Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Sudeten German’ 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 »

mogv-part-16-cover

 

 

[Part 16]

 

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

 

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

 

Churchill was determined that Britain would eventually go to war with Germany and his fellow alarmists worked feverishly to bring it about. “Was he deliberately channeling British power towards the service of the international Jews who were paying him through “The Focus,” or was he deluding himself that he was serving England?

 — KATANA.]

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

The Myth of

 

German Villainy

 

by

 

Benton L. Bradberry

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

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

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 17

 


Germany Annexes the Sudetenland
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

mogv-part-16-3114-map-of-the-sudetenland

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

 

mogv-part-16-3105-a-prosperous-sudeten-german-farm

A prosperous Sudeten German farm

 

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

(more…)

Read Full Post »

mogv-part-15-cover

 

 

[Part 15]

 

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, 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 15, the fulfilment of Hitler’s dream of uniting Austria with Germany; the subsequent revival of the Austria economy; and the situation with Austria’s jews pre and post “Anschluss” are described.

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

The Myth of

 

German Villainy

 

by

 

Benton L. Bradberry

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

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

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 16

 


“Anschluss” The Unification

 

of Austria and Germany 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 mogv-part-15-3039-otto-bauer

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

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

 

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

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Ben Bradberry - COVER Ver 1

 

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

 

 

Ben Bradberry - Video

 

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

 

Click on the above link to watch the video.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

The Myth of Germany Villainy

 

Author Ben Bradberry Interviewed

 

by

 

Jim Rizoli

 

 

 

January 6, 2016.

 

Ben Bradberry, who wrote The Myth Of German Villainy, is interviewed by League of Extraordinary Revisionists Co-FounderJim Rizoli.

 

_______________________

 

Neither Kaiser Wilhelm nor Adolf Hitler wanted war. Both WWI and WWII were thrust upon Germany by the Allied powers. Germany’s great sin was emerging too late as a consolidated nation-state and upsetting the long established balance of power scheme in Europe. The already established great powers, Britain, France and Russia, joined together in 1914 to destroy this new rival. When Germany rose phoenix-like from the ashes of WWI to again become a great power, they finished. the job with World War II. The deliberate destruction of Germany during the Second World-War can only be compared.to the Roman destruction of ancient Carthage, and it was done for the same reason — to destroy a commercial rival. The “official” history of World Wars I & II, the story we learned in school, is a myth.

 

As the title “The Myth of German Villainy” indicates, this book is about the mischaracterization of Germany as history’s ultimate “villain“. The “official” story of Western Civilization in the twentieth century casts Germany as the disturber of the peace in Europe, and the cause of both World War I and World War II, though the facts don’t bear that out.

 

During both wars, fantastic atrocity stories were invented by Allied propaganda to create hatred of the German people for the purpose of bringing public opinion around to support the wars. The “Holocaust” propaganda which emerged after World War II further solidified this image of Germany as history’s ultimate villain. But how true is this “official” story? Was Germany really history’s ultimate villain? In this book, the author paints a different picture. He explains that Germany was not the perpetrator of World War I nor World War II, but instead, was the victim of Allied aggression in both wars. The instability wrought by World War I made the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia possible, which brought world Communism into existence. Hitler and Germany recognized world Communism, with its base in the Soviet Union, as an existential threat to Western, Christian Civilization, and he dedicated himself and Germany to a death struggle against it. Far from being the disturber of European peace, Germany served as a bulwark which prevented Communist revolution from sweeping over Europe. The pity was that the United States and Britain did not see Communist Russia in the same light, ultimately with disastrous consequences for Western Civilization. The author believes that Britain and the United States joined the wrong side in the war.

 

 

About the Author

 

Benton L. Bradberry served as an officer and aviator in the U.S. Navy from 1955 to 1977, from near the beginning of the Cold War to near its end. His generation was inundated with anti-German propaganda and “Holocaust” lore. Then, in his role as a naval officer and pilot, he was immersed in anti-Communist propaganda and the war psychosis of the Cold War era. He has had a life-long fascination with the history of this period and has read deeply into all aspects of it. He also saw much of Europe during his Navy years and has travelled widely in Europe since. A natural skeptic, he long ago began to doubt that the “propaganda” told the whole story. He has spent years researching “the other side of the story” and has now written a book about it. The author is a graduate of the Naval Post Graduate School in Monterey, California with a degree in Political Science and International Relations.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

[[Dies ist eine Übersetzung von The Blackguard – Winston Churchill. Wenn Leser erkennen keine wesentlichen Fehler in der Übersetzung informieren Sie mich in den Kommentaren wissen.]

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

 Winston Churchill - Das Blackguard - Cover

[Click to enlarge]

 

Das Blackguard

 

Winston Churchill

 

 

The Barnes Review — 2012 Januar – Februar

 

Winston Churchill - Das Blackguard - Cartoon 2

 

ILLUSTRATION: RICHARD COLE I DRAWN & QUARTERED/NEWSCOM

& KATANA

 

 

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

Von Major MERVYN F. THURGOOD

 

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 Winston Churchill - That Blackgaurd Cover

[Click to enlarge]

 

That Blackguard

 

Winston Churchill

 

 

The Barnes Review — 2012 January – February

 

Winston Churchill - Cartoon lighting cigar with swastika, Europe, Star of David, Pound sign

 

ILLUSTRATION: RICHARD COLE I DRAWN & QUARTERED/NEWSCOM

& KATANA

 

 

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

By MAJOR MERVYN F. THURGOOD

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 The Case for Germany - Cover Ver 2

[Part 6]

 

 

 

I am deeply stirred by the word which Ulrich Hutten wrote the last time he seized his pen: — Germany.

ADOLF HITLER

January 30th, 1937

 

 

 

The Case for Germany 

 

A Study of Modern Germany 

 

by

A. P. Laurie

M. A. Cantab., D. Sc., LL. D. Edin., F. C. S., F. R. S. E.

With a Preface by Admiral Sir Barry Domvile

K. B. E., C. B., C. M. G.

Berlin W 15

Internationaler Verlag

1939

FIRST EDITION ………… JUNE 1939

SECOND EDITION ……. JULY 1939

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED IN GERMANY

DEDICATION

It is with admiration and gratitude for the great work he has done for the German people that I dedicate this book to the Fuhrer.

A. P. L.

TO THE READER

There are two sides to every question. You have read one side in our Press for six years.

This book gives the other side.

A. P. L.

 Artur Pillians Laurie

PREFACE

 

It is a great pleasure to me to introduce the public to Dr. Laurie’s valuable book on modern Germany. He is best known to the world as a brilliant scientist, but he has found time in the intervals of his work to pursue with ardour the task upon which every sensible member of the British and German races should be engaged — namely the establishment of good relations and a better understanding between these two great nations.

Dr Laurie knows full well that this friendship is the keystone to peace in Europe — nay, in the whole world.

He is one of the small group who founded the Association known as “The Link”, whose sole aim is to get Britons and Germans to know and understand one another better. He is one of the most zealous workers in this good cause in the country.

He writes of the National Socialist movement with knowledge and great sympathy.

The particular value of this book lies in the fact that it is written by a foreigner, who cannot be accused of patriotic excess in his interpretation of the great work done by Herr Hitler and his associates. I recommend this volume with confidence to all people who are genuinely impressed with the desire to understand one of the greatest — and most bloodless — revolutions in history.

BARRY DOMVILE

Robin’s Tree

8th May 1939.

 

 

“As we advance in our social knowledge, we shall endeavour to make our governments paternal as well as judicial; that is, to establish such laws and authorities as may at once direct us in our occupations, protect us against our follies, and visit us in our distresses; a government which shall repress dishonesty, as now it punishes theft; which shall show how the discipline of the masses may be brought to aid the toils of peace, as the discipline of the masses has hitherto knit the sinews of battle; a government which shall have its soldiers of the ploughshare as well as its soldiers of the sword, and which shall distribute more proudly its golden crosses of industry — golden as the glow of the harvest — than it now grants its bronze crosses of honour — bronzed with the crimson of blood.

RUSKIN. Political Economy of Art.

 

 

“All front fighters fought side by side and went through an inferno. They are all comparable to the heroes of the ancient world. It was the manhood of the nations in their prime who fought and experienced the horrors of modern war.

In another war the flower of the nations’ men and women will have to fight. Europe will be destroyed if the best in all of the nations are wiped out. A new conflict will exceed even the ghastly tragedies of the Great War.

I believe that those who rattle the sabres have not participated in war. I know that war veterans speak and think differently.

They energetically desire to prevent another conflict. I hope that the men who are standing before me can contribute to preserve the peace of the world — a peace of honour and equality for all.

Let us not talk of prestige as between the victors and the defeated. This is my one request: Forget what has divided the nations before and remember that history has advanced.”

Field Marshal GOERING addressing the British

and German war veterans.

 

 

CONTENTS

 

CHAPTER ……………………………………………………………. PAGE

 

Dedication

To the Reader

Preface

Field Marshall Goering’s Address

I.   DER FUHRER ……………………………………………………….. 11

II.   THE BELEAGUERED CITY ……………………………………. 21

III.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM ……………………………………… 25

IV.   THE NAZI RALLYS AT NUREMBERG ……………………. 34

V.   THE FOREIGN POLICY OF GERMANY ……………………. 41

VI.   ENGLAND AND GERMANY ………………………………….. 49

VII.   MARCH 7th, A MOST IMPORTANT DATE …………… 54

VIII.   THE REAL ENEMY OF EUROPE ……………………….. 58

IX.   COMMUNISM VERSUS NATIONAL SOCIALISM …… 62

X.   THE UNION OF THE GERMAN PEOPLE …………………. 68

XI.   ACTS OF “AGGRESSION” BY GERMANY ……………… 79

XII.   THE DANCE OF DEATH ……………………………………… 85

XIII.   OUR FUTURE POLICY TOWARDS GERMANY ……. 93

XIV.   THE HITLER YOUTH MOVEMENT ……………………… 100

XV.   THE WINTER HELP ORGANIZATION ………………….. 104

XVI.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM AND THE PROTESTANT

CHURCH ……………………………………………………………………… 109

XVII. ECONOMICS …………………………………………………….. 118

XVIII. THE FOUR YEARS PLAN …………………………………… 138

XIX.   THE GERMAN COLONIES …………………………………. 141

XX.   THE LABOUR FRONT ………………………………………….. 146

XXI.   AGRICULTURE …………………………………………………. 155

XXII. MUNICH AND AFTER ………………………………………… 167

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter Twelve

 

 

THE DANCE OF DEATH

 

 

We have recently developed a habit of holding public meetings to denounce the sins of our neighbours. On such occasions violent and exaggerated statements are made and the whole audience worked up to a condition of glorious indignation and intense moral satisfaction with themselves thanking God as the Pharisee in the Temple, that they are not as this Publican. I cannot find in the scriptures that Our Lord tells us to meet together to confess the sins of our brothers, instead of confessing our own sins, and we are especially warned not to pass judgment. We, like the village gossip, always assume the worst. What effect are such meetings likely to have in the countries which are denounced? We have recently had some experience owing to the German press having at last taken to hitting back, digging out some black passages in our past history, and describing them with the gross exaggeration customary in political propaganda. These attacks in the German press have produced a feeling of intense indignation here. We may criticise our own sins, but are not going to have any damned foreigner doing it for us. It is none of his business, we say. Curiously enough the Germans have just the same feeling about things we say about them, and so the piling up of ill feeling is growing on both sides every day.

It is generally admitted by serious students to-day that the war of 1914 had no legitimate cause, if any cause for war can be regarded as legitimate. There have been in the past economic wars, dynastic wars, religious wars and wars for the conquest of territory, but in 1914 the nations of Europe had no quarrel with each other, and the whole world was prospering and increasing in trade.

[Page 86]

It is true that we were very jealous of the rapid increase of the German export trade, and suspicious of the Fleet they were building although it was much less than half the size of our own, but I doubt if any merchant feeling the pinch of German competition in the world market would have regarded that competition as a justifiable reason for war.

The quarrel between Austria and Serbia could have been settled by reasonable negotiation between Austria and Russia without disturbing the rest of Europe. The only outcome of the war has been that millions of lives were thrown away, and a distracted Europe and an impoverished world left as the only tangible result.

Looking back on those years before the war, I realise that an insidious propaganda against Germany had been carried on for a long time, — why or by whom or with what intent I do not know, — which was gradually poisoning our minds. It is true Germany had the most powerful land army in the world, that the German Emperor had the gift of saying boastful and irritating things, and that there was a pan-German society which amused itself by drawing imaginary maps of a German European Empire. There had also been some trouble over the Agadir incident, when the German Emperor woke up to find that we had presented France with the whole of Morocco which did not belong to us; but there was no justification for saying that Germany meditated wars of conquest, and as an actual fact the German foreign office was in dread of the power of Russia.

What were the facts? Since the war of 1870, for which France and Germany were equally to blame, up to 1914 Germany had been at peace with all the world. We on the other hand had been constantly at war. We had invaded and conquered Egypt, we had made war on the Boers, we had fought in Africa and on the frontiers of India, and had annexed Burma. The gates of the temple of Janus had never been closed; yet we were firmly convinced that we were a peaceful non-aggressive people, and Germany an aggressive military nation.

[Page 87]

Now that no serious student of the events leading up to 1914 that the German government was to blame any more than any other European government including our own, this legend about an aggressive Germany is obviously false; yet it is still believed by many people in this country, and we are told that Hitler is the successor of the Kaiser, and aims at the military conquest of Europe. The last war was psychological, it had no basis on realities, and if there is another war in Europe it will also be psychological.

In the old days of mercenary armies in Europe, two kings might quarrel and let loose their armies on each other without troubling to consult the people, whose first knowledge that war had been declared was when soldiers of both sides began looting their farms. To-day, now that we have conscript armies, it is necessary for the government before it can declare war to rouse the peoples of two countries to such a hatred of each other, that decent Englishmen and decent Germans get out their rifles and try to kill each other. This is done by means of propaganda.

There are of course powerful interests in every country to whom war means big profits and who may be secretly engaged in financing. propaganda and, as I have shown elsewhere, the Socialists and Communists in Europe to-day are exerting every effort to set the four western powers at war; but this is not sufficient to explain the rapid spread of an infection over a country producing all the symptoms of mental rabies. The Press have no scruples about stimulating this mental intoxication if it sells a few more copies of the paper, and do not hesitate about publishing shocking lies, and using the poster to. excite the public.

The most serious danger to Peace is the utter want of any feeling of responsibility on the part of the British, French and American Press and wireless. Let me take a recent example.

The annexation of Bohemia and Moravia, by the German government, and the joining of Memel to the Reich, has caused considerable excitement in this country. It is therefore a time when those responsible for news should do their best to calm and not excite public imagination. The B.B.C. sent out a message that the German government had told the Lithuanian government that if they did not hand over Memel, German planes would bomb the capital of Lithuania, and that while the Lithuanian parliament was meeting, German bombing planes flew backwards and forwards overhead.

[Page 88]

There are poisons known to medicine which are called cumulative poisons. One drop will do no harm, but it remains in the body waiting for the next drop and the next and the next, until sufficient of the poison has accumulated to produce illness and death. The same is true of poisons to the mind. We read in the Press a lie about Germany, next day we read part of a speech denouncing Germany, on the Sunday we hear a sermon in which Germany is attacked. We pick up a magazine lying on the club table and there is an article abusing Germany. And so day by day and week by week and month by month this cumulative poison collects in our minds until the day comes when it produces a mental fever in which all sense of proportion is lost and we are controlled by the horrible delusion that it is our duty to go out and kill.

An interesting example of this occurred in the House of Commons the other day. The leader of the Labour party and the leader of the Liberal party, both accused Franco of having dropped from his planes chocolate boxes containing infernal machines to blow children to pieces. There is a well known morbid disease known as persecution mania which often results in the sufferer committing murder. Both these men have reached this dangerous mental condition. They will not have to commit the murder themselves, but will send other men out to kill and to be killed.

When once war has been declared, the governments of both sides take charge of the propaganda machine and pour out lies about the people on the other side in order to keep hatred at a killing point. Many will remember that during the first year of the war, it was decided by both sides on the French front to have a truce at Christmas with the result that the German and English soldiers got so friendly that if the higher command had not stopped it at once, they would have refused to go on killing each other. I remember the first time I visited France during the war. I went to the camouflage factory and was astounded to find that our officers liked the Germans and only began to use bad language when the Portuguese were mentioned. The hatred of the German which was felt in Great Britain did not extend to the fighting line. As I watched Chinese labourers, French peasant girls, German prisoners and English soldiers all working happily together I wondered what we were fighting about.

[Page 89]

It is also necessary, in order to keep the war fever at its height, to invent a slogan. Our slogan was that we were fighting to save democracy, — the victory of the allies having resulted in the abolition of parliament and the setting up of dictators in nearly every country in Europe.

I have during my life seen the nations of Europe hurled at each other’s throats in a meaningless slaughter by means of lying propaganda, and when I see the same thing going on to-day in an aggravated form, I confess I am very much afraid. The German people who have been carrying through a revolution against enormous odds, have doubtless done many things of which we cannot approve, but these things have not only been exaggerated out of all proportion, but have been successfully used to rouse the most dangerous and bloodthirsty of all human emotions, — moral indignation, and the church has been pressed into service in order to bring us nearer to war. Everywhere the gospel of hate is being preached in the Press and from the pulpit. We are told by those preaching this gospel that they have no hostility to the German people but only to the German government, the wicked Hitler and the dreadful Nazis. If that is true, surely the right way to go about it is to persuade the German people that our view and not their view is right. Surely a hatred of Hitler is not a reason for killing millions of Germans, and incidentally killing millions of Englishmen in the process. If war is declared against Germany, every German whatever his private opinions will line up behind Hitler to defend his fatherland, and after a furious and bloody war, nothing will have been settled and Europe ruined.

We are told that Hitler is going to do this and is going to do that; let us at any rate wait and see if he does do any of these things before we dream of plunging into war.

[Page 90]

The danger of the situation in this country is that good well-meaning people have got trapped by this propaganda and are beginning to think that the killing of Germans is a righteous and Christian act. If these people would go to Germany and visit some of the little German towns and wander about among the decent kindly people and say to themselves when they see a German workman returning to his home, “I am going to kill that man”, and a German mother sitting in a public garden with her children, “I am going to make her a widow, and I am going to drop bombs upon this town and set it blazing in flames with the tortured people dying in agony in the ruins”, all this in the name of the Christian religion, I believe they would go away shuddering at committing such devilry in the name of Christ.

When savage tribes wish to make war upon another tribe, they work their young men up to the killing point by means of war dances which produce the necessary mental intoxication. Our method to-day is more elaborate, but the object and the outcome is the same. The dance of death is getting wilder and wilder in this country, until nothing will satisfy us except a holocaust of blood.

It is obvious that the war propaganda in this country and in America, cannot be kept going without a large expenditure, and the investment of capital in buying up politicians, managing governments, and controlling the British and American Press. It is impossible to find out who really owns the big British dailies behind the scenes, but it is evident that most of them dare not publish anything but anti-German news. Probably the only really free press in England today, are the local weekly newspapers.

Those who handle large sums of money are the International financiers, who do not spend money for ideological reasons, but only to make more money. It was not till I read the story of the political activities of the great Jewish banking firm Kuhn Loeb and Co, and the way in which they controlled American Presidents, and financed the Japanese war against Russia, that I realised the connection between war and high finance, which is the polite name for money lending on a big scale.

[Page 91]

We cannot imagine our dear old orthodox British banks indulging in such unorthodox practices, but they pick up the crumbs which fall from the masters table. The profits are made in handling big loans, the general public finally holding the baby. Since the war, by means of propaganda, the American public have been persuaded to invest large sums in loans to bankrupt South American States, every penny of which has been lost, the financiers making their profit and clearing out.

We had a ramp in the cotton industry, organised by the “City”, which robbed the Lancashire workers of their savings and ruined the industry.

The richest field for plunder for the international financier, is war and rumours of war. Owing to the present bad temper among European nations, some five thousand millions, if we include the U.S.A., is being spent on armaments, with no control on profits here or in America, and most of the money is being borrowed, while war means the borrowing of huge sums by the government at high rates of interest. It is obvious then, that while war ruins nations, it is the best way in which high finance can make enormous profits, the burden of interest being born by future tax payers.

In the second place, as long as Germany and Italy are under their present governments, they will not touch foreign loans, and Germany by her method of internal economy and trading has eliminated the international financier, and those who make profits by playing with foreign exchanges. That is doubtless why the government is being forced by the “City” to start a trade war with Germany. If the economic methods devised by Germany are successful, and spread to other nations, and if Hitler succeeds in his policy of establishing permanent peace in Europe, the high financier will cease to be able to exist. It is therefore their main interest today to plunge the four powers into war, in order to destroy Germany and Italy. Having failed in September to start Europe fighting over a time table, they are now trying to bring in the U.S.A., which has already begun a trade war against Germany. It would be interesting to know the real origin of Roosevelt’s outburst about defending “Christianity, democracy and international good faith”. Who pulled the strings and sat grinning in his bank parlour in New York?

[Page 92]

The organisation of mass propaganda here and in the U.S.A., by financial groups, means the end of democracy, which is based on the free expression of opinion and putting both sides before the people. Not only is the Press and the B.B.C. controlled, but the House of Commons itself is being intimidated, as the Members of Parliament fear their constituents whose minds have been poisoned by mass propaganda. There are many Members of Parliament opposed to our hostility to Germany, but they are afraid to speak in the House.

In fact, we have reached the extraordinary position in this “free and democratic” country, that the only place where a fearless discussion is possible and takes place, is in the House of Lords, where the members separated by their exalted position from the tyranny of machine-made democratic opinion, can speak freely what they believe, and excellent speeches are made opposing our hostility to Germany.

Freedom of speech, a high level of intelligence, and a genuine desire for the public good, apart from the low motives of political life, has deserted the House of Commons, and taken refuge in the House of Lords.

Once their propaganda has been successful, the governments of democratic countries have to yield as our Government has yielded to the outcry about the annexation of Bohemia and Moravia. Only Hitler and Mussolini are strong enough to say No and will keep the peace unless we and France compel them to draw the sword. Unfortunately in this country the “City” pulls the strings, and while our young men will be fighting and dying under the delusion that they were defending Christianity and democracy, they would really be fighting to rake profits for the international financiers.

The vultures of finance gorge on war and rumours of war, and millions of lives are sacrificed to fill their money chests.

[Page 93]

 

 

 

 

Chapter Thirteen

 

 

OUR FUTURE POLICY

 

 

TOWARDS GERMANY

 

 

The Peace Pact having been signed with Germany, and the German people in Central Europe having accomplished their union under one Reich, with the exception of one minor area, Danzig, the question before the people of this country is what is to be our policy towards Germany in the future.

We must agree that it has not been a wise policy in the past. While on the one hand admitting that the conditions forced on them by the Treaty of Versailles were unfair and would have to be revised, on the other hand instead of arranging with them that the revisal be done by agreement, we have protested against every step they took in this direction. Why could we not have done what we did in the case of Turkey in agreeing to the fortification of the Dardanelles? — a matter much more vital to us than anything happening in Central Europe. Either we could have adopted the policy of the Opposition, said No, and been prepared to back our No with war if necessary, or we could have agreed to the revisal by mutual consent.

Mr. Chamberlain in arranging for a conference of the four Powers to settle the Sudeten German problem, has adopted the policy which we should have adopted from the beginning. The Sudeten German question differed from anything that had happened before, as up to that time Germany had been engaged in internal re-organization and in completing, by the union — with Austria, the policy begun by Bismarck, — a policy which was entirely their own affair. The problem of Sudeten Germany was the first to involve the interests of another state, and was further complicated by the alliance between CzechoSlovakia and France. Germany was therefore quite right in accepting the offer to settle the matter by agreement according to the promise made by Hitler in his speech of March 7th 1936.

[Page 94]

Mr. Chamberlain having initiated this new policy of consultation among the four Powers on any point of disagreement, it is all the more necessary to define our attitude towards Germany.

In order to be able to do this, we must begin by considering what are the vital necessities of the German people, and whether there is any reason why we should oppose them. In considering this question we must put on one side our democratic sentiments, and our disapproval of some of the things the German Government have done within their own country, and look into the question on a purely business basis from the point of view of our Imperial interests.

To deal first with the needs of the German people. There are 80 million Germans living on a small area in Europe with a comparatively poor soil, who cannot like the French obtain all the food they want from the fertile soil of their own country. It is therefore evident that they must either be satisfied with a very low standard of comfort and an underfed population, or develop external trade, or undertake military conquest of new territory.

In spite of the alarm of the Opposition, we may dismiss the idea that Germany is meditating ventures of military conquest. Such a policy must result in ruin and disaster, and though partly successful would not improve her economic position. Even if Hitler is the military filibuster which the Opposition foolishly imagine him to be, we may take it for granted that the average German citizen would rather trade than fight. The days of military conquest and subjugation of other nations in Europe are over, as there is no genuine economic advantage to be obtained from it. This is clearly perceived by the German people and in course of time will doubtless be understood by our own politicians who in this matter are mentally behind the times.

[Page 95]

The only alternative therefore is extended trade, and Germany is making every effort she can to carry out this policy. While trading with any and every nation, she has looked round the world to see whether there is any region open to her which is economically undeveloped and which would supply her with the raw materials she requires. Putting on one side for a time her claim for colonies, and realising the importance of doing nothing to arouse the jealousy and suspicion of Great Britain, she has agreed to a strict limitation of her fleet, and is looking for a development of trade on land areas.

If we look at the map of Europe, we shall recognise that the. obvious direction for her trade expansion is in the countries situated on the Danube and beyond that the Balkans and Turkey, along the lines of the old overland trade route from Asia to Europe. She has already developed a considerable trade with the states on the Danube and with the Balkan states, and is projecting a great canal taking ships up to 1500 tons to connect the Rhine with the Danube.

There can be no question that there are great possibilities of development in these economically backward countries, and that Germany will be of the greatest assistance to them, enabling them to take advantage of modern scientific methods of production.

Although she has been compelled by her economic position to enter into special trade agreements, she is not attempting to claim any monopoly and if she is successful in developing these countries economically, we shall reap some of the benefits. Surely with our world trade and vast Empire, we can allow Germany to cultivate this garden lying at her door. Doubtless these countries will be included in the German “sphere of influence”, whatever that may mean. I cannot see that this is any business of ours, as no vital interests of the British Empire can be affected by the development of trade in the central parts of Europe. It is the right of every nation to adopt the form of government they prefer, and we have no more right to try and compel nations to adopt our political theories by acts of war than the Roman Catholic Church has the right to crush Protestantism by promoting war in Europe. We are a business people engaged in world trade and, avoiding all ideologies, we must look at the whole question from a purely business point of view. To repeat the famous phrase of Bismarck with a difference. — The whole of the Balkans is not worth the life of one British soldier. Surely possessing the world and the fatness thereof, we need not grudge her this line of development.

[Page 96]

There are rumours that the Soviet is breaking up and that the next great national movement is going to be in the Ukraine which formed an independent republic after the war and was afterwards massacred into submission by the Soviet. The Ukrainians in Poland who have been badly treated by the Poles are demanding Home Rule, and the Ukrainians in CzechoSlovakia are evidently in a restless condition. The Ukraine includes the black soil wheat area of Russia on the Dneiper, and could supply unlimited wheat to Germany in return for manufactured goods and will naturally enter into close relations with Germany who will be her natural protectors against the Soviet. Therefore if once an independent Ukraine republic was established and entered into friendly relations with Germany, we should be glad that the essential needs of Germany for raw materials had been satisfied. To quote Hitler:

 “A nation which is satisfied and well fed is more likely to keep the peace than a nation which is dissatisfied and hungry.

Ah, our Opposition will reply, but Germany will be exercising throughout all these regions that vague and mysterious thing called a sphere of influence. As long as they are exercising a sphere of influence results in these nations being contented and well supplied with goods, and therefore secures the peace of Europe, why should we object, and oppose these natural developments which are inevitable because they are based upon the facts of geography. The answer is there is no alternative plan except to make war on the German people and reduce them to such desperate impoverishment and slaughter of so many of their youth, that they are again brought to their condition after the thirty years war and will require a century to recover. Mr. Lloyd George says we can crush them like an eggshell. He would find the eggshell made of tempered steel.

I have searched the pages of Hansard containing the speeches of the Opposition in the recent debate on a vote of censure against the Government’s foreign policy, with a view to finding out what is their alternative policy to the one advocated by Mr. Chamberlain. This alternative policy was given by Mr. Dalton and is worthy of quotation in full.

[Page 97]

There is once more a possibility, it may not last much longer. There is still one more chance for British diplomacy to bring together into an effective combination all those nations in the East of Europe who are threatened by this German push to the East. They are still there a potential combination, the Soviet Union, Poland, Rumania, Yugo-Slavia, Turkey and Greece. They are all members of the League of Nations, to which we and France still belong. You have still there a potential formidable force if it could be welded together for peace and for organised resistance to further endeavours to dislocate Europe.

It is unfortunate that men in the responsible position of leaders of the Labour party should be so ignorant of the real situation in Europe to-day. Germany far from dislocating Europe is consolidating Europe by helping to adjust the injustices caused by the peace treaties, and has no intention of threatening any of these countries with aggression. France who has signed a peace pact with Germany and is anxious to develop her trade relations with her, would not support the Labour policy, and the Soviet is too busy with internal affairs and with Japan, to indulge in the venture of a European war at the call of our Labour party. When Mr. Dalton’s delegate called on the governments of Poland, Rumania, Yugo-Slavia, Turkey and Greece, they would receive his proposals with astonishment, and tell him that they were much too busy making profitable trade agreements with Germany.

Mr. Dalton had great hopes of the new Prime Minister of Hungary. If he had listened over the wireless the other day he would have heard the Prime Minister saying that the closest bonds of friendship united Hungary to Germany and Italy, because they would be for ever grateful to them for enabling them to recover their stolen territories from Czecho-Slovakia.

Our policy in Europe in the past has been called securing “the balance of power” which meant that if ever we thought one nation in Europe was getting more powerful than the other nations we made it our business to promote war against that nation, and to support war when it came with our money bags, our fleet and expeditionary forces.

[Page 98]

This policy is openly advocated by Mr. Ramsay Muir who glories in the days of Marlborough and Wellington, and wishes to see them come back again. There can be no question that this policy of the past has cost Europe millions of lives on a hundred battle-fields. We not only promoted wars but when war had once begun supported its continuance with our money bags until the war to quote Mr. Lloyd George was “fought to a finish”, with the result that it ended probably in an unjust treaty which opened the door to future wars.

Can anyone doubt now that if we had adopted Lord Lansdowne’s policy in 1917, and made peace with Germany then, we should have saved all the dangers and difficulties of the last twenty years.

To my mind the policy of the Balance of Power is a damnable policy. We have been in the past the evil genius of Europe. It is surely evident that if the policy of the Opposition was adopted, and could be successfully carried out, blocking Germany’s natural trade expansion in the Danube basin and in the Balkans, the German people confined to a limited area with no hope of commercial development, would be compelled to fight in order to live. The choice therefore is between Mr. Chamberlain’s policy of allowing Germany a free area for commercial expansion, or war — a war in which Germany would be fighting for her life.

The maddest of all nightmares from which the Opposition suffer, is that Germany would attempt a military conquest of the Ukraine. Either she would have to march six hundred miles across Polish territory, to which Poland would naturally object, or if she marched through Czecho-Slovakia would find herself lost in the Carpathian mountains, with no railways or roads, and would still have to violate either Rumanian or Polish territory. The one thing that would save the Soviet, if it is true that it is breaking up, would be an external attack.

The difficulty that Germany and Italy find in dealing with democracies, is that they have no continuity of foreign policy, and therefore States with a stable form of government and a continuity of foreign policy have to be very cautious in their approach to France and Great Britain. France, where the members of the Cabinet are paid their salaries weekly, and Great Britain, where the old policy of continuity of foreign Policy has been abandoned for the pursuit of opposite policies by the Government and the Opposition.

[Page 99]

Since the peace pact with Germany was signed, there has been an outburst of attack on Germany, which started before the new decrees against the Jews, in the Press, by politicians, and from the pulpit, and Germany is naturally anxiously watching to see whether the next election will return the parties of the Left to power, who would denounce the treaty with Italy, and seek for some pretext to declare war on her.

In every capital in Europe, the triumph of the parties of the Left in this country at the next election, would be taken as the red signal for war.

[Page 100]

 

 

 

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

 

PDF of Part 1. Click to download (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 1
PDF of Part 2. Click to download (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 2
PDF of Part 3. Click to download (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 3
PDF of Part 4. Click to download  (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 4
PDF of Part 5. Click to download (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 5

PDF of this post. Click to download (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 6

 

 

Version History

 

 

Version 1: Published Sep 26, 2014

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »