“Never Again”: The Magic Wand of Democracy

The desire for vengeance that Disraeli asserted made many Jews “odious and so hostile to mankind”[1] was especially malignant after the Second World War when Jews from all over the world were seeking vengeance for the persecution of their brethren for no rational or logical reasons… from their point of view!

As Russian armies poured into Germany near the end of the war, the Jewish Soviet Propa-ganda minister, Ilya Ehrenburg, had millions of leaflets printed up and air-dropped onto the Russian troops, exhorting them when they entered Germany to: “Kill the Germans, wherever you find them! Every German is our mortal enemy. Have no mercy on women, children, or the aged! Kill every German… wipe them out!” In another leaflet drop, Ehrenburg urged the Russian troops to: “Kill, kill, you brave Red Army soldiers, kill. There is nothing in the Germans that is innocent. Obey the instructions of comrade Stalin and stamp the fascistic beast in its cave. Break with force the racial arrogance of the Germanic women. Take them as your legal loot. Kill, you brave soldiers of the Red Army, kill!”[2]

When the fighting stopped in Europe, Roosevelt’s Jewish Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau’s plan was executed. The goal of this “Semitism gone wild for vengeance”[3] was to destroy the German economy, subdivide Germany into several smaller states, enslave, and starve to death millions of her citizens. Though the Plan was eventually toned down by saner heads, most of it was implemented with brutal consequences for the German people.[4]

A small group of German “well poisoners” who had fled Germany before the war came back with the intention of poisoning the water supply of the city of Nuremberg.[5] They failed, but with the complicity of Jewish American soldiers, another group of East European “well poisoners” successfully poisoned 2000 loaves of bread with arsenic which were then delivered to a POW camp in Germany holding 36,000 German SS prisoners. “Thousands of SS soldiers were seized with violent stomach pains,” and, “700 to 800 died during the year.” [6]

After the defeat of Nazi Germany, Jews were now in charge of the concentration camps. The most sadistic post-war camp commandant was the 26-year-old Jew Shlomo Merrel.[7] German soldiers interned in his death camp in Poland were beaten by Jewish sadistic guards with rubber clubs and hoses before they were executed Palestinian style. “Women who fared even worse,” notes Dr. E. Michael Jones, “perhaps because they were more helpless,” were forced to exhume the corpses of the Poles who were buried there:

They started to suffer nausea as the bodies, black as the stuff in a gutter, appeared.  The faces were rotten, the flesh was blue, but the guards, who had often seemed psychopathic, making a German woman drink urine, drink blood, and eat a man’s excrement, inserting an oily five-mark bill in a woman’s vagina, putting a match to it — shouted at the women… “Lie down with them!” The women did and the guards shouted at the women. “Hug them!” “Kiss them!” “Make love with them!” and, with their rifles pushed on the backs of the women’s heads until their eyes, noses, and mouths were deep in the Polish faces’ slime.[8]

Then there was the Jewish Brigade. Formed in Palestine, outfitted in British Army uniforms and riding in American Jeeps, the Brigade was established, not to fight in the war, but to enter into Germany behind the British army to take revenge on the now disarmed and defenceless German officers. There were no charges filed against these German officers, no trial, no judge, not even an arrest; they were simply murdered according to the caprice or whim of vengeance-seeking Jews. The Jews called it “vengeance,” but, in fact, it was a simple murder of defenceless men who may or may not have been guilty of anything except having served in the German Army in defence of their country.[9] And more than one young Jew of this brigade was heard to say: “I must kill a German in cold blood, I must. And I must rape a German girl. That’s our war aim, revenge! Not Roosevelt’s four freedoms or the greater glory of the British Empire or Stalin’s ideology, but vengeance, Jewish vengeance.” [10]

Finally, a hugely disproportionate number of Jews flooded into the Nuremberg Trials and used it as a means of exacting vengeance not only on the German leadership but on the German nation. Of the 3,000 people who participated in the Trials, 2,400 of them were Jews. Working just behind their gentile front men, they could do whatever they wanted, while the defeated, starving, prostrate Germans were without any means of defending themselves.[11] In this tribunal set up by the victors to judge the defeated:

–The crimes for which the Germans were indicted had been committed by at least one of the four prosecuting powers;

– The court could accept whatever evidence it liked as it was not bound by technical rules of evidence;

—Unsworn “copies” of documents and third-hand statements (hearsay) were admitted as proof;

—Cross-examination by the defence was not permitted; lawyers were outnumbered and had no access to the prosecutor’s documents; prosecutors eliminated other tools that were usually available to the defence such as the right to call any witness it wanted;

—Forensic evidence such as autopsies and the examination of the crime scenes was not admitted; this means that the trial does not prove the extermination of six million Jews and the existence of gas chambers;

–Judgments were obtained strictly on the basis of confessions, spurious testimonies, and fraudulent documents; the confessions that were obtained by the mostly Jewish investigators were extracted by intimidation, threats, torture, and extreme duress; most of the German guards at Dachau, for example, had their testicles crushed beyond repair; Auschwitz commandant Rudolph Höss was tortured for days on end by Jews serving in the British army; beaten nearly to death, his wife and children threatened with death and deportation to Siberia, he signed the most important confession of the Nuremberg trials, an admission full of absurdities and lies. The goal of these exactions was not the search for truth and justice, but lust for vengeance and the obtainment of financial reparations;

—Indictments were also obtained on the basis of laws that were invented for the purpose; in other words, defendants were punished for acts which were not against the law when committed (in the absence of a law there can be neither crime nor punishment);

—The ultimate injustice was the final interference of the legislature with the judiciary. [12]

In the aftermath, several independent newspapers were highly critical of the farcical nature of this trial. In October 1946, Mr. Paul Sauriol, for example, the editor-in-chief of the largest French-language Canadian daily newspaper, Le Devoir de Montréal, condemned the Nuremberg trial in the following terms:

Historians will look back with astonishment on this great trial, which set such formidable precedents in international law. Under the Nuremberg judgment, it is understood that the victors have the right to judge and condemn the vanquished; to judge and condemn them under retroactive “laws” enacted after their defeat; the victors can act as both prosecutors and judges; they can also judge only the actions of the vanquished, without taking into account similar actions committed by the victors; finally, the fact of having prepared for a war of aggression will be a crime for the vanquished, because it is the victors who will decide which side committed the aggression.[13]

And in his book Nuremberg II or the Counterfeiters, French nationalistic scholar Maurice Bardèche had this to say about the Allied occupation of Germany:

 The record of the Allied occupation of Germany is utterly despicable. It is not even hatred, for real hatred has its own nobility. It is something abject and underhanded, a mixture of looting, swindling, influence peddling, sexual depravity, baseness, hypocrisy, and fear. And a smell of Levantine rot rises from this mass grave. It doesn’t even have the grandeur of rage and sacrilege. It mixes horror with something shady and mercenary: everywhere you look, you see the profile of the usurer and the trafficker.[14]

In the final analysis, the Nuremberg trial laid the foundations for a globalist New World Order in which nationalism is forever stigmatized and suppressed.[15] Jewish power, which had been severely defeated and humiliated by Hitler’s nationalist Germany had to make sure this kick in the face would never happen again. The expression “never again” is in fact one of their favorite magic wands with “Nazi,” “fascist,” “anti-Semite,” or “White supremacist.” As if by magic, these powerful words can trigger feelings of guilt, fear, and anxiety in a Pavlovian type reflex which can neutralize any desire to threaten or resist Jewish power.

The following excerpts from Maurice Bardèche’s prophetic book, Nuremberg, the Promised Land are a brilliant illustration of this sleight-of-hand magic with one caveat: In light of what has been described above, it can be argued that “the conscience of humanity” means first “the conscience of Jews” as they are the most affected by a resurgence of nationalism and the positive feelings of pride, homogeneity, solidarity, and independence that come with it. As noted by Jewish journalist Charles E. Silberman, Jews are committed to the “never again” magic wand of democracy “because of their historically held belief that Jews are safe only in a society that accepts a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups.”[16] And if one controls the money and the media, democracy is the easiest political system to subvert:

There is a very simple way to tell if the organization to which you belong runs the risk of being declared criminal one day.

If you catch even a whiff of the adjective nationalist, if one invites you to be masters in your own lands, if one speaks to you about unity, discipline, force, grandeur, you cannot deny that this is not a very democratic vocabulary, and consequently you are likely one day to see your organization become criminal. So, beware of bad thoughts, and know that what we call criminal is always marked out with the same intentions.

The world is from now on democratic for perpetuity. It is democratic by judicial decision. From now on a legal precedent weighs down on every sort of national rebirth.

The decision of Nuremberg thus consists in making a preliminary selection between the parties. One is legitimate, and the other suspect. Those in the one are in line with the democratic spirit and have the right consequently to seize power and to have a concerted plan because it is certain that their concerted plan will never threaten democracy and peace. Those in the other party, on the contrary, are not entitled to have power, and consequently it is useless that they exist: it is understood that they contain in themselves the seeds of all kinds of crimes against peace and humanity.

The right to interfere and destroy governments that are considered authoritarian is therefore inherent in these simple statements. This right, however, is peculiar in that it does not entail, or does not seem to entail, an identifiable will to interfere. It is not some great power in particular or some group of great powers which is opposed to the re-establishment of nationalist movements; […] it is the conscience of humanity [the conscience of Jews, my comment]. “We do not want to see that again,” says the conscience of humanity [the conscience of Jews, my comment].

If a movement similar to National Socialism were established tomorrow, it is certain that the UN would not intervene to require its suppression. But the universal conscience would approve any government which announced the prohibition of such a party or, for greater convenience, of every party which it accused of resembling National Socialism. Every national resurrection, every policy of energy or simply of cleanliness, is thus struck with suspicion.

There is a closed world of democratic idealism which is of the same order as the closed world of Marxism. It is not astonishing if their methods manage to coincide, if their justice ends up being the same even though words, as they use them, do not have all the same sense. It too is a religion. It is the same attack on our hearts. When they condemn nationalism, they know well what they are doing. It is the foundation of their Law. They condemn your truth; they declare it radically wrong. They condemn our feeling, our roots even, our most profound ways of seeing and feeling. They explain to us why our brain is not made as it should be: we have the brain of barbarians.

The condemnation of the National Socialist Party goes much further than it seems to. In reality, it reaches all the solid forms, all the geological forms of political life. Every nation, every party which urges us to remember our soil, our tradition, our trade, our race is suspect. Whoever claims the right of the first occupant and calls to witness things as obvious as the ownership of the city offends against a universal morality which denies the right of the people to write their laws. This applies not just to the Germans; it is all of us who are dispossessed. No one has anymore the right to sit down in his field and say: “This ground belongs to me.” No one has anymore the right to stand up in the city and say: “We are the old ones; we built the houses of this city; anyone who does not want to obey our laws should get out.”

And we are free to protest, free, infinitely free to write, to vote, to speak in public, provided that we never take measures which can change all that.[17]

[1] Benjamin Disraeli, Lord George Bentinck: A Political Biography, 1847, Chapter XXIV. Cited by Kevin MacDonald in The Culture of critic. An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, third edition, Antelope Hill Publishing, 2025.

[2] Joachim Hoffmann, Stalin’s War of Extermination, 1941-1945. Planning, Realization, and Documentation, Castle Hill Publishers, 2001, pp.155-160.

[3] Dr. E. Michael Jones, The Holocaust Narrative, Fidelity Press, 2023, p. 125.

[4] Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, Second Edition Updated and Revised, Money Tree Publishing, 2024, p. 385.

[5] Jones, The Holocaust Narrative, p.105.

[6] Ibid., p.108.

[7] Sepp Jendryschik, Zgoda – Une station sur le chemin de croix silésien, Akribeia, 2004.

[8] Jones, The Holocaust Narrative, p. 112.

[9] Morris Beckman, The Jewish Brigade. An Army with Two Masters 1944-1945, Spellmount, 1998.

[10] Michael Bar-Zohar, The Avengers, Hawthorn Books, 1967, p.21.

[11] Mark Weber, The Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust. Do the ‘war crimes’ trials prove extermination? The Unz Review, 1992.

[12] David Irving, Nuremberg. The Last battle, 1996. Cited by Charles Stanford in Chapter 7, “The Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal,” of The Holocaust Narrative by Dr. E. Michael Jones, pp. 117-157.

[13] Citation from Maurice Bardèche, Nuremberg II ou les faux-monnayeurs (Nuremberg II or the Counterfeiters), Omnia Veritas ( original publication in 1950), p. 157.

[14] Ibid., p. 134.

[15] Editor’s note, Maurice Bardèche, Nuremberg and the Promised land, Counter-Currents, August 9, 2013.

[16] Charles E. Silberman, A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, Simon and Schuster, 1985. Cited by Scott Howard, The Transgender-Industrial Complex, Antelope Hill Publishing, 2020, p. 116.

[17] Excerpt translated by George F. Held; see Editor’s note, Maurice Bardèche, Nuremberg and the Promised land, Counter-Currents, August 9, 2013.