort of three weeks, as it always is in the Alternative Right. Never a dull moment.

 

There’s been a bit of a spat with The Daily Stormer and Andrew Anglin. And I think, well, you know, Greg Johnson wrote an article at Counter Currents called “Punching Right“, and I think anybody who was anybody in the ’punching right’ debate kind of pitched in, so that was kind of interesting, I think. I expressed my opinion there. I said, … I think one of my most interesting points was that the Daily Stormer lures people into a state of inauthenticity, having a fake position in private, having a different position in public life — whichever one is fake, whichever one is genuine who knows. Suspicions abound.

 

Anyway, it’s not a healthy way to be, to sort of believe something, or to be lured into believing in something that you can’t actually talk to normal people about! That is obviously a ghettoizing mechanism to prevent White nationalism, which is a natural ideology of most people, because it suits their interests. That’s obviously a ghettoizing device to stop White nationalism spreading. And it’s a kind of anti, … The left would see it as an anti-contagion device — and that’s a disease metaphor. So, we would not use that, obviously. We would see, we would see it more in terms of spreading enlightenment.

 

colin-liddel-stormerism-montage

 

See if I can just fix my hat here. No, no, the winds is keeping it there! Anyway, have a look around. There’s an interesting vista — some motorways over there, bridges, dredging the river, … And I’m actually cycling along a large dyke, which is relatively, relatively deserted. Just one, or two other lonely cyclists on their way to work at this early hour in the morning.

 

Anyway, back to the big debate, … Also, I think another thing that ties into this “punching Right” debate is the banning of this so-called “neo-Nazi group“, National Action in the UK. They were banned, I think just yesterday, by the Home Secretary who goes by the name of Amber Rudd, which is a soft sounding name especially for a Conservative. And anyway, they were banned. Now, National Action, they kind of dress up in scary costumes with skull masks and black ninja costumes and they wave their obviously very fascistic looking flags. And there is usually about, like, 10 to 20 of them. And if they stick around for more than five minutes the anti-fa usually give them a hard time. So they kind of pop up and they pop down a lot. And I’ve always seen them as a kind of cosplay neo-Nazi LARPy* group.

 

* A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically act out their characters’ actions. The players pursue goals within a fictional setting represented by the real world while interacting with each other in character.

 

And so, I think banning them isn’t actually, you know, really it’s almost an irrelevance. But, I think the only significant point is that the state can use these little shock groups to justify clamping down on things like social media, more and more. It becomes permissible for social media to throw perfectly moderate and calm people off their platforms, because such groups exist!

 

And, you know, we saw that with, when Andrew Anglin was on Twitter. He was very active, and of course, you know, he sort of set a precedent for Twitter throwing people off. And then, they then used that power more recently against many members of the Alt-Right, including their Richard Spencer. And then, they kind of, you know, they retracted that suspension in the case of Richard Spencer. But, you know, it’s just something they can do any time they feel like now. And they can always justify it and back it up with:

Look at these neo-Nazi psychopaths spreading hatred and violence! And look what happened to Joe Cox and that poor jewish MP, Luciana Berger. She was sent hate mail and death threats!” blah, blah, blah!

 

And, because these politicians are women, it makes it all the more easy to ban those kind of extremist groups!

 

Now, I’m not too bothered by that, you know, because if you look at the one country that doesn’t have a lot of extreme censorship is America. OK, you can still lose your job, but for the most part, for the most part, it’s not really a problem, if you are financially independent.

 

[On his bike] I’m going downhill now, it’s getting a bit fast! Safety first!

 

Anyway, so as I was saying, … The one country, the one country that doesn’t have extreme censorship laws is the United States. And, “Wow!” by weird coincidence that is also the one country that doesn’t really have a healthy White nationalist movement. At least in electoral terms.

 

Whereas Europe, which has a lot if, you know, “thought crime” legislation and “hate crime” legislation and that bans little funny cosplay* groups like National Action. This area, or this collection of countries, that is where nationalism is doing much, much, better. Although, of course, in the UK, it’s in a period of abeyance at the moment after, following the collapse of the BNP a few years ago. But, if you look around Europe, they all have these very, very strict, you know, anti, you know, in inverted commas “hate laws” and various other forms of thought crime legislation and, … You know, nationalism is doing relatively well there!

 

* Cosplay: the practice of dressing up as a character from a film, book, or video game, especially one from the Japanese genres of manga or anime.

Austria — they almost elected somebody from the Austrian Freedom Party! They almost elected somebody from the Austrian Freedom Party, which is typically described as a hard line anti-immigrant party.

 

In France Marine Le Pen is, you know, again, very, very, you know, a cultural, she’s a cultural nationalist, I guess you could say, civic nationalist, not a religious a genuine ethno-nationalist, but still that’s a lot better than what America’s got. America’s got Donald Trump, and we’re still not really sure of, what we’ve got there. The omens are very, very mixed. He could turn out to be, you know, he could actually turn out to be a decent guy, a stand up guy, who wants to at least ensure the dominance of the Republican Party. Which would also mean deporting a lot of the illegals and securing the borders, and encouraging White people to have more kids. Or he could just be part of the whole the globalist system! A kind of reboot.

 

Anyway, I think that is plenty of thoughts to mull over.

 

So, from Tokyo, over and out!

 

END

 

 

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

 

Click to download a PDF of this post (1.1 MB):

 

colin-liddel-discussing-stormerism-in-a-storm-transcript-ver-2

 

colin-liddel-stormerism-cover-ver-3

 

________________

 

Version History

 

Version 3: Dec 19, 2016 — Added missing parts and made some corrections. Thanks to Colin Liddell for that. Added 1 image. Updated PDF (Ver 2) for download.

 

Version 2: Dec 17, 2016 — Added PDF of this post for download.

 

Version 1: Published post — Dec 16, 2016.

Read Full Post »

 realist-report-tanstaafl-2016-cover

 

[After a year’s break from blogging and interviews TANSTAAFL returns with this interview with John Friend at his The Realist Report site. I consider TANSTAAFL to be one of the most insightful commentators on the jewish problem, and in this interview he doesn’t disappoint with his take on what’s being going on in our movement to expose and rid ourselves of the organized evil jewish cabal that dominates our societies.

 

Topics include; the ongoing jew war on Whites, the meaning of “conspiracy theory”, kikeservatives, Twitter, the jewsmedia, Trump, Bannon, (((the echo meme))), Alt-Right, Richard Spencer, Greg Johnson, Jared Taylor, Hitler and National Socialist Germany, and White racial consciousness — KATANA.]

 

_______________________

 

 

ATTENTION READERS!

 

Volunteers are needed to help complete this transcript.

 

Please step forward and do your bit!

 

[ 65/115 mins, now complete!]

 

Always leave a message in the comments BEFORE starting on a time-slot.

 

realist-report-tanstaafl-2016-progress-chart-06

 

 

Why Bother with Transcripts?

 

Occasionally, people ask if having a transcript is really necessary (considering all the work involved) when people can just listen/watch the audio/video.

 

Here are some reasons. If you can think of any more or would like to elaborate on the ones here please leave a message in the Comments.

 

Some of the advantages of a transcript are as follows:

You are able to read the whole presentation with full accuracy at the speed that you can read, which is generally a lot faster than listening to the audio or watching the video.

Some speakers, with strong accents or idiosyncratic speech habits, are often difficult to follow.

You can easily scan the text and zoom into what interests you in a non-linear manner.

You can easily quote verbatim from the text when making comments about the text.

You can print out a hard copy for future reference.

When you listen to an audio or watch a video you tend to forget much of the points made, etc. Having it in writing allows you to refresh your memory quickly and accurately.

Transcripts lend themselves to be available off-line and spread via hard copies.

Transcripts can make it easier to create accurate translations of the material which can in turn be used to create video and audio versions.

Video and audio files often become unavailable, for many reasons including censorship (on YouTube, etc.), technical causes due to lack of equipment or power.

Video and audio files are many times larger than a text file of the same material, sometimes hundreds of times larger. In many cases presenting the information in video or audio format has no worthwhile advantage over a text file. Of course there are may cases where the opposite is true.

Other?

That all said, a transcript is often no substitute for an audio/video file and vice-versa. They are complimentary to each other.

 

_________________________

 

Readers, please:

  • BEFORE starting, indicate in the COMMENT section the time slot that you are willing to complete. For example:    >>> I will do 15:00 to 20:00 <<<
  • Every minute of transcription will take you about 15 minutes to complete accurately.
    • Doing even 1 minute is helpful!

  • As a double-check, please look at the COMMENTS to see whether anyone has indicated they are already doing a particular time-slot. (Comments are automatically posted. There is always some delay in the time-slot status being updated in the actual post by me.)
  • Time slots that I know are being worked on will be marked as IN PROGRESS in the post so as to help avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Always check the COMMENTS though.
  • If you have little time, don’t worry or fuss about typos, spelling, punctuation, etc. I can clean it up.
  • If something is unclear put your best guess followed by some question marks, e.g., “He said that xxx ??? thought this, …” Don’t spend time trying to figure it out.
  • Please enter the transcript in the comment section with the times. I will then copy it (after proofing it) into the post.
  • NOTE: Comments with MORE than 3 URLs are automatically treated as SPAM by this WordPress system. So in those cases change the 4th or more URLs from, e.g.: “abc.com” to “abc . com”.
  • Another way to help if you don’t have time to do any transcription is to point out any errors.
  • Remember that old adage, “Many hands make light work“.

Thank you.

 

____________________

 

 

On this edition of The Realist Report, we’re joined once again by Tanstaafl of Age of Treason. To begin the program, Tanstaafl gives listeners an overview of what he’s been up to lately, including being banned from Twitter for making factual statements about Jews and their anti-White agenda. We move on to focus on the Jewish problem more generally, and the open and quite blatant war being waged on Whites by the organized Jewish community. We also discuss Trump’s election, the Alt Right, and related topics.

 

http://therealistreport.com/the-realist-report-tanstaafl/

 

The Realist Report

 

Interviews

 

TANSTAAFL — 2016

 

 

Published on Dec 8, 2016

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

[00:00]

 

 

 

John Friend: All right folks. Welcome back to another edition of the Realist Report. This is your host John Friend. Joining me today is TANSTAAFL, who maintains the excellent website Age of Treason. TANSTAAFL is one of the most insightful and articulate commentators in the alternative independent media today, especially when it comes to the jewish problem. A topic that we will be discussing at length during this podcast.

 

Tan thanks for joining me. How are you today sir?

 

John: Good! Well, you sound fine and, you know, if you’ve got to sneeze, or cough, or anything, …

 

TAN: I may! [laughing]

 

John: … Just put yourself on mute and I’m sure we can deal with it. Thanks for coming on the program. Last time you were on was actually a year ago, exactly. I was just looking at my website and one year ago, today. Well, I guess when I post this program, which will be technically tomorrow, December 7th. You were on and I’ve been wanting to or I had been wanting to interview you for a long time because I followed your work for a number of years and listened to pretty much all of your podcasts and you’ve been a big, you know, influence in my thinking, especially when it comes to racial issues and, of course, the jewish problem.

 

So, just to get started, could you talk about what you’ve been up to lately? I know you were recently shoahed from Twitter. So you are no longer on Twitter, but I see you’ve been blogging a lot lately so, why don’t you just tell us what you’ve been up to well.

 

TAN: Well, yeah, I wouldn’t call it a lot. I’ve actually been pretty inactive for the last year. Actually, it started even before I talked to you last. But, I’ve been active mostly on Twitter. I had stopped blogging so much. Before I had been in the habit of posting about once a week, once every couple of weeks, and it really dropped off to almost nothing. But Twitter is, … It wasn’t because I was not paying attention to what was going on and didn’t have thoughts. It was just because I was expressing myself mainly through Twitter. Which is really a different form of media. It’s like, it’s been called a “micro blog” and that is really a good description for it. So, instead of writing these long posts on a blog, you write little snippets of thoughts that fit in 140 characters and you can whip them off pretty quickly and in response to lots of different stories. So it’s becomes addictive! You know, you’re sitting there paying attention to what’s going on in the news, what everybody’s excited about and you have some insight into it, or you just want to bring it to other people’s attention and you comment on it. And the big problem with it, as I found out — I was well aware I was just wondering when it would happen — but I found out a couple of weeks ago right, you know, few weeks after the election. When Twitter decides that you’re too much of a problem, they can just delete your account and it’s as if you never existed.

 

So I don’t really plan on going back, as useful as I found it. Most of the value was, for me, in the besides sharing thoughts with other like minds, was, … What I found on Twitter was that basically the enemy is using it as a communication platform. Very similar to what they, what was uncovered back several years ago. I think 2012 election cycle. The journalist email list that they used to use back then — it might have been even 2008 cycle? I can’t recall now. It was quite a while ago. But basically before Twitter existed, the jews and the jews media and their fellow travellers used to communicate with each other via a private email list, that was invite only. But it was a massive number of people. And when it was uncovered and the e-mails were shared by somebody, it was shocking to a lot of people. That these people were colluding and, you know, coming up with a shared narrative about how to deal with certain scandals that broke. And we’ve seen it again in this election cycle with the Wiki Leaks thing, I mean there was there was a bit of that.

 

But every day on Twitter — and you don’t even have to have an account on Twitter — you can sign up. And the main reason to sign up is so you can make a list. But even if you don’t sign up for Twitter you can just go to these different accounts one by one and look at what they’re saying. It’s convenient when you make a list, because it basically mashes them all together. And that’s one of the first things I did after they kicked me off. I just created a dummy account so that I could create a list of all these jews media jews, so that I could see what they were chattering about, what they were screeching about today. And so basically it’s what they call that, “opposition research“?

 

[05:00]

 

John: Sure

(more…)

Read Full Post »

mogv-part-04-cover

 

[Part 04]

 

[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 04, the background behind and implementation of organized jewry’s New York and European banker funded and organized takeover of Czarist Russia through its “Russian Revolution” of 1917 is detailed. Although Germany was bogged down on the Western Front, it achieved victory over Russia on the Eastern front. In the resulting chaos Czar Nicholas II abdicated and the jew Alexander Kerensky headed up a “Provisional Government” that then abolished all restrictions on jews throughout Russia. This allowed an invasion of some 90,000 exiled revolutionary jews to flood back into Russia, forming the heart of the jewish Bolshevik revolution.

The origin of Ashkenazi jews is described with the controversial view that they have their origins in Khazaria. Ever since the Russian Empire took control of areas of Poland, Ukraine and other areas of Eastern Europe the jews were mainly, legally confined to the area known as the “Pale of Settlement“, as the Russian government regarded the jews as “a perpetual menace to the continued well-being of the Russian State.” Jewish hatred and exploitation of the Russian people resulted in cycles of “pogroms” against jews by local people, further fueling jewish sense of grievance and their subversion towards the state.

During the 19th century jewish population growth rose rapidly resulting in over 2 million jews emigrating from Russia and Eastern Europe to the United States and Western Europe, spreading with them the twin evils of Zionism and Communism. In the US the jew Jacob Schiff, one of the wealthiest bankers in the world, helped finance Japan’s 1905 war with Russia. The failed “Russian revolution” of 1905 was also financed by jewish banks.

Success” for organized jewry came with 1917 revolution whereby Jews, who comprised less than 2 percent of the Russian population, now had total control of every branch of the government as well as the armed forces under Lenin and Trotsky. The “White Army” was defeated by the “Red Army” as jewish bankers provided the Reds with unlimited funding whilst refusing and blocking funding to the Whites.

The author ends this part with: “Proof of the Jewish nature of the Russian Revolution and of the preponderance of Jews in the Bolshevik government, as well as their role in the Communist revolutions which swept Europe afterwards, is irrefutable.”

In Part 05 the reign of terror unleashed on the Russian people following this jewish takeover will be detailed —  KATANA.]

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

The Myth of

 

German Villainy

 

by

 

Benton L. Bradberry

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

Preface  

Chapter 1   –   The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s positive image changes overnight 

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?

Chapter 3   –   The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

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

Chapter 5   –   The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

Chapter 6   –   The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Sparticist 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!

Chapter 7   –   The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

Chapter 8   –   Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

Chapter 9   –   Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

Chapter 10  –  National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

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

Chapter 12  –  The Nazis and the Zionists actually work together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws -1935

The Zionist Movement

Chapter 13  –  Life in Germany under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hider becomes the most popular leader in the world

Chapter 14  –  Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15  –  The 1936 Olympics

Chapter 16  –  Anschluss.” The unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

Chapter 17  –  Germany annexes the Sudetenland

Chapter 18  –  War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristalnacht

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

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

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

Chapter 21  –  The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Chapter 22  –  Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

Chapter 23  –  Winners and Losers

Bibliography

 

 

Chapter 4

 


The Russian Revolution of 1917 

 

 

Germany actually won World War I on the Eastern Front, though that aspect of the war is less well known than the war on the Western Front, which Germany lost. The war on the Eastern Front began on August 17, 1914 when Russia invaded East Prussia with a full scale offensive. The Russian attack was launched a little more than two weeks after Germany had crossed into Belgium in its drive on France, which marked the beginning of the war. To meet the Russian invasion of East Prussia, Germany immediately diverted large numbers of soldiers from the Western Front. The massive German troop transfer from the Western Front to the Eastern Front is one of the reasons the Western Front bogged down in stalemate so soon after the war began. Germany’s Schlieffen Plan called for a lightening attack through Belgium, into France, to knock France out of the war, whereupon the German army would wheel around and take on the Russians on the Eastern Front. A two front war was to be avoided at all cost.

 

When Germany’s attack on France did not produce the expected quick victory, the German Army dug trenches and assumed a defensive position until the war on the Eastern Front could be resolved. Germany fought a defensive war on the Western Front with reduced forces through most of the war while aggressively engaging the Russians on the Eastern Front. Germany was now fighting the two front war the Schlieffen Plan had been designed to avoid.

 

mogv-part-02-2413-the-schlieffen-plan

[Add. image —  The “Schlieffen Plan.”]

 

Russia and Germany clashed in a series of bloody battles on the Eastern Front, in which Russia came out second best in all of them. In East Prussia the Russian armies were crushed by German forces at both the Battle of Tannenberg and the Battle of Masurian Lakes. In the disastrous Battle of Tannenberg, only 10,000 of General Samsonov’s Russian Second Army managed to escape. The remainder of his 150,000 troops were either killed or captured. General Samsonov then shot himself rather than face the humiliation of his disastrous defeat. The Russians were then pushed completely out of East Prussia by the victorious Germans.

 

Russian forces fared better in their invasion of the Austro-Hungarian province of Galicia by winning an important victory at the Battle of Lemberg (now Lvov), but the German army came quickly to the rescue and drove the Russians back into Russia. In just six months time, the Russian Army had gained nothing, yet lost over 2 million men, either killed or captured. German troops then seized the initiative by advancing into Russian held territory, seizing Warsaw in early August, 1915, Brest Litovsk on August 25, and Vilna, Lithuania on September 19. These battles resulted in the loss of another million Russian soldiers.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »