Roosevelt’s Catos

Peter Stuyvesant


Winter in Germany, 1946-1947

Today we can hardly imagine that 65 years ago the victorious Allies were in the process of dismembering Germany, tearing down its economy and starving out its population. Older Germans remember the postwar winter of 1946/1947 as a dreadful hunger winter. In his book The German Question and the Origins of the Cold War (Milan 2008) Nicolas Lewkowicz notes that “Germany was given the most comprehensive treatment ever dispensed to a vanquished nation in the modern history of the international political system.” (p. 11) The question is how this treatment came to be and which forces played a pivotal role in these developments.

In 1942 the war was far from decided as German submarines were cruising the American Eastcoast and German tanks were relentlessly advancing in Russia and Africa. This did not stop (or maybe actually encouraged) Jewish exiles from dreaming about Germany’s demise after the war. Tens of thousands of Jewish exiles from Germany had found refuge in New York and even had their own newspaper —Aufbau (German word for ‘build-up’). They were not sitting idle awaiting the end of hostilities, but were active in canvassing the public opinion to lobby for imposing a hard peace on Germany. The most active and outspoken among them was Emil Cohn, better known under his German pen name Emil Ludwig.

Advertisement

Cohn delivered an important speech in New York in 1942, which was noted in the New York Times (6th of July 1942) and printed in Aufbau (July 24th 1942): “Was soll mit Deutschland geschehen?” (What should happen with Germany?). Ludwig advocated that Germany should be totally occupied and not be able to exercise self-government for a long time. Germany should go through a ‘probation’ and should be ‘re-educated’. Another contributor to Aufbau, Manfred George, made no secret about his his primary allegiance when he noted in Aufbau (March 19, 1943) that “onetime German-speaking Jews consider this problem [of Germany’s fate after the war] as Jews and not as Germans.” There were many similar voices but Cohn was not a mere commentator as he was summoned to testify before the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives on March 26 1943. He proposed a partition of Germany and a long period of Allied control. In order to spread his radical ideas among the American public he published a book with the title How To Treat The Germans (New York: Willard, 1943). Note that there is no question mark in the title.

In Jewish circles there was little room for a distinction between National-Socialist policies and the German people, which was contrary to the American public opinion of Germany as I will illustrate below. The idea of collective punishment based on collective guilt was paramount among Jews. During a protest rally at Boston Garden on May 2 1943 assistant secretary of state Adolf Augustus Berle Jr. exclaimed: “This guilt now generalized throughout the German people must constitute one of the basic considerations in dealing with the German people in the hour of their final defeat.” Berle was not Jewish, but his family was strongly pro-Zionist and philo-Semitic. His father, Adolf Augustus Berle Sr., was the author of the book The World Significance Of A Jewish State  (New York: M. Kennerly, 1918). The World Jewish Congress promoted Berle’s speech at this rally in the Jewish Comment (May 28, 1943).

Knowing that Jewish activists were advocating harsh measures to be imposed on postwar Germany, it is not surprising that a harsh peace was being drafted long before the end of the war. In  April 1943 the American journalist Kingsbury Smith revealed the blueprint for a defeated Germany under the title “Washington’s Plan for Postwar Germany” in the American Mercury 56 (April 1943). This plan was entirely congruent with the ideas of Cohn and Berle: 1. The decentralization of Germany as a political and economic unit; 2. The reduction of Germany’s heavy industry by the removal of machinery, and then placing the remaining industries under Allied control for an indefinite period of years; 3. The establishment of an Allied commission for the investigation of war crimes and the trial of Germans who were “responsible for sponsoring or condoning the barbaric slaughter and persecution of Jews in Europe as well as other war crimes.”

This plan meant that the abandonment of the Anglo-American Atlantic Charter of August 1941, which stipulated that no territorial changes would be made without the consent of the people concerned. Moreover, the plan was highly criticized in the media and did not have any significant support among the American public. A public opinion-poll of June 1943 showed that only 11% of the people in the poll were in favor of carving up Germany (“Germany in the Dock,” Fortune, June 27, 1943). In a poll of September 1943 only a quarter of the American public responded that Germany was inherently warlike (50% thought Japan was inherently warlike).

Apparently the American public did not hate (or fear) Germans. In order to achieve this the Society for the Prevention of World War III was found in December 1943. At a first glance non-Jews like the German pacifist Friedrich Wilhelm Foerster and the American fiction writer Rex Stout were in charge, but the advisory committee was stacked with Jews like Paul Winkler, Louis Nizer and Clifton Fadiman.  Jews were also overrepresented among the contributors and writers, because they were mustered in Jewish circles (S. Casey (2005), The campaign to sell a harsh peace for Germany to the American public, 1944–1948, p. 11) The Society was the vanguard of advocates for Germany’s dismemberment. In 1943 Paul Winkler published a book called The German Conspiracy: Secret Germany Behind the Mask (New York: Charles Scribner’s sons, 1943). In 1944 Louis Nizer published his book What To Do With Germany (Chicago: Ziff-Davis) in which he advocated that Germany’s sovereignty as a nation should be forfeited. The society was not very successful among the public. Indeed, its hatred for the Germans as a nation caused indignation among some writers and editors, who accused the society of “bad history, bad logic, and inverted racism” (Common Sense, June 1944 p. 207–212).

In the summer of 1944 the defeat of Germany seemed imminent and Roosevelt felt confident enough to propose an official postwar plan for Germany to his Anglo-Saxon ally Churchill during the Quebec Conference of September 1944. This time it was the Treasury Department of Roosevelt’s long-time confidant Henry Morgenthau Jr. (also from the above mentioned Brain Trust) who drafted the plan, circumnavigating the State Department.  Before Morgenthau submitted his plan during the conference he visited the front in France in August 1944. He was horrified to find out that in London and among the American generals “plans were afoot to administer a conquered Germany not as a madhouse full of psychopathic killers but as a defeated nation in need of rebuilding.” (J.M. Blum, From the Morgenthau Diaries, Houghton Mifflin 1967). Churchill ultimately agreed to adopt the plan in exchange for a large loan which Great-Britain desperately needed at this stage of the war. The plan was again leaked to the press, causing indignation and criticism towards the Roosevelt administration. Even from within the administration secretary of state Henry L. Stimson criticized the “Carthaginian peace.”

Morgenthau envisaged the dismemberment of the German state and decimation of the German people. A quarter of Germany’s territory was to be given to neighboring countries and ethnically cleansed from Germans. The rest was to be politically divided into several pieces, which were under the control of the Allied nations. Germans were deprived of any form of self-governance and political self-determination. Economically, the remaining German territory was to be stripped of all its industry and the German people were only to be fed on a subsistence level. Germans were not allowed to emigrate and were liable to be conscripted for forced labor abroad. Access by relief organizations was not allowed, and any charity from abroad was forbidden. Germany was to become the largest concentration camp on earth. Goebbels described the plan as followed: “The Jew Morgenthau wanted to make Germany into a giant potato patch.”

The “Morgenthau Plan” has often been downplayed: Morgenthau’s role was diminished by the suggestion that it came largely from the pen of Harry Dexter White (also Jewish, a target of Sen. Joe McCarthy, and later shown to be a communist spy), that the plan was executed after Morgenthau’s term of office, and that the Allied occupation in fact ended in the formation of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1948. However, it should be noted that Morgenthau was committed to the execution of his plan and published a book Germany Is Our Problem (New York: Harper, 1945) to personally promote the plan. The Allied occupation regime until 1948 largely executed the Morgenthau Plan by Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive 1067 imposing a division of Germany into four zones, restrictive food distribution which caused starvation in 1947, and by dismantling German industries. Millions of Germans were submitted to forced labor abroad and millions of Germans were on the brink of starvation at home as pointed out in Herbert Hoover’s report “German Agricultural and Food Requirements.” Eventually, it was the Cold War that hastened the creation of the Federal Republic of Germany and its merging into the camp of the Western Allies.

As outlined above, the Roosevelt administration’s postwar plan for Germany did not stem from the sentiment among the American public, or even its generals at the front. The American public did not believe in the inherent evil of the Germans, nor did it desire a harsh peace. They did not hate the Germans, nor did they believe in collective guilt/punishment. It was the desire of small minority of Jewish activists and policy makers with access to President Roosevelt. The Morgenthau Plan did not come out of the blue; its outline was in place long before September 1944. It stemmed from the same group of Jewish activists and policy makers who had advocated its basic principles for years in many publications. Morgenthau himself was deeply committed to his plan and advocated its execution after his leave from office. The Morgenthau Plan became the official Allied occupation policy of Germany until Cold War reality forced its abandonment. Still, it should be noted that at least until 1991 German chancellors were forced to sign a ‘act of submission’ to the Allied victors before entering office.

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

114 Comments to "Roosevelt’s Catos"

  1. Annabelle's Gravatar Annabelle
    December 22, 2011 - 12:56 pm | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon: It is my belief that the Jews took down the British Empire.

    The Jews were close friends of Gandhi.

    A jew financed the Revolutionary War against England. After seeing how whites have accepted the Dictatorship of Multiculturalism, I can not believe that it was in whites to fight England.

    The Jews have not been given credit for this but I see it as possible.

    The Jews took over the United States without a whimper from whites.

    40 years ago, a man from Pakistan and a man from Saudi Arabia told me the same thing, “Through out history, where Jews go, they cause trouble.” And then they create a Jewish ceremony around it.

  2. George's Gravatar George
    December 3, 2011 - 3:11 am | Permalink

    THE ‘INCORRECT’ SIX MILLION
    Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Prizewinner and author of The Gulag Archipelago, in a speech in Washington in 1975 had this to say of the Soviet system which was deemed worthy of recognition as one of ‘our’ Allies fighting ‘for Democracy’ against the ‘Dictators’ in WW2:

    “This was a system which, in time of peace, artificially created a famine causing SIX MILLION PERSONS to die in the Ukraine between 1932 and 1933. They died on the very threshold of Europe. And Europe didn’t even notice it. The world didn’t even notice it. SIX MILLION PERSONS!”

    (Alexander Solzhenitsyn Speaks to the West (1978) p 16)

    Who were these people, and why was and is their fate unknown to the ordinary man in the street in western countries?

    Franklin Roosevelt’s ally and associate Joseph Stalin was the supreme dictator of Russia for almost a quarter of a century, from 1929 until his death in 1953. Born as Iosif Djugashvili, he adopted the very indicative name ‘Stalin’, ‘man of steel’. He lived up to this name in every respect. Soviet Russia under Stalin was a despotic police state that relied on espionage and terror, with a profound gulf in manner of living between the rulers and the ruled.

    Stalin’s first Five-Year Plan (1928-1932) sought to bring about the ‘collectivization of agriculture’ in accordance with the ‘abolition of property in land’ put forward in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. But back in 1861 Czar Alexander II had liberated 23 million serfs, four years before slavery was abolished in the United States. In the period before the Revolution, millions of these peasants had been enabled to get title to their own individual plots, boosting Russian agricultural productivity. These independent peasant farmers became known as kulaks. When Communism was imposed on Russia, the kulaks as private property owners now stood in the way of the idea of Communism. In 1929 Stalin called for ‘the liquidation of the kulaks’, and their small family farms, animals, implements and crops were declared to belong to the state. “(The Jews) Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev had always argued that the peasant would never surrender enough food voluntarily, and must be coerced and, if need be, crushed” (*Paul Johnson A History of the Modern World (1983) p 268). The Red Army and the GPU secret police were used to implement the policy. All peasants who resisted were treated with violence. A very large number were killed or sent in cattle or freight trains to exile in remote areas in the frozen north or the desert steppes. Rather than give up their animals to the collective farms, many peasants killed and ate them. As a result, the number of farm animals in the Soviet Union was catastrophically reduced:

    1928
    1933

    Cattle
    30,7 million
    19,6 million

    Sheep and goats
    146,7 million
    50,2 million

    Hogs
    26 million
    12,1 million

    Horses
    33,5 million
    16,6 million

    (*Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p 398).

    The peasants stopped farming on ground that suddenly, officially, no longer belonged to them. As a result, food production decreased drastically. After a while, the cities started running out of food. Orders were given for grain to be confiscated from the peasants, whether they had sufficient for themselves and their families or not. Those caught trying to reserve food for their families were ‘severely dealt with’. By the winter of 1932-3, virtually no food was left in the countryside. By early March 1933, ‘death on a mass scale really began’ (Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow (1986) p243). The main farming areas of Russia, in the regions of the Ukraine and North Caucasus, were utterly devastated. Millions of people were forced to eat anything that was available, mice, rats, birds, grass, nettles, bark and even cats and dogs, but even then did not survive. It was a time of great and terrible hunger, a catastrophic man-made famine.

    The American journalist Eugene Lyons was sent to Russia in 1928 as chief correspondent for the United Press agency. Arriving as an enthusiastic communist, he was able to experience the Soviet experiment at first hand. He became extremely disillusioned. He described the famine in his book Assignment in Utopia (published in 1937) in the following terms:

    “Hell broke loose in seventy thousand Russian villages.. A population as large as all of Switzerland’s or Denmark’s was stripped clean of all their belongings.. They were herded with bayonets at railroad stations, packed indiscriminately into cattle cars and freight cars and dumped weeks later in the lumber regions of the frozen North, the deserts of central Asia, wherever labor was needed, there to live or die..”. The number of people that died is unknown, but the famine alone is estimated conservatively to have been responsible for 6 million deaths, almost half of them children (*Conquest, p 303-4). Other millions died from the killings and sickness as a result of the deportations (*p 304-7). At the famous Yalta conference in 1945, Winston Churchill was able to question his friend and fellow ally Stalin about the process. Stalin said ‘ten million’ had been ‘dealt with’, but that it had been ‘absolutely necessary’. Churchill records that he ‘sustained the strong impression of millions of men and women being blotted out or displaced forever’ (*Churchill, The Second World War, vol. IV p448). However Churchill – thank God for Winston Churchill – had no further comment to make on the matter. Controlling the agenda is always so important!

    Lyons, himself Jewish, credits the Jewish commissar Lazar Kaganovich with the major portion of responsibility for this major crime against humanity:

    “Lazar Kaganovich… it was his mind that invented the Political Departments to lead collectivized agriculture, his iron hand that applied Bolshevik mercilessness.” (*Lyons, p 578). The Encyclopaedia Britannica says tersely, “(Kaganovich) was one of the small group of Stalin’s top advisors pushing for very high rates of collectivization after 1929.. Within the Politburo, Kaganovich and Molotov led the opposition to Kirov’s proposed concessions to the peasantry and to his attempts to relax the harshness of Stalin’s control.. (Kaganovich) opposed Krushchev’s de-Stalinization..”. Kaganovich died at the ripe old age of 98 in 1991 (Encl. Brit.), ethnically safe from pursuit by the Israeli secret service, the Simon Wiesenthal organization, the New York media-intelligentsia or other hunters of real or imagined war criminals or human rights violators.

    The suffering caused by the great man-made famine was covered by some reports in newspapers in Britain, Europe and the United States. Books dating from before World War Two can still be found in second-hand bookshops which describe the ferocity… Arthur Koestler, Soviet Myth and Reality in The Yogi and the Commissar (1945) Muggeridge, Lyons, Chamberlin… Yet this episode has been completely, entirely, totally ignored by our guardians of history, morality and political correctness…

    NO MEMORIAL EXISTS IN WASHINGTON DC

    (obviously) to record the indescribable scale of human suffering which resulted, undoubtedly because such a high burden of responsibility for it lies with the Jew Kaganovitch, and because the victims were not Jewish. No chance exists for such a monument, according to a private consensus, owing to certain political realities.

    This six million is the ‘incorrect’ six million, because their inconvenient story is not and has not been useful to today’s elite. The tribal affiliations of the chief perpetrator (Jew) and the victims (non-Jews) are the wrong ones, not fitting into the ‘correct’ pattern.

    According to Solzhenitsyn in the eighty years that preceded the Revolution in Russia, – years of revolutionary activity, uprisings and the assassination of a Czar, an average of ten persons a year were executed. After the Revolution, in 1918 and 1919, according to the figures of the Cheka, the secret police itself – more than a thousand persons were executed per month without trial. In 1937-8, at the height of Stalin’s terror, more than 40 000 persons were executed per month. (*Solzhenitsyn p17).

    Millions of persons were executed or sent to labour camps. In his magnum opus The Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn credits Naftaly Frenkel, a ‘Turkish-born Jew’, with being works chief / chief overseer of the one-hundred-and-forty-mile-long Belomor (Baltic-White Sea) canal, built entirely with slave labour (paperback edition, vol 2 p 72). Solzhenitsyn quotes the official Soviet history of the project which describes Frenkel as having ‘..the eyes of an interrogator and prosecutor.. A man with enormous love of power and pride, for whom the main thing is unlimited power. If it is necessary for him to be feared, then let him be feared. He spoke harshly to the engineers, attempting to humiliate them.’ (ibid p 75). Other Jews were also involved in influential positions. Yakov Rappoport was deputy chief of construction (p 78) and Matvei Berman was the Chief of Gulag (p 79). Frenkel, Berman and Rappoport are amongst six men described by Solzhenitsyn as ‘hired murderers’, ‘each of whom accounted for thirty thousand lives’ (p 91). Is Solzhenitsyn alone in his accusations? Why are these names generally unknown to ordinary citizens in the West?

    “The major role Jewish leaders played in the November (Russian) revolution was probably more important than any other factor in confirming (Hitler’s) anti-Semitic beliefs.” (J&S Pool, Who Financed Hitler, p.164).

    “There has been a tendency to circumvent or simply ignore the significant role of Jewish intellectuals in the German Communist Party, and thereby seriously neglect one of the genuine and objective reasons for increased anti-Semitism during and after World War 1.. The prominence of Jews in the revolution and early Weimar Republic is indisputable, and this was a very serious contributing cause for increased anti-Semitism in post-war years.. It is clear then that the stereotype of Jews as socialists and communists.. led many Germans to distrust the Jewish minority as a whole and to brand Jews as enemies of the German nation.” (Sarah Gordon Hitler, Germans and the ‘Jewish Question’ Princeton University Press (1984) p 23).

    “The second paroxysm of strong anti-Semitism came after the critical role of Jews in International Communism and the Russian Revolution and during the economic crises of the 1920s and 30s… Anti-Semitism intensified throughout Europe and North America following the perceived and actual centrality of Jews in the Russian Revolution.. Such feelings were not restricted to Germany, or to vulgar extremists like the Nazis. All over Northern Europe and North America, anti-Semitism became the norm in ‘nice society’, and ‘nice society’ included the universities.” (Bernal, Black Athena vol. 1 pp. 367, 387).

    “To many outside observers, the Russian revolution looked like a Jewish conspiracy, especially when it was followed by Jewish-led revolutionary outbreaks in much of central Europe. The leadership of the Bolshevik Party had a preponderance of Jews and included Litvinov (real name Wallach), Liadov (Mandelshtam), Shklovsky, Saltz, Gusev (Drabkin), Zemliachka (Salkind), Helena Rozmirovich, Serafima Gopner, Yaroslavsky (Gubelman), Yaklovlev (Epstein), Riaznov (Goldendach), Uritsky and Larin. Of the seven members of the Politburo, the inner cabinet of the country, four, Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinoviev (Radomsky), Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Sverdlov, were Jews.”

    When Lenin died in 1924, Zinoviev – the first chairman of the Communist International – formed a triumvirate with Kamenev and Stalin to govern Russia. This ‘Troika’ as it was known was formed to keep Trotsky from the succession. Stalin was the only one of the three members of the Troika who was not Jewish. “Though Zinoviev and Kamenev feared Trotsky as too militant and extreme, they shared his belief in permanent revolution, which Stalin did not. Russia had been in almost continuous turmoil for twenty years and had suffered revolutions and counter-revolutions, war, invasions and a pitiless and drawn-out civil war. There were limits to which the endurance of a people could be stretched. The Russians wanted to bury their dead and resume what they could of normal life. Stalin understood this. Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev (the three Jews) did not.”

    “Jews had a prominent role in Communist parties elsewhere..” (Chaim Bermant, The Jews (1977)).

  3. George's Gravatar George
    December 3, 2011 - 3:02 am | Permalink

    It’s now official – there’s been no actual shortage of Holocaust Survivors :

    Quote from The Holocaust Industry by Norman G. Finkelstein of the City University of New York, published by Verso in the year 2000:
    ‘The Israeli Prime Minister’s office recently put the number of “living Holocaust survivors” at nearly a million.’ (page 83)

    I’ve checked out the six volumes of Churchill’s Second World War and the statement is quite correct – not a single mention of Nazi ‘gas chambers,’ a ‘genocide’ of the Jews, or of ‘six million’ Jewish victims of the war.

    Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe is a book of 559 pages; Churchill’s Second World War totals 4,448 pages; and De Gaulle’s three-volume Mémoires de guerre is 2,054 pages.

    In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi ‘gas chambers,’ a ‘genocide’ of the Jews, or of ‘six million’ Jewish victims of the war.

    CODOH – Committee for Open Debate of the Holocaust – breaking the power of taboo

    http://www.codoh.com/

  4. George's Gravatar George
    December 3, 2011 - 2:56 am | Permalink

    Zionist trial runs of “6 Million” Holocaust propaganda in 1911 – and 1919

    Max Nordau (1849-1923) was the co-founder of the World Zionist Organization together with Theodor Herzl.

    Have a look at this Max Nordau quote from Ben Hecht’s book ‘Perfidy’ – which is available for free in PDF format at
    http://www.hirhome.com/israel/perfidy.pdf (on page 232 of 261):

    Quote:
    In the Zionist Congress of 1911, 22 years before Hitler came to power, and three years before World War I, Nordau said, “How dare the smooth talkers, the clever official blabbers, open their mouths and boast of progress. . . . Here they hold jubilant peace conferences in which they talk against war. . . . But the same righteous Governments, who are so nobly, industriously active to establish the eternal peace, are preparing, by their own confession, complete annihilation for six million people, and there is nobody, except the doomed themselves, to raise his voice in protest although this is a worse crime than any war . . .” unquote.

    ______________________________

    And take a look at the article from The American Hebrew, October 31 1919

    (see attached reproduction below), prophesying a ‘holocaust’ of ‘six million':

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_H._Glynn

    http://www.jrbooksonline.com/images/091031crucifixion.gif

    The Crucifixion of Jews Must Stop!
    By Martin H. Glynn
    (Former Governor of the State of N.Y.)

    From across the sea six million men and women call to us for help, and eight hundred thousand little children cry for bread.

    These children, these men and women are our fellow-members of the human family, with the same claim on life as we, the same susceptibility to the winter’s cold, the same propensity to death before the fangs of hunger. Within them reside the illimitable possibilities for the advancement of the human race as naturally would reside in six million human beings. We may not be their keepers but we ought to be their helpers.

    In the face of death, in the throes of starvation there is no place for mental distinctions of creed, no place for physical differentiations of race. In this catastrophe, when six million human beings are being whirled toward the grave by a cruel and relentless fate, only the most idealistic promptings of human nature should sway the heart and move the hand.

    Six million men and women are dying from lack of the necessaries of life; eight hundred thousand children cry for bread. And this fate is upon them through no fault of their own, through no transgression of the laws of God or man; but through the awful tyranny of war and a bigoted lust for Jewish blood.

    In this threatened holocaust of human life, forgotten are the niceties of philosophical distinction, forgotten are the differences of historical interpretation; and the determination to help the helpless, to shelter the homeless, to clothe the naked and to feed the hungry.. etc etc

  5. George's Gravatar George
    December 3, 2011 - 2:49 am | Permalink

    Dirty Little Secrets – the hidden, awkward origins of World War 2

    http://www.rense.com/general92/dirty.htm

    The unexpected views of four key diplomats who were close to events

    Just consider the following:

    · Joseph P. Kennedy, U.S. Ambassador to Britain during the years immediately preceding WW2 was the father of the famous American Kennedy dynasty. James Forrestal the first US Secretary of Defense (1947-1949) quotes him as saying “Chamberlain (the British Prime Minister) stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war”. (The Forrestal Diaries ed. Millis, Cassell 1952 p129).

    · Count Jerzy Potocki, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, in a report to the Polish Foreign Office in January 1939, is quoted approvingly by the highly respected British military historian Major-General JFC Fuller. Concerning public opinion in America he says “Above all, propaganda here is entirely in Jewish hands…when bearing public ignorance in mind, their propaganda is so effective that people have no real knowledge of the true state of affairs in Europe… It is interesting to observe that in this carefully thought-out campaign… no reference at all is made to Soviet Russia. If that country is mentioned, it is referred to in a friendly manner and people are given the impression that Soviet Russia is part of the democratic group of countries… Jewry was able not only to establish a dangerous centre in the New World for the dissemination of hatred and enmity, but it also succeeded in dividing the world into two warlike camps…President Roosevelt has been given the power.. to create huge reserves in armaments for a future war which the Jews are deliberately heading for.” (Fuller, JFC: The Decisive Battles of the Western World vol 3 pp 372-374.)

    · Hugh Wilson, the American Ambassador in Berlin until 1938, the year before the war broke out, found anti-Semitism in Germany ‘understandable’. This was because before the advent of the Nazis, “the stage, the press, medicine and law [were] crowded with Jews…among the few with money to splurge, a high proportion [were] Jews…the leaders of the Bolshevist movement in Russia, a movement desperately feared in Germany, were Jews. One could feel the spreading resentment and hatred.” (Hugh Wilson: Diplomat between the Wars, Longmans 1941, quoted in Leonard Mosley, Lindbergh, Hodder 1976).

    · Sir Nevile Henderson, British Ambassador in Berlin ‘said further that the hostile attitude in Great Britain was the work of Jews and enemies of the Nazis, which was what Hitler thought himself’ (Taylor, AJP: The Origins of the Second World War Penguin 1965, 1987 etc p 324).

    Is all of this merely attributable to terrible antisemitism?

    The economic background to the war is necessary for a fuller understanding, before casting judgement on the originators of these viewpoints.

    At the end of the First World War, Germany was essentially tricked [see Paul Johnson A History of the Modern World (1983) p24 and H Nicholson Peacemaking 1919 (1933) pp13-16] into paying massive reparations to France and other economic competitors and former belligerent countries in terms of the so-called Treaty of Versailles, thanks to the liberal American President Woodrow Wilson. Germany was declared to be solely responsible for the war, in spite of the fact that ‘Germany did not plot a European war, did not want one, and made genuine efforts, though too belated, to avert one.’ (Professor Sydney B Fay The Origins of the World War (vol. 2 p 552)).

    As a result of these massive enforced financial reparations, by 1923 the situation in Germany became desperate and inflation on an astronomical scale became the only way out for the government. Printing presses were engaged to print money around the clock. In 1921 the exchange rate was 75 marks to the dollar. By 1924 this had become about 5 trillion marks to the dollar. This virtually destroyed the German middle class (Koestler The God that Failed p 28), reducing any bank savings to a virtual zero.

    According to Sir Arthur Bryant the British historian (Unfinished Victory (1940 pp. 136-144):

    ‘It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities.. They did so with such effect that, even in November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real property in the Reich. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation.. But to those who had lost their all this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice. After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions.. The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned professions (in spite of constituting) less than one percent of the population.. The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large part of the press – all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized country is formed.. The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was a Jewish monopoly.. Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep a foothold in any privileged occupation.. At this time it was not the ‘Aryans’ who exercised racial discrimination. It was a discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a majority. There was no persecution, only elimination.. It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed – and lavishly displayed – by aliens of cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle.’

    Goodness gracious!

    Strangely enough, a book unexpectedly published by Princeton University Press in 1984, Sarah Gordon (Hitler, Germans and the “Jewish Question”) essentially confirms what Bryant says. According to her, ‘Jews were never a large percentage of the total German population; at no time did they exceed 1% of the population during the years 1871-1933.’ But she adds ‘Jews were over-represented in business, commerce, and public and private service.. They were especially visible in private banking in Berlin, which in 1923 had 150 private Jewish banks, as opposed to only 11 private non-Jewish banks.. They owned 41% of iron and scrap iron firms and 57% of other metal businesses.. Jews were very active in the stock market, particularly in Berlin, where in 1928 they comprised 80% of the leading members of the stock exchange. By 1933, when the Nazis began eliminating Jews from prominent positions, 85% of the brokers on the Berlin Stock exchange were dismissed because of their “race”.. At least a quarter of full professors and instructors (at German universities) had Jewish origins.. In 1905-6 Jewish students comprised 25% of the law and medical students.. In 1931, 50% of the 234 theatre directors in Germany were Jewish, and in Berlin the number was 80%.. In 1929 it was estimated that the per capita income of Jews in Berlin was twice that of other Berlin residents..’ etc etc.

    Arthur Koestler confirms the Jewish over-involvement in German publishing. ‘Ullstein’s was a kind of super-trust; the largest organization of its kind in Europe, and probably In the world. They published four daily papers in Berlin alone, among these the venerable Vossische Zeitung, founded in the eighteenth century, and the B.Z. am Mittag, an evening paper.. Apart from these, Ullstein’s published more than a dozen weekly and monthly periodicals, ran their own news service, their own travel agency, etc., and were one of the leading book publishers. The firm was owned by the brothers Ullstein – they were five, like the original Rothschild brothers, and like them also, they were Jews.’ (The God that Failed (1950) ed. RHS Crossman, p 31).

    Edgar Mowrer, Berlin correspondent for the Chicago Daily News, wrote an anti-German tract called Germany Puts the Clock Back (published as a Penguin Special and reprinted five times between December 1937 and April 1938). He nevertheless notes ‘In the all-important administration of Prussia, any number of strategic positions came into the hands of Hebrews.. A telephone conversation between three Jews in Ministerial offices could result in the suspension of any periodical or newspaper in the state.. The Jews came in Germany to play in politics and administration that same considerable part that they had previously won by open competition in business, trade, banking, the Press, the arts, the sciences and the intellectual and cultural life of the country. And thereby the impression was strengthened that Germany, a country with a mission of its own, had fallen into the hands of foreigners.’

    Mowrer says ‘No one who lived through the period from 1919 to 1926 is likely to forget the sexual promiscuity that prevailed.. Throughout a town like Berlin, hotels and pensions made vast fortunes by letting rooms by the hour or day to baggageless, unregistered guests. Hundreds of cabarets, pleasure resorts and the like served for purposes of getting acquainted and acquiring the proper mood..’ (pp. 153-4). Bryant describes throngs of child prostitutes outside the doors of the great Berlin hotels and restaurants. He adds ‘Most of them (the night clubs and vice-resorts) were owned and managed by Jews. And it was the Jews.. among the promoters of this trade who were remembered in after years.’ (pp. 144-5).

    Douglas Reed, Chief Central European correspondent before WWII for the London Times, was profoundly anti-German and anti-Hitler. But nevertheless he reported: ‘I watched the Brown Shirts going from shop to shop with paint pots and daubing on the window panes the word “Jew”, in dripping red letters. The Kurfürstendamm was to me a revelation. I knew that Jews were prominent in business life, but I did not know that they almost monopolized important branches of it. Germany had one Jew to one hundred gentiles, said the statistics; but the fashionable Kurfürstendamm, according to the dripping red legends, had about one gentile shop to ninety-nine Jewish ones.’ (Reed Insanity Fair (1938) p. 152-3). In Reed’s book Disgrace Abounding of the following year he notes ‘In the Berlin (of pre-Hitler years) most of the theatres were Jewish-owned or Jewish-leased, most of the leading film and stage actors were Jews, the plays performed were often by German, Austrian or Hungarian Jews and were staged by Jewish film producers, applauded by Jewish dramatic critics in Jewish newspapers.. The Jews are not cleverer than the Gentiles, if by clever you mean good at their jobs. They ruthlessly exploit the common feeling of Jews, first to get a foothold in a particular trade or calling, then to squeeze the non-Jews out of it.. It is not true that Jews are better journalists than Gentiles. They held all the posts on those Berlin papers because the proprietors and editors were Jewish’ (pp238-9).

    The Jewish writer Edwin Black notes ‘For example, in Berlin alone, about 75% of the attorneys and nearly as many of the doctors were Jewish.’ (Black, The Transfer Agreement (1984) p58.

    To cap it all, Jews were perceived as dangerous enemies of Germany after Samuel Untermeyer, the leader of the World Jewish Economic Federation, declared war on Germany on August 6 1933. (Edwin Black The Transfer Agreement: the Untold Story of the Secret Pact between the Third Reich and Palestine (1984) pp272-277) According to Black, ‘The one man who most embodied the potential death blow to Germany was Samuel Untermeyer.’ (p 369). This was the culmination of a worldwide boycott of German goods led by international Jewish organizations. The London Daily Express on March 24, 1933 carried the headline Judea Declares War on Germany. The boycott was particularly motivated by the German imposition of the Nuremberg Laws, which ironically were similar in intent and content to the Jewish cultural exclusivism practiced so visibly in present-day Israel (Hannah Arendt Eichmann in Jerusalem p 7).

    Hitler saw the tremendous danger posed to Germany by Communism. He appreciated the desperate need to eliminate this threat, a fact that earned him the immense hatred and animosity of the Jewish organisations and the media and politicians of the west which they could influence. After all, according to the Jewish writer Chaim Bermant, although Jews formed less than five percent of Russia’s population, they formed more than fifty percent of its revolutionaries. According to the Jewish writer Chaim Bermant in his book The Jews (1977, chapter 8):

    ‘It must be added that most of the leading revolutionaries who convulsed Europe in the final decades of the last century and the first decades of this one, stemmed from prosperous Jewish families.. They were perhaps typified by the father of revolution, Karl Marx.. Thus when, after the chaos of World War I, revolutions broke out all over Europe, Jews were everywhere at the helm; Trotsky, Sverdlov, Kamenev and Zinoviev in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Kurt Eisner in Bavaria, and, most improbable of all, Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin.

    ‘To many outside observers, the Russian revolution looked like a Jewish conspiracy, especially when it was followed by Jewish-led revolutionary outbreaks in much of central Europe. The leadership of the Bolshevik Party had a preponderance of Jews.. Of the seven members of the Politburo, the inner cabinet of the country, four, Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinoviev (Radomsky), Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Sverdlov, were Jews.’

    Other authors agree with this:

    “There has been a tendency to circumvent or simply ignore the significant role of Jewish intellectuals in the German Communist Party, and thereby seriously neglect one of the genuine and objective reasons for increased anti-Semitism during and after World War 1.. The prominence of Jews in the revolution and early Weimar Republic is indisputable, and this was a very serious contributing cause for increased anti-Semitism in post-war years.. It is clear then that the stereotype of Jews as socialists and communists.. led many Germans to distrust the Jewish minority as a whole and to brand Jews as enemies of the German nation.” (Sarah Gordon Hitler, Germans and the ‘Jewish Question’ Princeton University Press (1984) p 23).

    “The second paroxysm of strong anti-Semitism came after the critical role of Jews in International Communism and the Russian Revolution and during the economic crises of the 1920s and 30s… Anti-Semitism intensified throughout Europe and North America following the perceived and actual centrality of Jews in the Russian Revolution.. Such feelings were not restricted to Germany, or to vulgar extremists like the Nazis. All over Northern Europe and North America, anti-Semitism became the norm in ‘nice society’, and ‘nice society’ included the universities.” (Martin Bernal, Black Athena vol. 1 pp. 367, 387).

    “The major role Jewish leaders played in the November (Russian) revolution was probably more important than any other factor in confirming (Hitler’s) anti-Semitic beliefs.” (J&S Pool, Who Financed Hitler, p.164).

    Hitler came to power in Germany with two main aims, the rectification of the unjust provisions of the Versailles Treaty, and the destruction of the Soviet/ Communist threat to Germany.

    Strangely enough, contrary to the mythology created by those who had an opposing ethnic agenda, he had no plans or desire for a larger war of conquest. Professor AJP Taylor showed this in his book The Origins of the Second World War, to the disappointment of the professional western political establishment. Taylor says, “The state of German armament in 1939 gives the decisive proof that Hitler was not contemplating general war, and probably not intending war at all” (p.267), and “Even in 1939 the German army was not equipped for a prolonged war; and in 1940 the German land forces were inferior to the French in everything except leadership” (p104-5). What occurred in Europe in 1939-41 was the result of unforeseen weaknesses and a tipping of the balance of power, and Hitler was an opportunist ‘who took advantages whenever they offered themselves’ (Taylor). Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Hitler wanted peace with Britain, as the German generals admitted (Basil Liddell Hart, The Other Side of the Hill 1948, Pan Books 1983) with regard to the so-called Halt Order at Dunkirk, where Hitler had the opportunity to capture the entire British Army, but chose not to. Liddell Hart, one of Britain’s most respected military historians, quotes the German General von Blumentritt with regard to this Halt Order:

    “He (Hitler) then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence, and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world. He remarked, with a shrug of the shoulders, that the creation of its Empire had been achieved by means that were often harsh, but ‘where there is planing, there are shavings flying’. He compared the British Empire with the catholic Church – saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in difficulties anywhere..” (p 200).

    According to Liddell Hart, “At the time we believed that the repulse of the Luftwaffe in the ‘Battle over Britain’ had saved her. That is only part of the explanation, the last part of it. The original cause, which goes much deeper, is that Hitler did not want to conquer England. He took little interest in the invasion preparations, and for weeks did nothing tospur them on; then, after a brief impulse to invade, he veered around again and suspended the preparations. He was preparing, instead, to invade Russia” (p140).

    David Irving in the foreword to his book The Warpath (1978) refers to “the discovery.. that at no time did this man (Hitler) pose or intend a real threat to Britain or the Empire.”

    This gives a completely different complexion, not only to the war, but to the successful suppression of this information during the war and afterwards. Historians today know only too well where the boundaries lie within which they can paint their pictures of the war and its aftermath, and the consequences of venturing beyond those boundaries, irrespective of the evidence. Unfortunately, only too few of them have been prepared to have the courage to break out of this dreadful straitjacket of official and unofficial censorship.

    E-mail comment received:

    I worked and studied in Berlin for three years, have an MA in International Relations and a BA in Government with a minor in History. I am embarrassed to say that until I read this article, I had no idea of the scope and cause for the anti-Semitism in Germany before WWII. The Halt Order at Dunkirk was never mentioned in my studies, nor was the ownership of the media, banks and businesses.

    Thank you for the excellent article. It certainly gives me a new perspective. I have always questioned the actual numbers of Jewish victims of the concentration camps, as the numbers didn’t make sense based upon Germany’s population. Perhaps it was fear of failing or being labeled an anti-Semite by my history professors (all but two were Jewish) and classmates that I refrained from demanding an honest discussion during my classes. I once said that the only reason Israel existed was out of Holocaust guilt, and I was immediately labeled a terrorist sympathizer.

    I see what is now happening in the Middle East, Iraq, Palestine, Gaza and soon Iran, and I am aghast. The parallels to WW II are frightening. Even today, one cannot bring up this subject without being labeled a Holocaust denier or antisemite.

    Thanks again for an excellent article. I am forwarding it to several friends.

    JBP

  6. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    November 5, 2011 - 11:15 am | Permalink

    Didn’t see any reference to this, so I thought I’d post it. Dr. Anthony Kubek was a history professor from Texas who also went through Morgenthau’s diaries in 1967 (at the request of Congress.) Here are some excerpts of his findings (most interesting is White’s intent to use the Morgenthau Plan to push Germany towards Soviet Communism):

    —————–

    “In his Memoirs, Secretary of State Cordell Hull described it in these terms:
    ‘Emotionally upset by Hitler’s rise and his persecution of the Jews, Morgenthau often sought to induce the President to anticipate the State Department or act contrary to our better judgment We sometimes found him conducting negotiations with foreign governments which were the function of the State Department. His work in drawing up a catastrophic plan for the postwar treatment of Germany and inducing the President to accept it without consultation with the State Department, was an outstanding instance of this interference.’ “

    “The real goal of the proposed condemnation of ‘all of Germany to a permanent diet of potatoes’ was the communization of the defeated nation. ‘The best way for the German people to be driven into the arms of the Soviet Union,’ it was pointed out, ‘was for the United States to stand forth as the champion of indiscriminate and harsh misery in Germany.’ “

    “Morgenthau hit the ceiling when he got a copy of the ‘Handbook for Military Government in Germany‘, which was designed for the guidance of every American and British official upon entering Germany. The Handbook offered a glimpse of a very different kind of occupation that Treasury officials were hoping for. Its tone was moderate and lenient throughout Germany was not only to be self-supporting but was to retain a relatively high standard of living. “

    “Regarding the punishment of Nazi leaders, White suggested that a list of ‘war criminals’ be prepared and presented to American officers on the spot, who could properly identify the guilty and shoot them on sight. Morgenthau remarked jokingly that a good start could be made with Marshal Stalin’s ‘list of 50,000’ reference to Stalin’s vodka toast to Roosevelt and Churchill at the Teheran Conference.“ [my note – Churchill was so disturbed by this toast that he stormed out of the conference.]

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p287_Kubek.html

  7. Floda's Gravatar Floda
    November 2, 2011 - 10:10 pm | Permalink

    @Frank Edwin Stone:

    I write this in response to your observation that German in Ukraine were welcomed. They were very much so welcomed, Ukrainians had fresh recent memories of the mass starvation their Jewish friends had forced upon them as retribution for refusing to supply Wheat at 1/8th of the World price.

    From 1941 to 1944 my father was a Leutnant in the Wehrmacht in the occupied German colony of Ukraine, he was there for over three years. There he met and married my mother who worked as an interpreter for a small detachment of his soldiers. Their function was to oversee wheat and other foodstuff shipments back to the Reich. He often spoke fondly of his time there and spoke highly of the Ukrainians, especially my maternal Grandfather whom he admired.

    Their unit was under the command of a career officer, a Prussian Captain named Nagel. Near the end of 1943 things were already quite grim and the men were agitating my father to whisper into Nagel’s ear that with the Red Army on the rise and all, it might be a good idea to retreat. Nagel refused saying his orders did not permit a retreat.

    My father said at some nights you could almost hear the Red Army artillery in the distance and the men were uneasy. This was not a combat unit and I dare say even if it were they would have been just as nervous. Then one dark night an incident occurred which was to lead to their departure:

    A young and very popular soldier was out on a motorcycle with a Ukrainian Girl when he was attacked and killed by Partisans who also roughed up the Girl. It was the only time this ever happened. Shortly afterwards late at night Captain Nagel went into a Latrine and did away with himself by placing his Mauser to the roof of his mouth.

    This left my old man in charge, before Nagel’s body had cooled off he and his men were busy packing their gear and commenced their return west to Germany. At the beginning of their journey they had a herd of perhaps a hundred Horses, they left all their mechanized transport where it was and used the Horses for food and transport. I know the stuff they left behind included a Fiesler Storch aeroplane. My mother often joked about how scared the old man was when he, a non swimmer, had to cross the mighty Dniepper River in a (for buoyancy) straw filled small trailer towed by several Horses.

    When I was younger I often asked my father why old Nagel blew his Kopf off. He never told me, but today I know why. Nagel’s orders would have included shooting ten men and boys from the community as a reprisal for the killing of the young German soldier. I have no doubt Nagel had befriended the locals after living there for over three years and he simply couldn’t do it. The act of a decent man it seems.

    The journey back took nearly a year and in December 1944 my father, essentially a deserter, seeing half the houses in townships deserted helped himself to a moped (small bicycle with a ‘helper’ motor) in Upper Silesia, Germany’s far eastern state and rode first to Berlin to tell his older Brother to expect his wife and baby (me) sometime around April or May. He then rode this small machine onto south western Germany to the House of another older Brother. His epic ride on the bombed out Autobahn at night and hiding from arrest and instant on-the-spot execution, is another story. He and others eventually succeeded in surrendering to scared as rabbits America GI’s and was sent to a POW camp in France on an open cattle train. For fun and amusement French teenagers would toss burning logs, boulders and anything else onto the trains as they passed under Bridges killing many men. He was released in October 1945 and WALKED back to Berlin where he met up with my mother and saw me for the first time. He had lost 40% of his body weight and to his last days claimed his most dangerous time during the war was near starvation in the POW Camp, ‘where AMI’s probably drunk, would shoot sometimes shoot their weapons for amusement at nights’.

    Meanwhile as the old man was seeking to surrender my Mother was left back in Upper Silesia where she and a number of Women refugees which included a half dozen or so older Nuns came across Auschwitz where they managed to shelter for about half a week. I posted her story earlier in this section. She was six months pregnant with me during her brief stay there. I was born about ten miles West in a hospital the Red Army destroyed not days after I came along. My mother pulling a wagon and pushing a pram took me through Opole, the then ferociously besieged holdout of the Hitler Youth in the city of Bresslau and last but not least Dresden in late April 1945 just weeks after it was firebombed by over 1,000 Bombers and over 100,000 people were murdered for no good reason except that mad bastard Churchill wanted to show Stalin how big he and his American pals are.

    My mother said to me in back 1996 when I recorded her wartime experiences, ‘as we came closer (to Dresden) we noticed the Flies, they were as big as sparrows’. We’ll one day get even with swine who has done this to us time and again.

  8. GREZCM's Gravatar GREZCM
    November 1, 2011 - 6:07 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:
    I would approach productions of the kind you’ve mentioned with great caution. The strong thesis that the Fuhrer was overwhelmed by drug abuse, as early as 1940, sounds like typical propaganda. However, there may be a grain of truth in it. Surely, towards the end of the war Germany’s leadership had to work round the clock and some substances may have been administered to them, to keep them going. They had to face enormous psychological strain as well: surrender out of question, the wunderwaffe not delivered, honorable peace treaty denied – enormous challenges.
    I fully agree with hazards of unlimited dictatorship. These father- of-nation figures eventually die, but, most importantly, they err too. As they deal with matters matching they greatness, they err grossly.
    For me, a Polish nationalist, it’s difficult to judge Adolf Hitler. His actions were, possibly, very patriotic. Unfortunately, that meant annihilation of my nation, one way or another.

  9. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 1, 2011 - 5:10 am | Permalink

    @GREZCM: Adolf Hitler’s personality was most unhelpful, either. He had grown so high above other mortals, that he and his entourage both forgot he’s a mortal anyway.

    There is an interesting book out now (A First Rate Madness) that claims Hitler’s doctor started giving him big doses of amphetamines somewhere around 1940, along with other drugs. The author claims that Hitler’s decisions were more or less rational before that. After the introduction of speed, Hitler became less willing to listen to his generals, believed he was almost invulnerable and would not exercise caution in decision making.

    He started overruling Rommel’s strategies which led to problems (and Rommel turning against Hitler eventually, believing him insane). Of course, after the conspiracy to blow up Hitler failed, Rommel was tracked down and forced to commit suicide.

    This is one reason why I am not a fan of unlimited dictatorship. You need an orderly ability to remove someone if they are not fit to lead. Such men seldom want to step down on their own.

  10. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 1, 2011 - 4:51 am | Permalink

    @Frank Edwin Stone: Yes, I didn’t mean to single out Germany as engaging in “total war” as opposed to other nations. The US had developed the concept at least as far back as Sherman burning cities in the South to the ground. And yes, I had heard that Nazis were initially welcomed as liberators by many in the Soviet Union.

  11. Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
    October 30, 2011 - 11:50 am | Permalink

    @Armor: Very well stated, Armor. The people of the double standard are unbelievably intransigent and intolerant, and when they hold power, nations are wrecked.

  12. GREZCM's Gravatar GREZCM
    October 29, 2011 - 7:58 pm | Permalink

    @GREZCM:
    I will add:
    Danzig was for Poland what New Orleans was for USA – a spigot, regulating trade.
    Rationale to disengage from Danzig as early as 1920 (!) was drawn from the fact that, during The Polish-Bolshevik War of 1919-20, the port authorities of Danzig refused to process so much needed supplies in hope that re-born Poland collapsed. No need to add, Germany and Czechoslovakia also refused the transfer of materiel. Jozef Pilsudski, then-time dictator of Poland and CiC issued a proper act of law to the effect, that Poland must build a fully independent sea-port. Consequently, studies were carried out and the right spot was determined – Gdynia. Thus, Poland got independent access to the sea. Danzig was gradually deprived of profits from foreign trade, which the city had taken for granted, which fuelled the Danzigers’ desire to “re-unite” with the Fatherland for ecenomic reasons, no lesss then “patriotic” ones. Only a bit of patience would have sufficed to end the Danzig affair, but war frenzy took its full swing, and we know what would have followed.

  13. GREZCM's Gravatar GREZCM
    October 29, 2011 - 12:47 pm | Permalink

    The trouble for this part of the world is, that German and Russian peoples, with they states, have this peculiar difficulty to aknowlege that, between them, other nations reside with legitimate ambitions for self-determination. Once the problem is definetely solvel there will be no wars here.

    In 1939 Danzig was a non-issue*, neither were other Polish-German relations. The issue at that time was the inabitity, on the part of German and Russian states, to accept that they would be separated by others. How otherwise could be explained the rationale behind The Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, forged on the spot despite (supposedly) fundamentally hostile participants? This attempt to “close the gap” was used by outside players to destroy everything from the Rhine eastward.

    Adolf Hitler’s personality was most unhelpful, either. He had grown so high above other mortals, that he and his entourage both forgot he’s a mortal anyway.

    Germans lost the war, Poles lost the war, and Russians lost the war, as well. Let there be no doubt about it.

    * – From 1920 to 1939, Poland had developed the large, brand new port city of Gdynia, north of Danzig. According to wikipedia (with usual dislaimers), the port was in 1939 the largest on the Baltic Sea, and 10th largest in Europe. The site had grown from quay-less village to a modern city with 140,000 inhabitants and rapidly expandind. A new railway line, connecting heartland Poland with Gdynia, had been built outside the Free City of Danzig. Knowing this fact, even the last idiot should know that Poland was STRATEGICALLY FULLY PREPARED to disengage from the Danzig affairs.

  14. Frank Edwin Stone's Gravatar Frank Edwin Stone
    October 28, 2011 - 5:34 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:
    wrote:
    “I suppose, that when nations engage in total war and conquest, we shouldn’t be shocked that the winners exert maximum leverage over the vanquished for quite some time.”

    That statement as it refers to Nazi Germany is 25% truth and 75% lie.

    Total war was forced upon Germany.
    Germany did everything to avoid a criminally insane war with the West. Jewish money and propaganda was in the way though, just as predicted by Charles Lindbergh and accurately described by Pat Buchanan in his “The Unnecessary War”.
    As to whether the invasion of the Soviet Union was started to preempt Stalin’s planned invasion of Europe or was a war of conquest is not crystal clear to this day.

    That the Germans were initially welcomed as liberators from the barbarism of Jewish Communist terror in the Ukraine is beyond dispute. That they evolved into conquerors and occupiers with time, alienating the local population is also beyond dispute. Hitler always planned to conquer and colonize the Ukraine. They even brought Germanic colonists from Holland and Norway, beside the ones from Germany, to settle in the Ukraine.
    In spite of this, the Ukrainians were treated well and were not anti-German as a whole. Their life was much better under the Nazis than under Stalin.

    Anti-German feeling was almost exclusively a Polish specialty.
    (The only exception to that is the Benes decrees and the Sudetenland atrocities, in spite of the fact that the Checkhs lived very well under the German occupation, just like the French did.
    Of course, the main force behind the fanning of anti-German hatred was the International Jew.)
    The Poles hated the Germans, the Russians, the Ukrainians and the Jews and still do, for various reasons.
    In fact the only people that the Poles like in Europe are the Hungarians.
    The atrocities and mass murder committed against German civilians before the German Invasion was a major reason for the invasion, besides the justified territorial claims for Danzig.

    What is noteworthy is that the Germans did not commit massacres of Polish civilians after the invasion.

  15. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 26, 2011 - 11:25 pm | Permalink

    @Jarvis Dingle-Daden: How do you do the little @Jarvis Dingle-Daden: The way you put that symbol next to Holocaust™ is hilarious. I am testing it out here. Humorous things like that can be really effective at undercutting the “moral authority” of an opponents argument. Will try and use it other venues.

  16. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 26, 2011 - 9:45 pm | Permalink

    Basically, the claim is that 6 million Jews were gassed by European nationalism.

    That claim comes in @ least 3 more flavors:
    Centuries of European anti-semitism™ could not but culminate in The Holocaust ®
    Catholic church is responsible for The Holocaust ®
    Flaws in the German character ultimately manifested themselves in The Holocaust ®

  17. Jonathan's Gravatar Jonathan
    October 26, 2011 - 8:24 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:
    What’s so interesting about that particular example is that it demonstrates how important perception was and how Lenin used that and shrewd maneuvering to manipulat what had been a popular revolution and steer it to his own small clique’s interests. Bolshevik means majority (as in the Bolshoi ballets) yet Lenin’s faction claimed this as their title and branded their socialist enemies Mensheviks or minorities

  18. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    October 26, 2011 - 7:07 pm | Permalink

    @Anglo Saxon: I like your numbers, AS; they make sense. In addition, they are low enough to forestall automatic discouragement but high enough to trigger the sense that it’s time to get off one’s bum and get to work.

    Since 20 percent is also about ten or twenty times higher a figure than Lenin and Trotsky had at their disposal when they seized a vast empire and murdered its centuries-old gentry and aristocracy, it serves as a reminder that we are moral men and women, people who wish to win others over, not with lies and force of arms, but by recalling them to an awareness of what they have lost and what they have had taken from them. Our weapons are (or ought to be) hard evidence and tough argumentation, which aims at extruding the rational consequences of that evidence.

  19. Armor's Gravatar Armor
    October 26, 2011 - 7:06 pm | Permalink

    “In Jewish circles there was little room for a distinction between National-Socialist policies and the German people”

    It is still the same today. In Jewish circles, the gas chamber meme is used to smear Germans by and large, as Goldhagen tried to do. Every media resource is used to spread the smear on as many people as possible. Trying to restrain the accusation is denounced as antisemitic. The gas chamber meme is also used to smear White people by and large, as well as white nationalism, white pride, and the desire to protect our collective existence. Basically, the claim is that 6 million Jews were gassed by European nationalism. The responsibility cannot be attributed to Hitler only. It was a broad German conspiracy, and it was part of a larger, worldwide conspiracy. In fact, the Europeans are collectively guilty. Even people who were born 50 years after the war can be guilty of moral complicity in the holocaust.

    On the other hand :
    1. Jews cannot have collective responsibility about anything.
    2. A Jew’s individual responsibility cannot have anything to do with his Jewish identity.

    Any criticism of a single, individual Jew for his well-documented anti-white Jewish supremacism will be denounced in Jewish circles as an infamous racist attack against Jews.

    In cases like Ukraine’s holodomor, where Jews bear a huge responsibility in the death of millions of non-Jews, we are basically told that the murderers’ Jewish identity is irrelevant and must be ignored. Noticing their Jewish identity and their Jewish motivations is antisemitic. Any condemnation of a Jewish murderer should be made strictly on an individual basis, as if there was no tradition of Jewish hostility against non-Jews. Telling non-Jews what the Talmud says about them is antisemitic. Denouncing Jewish discrimination against non-Jews is antisemitic too. And Solzhenitsyn is an antisemite for having written a book that documents Jewish responsibility in mass-murder.

    Also, in Jewish circles, there is little room for a distinction between the different aspects of the National-Socialist movement. If you like sport and believe in decency, truth, honor and hard work, and if you dislike phony modern art, it means that you basically agree with people who, Wiesel says, gassed 6 million Jews. In the Jewish view, you are guilty by association.

  20. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 26, 2011 - 6:30 pm | Permalink

    @Ivan Groznij: I found this page on the note from Stalin, interesting reading, although it is Wikipedia, so usual disclaimers apply.

    I suppose, that when nations engage in total war and conquest, we shouldn’t be shocked that the winners exert maximum leverage over the vanquished for quite some time.

  21. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 26, 2011 - 6:12 pm | Permalink

    @3D: I also remember hearing a WWII pilot telling a story of a Polish guy in their unit, who apparently had had his family wiped out by Nazis. He hated all things German and was a fanatical killer as the story goes, without restriction, of soldier and civilian. Everyone thought he was crazy, but he was effective. He seemed to have a death wish, and eventually died in battle.

    It just shows that once war is unleashed and blood drawn, mutual hatreds grow up fast on all sides. But, just like in your story, once hostilities ceased, things were often forgiven in short order and friendships with the former enemies forged.

  22. Ivan Groznij's Gravatar Ivan Groznij
    October 26, 2011 - 5:52 pm | Permalink

    If anybody wants to have some more information about these KANZLERAKTE ( top-secret treaties, dated May 21. 1949, which suggest restrictions of a state souvereignity of the BRD introduced for a period until – 2099 ), he should read a book “Die Deutsche Karte”, written by retired BND ( military counter-intelligence) general Gerd-Helmut Komossa.
    Every new German chancellor is obliged to sign this piece of garbage, including the last one, Frau A. Merkel/Ferkel. There was no peace-treaty for Germany after WW2, Germany has no constitution and is still vanquished land under military and media occupation.
    In 1952 Stalin proposed to Adenauer reunification of German territories, including Silesia, Danzig and East Prussia. There was no reply.
    German anthem “Deutschland uber alles” was written in 1840 . There was no Germany until 1871. It doesn’t say Germany above all. It just means – above all, think of Germany. Writter just wanted to uplift German sentiments for unification. It was a time called “Spring of Nations”.

  23. GREZCM's Gravatar GREZCM
    October 26, 2011 - 11:30 am | Permalink

    @Floda:
    Dear Madam,
    Thank you for your valuable contribution.
    First, I’ll clarify one secondary matter: Auschwitz was part of the Upper Silesia only during WW2, never before and never after. This place was developed into huge (primary) chemical industrial complex due to its unique characteristic – the town is located at the river Sola’s estuary to the river Vistula, both able to deliver abundant quality water and the Vistula to carry away the waste. This water business is never properly explained, even by the most prominent revisionists, but was most crucial. Had there been no water, there would have been no notorious Auschwitz.
    A lot of water there, in lowland area, implicates high water table – so much for “burnig pits” legends, by the way.
    Obviously, Auschwitz was for inmates neither “utter hell”, nor a “resort”, least of all it was a “factory of death”. What it has become, however, is disgrace to reason and litmus paper for Europeans’ gullibility.
    The tragedy of Germans evacuated or expelled westward carried only one positive message for them – they would live among their own, ruled by their own. This ethnic cleansing was, to no lesser extent, the fate of Russians and Ukrainians (Operation Keelhaul), Poles (so called Republican Treaties), and others, sad heritage of the war.

  24. 3D's Gravatar 3D
    October 26, 2011 - 6:03 am | Permalink

    I worked for a number of years with a big, fast tempered Irishman who had served in the European theatre as a rifleman with a mobile fire team,transported to hot spots on the battlefield on a two and a half ton halftrack named “Big Dick”. His team was inserted into the war in the middle of the bloody, Normandy Hedgerow fight. He told me: “We hated the Germans. We wanted to kill the Germans. We enjoyed killing Germans.” But he was a thoughtful man, and he said: ” You know, later we understood that they were just like us. Just poor yokels that didn’t want to be there any more than we did.” True story.

  25. GREZCM's Gravatar GREZCM
    October 26, 2011 - 4:45 am | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon:
    I can put the context in plain language if required.
    I described only one of innocent policies of devastating effect, not litanies of greviances that lead to nowhere.
    The point is, that victorious sides are unable to treat the vanquished opponents fairly (fairly in peacetime terms). The same happened in 1945 and later, only this time the Germans were the vanquished victims, totally conquered thus totally mistreated. The spiral of cruelty was in full swing. What would had been unaccpetable five years earlier, was seen as just in 1945 and later. Years needed to past until wartime hysteria would decrease.
    The knowlegeable crowd here need not to be reminded that Communism was the rule of mob of the lowest sort, only after years to be somehow civilized. This happened in Poland as well (after the war) and the Poles were victims no less than Germans including expulsions from ancestral lands.

  26. Henry's Gravatar Henry
    October 26, 2011 - 4:24 am | Permalink

    I really love reading these historical articles, that is, real historical articles. I value them so much. Thank you and please, keep them coming. Keep the truth flowing through out our people and our movement.

  27. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 26, 2011 - 4:20 am | Permalink

    @Frank Edwin Stone: Thanks, that reference is a little more clear. It says that Egon Bahr wrote about it – I will try and find that. I am not sure this reference would convince anyone beyond those of us predisposed to believe it in the first place, given that it is in a “new Right” newspaper. Most people may write it off as an exaggeration. But I imagine it will be a while before anyone sees these actual documents or any primary sources step forward and speak publicly. It would be nice if Wikileaks found something on this.

    I find these secret treaties fascinating. Of course, in the long run, it is the respective power the parties have that determine whether such treaties are complied with, but they do give us insight into the true intent of political leaders.

  28. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    October 26, 2011 - 3:48 am | Permalink

    @Jonathan: ”
    cracks in the aging postwar edifice are starting to become apparent now.”

    The neoliberal Washington consensus that took hold with the elections of Reagan and Thatcher and replaced the Keynesian consensus is in complete disarray. It is back to the future, but in the nuclear era, another world war is precluded.

  29. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    October 26, 2011 - 2:09 am | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon: God Bless The Irish!

    All we need is 20 percent, Pierre. Forget about educating or converting the majority. Just focus on the 20 percent … of true, good men. Forget about educating the young women … they have shown themselves to be part of the problem, not the solution. All they require is discipline: strict if necessary. Just focus, my good friend, on educating and strengthening that 20 percent cohort of true, good men of White ancestry.

    That will be enough to transform the world we know. The remainder will follow their lead and example.

  30. Floda's Gravatar Floda
    October 26, 2011 - 1:15 am | Permalink

    In mid December of 1944 my mother, then aged 24, was among about 25 women refugees all fleeing west on foot in front of the advancing Red Army when late on a freezing afternoon they came upon a small town in Eastern Germany’s Upper Silesia, called Auschwitz. As they went through the town they saw what she described to me in 1996 as a huge Factory Complex (German; Fabrik Werke) Among this group were several Nuns who persuaded the German SS guards to permit them to shelter there.
    Fifty two years later her granddaughters asked me to ‘interview’ her and record her remarkable wartime experiences. She was then aged 76 and sharp as a tack.
    On Auschwitz she said they were permitted to stay there but no longer than a few days. She recalled how OLD and POLITE the German SS were to the women, especially to the Nuns and how pleased these men were to have them join their evening meals so close to Christmas.
    I asked her where she slept and about the food:
    She remembered sleeping on a dry wooden parquetry floor in an indoor hall which may have been used for sports such as basketball or gymnastics. She remembered sleeping near what must have been a bakery as she recalled the sweet smell of bread baking.
    I asked her about the SS guards:
    She said they had evening meals in a large dining room and she remembered having had pea and ham soup. Throughout our ‘interview’ she repeatedly mentioned how polite and ‘correct’ the ‘Old Gentlemen’ of the SS were.
    I asked her about the conversation and small talk, what she remembered:
    The dominant conversation was about the war and how everyone just wanted and end to it and GO HOME.
    I asked her if the SS understood Germany had lost the war, her answer actually astonished me:
    The SS Guards TO A MAN, felt the war would end as did the First World War, with an armistice! As late as December 1944, I found that incredible but somehow understandable.
    Then of course. came the most important question: The Gas Chambers and 4,000,000.00 (in Auschwitz) Dead Jews & Gypsies.
    Back in 1996 I wasn’t as wise to the Holocaust lie as I am today, but sure as hell, my 76year old Mother was! She went off like a firecracker! Anyone who has seen the numerous Youtube spoofs of Adolf Hitler going off his rocker as he (actor Bruno Ganz) is given some bad news in the film ‘Downfall’, will understand.

    She said ‘We spent about three, even four days there, in our group were educated intelligent people, Doctors and Teachers, all Women and we were given free access to whatever we wanted. Nobody hid anything from us and nothing was off limits. I even bought or exchanged a fine pair of Leather Boots with a female prisoner there. The old Gentlemen of the SS were old and frail, there were no young men anywhere, all were at the front! Twenty five women and women talk. If there had been any hanky panky there we would have known about it! This fiction of millions of Jews being gassed there is lunacy! The place was a very big FABRIK! For God’s sake!……….
    I was not expecting such an outburst and wanted to calm her down, so I changed the subject and asked her about Typhus: Long ago when I was a teenager, my Father and I watched a grainy old B/W film of a Scottish soldier bulldozing corpses into a pit I said to him, who was a German Lieutenant on the Eastern Front, ‘how could you have been a part of this?’ He looked at me sadly and said quietly, ‘My Boy, these people mostly died from ‘Fleckfieber’, (spotted Typhus)
    My dear old mother composing herself then said, ‘Yes, the SS Men warned us about Typhus. They told us never to seek shelter in Barns or anywhere near animals, as the disease is carried by fleas and that in Auschwitz they had some terrible epidemics, which sometimes killed hundreds of people a month, including them and their own family members.’
    Three or four weeks later the Red Army ‘liberated’ Auschwitz. Three months later my mother gave birth to her first child, me, in a place then called Konigshutte a few miles west.
    She turns 92 in February 2012 and is living in Australia, still in reasonable shape. I dare say were she in Germany, or any other European state she would find herself imprisoned for telling her story. Auschwitz and ‘Gas Chambers’ (not so much as even ONE has ever been found anywhere), are a great, big, fat Jewish LIE! It took me over 50 years to discover why the 1930′s Germans were told by their leaders Jews were a bacillus and had to be removed. Until we wake up to them they will continue destroying our people as they have in the past.

  31. Jonathan's Gravatar Jonathan
    October 26, 2011 - 12:40 am | Permalink

    @Hedgerow:
    The Truman administration did indeed want to the new ruling parties of Europe to be modeled on the US Democrat party and for them to show deference to American business interests, that was probably the biggest success of his policy, though cracks in the aging postwar edifice are starting to become apparent now.

  32. Frank Edwin Stone's Gravatar Frank Edwin Stone
    October 26, 2011 - 12:09 am | Permalink

    @Joe Webb:

    Here is the copy of the German document on page 4 of the PDF file in the link I hereby provide. It also talks about the gold of Germany: http://www.fk-un.de/UN-Dateien/PDF/Zeitung/UN-99-09.pdf
    The handwritten note on the left side of the document says: “Original bitte vernichten”, which means “Please destroy the original”

  33. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 25, 2011 - 11:04 pm | Permalink

    @mod There seems to be an italics problem on this thread

  34. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    October 25, 2011 - 10:55 pm | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon:

    No, Chamberlain. Stories are emerging (see Buchanan) that Hitler was baffled by Chamberlain’s war guarantee to Poland and subsequent declaration on their behalf. In other words, Hitler failed to understand how the “bankbench” system works within the British parliamentary system and how a “leader” is beholden to said backbenchers as much as, if not more than, the electorate.

  35. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    October 25, 2011 - 10:41 pm | Permalink

    Two different takes on the Marshall Plan:

    “The Marshall Plan will remain for all time a glorious page in the history of the United States of America.”

    — Konrad Adenauer, March 23, 1949

    “Marshall Plan aid, essentially intended to keep the post-war economies of the West Europe countries within the capitalist world, was also intended to dominate their economy.”

    — Felix Greene, The Enemy, 1965
    Felix Greene, incidentally, was the Marxist cousin of Graham Greene.

  36. Frank Edwin Stone's Gravatar Frank Edwin Stone
    October 25, 2011 - 10:26 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:
    Unfortunately, I can only point you to documentation in German, which of course, can be translated with a little effort.

    Former high ranking politician, Egon Bahr, himself of Jewish descent, but who served in the Wehrmacht, speaks to the newspaper Junge Freiheit in this recent interview: http://www.jungefreiheit.de/Single-News-Display-mit-Komm.154+M5029fcff590.0.html

    Also here: http://www.fk-un.de/UN-Dateien/PDF/Zeitung/UN-99-09.pdf

    I recommend that you learn some basic German,
    It is a cousin of English, easy to learn.

  37. Jonathan's Gravatar Jonathan
    October 25, 2011 - 10:22 pm | Permalink

    @Hedgerow:
    The aid went mostly to Britain and France, it’s effect on Germany was minimal and definitely not important in that country’s recovery:
    http://www.cato.org/research/articles/vasquez-030509.html

    “In every country formerly controlled by the Nazis, growth did not resume until rigid economic controls were removed. The arrival of Marshall Plan funds did not correlate with the resumption of growth. In a review of West Germany’s economy from 1945 to 1951, German analyst Werner Abelshauser concluded that “foreign aid was not crucial in starting the recovery or in keeping it going.””

    “The Marshall Plan allowed other countries to maintain otherwise unsustainable economic policies. Austria, Greece, and other recipients of high per capita level of U.S. funds began their recoveries only as those aid flows came to an end. Great Britain, the recipient of the most U.S. aid, had the slowest European growth rate in the postwar era. “

  38. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 25, 2011 - 9:56 pm | Permalink

    One has to keep in mind that much of Germany was literally reduced to a pile of
    smoldering ashes. The zio-cons’ favorite Englishman of all time Churchill exhibited a particular penchant for firebombing German war refugees. The denser the cluster the better.
    What little had been left of German industry, would be dismantled, placed on a transport – and shipped out east or across the pond.
    The Russians, for instance, got themselves a tidy Opel production line and soon were cranking out re-badged Opel Kadett K38 model. Suddenly their optics makers received a big hit of oxygen allowing them to become a precision optics industry.
    (Uncle Joe “reciprocated” by bringing out of Bolshevik party reserves scores of communist German Jews who had waited out the hostilities in Russia, and saturate with them the new police operating in the Soviet sector.)
    It is truly astonishing how quickly the Germans got their stuff together given the savage circumstances they were under.

  39. October 25, 2011 - 9:46 pm | Permalink

    @buckle: I think you mean that he never worked out Churchill, the Rothschild boot lick, whose Jewish mother was King Edward VII’s whore.

  40. October 25, 2011 - 9:39 pm | Permalink

    @Trenchant: I saw piles of rubble in bombed areas in Newcastle in the early 1970s.

  41. October 25, 2011 - 9:35 pm | Permalink

    @GREZCM: The work camps were actually built for the criminal element and Poles.
    While the policies you list may be correct, context is lacking. Hitler clearly stated that he sought peaceful means for the return of German territory lost at Versaille.
    He asked for a railway corridor to Danzig. He was negotiating the return on the basis of self determination by the people living in the areas in question. Part of the treaty offered to Poland was a guarantee of borders, which would have protected it from Soviet invasion. The Poles walked away and signed a deal with the UK, which only “protected” Poland from German invasion, not Soviet, and began assaults on ethnic Germans in territories ceded to Poland after WWI.
    The policies were, in essence, payback for what he saw as the Polish Government’s treachery.

  42. October 25, 2011 - 9:24 pm | Permalink

    @Rehmat: Please stop bleating about regime change in Muslim countries. The Jew S.A. was doing regime change at the turn of the 19th century, mostly in Central and South America, as well as the Phillipines. All, at the time, were predominantly Roman Catholic countries. They participated in regime change twice in Germany with 2 World Wars, as well as Russia and Japan. None of which are Muslim. Since WWII, regime change has come to Italy, Romania, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, and Georgia with a failed attempt in Byelorussia. Not all involved violence, but regime change, none the less. In the big scheme of things, Muslim countries are recent targets.

  43. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    October 25, 2011 - 8:59 pm | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Germany and Britain both took aid, and both economies grew rapidly.

  44. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 8:35 pm | Permalink

    @Jarvis Dingle-Daden:
    Great post on Soviet “diplomacy”. Thanks.

  45. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 8:32 pm | Permalink

    @Hedgerow: London still had bomb damaged buildings and vacant lots visible in the mid-fifties, despite their educated workforce. Germans worked day and night to rebuild, and by the mid-fifties similar damage was not visible in the cities. My mother still regales me with stories of how the jack-hammers went right through the night in Germany of that era. Britain was all stamped-forms-in-triplicate!

  46. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 8:21 pm | Permalink

    @Banshee:
    The Nanking massacre seems to be another example of victors’ history. There are some excellent papers here contesting the American narrative. War does away with truth with the first bullet.
    http://goo.gl/8yX2i

  47. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 8:11 pm | Permalink

    @Hedgerow:
    Every time I hear Marshall plan invoked by some politician, I know it’s coming out of my hide. Even putting aside its theoretical demerits (plenty), post-war assistance to Germany amounted to some 5% of GNP; reparations and occupation expenses from her, 11 to 15%.
    http://goo.gl/xvJSm

  48. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    October 25, 2011 - 6:28 pm | Permalink

    @GREZCM:

    Hitler was indeed a poor leader. Unlike Ireland’s de Valera, he never worked out Chamberlain nor the British in general.

  49. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    October 25, 2011 - 6:00 pm | Permalink

    By the time U.S. funding for the Marshall Plan ended in 1952, the economies of all the European recipients had surpassed pre-war levels.

  50. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 25, 2011 - 5:47 pm | Permalink

    Following the commencement of Operation Barbarossa, German security services entered the Soviet embassy in Berlin, and premises were searched.
    Among various unconventional finds was a small cremation furnace with human remains. Further investigation revealed that goons from Stalin’s foreign intelligence operating under diplomatic cover would target hostile to the Bolshevik regime members of substantial Russian expat community, drag them over to the embassy for interrogation and torture, then kill them, dismember – and feed body parts into the oven.
    Under the roof of the embassy !
    Yet today you meet pinhead college kids in Comandante Che t-shirts who try to persuade you a vegetarian version of communism does exist.

  51. Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
    October 25, 2011 - 5:43 pm | Permalink

    @Frank: Then what’s good for the Goy is good for the Self Chosen.

  52. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 25, 2011 - 4:56 pm | Permalink

    It sure seems like Russia gets off easy in the stories that get retold about that period and Reunification. One would get the impression that lil ol’ Russia never hurt a fly or stood in the way of anyone’s happiness, when it came to Germany.

  53. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 25, 2011 - 4:51 pm | Permalink

    @European: yes, it was made public in 2009. Adenauer, Willy Brand usw. were presented with these submission letters, ofcourse they were outraged.

    Is this submission letter available now for the public to see? Has anyone who saw it been quoted in an article that we can go see right now? Someone like Willy Brandt. This would be a bit shocking to most people, (Chancellors required to sign an act of submission up until at least 1991, before being allowed to enter office).

  54. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    October 25, 2011 - 3:49 pm | Permalink

    @Felix Grubel: I believe that you are fundamentally correct, Mr. Grubel. All by itself, the evidence of one’s senses would lead a man to conclude that we live in a golden age of information availability. As you say, thanks to the Internet, never in my lifetime—probably never at all—have so many facts been available to so many with the expenditure of so little time and effort . . . or cash for that matter.

    Yet if only availability mattered! As I look about me, I see little reason to suppose that more than a handful of our fellow creatures have the slightest interest in anything but sports, SUVs, and smut. Since our Jewish friends are the principal providers of at least two of those three commodities and since their brothers, sisters, and cousins running the governments of the USA and the once-Christian nations of Europe have already imposed near–police state restrictions on those societies without encountering much more than a murmur of complaint (let alone resistance), I think that I might be excused for wondering whether, unaided and all by itself, truth’s availability will ever again serve to make us free. Won’t we require some form of thoroughgoing moral regeneration first, one that—against all odds and indeed against all hope and experience—puts at least a certain amount of the toothpaste of sports, SUVs, and smut back into the tube?

    Call me depressive if you will, but whether for good or ill, I’m not alone. Our fellow commenter Junghans concluded his most recent remarks with words that tell me that his eyes and ears, unlike those of most people everyone encounters day in and day out, are in perfect working order: “When presented with unpleasant historical truths, most people recoil from any mention of it . . . they usually wiggle away from the subject, if they don’t otherwise get belligerent . . . and accuse you of being a ‘Nazi’, or some other such Jewish-generated epithet.”

    I see no way out of this trap of self-imposed, self-maintained ignorance, in any case not prior to the permanent dispersal of the myth that through our beloved and worshiped “democratic” processes, we are all governed and dictated to (and stolen from?) by ourselves—or at least by our designated and deeply admired proxies, though virtually none of them look, sound, or think like “us,” whoever we/they may be. Whether even such a dispersal of Tribal myth will be enough even to clear the ground for action is matter for discussion in another place and time.

    Professor MacDonald frequently says (I paraphrase) that the engine of Jewish domination is far less formidable than it may appear, that it is crumbling from within, and that its fall is not far off. Not least because he has opened my eyes to so much else, part of the reason I pray that he’s right about this subject is that my own conclusions are quite otherwise.

    In the meantime, I’m glad to drink to the availability of truth, Mr. Grubel. Being half Irish, I’m generally content to drink to anything, and truth sure beats the hell out of most other makeshifts.

  55. Jonathan's Gravatar Jonathan
    October 25, 2011 - 3:02 pm | Permalink

    @Trenchant:
    France and the UK received the most Marshall Plan largesse, which is why they recovered much more slowly. Germany and Japan were basically looted and they made rapid and lasting recoveries.

  56. Lancashire lad's Gravatar Lancashire lad
    October 25, 2011 - 3:00 pm | Permalink

    @Jarvis Dingle-Daden: “Wasn’t Helmut Kohl forced to sign away East Prussian territories incorporated into post-war Poland as one of conditions before German unification can proceed ?”

    Kohl agreed to declare the Oder-Neisse Linien the Eastern border of Germany at an EU meeting as a condition of EU acceptance of reunification. It was a tragic mistake that somehow his predecessors – perhaps being communists – had been able to avoid. Danzig becomes Gdansk, Stettin, the port of Berlin, Breslau, Posen remain in Poland in perpetuity… You have to look at Germany and Poland together on a map to understand what Germany was, as Poland lost much of its own Eastern territory to Ukraine, Byelorussia, etc.

  57. GREZCM's Gravatar GREZCM
    October 25, 2011 - 1:42 pm | Permalink

    A lot is missing in narratives relative to the WW2 and its aftermath, particularly on the suffering of the German people.
    If my misspellings and other errors are not disqalifying, let me contribute to the discussion here from the perspective of the ethnic Pole, living in Poland all my life.
    Having been exposed to the communist propaganda throughout formative years, it came AT FIRTS, as a shock to learn how the Germans actually suffered: carpet bombings, expulsions from the East and Czechoslovakia in dramatic conditions and slave labor included. THAT WAS HUGE DRAMA, no doubt.

    I will focus on Poland, including territories annexed from Germany.
    Obviously, hatred towards Germans was huge and was due not only to the destruction of Poland as the result or the war of 1939, which could have resulted in the destruction of the statehood, but went much further. Policies of Germany during occupation of Poland, that lasted full 5 years, mattered no less.
    To get the taste of the policies let’s consider education. It was limited to primary school (7 years), followed by two-year vocational school at best. NO OTHER OPTION EXISTED. The primary schools were operating with much trouble, with large numers of drop-outs. Consequently, upon “liberation” there was huge number of 15-19 year olds who even have not graduated the primary school, to say nothing of all others whose education was effectively terminated in 1939 (lyceum pupils, students). University proffessors were sent to camps (case of the Jagiellonian University, others). Professor Stafan Banach, one of the greatest mathematician of the XX century, was reduced to the role of the lice-feeder, feeding the insects with his own blood (!).
    Thanks to the Carlos W. Porter’s website (www.cwporter.com) I’ve learned, that the notorious Hans Frank – the honcho of The General Gouvernmet, tried to abdicate 14 times and his applications were not accepted. That man had a concience (possibly), which would not prevent him from hanging anyway.
    Add to this that Poland was not liberated by the USSR (CCCP=666P=Devil’s Empire), but enslaved.
    Professor Robert Faurisson famously wrote: “for me, every war is a butchery; the winner is a good butcher and the loser not so good a butcher; on the other hand, at the end of a war, the winner may at most administer to the vanquished lessons in butchery but not lessons in law, justice or virtue”.

    Of course, Adolf Hitler will re-gain his place in history, less tarnished than now. But he will remain, in my opinion, a poor leader, who was not unable to avoid war, which he lost to the detriment of his beloved volk. Had he been vioctorius, only Muhammad the Prophet wold have been comparable to him.

  58. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    October 25, 2011 - 1:27 pm | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Actually, Ludwig Erhard already had the benefits of government planning at his disposal in the form of things such as an educated workforce and the autobahns. But it was economic failing that cost him his chancellorship.

  59. Felix Grubel's Gravatar Felix Grubel
    October 25, 2011 - 1:27 pm | Permalink

    God bless the internet. The truth really will set you free. People need to educate themselves as much as they possibly can about history; what really happened in the Post WWI period. The more you see, the clearer the pictures becomes.

  60. Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
    October 25, 2011 - 12:55 pm | Permalink

    @Anglo Saxon: Are you sure you don’t mean Helmut Schmidt? And don’t forget Kreisky. It’s amazing that both Germany and Austria were openly led by Jews within 30 years of the war’s end.

  61. TabuLa Raza's Gravatar TabuLa Raza
    October 25, 2011 - 12:10 pm | Permalink

    “The idea of collective punishment based on collective guilt was paramount among Jews.” Good. Let’s give it to them.

  62. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    October 25, 2011 - 12:09 pm | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Thanks for that Brother. Downloaded already, and will be read soon.

  63. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    October 25, 2011 - 12:03 pm | Permalink

    @European: I read somewhere that Helmut Kohl was in fact an ethnic Jew (i.e., ‘Jewish’ ancestry … since confirmed by others). Might this inherited “insider status” explain why/how he somehow danced around the submission issue?

  64. Banshee's Gravatar Banshee
    October 25, 2011 - 11:08 am | Permalink

    @Free Thinker:

    The Australian newspaper the main cartoon is again throwing rocks at a bloke called Andrew Bolt who had the temerity to ridicule (in a very mild way) white aboriginals claiming discrimination (sic) after a long drawn out court case involving a Jewish judge and Jewish lawyer ! ; no mention of course is made of this .

    Could you explain more about this case please? Did Mr.Bolt win the case? What are the details of the discrimination?

  65. Banshee's Gravatar Banshee
    October 25, 2011 - 11:05 am | Permalink

    @Junghans:

    Exposure of the depth of the German baiting, past and present, is virtually never mentioned.

    Japanese too

  66. Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
    October 25, 2011 - 10:47 am | Permalink

    Thank you for a much needed article, Peter. The story of Germany’s brutal crucifixion has barely been touched upon in the English speaking world, due to the usual suspects in control of the media, and thus, the dialogue. The truth about how the war was generated is even more suppressed, or distorted. Exposure of the depth of the German baiting, past and present, is virtually never mentioned. The ravings of “Lord Russell of Liverpool”, and the anti-German smear artist, “Lord” Vansittart, are smartly glossed over, even though their fratricidal filth is still poisoning the Anglo intellectual well.
    There is a lot of truthful information available in German, but most of these books have never been translated into English. For example, Karl Grau’s book, SILESIAN INFERNO, was translated and published, but who even knows of it, or cares to read it? The pathetic fact is, most Anglos would never read this material. Their intellectual toxification is, most unfortunately, very deep rooted, and not amenable to sweet reason. This is especially so, if it leads to introspection of their delusional ideals. Sad to say, many are even “proud” of their pugnacious ignorance. The free thinkers at places like this site are open to reading and discussing historical verities, but the overwhelming majority of Anglos, (and the mentally Anglicized), prefer to smugly bask in their complacent ignorance.
    When presented with unpleasant historical truths, most people recoil from any mention of it. It definitely makes them uncomfortable and they usually wiggle away from the subject, if they don’t otherwise get belligerent, (where their programmed ideological conditioning kicks in), and accuse you of being a “Nazi”, or some other such Jewish generated epithet.

  67. Frank's Gravatar Frank
    October 25, 2011 - 10:23 am | Permalink

    “The idea of collective punishment based on collective guilt was paramount among Jews.”

    They are correct.

  68. Robert Lloyd's Gravatar Robert Lloyd
    October 25, 2011 - 9:49 am | Permalink

    @Andrew Hamilton:

    The author clearly stated that Berle was not Jewish. Your point?

  69. Rehmat's Gravatar Rehmat
    October 25, 2011 - 8:31 am | Permalink

    As commander of the Allied Forces, Gen. Eisenhower played a major role in the death of 1.7 million German Christians. He wrote to his wife: “I hate Germans….”

    However, the brainwashed Americans not only elected him their President after the WW II, but also named Presidential resort, Camp David, after Eisenhower’s son David.

    The great majority of the 44 American Presidents have been involved in wars and regime change without declaring wars or being threatened by its victims. However, since Eisenhower to Obama, the American targets have mostly been Muslim countries. In 1953, Iran’s elected prime minister Dr. Mohammad Mosaddegh was removed from power by US-Britain-Israel ‘axis of evil’. Now the same powers are trying their best to bring another regime change in Tehran by toppling Ahmadinejad’s elected government…..

    http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/03/24/americas-war-presidents/

  70. Free Thinker's Gravatar Free Thinker
    October 25, 2011 - 4:03 am | Permalink

    You say : As outlined above, the Roosevelt administration’s postwar plan for Germany did not stem from the sentiment among the American public, or even its generals at the front.

    This is what all the European people of the world should truly fear . I see in todays The Australian newspaper the main cartoon is again throwing rocks at a bloke called Andrew Bolt who had the temerity to ridicule (in a very mild way) white aboriginals claiming discrimination (sic) after a long drawn out court case involving a Jewish judge and Jewish lawyer ! ; no mention of course is made of this .
    The average person is being stripped of the right of common sense to object to obvious stupidity in the name of theory .But only when the theory suits Jews. Any criticism of Israel is quashed with either cunning propaganda or legal tools (art exhibitions are closed when they don’t suit the Jewish community ) . Just as in the USSR the noose is being tightened while the innate stability of our nation is being stripped away by massive none white immigration and the heavy hand of the law is being substituted for good Gov .
    The ADL thugs and bigots have been allowed to open a branch in Australia which ofcourse means they will be stirring up business to justify their existence and over reacting to minor infractions .

    Wake up White Man before your standing on the gallows with minorities and the useful idiots baying for blood .

  71. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 25, 2011 - 2:47 am | Permalink

    Wasn’t Helmut Kohl forced to sign away East Prussian territories incorporated into post-war Poland as one of conditions before German unification can proceed ?
    I do know that many of the descendants of expelled Germans returned to buy local properties once the Marxist experiment in Poland had run its course.

  72. Dirk's Gravatar Dirk
    October 25, 2011 - 2:34 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant: The U.S. did the same legal trick with Japan and South-Korea. All their armed forces are under U.S. command because there was never a peace between Japan and the U.S. and South-Korea and North-Korea.

    I forgot to thank Peter Stuyvesant for this great article. Recently I just happened to bump into an interesting article on the above mentioned topic.

  73. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 25, 2011 - 2:31 am | Permalink

    German auto manufacturers had bought up whatever there was worth salvaging on the moonscape formerly known as the glorious British car industry. The rest of the players either went the way of the dodo, or were picked up by the Red Chinese and Indians who, ostensibly, would pay for any sort of shyte so long as they can jew down the seller’s price.
    And now the power to control regulations over the City of London had been transferred over to E.U. (read: Frankfurt).

  74. Dirk's Gravatar Dirk
    October 25, 2011 - 2:31 am | Permalink

    This topic can be extended by the story about the postwar reframing of the German mind. If someone could help me with consulting the ‘Parson papers’ in the archives of Harvard University, I would appreciate that.

  75. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 25, 2011 - 2:30 am | Permalink
  76. European's Gravatar European
    October 25, 2011 - 2:18 am | Permalink

    @Joe Webb:
    yes, it was made public in 2009. Adenauer, Willy Brand usw. were presented with these submission letters, ofcourse they were outraged. In 1955 entering the UN was a lie the old Germany had to live with. Eine sogenannte Lebensluege= Survivors-lie. Since the wall of Berlin was permitted and build in front of the allies, Germany itself could do nothing, and Kohl knew that.
    For some reason Kohl was not asked, or he was never interviewed, (not known) if he also had signed such a document, but Germany and the three allies did no longer desire to speak about the limitations held on the Germans self- government after the Berlin wall fell, and so gave Germany on march 15. 1991 its sovereignty back, with some enemy clauses still held in place.
    Sorry but I am not a very good translater. I am sure someone else can translate the whole article. But in a nutshell, it is what it states.

  77. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 2:17 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Actually, here it is:
    http://goo.gl/PmzT4

  78. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 2:14 am | Permalink

    @Anglo Saxon:
    Here’s the pdf for Bagus’ book. His thesis, is that France resented the Deutschmark’s strength, which posed a threat to the French state’s less rigorous monetary policy. The DM was the German nuclear bomb, according to Jacques Attali.

  79. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 25, 2011 - 1:38 am | Permalink

    @Hedgerow:
    The German economic boom owes nothing to the Marshall Plan (welfare at national level), and everything to Ludwig Erhard, who ignored the Allied central planning framework and allowed the Germany people, industrious and able if left to themselves, to rebuild the country in short order. Britain kept her war-time central planning socialism for decades and became the sick man of Europe.

  80. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    October 25, 2011 - 1:36 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant: The Third Reich still exists. It was never legally disbanded or adequately replaced. Ergo, the current Federal Republic is based upon a total fraud and the deliberate (childish) avoidance of reality not to mention constitutional protocols. I suspect this helps explain why there has been such a rush in recent decades to tie Germany politically to France: to firm up the core of the E.U. This would then likely render the fraud irreversible.

  81. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    October 25, 2011 - 1:14 am | Permalink

    The Truman administration instituted the Marshall Plan in Germany and other countries in Europe so as to undermine the political left in the region. Many on the American political right did not want to spend the money.

  82. European's Gravatar European
    October 25, 2011 - 12:56 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant:
    You are absolutely correct, and yes, Germans know of their given limitations after the war.
    And to the People who deleted my last post and did not let my post go thru, which was neither a personal insult, profanity or anything else, did I touch a raw nerve or some “Uncomfortable Truth in you” Truth is dangerous isn’t it, after the lies have been bought for decades as truth’s.? Who complained? Sleep well my friends.

  83. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 25, 2011 - 12:42 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Sorry for the multiple posts. That section in the book you mentioned is interesting. Most of us forget that Germany couldn’t reunite without the permission of the Allies. The French and the British were apparently worried about a reunited Germany. The Soviet Union just wanted to be paid a bribe before they would sign off (typical Bolsheviks). It seems to have been the Europeans who had fears about Germany reuniting, not so much the US. In fact, it seems like the US supported the reunification of Germany.

  84. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 25, 2011 - 12:23 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant: The more I think of it, I just can’t envision Helmut Kohl being forced to sign an act of submission to Allied victors every time he was elected. What if he said no? Were the Allies literally going to bomb Germany until he did? In the 1980s? I can’t imagine it.

    Or was whatever instrument he was required to sign a lot less draconian than the name “act of submission” suggests? It sounds like he was signing a document that promised to follow any orders the Allies gave him.

    If the Allies had this legal power over German internal affairs, what was the purpose of having the Chancellor sign it in the first place?

  85. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 25, 2011 - 12:01 am | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Very interesting, thanks for the information. I wonder just how much influence Allies had in the internal affairs or Germany and Japan (I mean after the first few years of occupation). I don’t mean indirect influence though such things as the media, I mean absolute legal authority to override local authorities.

    But I would still like something on the claim that German chancellors were forced to sign a ‘act of submission’ to the Allied victors before they were allowed to enter office. Just that one fact, if true, seems worthy of an entire article (if not a book!). No one even knows about it. What if a Chancellor refused to sign an act of submission? Did the German people know their leader was signing it?

  86. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    October 24, 2011 - 11:52 pm | Permalink

    “No peace treaty was signed with Germany after World War II. the Potsdam Agreement of August, 1945 stipulated that a peace treaty would be signed once an adequate government was established. But such a treaty was never signed. Germany did not enjoy full sovereignty because allies had special control rights until the Two Plus Four Agreement of 1991.
    (The UN Charter still contains enemy state clauses. The clauses allow the allies to impose measures against states such as Germany or Japan without authorization of the Security Council).”

    Bagus, The Tragedy of the Euro, p. 51.

  87. Fenria's Gravatar Fenria
    October 24, 2011 - 11:23 pm | Permalink

    I recall about ten years ago, I was out to lunch with my father in a restaurant in Los Angeles, whence I heard in a booth behind us two obvious jews discussing and laughing about how broken Germany was after WW2, and how Germany never was or will be the same again.

    Yeah, jews, we know what you’ve done. We’ve got your number.

  88. Jett Rucker's Gravatar Jett Rucker
    October 24, 2011 - 11:05 pm | Permalink

    @Andrew Hamilton, thanks for the corrections. It’s a shame that a needed, interesting article of this kind is marred by such errors. It damages the credibility of the whole thing.

    The article is on the Web. It should be corrected, with or even without acknowledgement thereof (preferably with).

  89. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 24, 2011 - 10:04 pm | Permalink

    I used to harbor a faint hope that some day Russia may open parts of their archives pertaining to what exactly was transpiring in the Nazi occupied Poland and Baltic states as far as Judaic grievances are concerned. The Russians know where 90% of the skeletons are buried as it was the Red Army that liberated the largest camps which, in turn, allowed their army intelligence to run wild.
    But given comrade Putin’s acute case of Soviet nostalgia (he had even ordered the old bolshevik hymn to be re-instated), any optimistic expectations in that regard will have to be shelved for a long while given his latest professional plans.

  90. Joe Webb's Gravatar Joe Webb
    October 24, 2011 - 9:53 pm | Permalink

    I checked the citation for German Chancellors being required to sign a “submissions” statement. It is in German. So what is the English translation?

    This is pretty weird stuff…until 1991? Please respond. thaks, Joe

  91. Lookaroundu's Gravatar Lookaroundu
    October 24, 2011 - 9:34 pm | Permalink

    It’s quite amazing (and disgusting) that in the 20th century the Wilson and Roosevelt regimes were able to propagate so many warmongering and hateful lies about Germans and Germany. This given the fact that the largest plurality of US citizenry has historically been of German ancestry. The information is out there for those who want to learn more. For example, Alfred-Maurice de Zayas was UN Chief of Petitions at the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. He has written extensively on the post WWII starvation, ethnic cleansing, outright murder and other atrocities against Germans, most of whom had no role in the Nazis coming to power. Two of his books relating to this subject are A Terrible Revenge: The Ethnic Cleansing of The East European Germans and Nemesis at Potsdam (Palgrave MacMillan).

  92. October 24, 2011 - 9:03 pm | Permalink

    WWII was a repeat of WWI, but with improvements. The end game in both wars was to genocide Germans. Why? Perhaps revenge for Martin Luther (The Jews and their Lies) and Johann Andreas Eisenmenger (The Traditions of the Jews) telling the truth.

    I recall reading Ben Freedman’s account of the bankers running the show at Versaille. The same bankers that funded Lenin and Trotsky. Their plan could not move forward without genociding Germans.

  93. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    October 24, 2011 - 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Not only was The Morgenthau Plan potentially harmful to Germans, it was also quite actually harmful to Allied soldiers, because once the plan was discovered, it was used by Goebbels to spur Germans into greater reluctance to surrender. This complaint about the public knowledge of the plan was made by General George Marshall as well as politicians in America at the time. So, this appears to be a case of Jewish interests devising a plan that caused harm to both sides, in order to achieve an end that is seen to be in the interests of only the Jews (be in the middle and play both sides against each other).

    Just curious, the article makes this statement:

    at least until 1991 German chancellors were forced to sign a ‘act of submission’ to the Allied victors

    Is there other documentation that I can use to prove this is true to others? I see the German article, but when I use google translator, I can’t really find the reference. Is there any documentation on this in English? I would like source material if possible, or at least something authoritative. Thanks.

  94. Jarvis Dingle-Daden's Gravatar Jarvis Dingle-Daden
    October 24, 2011 - 7:49 pm | Permalink

    I never understood out how 400K Jews of pre-1933 Germany who were allowed to emigrate by the tens of thousands, later to be joined by fresh thousands of German Jews who bribed their way out of the country traveling on Swiss, Vatican, Swedish or Portuguese documents – translated into $75 billion in reparations from Germany.
    Never mind the whole issue of original Israeli infrastructure being built by German engineers.

  95. Banshee's Gravatar Banshee
    October 24, 2011 - 7:34 pm | Permalink

    Wonderful article. This needs to be disbursed far and wide, for too long we have been held captive to the lies perpetuated by the media and academia about WW II.

    General Patton wrote in his diary about this era:

    Evidently the virus started by Morgenthau and Baruch of a Semitic revenge against all Germans is still working. Harrison (a U.S. State Department official) and his associates indicate that they feel German civilians should be removed from houses for the purpose of housing Displaced Persons. There are two errors in this assumption. First, when we remove an individual German we punish an individual German, while the punishment is — not intended for the individual but for the race.

    Furthermore, it is against my Anglo-Saxon conscience to remove a person from a house, which is a punishment, without due process of law. In the second place, Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals.

    In a letter to his wife of September 14, 1945, Patton wrote:

    I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff. It is not cricket and is Semitic. I am also opposed to sending POW’s to work as slaves in foreign lands (i.e., the Soviet Union’s Gulags), where many will be starved to death.

    I have been at Frankfurt for a civil government conference. If what we are doing (to the Germans) is ‘Liberty, then give me death.’ I can’t see how Americans can sink so low. It is Semitic, and I am sure of it.

    And in his diary he noted:

    Today we received orders . . . in which we were told to give the Jews special accommodations. If for Jews, why not Catholics, Mormons, etc? . . . We are also turning over to the French several hundred thousand prisoners of war to be used as slave labor in France. It is amusing to recall that we fought the Revolution in defense of the rights of man and the Civil War to abolish slavery and have now gone back on both principles.

    We have destroyed what could have been a good race, and we are about to replace them with Mongolian savages.

    http://goo.gl/Ze8g1

    You can be sure none of this will end up in a textbook.

  96. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    October 24, 2011 - 7:02 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know if any of you have ever seen any first hand personal photos, or strategic bombing survey photos, but, there wasn’t much left of Germany after WWII.

  97. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    October 24, 2011 - 6:06 pm | Permalink

    @tadzio: Those who appeared as Jesus and the Apostles were all declared guilty……… ” If true, that is sick, for any reason.

  98. European's Gravatar European
    October 24, 2011 - 6:02 pm | Permalink

    @ps79:
    There seems to be a great misunderstanding on the Germans National Anthem’s beginning. Deutschland Deutschland ueber alles…. It only expresses an affinity over one’s Country and over all other values, not over other People. That is what Germans are supposed to feel for themselves, their country and soil. It belongs to them, and expresses national pride, understandibly so after WWI and what was left of it.
    It can not be understood in the literal translation format without understanding History and the feelings attached to ones Homeland. The German people did not arrange the wars, they suffered during and in every war. Politic’s, Kaisers, Government, Lords etc. decide to go into war in which Jews I am sure always drew a benefit. I get so sick of the stupidity of People, who buy and believe the propaganda and analysis of the German People. (surely with the help of Jews to achieve their goal. Germans will recover, you can bet on it. Self-preservation will kick in, with the addition of lessons learned, don’t trust a Jew.) Replace the word Germans with Jews in the propaganda video and align yourself more to the Truth of the past and future events coming your way.

  99. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    October 24, 2011 - 5:47 pm | Permalink

    @Dark Henry: Another totally incredible piece of information, to me at least. Ditto what I said in my post above about the invention of the net.

  100. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    October 24, 2011 - 5:44 pm | Permalink

    German chancellors were forced to sign an “act of submission to the Allied Victors all the way up to 1991!! That’s got to be a first!! This invention of the net, has educated so many people, including myself, on so many things never before imagined, that it must have been an act of God.

  101. tadzio's Gravatar tadzio
    October 24, 2011 - 4:56 pm | Permalink

    An example of complete and petty influence of the Jewsih hate mongers is illustrated by Douglas Reed in his The Controversy of Zion, Chapter 42 The Talmudic Vengeance. The book is available free online. He was a journalist and popular author. He is very readible.

    “Certain symbolic deeds were evidently meant to establish the authorship, or nature, of the vengeance. These crowning acts of symbolism were the reproductions, after nearly thirty years, of the similar acts committed during the revolution in Russia: the Talmudic boast left on the wall of the Romanoffs’ death chamber and the canonization of Judas Iscariot. After the Second World War the Nazi leaders were hanged on the Jewish Day of Judgment in 1946, so that their execution was presented to Jewry in the shape of Mordecai’s vengeance on Haman and his sons. Then in the Bavarian village of Oberammergau, where the world-famous Passion Play had been performed for three centuries, the players of the chief parts were put on trial for “Nazi activities” before a Communist court. Those who appeared as Jesus and the apostles were all declared guilty; the one performer acquitted was he who took the part of Judas.

    By the choice of the Jewish Day of Judgment for the hanging of the Nazi leaders and German commanders the Western leaders gave the conclusion of the Second War this aspect of a vengeance exacted specifically in the name of “the Jews.” The shape which the trial took showed the purpose of the immense propaganda of falsification conducted during the war, which I have earlier described. “Crimes against Jews” were singled out as a separate count, as if Jews were different from other human beings… ”
    http://www.controversyofzion.info/Controversybook/Controversybook_eng_42.htm

  102. ps79's Gravatar ps79
    October 24, 2011 - 4:43 pm | Permalink

    Propaganda: Your Job in Germany

  103. Hour Glass's Gravatar Hour Glass
    October 24, 2011 - 3:29 pm | Permalink

    @Anglo Saxon:
    All history and politics apparently have a single source: the obsessive lust for power & wealth by a tight-knit tribe of genetic misfits who long ago emerged from somewhere in the centre of the great Asian landmass that lies between the Ukraine and China.
    -So very true Anglo. And if current American history students were are of this, professional historians would be out of a job. Grad school for an up and coming historian is one long-winded exercise in misdirection. Forget original research on Wall Street or the financial class. Grad advisers will force you to research the dishwasher, the field worker, and labor in general. Waste your life finding out about Juan and Rosa, the laborer family! Its just so dam antithetical to the mantle of higher learning throughout history. You pay your money only to be bled dry by the spiritless machinations of mind-control.

  104. Andrew Hamilton's Gravatar Andrew Hamilton
    October 24, 2011 - 3:27 pm | Permalink

    Life’s complicated!

    Neither Adolf Berle nor William Shirer were Jews, although Berle was frequently mistaken for one–even by Jews. Berle, Sr. was actually of German descent, and Berle, Jr.’s mother (nee Mary Augusta Wright) was a New England Calvinist.

  105. October 24, 2011 - 3:07 pm | Permalink

    The Morgenthau Plan and the Problem of Policy Perversion
    Prof. Anthony Kubek

    Excerpt:

    Morgenthau hit the ceiling when he got a copy of the Handbook for Military Government in Germany, which was designed for the guidance of every American and British official upon entering Germany. The Handbook offered a glimpse of a very different kind of occupation that Treasury officials were hoping for. Its tone was moderate and lenient throughout Germany was not only to be self-supporting but was to retain a relatively high standard of living. Morgenthau wasted no time in showing the Handbook to President Roosevelt, who immediately rejected its philosophy as too soft. Impressed by the critical memorandum White had prepared, the President killed the Handbook and sent a stinging memorandum to the Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, and a copy of which was sent to Hull. ‘This so-called Handbook is pretty bad,” Roosevelt began, and he instructed that “all copies” be withdrawn immediately because it gave him the impression that Germany was to be “restored just as much as The Netherlands or Belgium, and the people of Germany brought back as quickly as possible to their pre-war estate.”

    More:

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p287_Kubek.html

    Peace.
    Michael Santomauro
    ReporterNotebook@gmail.com

  106. European's Gravatar European
    October 24, 2011 - 3:05 pm | Permalink

    This article brings back memories and stories my mother told us of what it was like living, during and after WWII in Germany. I got the after math/taste I sometimes wish to forget. It also explains the forced submissive and oppressed behaviours I found odd among Germans, (my family) long after into the sixties to eighties. In a nutshell, like living in a cage or a hangmans rope around your neck. 1991, Jung Freedom indeed. I hope it can recover from the mental and spiritual bondage of 65 years. And from what I understand, it is still not militarily free.
    It is about time though, that History allows the other side to be known and told. I personaly appreciate the article. I do know what hunger is, what death in the family is due to war, what bombed out cities and perverted truth of events are, and what it is like to be labled intrinsically evil to be rotted out. History looks different in my homeland then history of Germany/Europe taught in the US. The US has it’s death-camps too. Ironic that the question was ” What to do with Germans”, when the cause of the conflicts in all Countries are the Jews (religious or economically). The US is waking up on Wall Street finally. I hope more Historical Enlightenment is to follow here in the US in education and protests. A truth told by facts and balanced by experienced facts, and not truth “created by Jews” and sold as facts. (History, as well as the financial bubbles and US melt-downs, and then getting away with **we are innocent**)

  107. Guy Francis's Gravatar Guy Francis
    October 24, 2011 - 3:04 pm | Permalink

    There was a frontpage headline in the early 1930’s:
    GERMANY MUST PERISH! the subline was World’s Jews Declare War on Germany a photo of that newspaper frontpage is available online.

    GRUESOME HARVEST
    The Costly Attempt To Exterminate The
    People of Germany
    By Ralph Franklin Keeling published in 1947 is well worth reading.

    “The truth,” he said, “is, indeed, as you once wrote: one can only understand the Jew when one knows what his ultimate goal is. And that goal is, beyond world domination, the annihilation of the world. He must wear down all the rest of mankind, he persuades himself, in order to prepare a paradise on earth. He has made himself believe that only he is capable of this great task, and, considering his ideas of paradise, that is certainly so. But one sees, if only in the means which he employs, that he is secretly driven to something else. While he pretends to himself to be elevating mankind, he torments men to despair, to madness, to ruin. If a halt is not ordered, he will destroy all men. His nature compels him to that goal, even though he dimly realizes that he must thereby destroy himself. There is no other way for him; he must act thus. This realization of the unconditional dependence of his own existence upon that of his victims appears to me to be the main cause for his hatred. To be obliged to try and annihilate us with all his might, but at the same time to suspect that that must lead inevitably to his own ruin — therein lies, if you will, the tragedy of Lucifer.”

    Adolf Hitler to Dietrich Eckart

    What profit from destroying civilization in Rhodesia and making that land again a land of savages? What can the Jews in South Africa gain in material terms from their present intensive effort to destroy the white population and make of that country another Rhodesia? Is it not obvious that they could squeeze much more money out of the White population by peaceful parasitism and without inciting the racial hatreds that disrupt the economy and could conceivably bring retribution upon themselves? The only explanation, it seems to me, is that with their race as a whole spiritual considerations are paramount, paramount over profit and even over self-preservation. One can foresee the logical end in a future that may not be too distant: one can see the last Jews dying with exultation on the surface of a planet from which they have exterminated all other human beings, all animals, all vegetation, all life — a planet of which they have made “a desolation of desolations.”

    Revilo P. Oliver, (Ph.D., Professor of Classics, University of Illinois)

  108. fender's Gravatar fender
    October 24, 2011 - 3:04 pm | Permalink

    Pretty much everything about the tribe revolves around vengeance and punishment. A Jewish communist named Solomon Morel ran a concentration camp for German citizens after WW2 where he and his men tortured and murdered thousands of civilians, many of them women and children. He evaded justice in Israel, where he lived out the rest of his life in peace. The Israeli government refused all extraditions, citing “antisemitism” (what else?) for the charges against him.

    There’s no doubt that, if they had their way, the tribe would have done to Germany what they did to Ukraine: turn it into one giant concentration camp of starving people. Luckily the US government was slightly more wise to the tribe than they are today. Imagine what would have happened to Germany if shabbos goy like Hillary Clinton were in the state department back then? There’d be no Germans at all.

  109. Dark Henry's Gravatar Dark Henry
    October 24, 2011 - 2:07 pm | Permalink

    And don’t forget the infamous “Germany must perish!” by the even more radical Theodore N. Kaufman:
    http://www.ihr.org/books/kaufman/perish.html
    where he basically asks for the genetic elimination of the German nation by the mass forced sterilization of the entire population and its complete territorial dismemberment, and/or by moving men out of Germany and bringing non-European foreigners to mate with German women.
    I do believe in some sort of karma though, and the cathastrophic fall and most probable demographic extinction of the Anglo (and French) countries these days has to be related to the way they treated their blood cousins during WWII and afterwards after letting themselves being duped by the Kaufmans and Morenthaus of this world; who btw still are manipulating them via usury, hollywood and the media.

  110. Doug's Gravatar Doug
    October 24, 2011 - 2:07 pm | Permalink

    It is good to preserve this kind of history.

  111. Mickey Meadows's Gravatar Mickey Meadows
    October 24, 2011 - 2:01 pm | Permalink

    The resurgence of Germany into one of the strongest economies in the world in 2011, is therefore a victory.

  112. Lancashire lad's Gravatar Lancashire lad
    October 24, 2011 - 2:00 pm | Permalink

    I wasn’t aware William Shirer was Jewish. He was well connected in Nazi circles for a Jew.

    This article reminds me of the German ‘turnip winter’ – with mass starvation – of 1917 and the tragedy of the Versailles negotiations that kept famine conditions alive until the Germans signed. That story is never told, yet it is needed to make sense of later developments.

  113. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    October 24, 2011 - 1:33 pm | Permalink

    A clear, succinct, informative, almost certainly accurate, and truly excellent essay.

    I am part of the minority that have made it their business to study the inhuman experience of Germans between late 1944 and the beginning of 1948, but Peter still managed to teach me several new facts.

    I would like to make this derivative point. The European Union is an illegal and bogus entity because Germany was a militarily occupied territory when it signed the Treaty of Paris in 1951.

    Indeed, to this day Germany remains a militarily occupied territory: US Military bases situated near to Frankfurt (the Rothschild Dynasty’s birthplace) still being maintained and fully staffed for reasons few (and even fewer Germans) dare question.

    This treaty brought into being the European Coal and Steel Community, which initially comprised France (plus Algeria: then a department of the French Republic), West Germany, Italy, and the three Benelux states: Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

    There is no question or doubt that the European Coal and Steel Community (the world’s first supranational trade organization) was the deliberate forerunner of the EEC, which then morphed into the E.U. (aka EUSSR).

    West Germany also entered into the ECSC while being governed by a New York City based, Zionist imposed political constitution: loosely known as the Basic Law.

    Thus by unwrapping the chain of events we can quickly find the fatal legal flaw (the Zionist fix) in the supranational entity that is now seeking to expand until it absorbs even the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean.

    All history and politics apparently have a single source: the obsessive lust for power & wealth by a tight-knit tribe of genetic misfits who long ago emerged from somewhere in the centre of the great Asian landmass that lies between the Ukraine and China.

  114. Donnerwedder!'s Gravatar Donnerwedder!
    October 24, 2011 - 1:21 pm | Permalink

    Tell it like it is!

9 Trackbacks to "Roosevelt’s Catos"

  1. on November 14, 2011 at 9:00 am
  2. on November 3, 2011 at 11:35 am
  3. on November 2, 2011 at 6:04 pm
  4. on November 2, 2011 at 5:17 pm
  5. on November 2, 2011 at 1:24 pm
  6. on November 2, 2011 at 10:28 am
  7. on November 1, 2011 at 6:19 pm
  8. on October 28, 2011 at 12:27 am
  9. on October 28, 2011 at 12:00 am

Comments are closed.