Re: Hitler's shady past - sinner, jew, cultist, or all of the above?
raven1
<snip>
Please don't eat me! My brothers are much fatter than me, and they'll
be along any minute now!
---
"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to skyscrapers..."
Mark K. Bilbo
> Hitler apparently had a very shady past
That's nice.
Now go away.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“The older I grow the more I distrust the familiar
doctrine that age brings wisdom.”
- H. L. Mencken
cactus
> Hitler apparently had a very shady past. So much so that he made extra efforts to conceal it. He
> was worried that he himself might actually be 1/4 Jewish. So far I've found evidence of
> illegitimacy in Hitlers ancestory which means it might never be known for sure whether Hitler was a
> pure Ayran or not, and I've found evidence (from Iranians -see below) that Hitlers mother was a
> Jewish prostitute.
>
> "Hitler's paternal grandfather was most likely one of the brothers Johann Georg Hiedler or Johann
> Nepomuk Hiedler. There were rumours that Hitler was one-quarter Jewish and that his grandmother,
> Maria Schicklgruber, became pregnant while working as a servant in a Jewish household. The
> implications of these rumours were politically explosive for the proponent of a racist ideology.
> Opponents tried to prove that Hitler had Jewish or Czech ancestors. Although these rumours were
> never confirmed, for Hitler they were reason enough to conceal his origins. According to Robert G.
> L. Waite in The Psychopathic God: Adolf Hitler, Hitler made it illegal for German women to work in
> Jewish households, and after the "Anschluss" (annexation) of Austria, Hitler turned his father's
> hometown into an artillery practice area. Waite says that Hitler's insecurities in this regard may
> have been more important than whether Judaic ancestry could have been proven by his peers."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler
>
> "After the war Hitler's former lawyer, Hans Frank, claimed that Adolf told him in 1930 that one of
> his relatives was trying to blackmail him by threatening to reveal his alleged Jewish ancestry.
> Hitler asked Frank to find out the facts. Frank says he determined that at the time Maria
> Schicklgruber gave birth to Alois, she was working as a household cook in the town of Graz. Her
> employers were a Jewish family named Frankenberger, who had a 19-year-old son. The son, according to
> Frank, was Alois's father and Hitler's grandfather--which would make the man who inspired the
> Holocaust one-quarter Jewish."
>
> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_325b.html
>
> According to one source, the Iranians think Hitler help create the Jewish State of Israel....
>
> Tuesday, January 02, 2007 by Staff Writer - Hitler a Jew?
> "Hitler was a Jew who helped found Israel." It might seem preposterous to many, but recent comments
> made by Mohammad-Ali Ramin, a top advisor to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seem to indicate
> otherwise. In a recent interview with an Iranian website, Ramin said that Adolph Hitler was a Jew
> from his mother’s side and his actions to found the State of Israel stemmed from his Jewish
> connections and came as a result of cooperation between him and Britain in light of their joint
> wishes to rid Europe of all Jews. Ramin explained Hitler’s hate towards the Jews because his mother
> was a Jewish prostitute and he developed a loathing towards her and her ethnic background. "At this
> time he both felt disdain and connection to the Jewish faith, and this ambivalence effected his
> treatment of the Jews," Ramin said. According to Ramin, on one hand, all of his family and friends
> were Jewish including his lovers and his personal doctor. "On the other hand," Ramin added, "he
> welcomed the expulsion and extermination of the Jews because of the rich Jews’ plans to establish a
> Jewish government in Palestine."
>
> http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=10957
>
> Makemud AfterdinnerJohn condemned Hitler publically....
>
> "The Iranian nation hates killing and considers Hitler and the executioners of the World War II as
> black and dark figures," he said. "But the Iranian nation has a question and as long as there is no
> clear and reasonable response to this question, it will remain."
>
> Ahmadinejad said "Zionists" should move to empty lands in Europe or North America and out of the
> Middle East entirely. "Europeans cannot tolerate the Zionists in their region and country, but they
> want to impose them on the people of the region... Give these vast lands of Canada and Alaska to
> them to create a country for themselves."
>
> http://www.israel.org/MFA/The+Iranian+Threat/Holocaust+denial+and+Antisemitism/Iranian%20President%20Ahmadinejad%20addresses%20Jerusalem%20Day%20rally%20in%20Tehran%205-Oct-2007
>
> Hitlers right hand man was into the occult...
>
> Heinrich Himmler - "Possibly the most powerful figure in the Third Reich after Hitler, Himmler - son
> of a Roman Catholic teacher and originally a devout Catholic. Saw the men in his army as the
> reincarnation of Teutonic knights and kings, in particular the knights of King Arthur's round table.
> He modeled the Nazi castle in Wewelsburg after the legend of King Arthur. Underneath the roundtable
> was a small room called the ‘realm of the dead’, where various occult rituals were performed. It was
> in the actual roundtable room where Himmler and his followers conducted occult rituals such as
> communicating with dead ancestors and Teutonic knights of the past. "
>
> "The SS was also the ideological vanguard of the new religion, and the instrument through which the
> Aryan people would be indoctrinated into it. Himmler established festivals on the Summer and Winter
> Solstices incorporating elements of ancient pagan rituals such as sun and nature worship. These
> celebrations were always characterized by a strong SS presence."
>
> http://www.geocities.com/nephilimnot/hitler.html
>
> All things considered, Hitler and his Nazis were not standing on high moral ground. (In fact, Hitler
> himelf could barely stand on any ground if the outside temperature was a bit on the cool side.....)
>
> "The Fuehrer could not stand the climate of Russia; he complained of constant headaches." -
> Jodl, Chief of Staff of German High Command, to Survey Interrogators (United States
> Strategic Bombing Survey Summary Report - European War Washington, D.C. 30 September 1945)
>
> http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/USSBS/ETO-Summary.html
>
> Jd
>
> "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. I
> have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That
> unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear" (Isaiah 45:22-23)
>
You are in better company than they are.
Topaz
The question of Mr Hitler's ancestry is dealt with at the beginning of
Ian Kershaw's 840+ page book entitled Hitler (Harmondsworth, Penguin:
1998).
<begin quote at p. 7>
The third possibility is that Adolf Hitler's grandfather was Jewish.
Rumours to that effect circulated in Munich cafes in the early 1920s,
and were fostered by sensationalist journalism of the foreign press
during the 1930s. It was suggested that the name Huttler was Jewish,
'revealed' that he could be traced to a Jewish family called Hitler in
Bucharest, and even claimed that his father had been sired by Baron
Rothschild, in whose house in Vienna his grandmother had allegedly
spent
some time as a servant. But the most serious speculation about
Hitler's supposed Jewish background has occurred since the Second
World War and is directly traceable to the memoirs of the leading Nazi
lawyer and Governor General of Poland, Hans Frank, dictated in his
Nuremburg cell while awaiting the hangman...
Allegedly commissioned by Hitler to look into his family history,
Frank reportedly discovered that Maria Anna Shicklgruber had given
birth to her child while serving as a cook in the home of a Jewish
family called Grankenberger in Graz...
Frank's story gained wide circulation in the 1950s. But it simply does
not stand up. There was no Jewish family called Frankenberger in Graz
during the 1880s. In fact, there were no Jews at all in the whole of
Styria at that time, since Jews were not permitted in that part of
Austria until the 1860s. A family named Frankenreiter did live there,
but was not Jewish . . . Hans Frank's memoirs, dictated at a time of
when he was waiting for the hangman and plainly undergoing a
psychological crisis, are full of inaccuracies and have to be used
with caution. With regard to the story of Hitler's grandfather,
whoever he was, he was not a Jew from Graz.
The only serious contenders for the paternity of Hitler's father
remain, therefore, Johann Georg Hiedler and Johann Nepomuk Hiedler (or
Huttler).
<end quote>
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
Topaz
>
>Good. At least you've admitted that no one knows Hitlers ancestry for sure.
>Didn't Hitler preach a "pure Aryan race"? What's up with that (or "wassup widdat" for the
>miscegenated metro-sexual audience following along)?
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developements and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
first beginnings must be attributed to one race. The maintenance of
civilization is wholly dependant on such peoples. Should they perish,
all that makes this earth beautiful will descend with them into the
grave."
"All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because
the originally creative race died out, as a result of the
contamination on the blood."
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art,
science and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is
almost exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very
fact fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who
founded a superior type of humanity"
"The foundations of actual life in Japan to-day are not those of
the native Japanese culture., although this characterizes the
exterenal features of the country, which features strike the eye of
European observers on account of their fundamental difference from us;
but the real foundations of contemporary Japanese life are the
enormous scientific and technical achievements of Europe and America,
that is to say, of Aryan peoples."
"A people that fails to preserve the purity of its racial blood
thereby destroys the unity of the soul of the nation in all its
manifestations. A disintegrated natioanal character is the inevitable
consequence of the process of disintegration in the blood. And the
change which takes place in the spiritual and creative faculties of a
people is only an effect of the change that had modified its racial
substance."
"For in a world which would be composed of mongrels and negroids all
ideals of human beauty and nobility and all hopes of an idealized
future for our humanity would be lost forever."
"It is especially the cultural creativeness which disappears when a
superior race inter-mixes with an inferior one."
"There may be hundreds of excellent States in this earth, and yet if
the Aryan, who is the creator and custodian of civilization, should
disappear, all culture that is on an adequate level with the spiritual
needs of the superior nations to-day would also disappear."
"We National Socialists know that in holding these views we take
up a revolutionary stand in the world to-day and that we are branded
as revolutionaries. But our views and our conduct will not be
determined by the approbation or disapprobation of our contemporaries,
but only by our duty to follow a truth which we have acknowledged. In
doing this we have reason to believe that posterity will have a
clearer insight"
"Thus for the first time a high inner purpose is accredited to
the State. In face of the ridiculous phrase that the State should do
no more than act as the guardian of public order and tranquillity, so
that everybody can peacefully dupe everybody else, it is given a very
high mission indeed to preserve and encourage the highest type of
humanity which a beneficent Creator has bestowed on this earth."
>
>Question: Why do the Iranians claim that Hitler was Jewish?
There are some a-holes in every country.
>
>The fact that they do means that they think of folks like you as being on the side of jews.
>
Iran Ex-President Rafsanjani Comments on Hitler and Jews
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301296,00 .html
Hashemi Rafsanjani, former Iranian president and current Chairman of
the Assembly of Experts, said Friday that Hitler's treatment of Jewish
people in Europe was due in part to their being "a pain in the neck."
Rafsanjani's comments came during a sermon for "International
Jerusalem Day" on Iranian TV. Rafsanjani noted that Jews caused
problems for European governments because they "had a lot of property"
and "controlled an empire of propaganda." He also said that the Nazis
were successful in saving Europe from the evil of Zionism.
cactus
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:47:02 GMT, Jd <Zion...@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>> Good. At least you've admitted that no one knows Hitlers ancestry for sure.
>> Didn't Hitler preach a "pure Aryan race"? What's up with that (or "wassup widdat" for the
>> miscegenated metro-sexual audience following along)?
>
> Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
<snip racist drivel>
parsi...@gmail.com
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:47:02 GMT, Jd <ZionsF...@att.net> wrote:
>
> >Good. At least you've admitted that no one knows Hitlers ancestry for sure.
> >Didn't Hitler preach a "pure Aryan race"? What's up with that (or "wassup widdat" for the
> >miscegenated metro-sexual audience following along)?
>
> Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
I think I told you before to fuck off, nazi piece of shit, didn't I?
In case I haven't, fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
Topaz
Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
by Thomas Jackson
There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" in greater
horror than does the United States. Compared to other kinds of
offenses, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press
and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and
arson, that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as
part of the inevitable texture of American life. "Racism" is never
shrugged off. For example, when a White Georgetown Law School student
reported earlier this year that black students are not as qualified as
White students, it set off a booming, national controversy about
"racism." If the student had merely murdered someone he would have
attracted far less attention and criticism.
Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities are on full
alert for it, newspapers and politicians denounce it, churches preach
against it, America is said to be racked with it, but just what is
racism?
Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the
word. They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic stock
is superior to others, or as the belief that culture and behavior are
rooted in race. When Americans speak of racism they mean a great deal
more than this. Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is a
clue to understanding what Americans do mean. A peculiarly American
meaning derives from the current dogma that all ethnic stocks are
equal. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, all races have been
declared to be equally talented and hard- working, and anyone who
questions the dogma is thought to be not merely wrong but evil.
The dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important. If
blacks, for example, are equal to Whites in every way, what accounts
for their poverty, criminality, and dissipation? Since any theory of
racial differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation
for black failure is White racism. And since blacks are markedly poor,
crime-prone, and dissipated, America must be racked with pervasive
racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state.
All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic.
Any explanation for black failure that does not depend on White
wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of
racial differences. Thus, even if today's Whites can find in their
hearts no desire to oppress blacks, yesterday's Whites must have
oppressed them. If Whites do not consciously oppress blacks, they must
oppress them Unconsciously. If no obviously racist individuals can be
identified, then societal institutions must be racist. Or, since
blacks are failing so terribly in America, there simply must be
millions of White people we do not know about, who are working day and
night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves no
room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some fashion,
an indictment of White people.
The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to
believe that the only explanation for non-White failure is White
racism, every time a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on
welfare, or takes drugs, White society stands accused of yet another
act of racism. All failure or misbehavior by non-Whites is standing
proof that White society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. For
precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the
same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition, thwarting and
oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange
conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be
committed almost exclusively by White people. Indeed, a black
congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black
mayor of Detroit, have argued that only White people can be racist.
Likewise, in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State
Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she
explained that all Whites are racist and that only Whites can be
racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without
flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?
Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can,
perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-Whites have been
forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of White
oppression. What appears to be non-White racism is so understandable
and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not
an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would
surely be called racism when done by Whites is thought to be normal
when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true.
Examples of this sort of double standard are so common, it is almost
tedious to list them: When a White man kills a black man and uses the
word "nigger" while doing so, there is an enormous media uproar and
the nation beats its collective breast; when members of the black
Yahweh cult carry out ritual murders of random Whites, the media are
silent (see AR of March, 1991). College campuses forbid pejorative
statements about non-Whites as "racist," but ignore scurrilous attacks
on Whites.
At election time, if 60 percent of the White voters vote for a White
candidate, and 95 percent of the black voters vote for the black
opponent, it is Whites who are accused of racial bias. There are 107
"historically black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be
preserved in the name of diversity, but all historically White
colleges must be forcibly integrated in the name of... the same thing.
To resist would be racist.
"Black pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but anything
that could be construed as an expression of White pride is a form of
hatred. It is perfectly natural for third-world immigrants to expect
school instruction and driver's tests in their own languages, whereas
for native Americans to ask them to learn English is racist.
Blatant anti-White prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is
now the law of the land. Anything remotely like affirmative action, if
practiced in favor of Whites, would be attacked as despicable
favoritism.
All across the country, black, Hispanic, and Asian clubs and caucuses
are thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club
or association expressly for Whites is by definition racist. The
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
campaigns openly for black advantage but is a respected "civil rights"
organization. The National Association for the Advancement of White
People (NAAWP) campaigns merely for equal treatment of all races, but
is said to be viciously racist.
At a few college campuses, students opposed to affirmative action have
set up student unions for Whites, analogous to those for blacks,
Hispanics, etc, and have been roundly condemned as racists. Recently,
when the White students at Lowell High School in San Francisco found
themselves to be a minority, they asked for a racially exclusive club
like the ones that non-Whites have. They were turned down in horror.
Indeed, in America today, any club not specifically formed to be a
White enclave but whose members simply happen all to be White is
branded as racist.
Today, one of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality
of American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn
on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of
Whites (and sometimes men), and never the other way around. No one
proposes that Howard University be made more diverse by admitting
Whites, Hispanics, or Asians. No one ever suggests that National
Hispanic University in San Jose (CA) would benefit from the diversity
of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one suggests that the Black
Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the NAACP or the
Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from a lack
of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to
celebrate homogeneity. And yet any all-White group - a company, a
town, a school, a club, a neighborhood - is thought to suffer from a
crippling lack of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as
possible. Only when Whites have been reduced to a minority has
"diversity" been achieved.
Let us put it bluntly: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we
are so often asked to do, is no different from deploring an excess of
Whites. In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess
of Whites. Our current immigration policies are structured so that
approximately 90 percent of our annual 800,000 legal immigrants are
non-White. The several million illegal immigrants that enter the
country every year are virtually all non-White. It would be racist not
to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is,
of course, only White nations that are called upon to practice this
kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any
other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.
What if the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated
citizens across the border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into
thinking that Mexico was being "culturally enriched?" What if the
state of Chihuahua were losing its majority population to poor Whites
who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on
celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the right to vote even if
they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative action" in jobs
and schooling?
Would Mexico - or any other non-White nation - tolerate this kind of
cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet White
Americans are supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians
entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed
to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling
numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be
hopelessly racist.
There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non-
Whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of
"hating" another group. Blacks can join "civil rights" groups and
Hispanics can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots and
hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can
come only at the expense of whites. They can demand preferential
treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are
"anti-white."
Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to
affirmative action to be called haters. They need only subject racial
policies that are clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called
racists. Should they actually go so far as to say that they prefer the
company of their own kind, that they wish to be left alone to enjoy
the fruits of their European heritage, they are irredeemably wicked
and hateful.
Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race
relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their
own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct
from those of the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None
of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, whites must also
champion the racial interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice their
own future on the altar of "diversity" and cooperate in their own
dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidize, the
displacement of a European people and culture by alien peoples and
cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, White people are
cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and
cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.
Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in the United States is
perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to
love one's people and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and
El Salvadorans are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by
setting foot in the United States they are entitled to affirmative
action preferences over native-born whites, but can they be blamed for
accepting them? Is it surprising that they should want their
languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take
possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-great
people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is
prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for
it, why should Mexicans and Cambodians complain?
No, it is the White enterprise in the United States that is unnatural,
unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let
themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to
dispossession, much less to work for their own interests. Never in the
history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to
strangers, and poured out its wealth to aliens. Never before has a
people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in
surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in
history. Of all the races in America, only whites have been tricked
into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only
whites are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow
"hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their own
kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their
families more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they
hate their neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear no
ill will towards non-whites. They only wish to be left alone to
participate in the unfolding of their racial and cultural destinies.
What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly
unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests
of other races and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like
asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his
neighbors, since to do otherwise would be "racist."
What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is
likely to say. It is any opposition by whites to official policies of
racial preference for non-whites. It is any preference by whites for
their own people and culture. It is any resistance by whites to the
idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be
pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of
people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history -
but only so long as the aspirations are those of whites.
Topaz
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:
"In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In
those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
the 'freedom of the press.'
In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in
Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always
one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a
liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three
sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common
attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected
people' actually form a community which operates and controls all
these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is
really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in
agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the
medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One
might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the
people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the
contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the
masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich
Britain.'
She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a
hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living
must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England
itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means!
In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is
poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible
wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The
workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the
masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to
have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions
of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs,
and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole
world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish
unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a
half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such
are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters
is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the
factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The
masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are
interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times
- only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise,
the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.
To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous
to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a
member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say:
'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'?
It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business
concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished
all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of
Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from
accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case
in other countries.
They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I
can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very
well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is
another matter.
The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible
in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in
return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train
once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace.
On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory
that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some
astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his
brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something
and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible
for idle drones to inhabit this country.
I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that
two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite
right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National
Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to
my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and
cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the
ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our
problems.
To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be
fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency
basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We,
too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I
came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold
standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the
gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part
with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign
exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the
previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret
it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different
basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an
agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated.
When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to
build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the
German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers,
technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which
animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to
perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which
spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though
we have no gold, we have capacity for work.
The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with
this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We
want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must
build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work.
My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work.
We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist
countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy.
Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will
step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by
no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed
by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable.
German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold
itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German
farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to
the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In
seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the
unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find
workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have
declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to
support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.'
Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for
us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.
Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone
can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The
work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to
work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to
its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the
world's goods.
We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic
system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into
full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid
for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime.
In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to
devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war
production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of
Germany...
One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today
a state with a different economic and political orientation from that
of the Western democracies.
Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel.
It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that
traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the
people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In
the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure -
the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of
democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone.
It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want
our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The
English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But
they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany
are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own
people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no
harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they
prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish
to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact.
They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have
destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully,
because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to
wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to
pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have
wrought enormous changes.
I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the
capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy
is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in
turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making
capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for
the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is
but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of
feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a
few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good,
excellent; my dividends are splendid.'
However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn
the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we
mean. You jeopardize liberty.'
Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense
of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British
capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76,
80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry.
Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove
victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'
They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of
affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from
this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have
definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a
whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose
arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the
country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.
To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called
directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a
board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey.
They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and
travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at
about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the
report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They
may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward
journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly
surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation
for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time
it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we
have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled
profiteering and even bribery.
In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence.
They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been
possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into
the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing
millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people
themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks.
For the first time in German history, we have a state which has
absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political
appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of
this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing
the best among the people for every position. We have
Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or
locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in
a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces.
Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have
done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In
this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we
are building up our life for the future.
As you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we
send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men,
farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher
education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are
educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take
their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest
posts....
Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the
world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for
family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a
means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know
perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only
be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the
end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of
coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses
dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone
are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact.
On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide
capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold.
It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that
work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We
shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion
can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their
dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and
the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all
costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has
been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a
state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons
to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or
national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the
sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of
the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions
over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State.
These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb.
Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people
would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced
that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not
fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against
them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We
demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or
that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you
because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we
fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are
carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to
the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But
they have made a great mistake.
If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting
against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the
progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be
victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the
others.
I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other
world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the
restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would
have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out
my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest
wish to rearm.
For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who
regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ
the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is
already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my
mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make
the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I
want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to
have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the
theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all
the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the
case in England.
The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers
in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made
proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I
received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of
armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be
altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested
that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is
just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ...
cactus
> All liberals have is meaningless buzz words. They call people racists.
> Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
>
> by Thomas Jackson
<snip racist screed from our resident neonazi who can only parrot nazis
and racists>
cactus
> Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
> on December 10, 1940:
JTEM
> Hitler apparently had a very shady past.
Duh. I mean, ya think? Seriously? Even with the
world-wide war that killed tens of millions, and the
attempted genocide?
parsi...@gmail.com
> All liberals have is meaningless buzz words. They call people racists.
> Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
parsi...@gmail.com
> Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
> on December 10, 1940:
>
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
Topaz
It's a Wonderful Race
by James Bronson
There once was a college freshman named George who thought he knew it
all. One night over dinner, George got into an argument with his
father. The argument began when the young student tried to explain to
his father that as White people, they should be held accountable for
all the evils that they had inflicted upon non-Whites throughout
history. George explained: "Because of European racism, we stole the
Indians' land, we held blacks in slavery, we persecuted the Jews, and
we plundered the environment. We've been oppressive racists for
thousands of years so it's only fair that we pay economic reparations
for all the harm we've done to the world. I'm pleased to see that we
are ending our political and economic domination of the oppressed
peoples."
George's dad was shocked to hear such talk. "Who put such commie-pinko
nonsense into your head, boy? Did one of your sandal-wearing hippie
college professors teach you that?" the father asked.
To which the son replied: "That's the truth dad. My anthropology
professor, Dr.Irving Silverstein, says so. He ought to know. Dr.
Silverstein is a well-respected Ph.D. People of your generation just
don't understand because you were raised in a White supremacist racist
society. That's why I've come to admire Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King as
the greatest man in American history. He stood up to the racists of
your generation. Because of him, my generation of White kids is
completely colorblind."
The father angrily replied: "That's bullshit! I've always been
fair-minded and tolerant of people from all backgrounds and races. I
haven't 'oppressed' anybody, and furthermore there's nothing wrong
with being proud of one's own people, including the European race of
people. Your race is in your blood. It's like an extension of your
biological family and you ought to be proud of your European heritage
and identity, just like every other racial group in America is proud
of its. Why is it OK for them to have a strong sense of racial
identity but it's evil for us Europeans to feel that way?"
The young "intellectual" laughed at his father. "Come on dad, that's
the kind of crap Hitler tried to peddle. Those racist attitudes were
discredited years ago. There's only one race and that's the human
race. Diversity is our greatest strength. Differences in so-called
"race" are as insignificant as differences in belly buttons. And
besides, UN statistics now show that low White birth rates, along with
the fact that we live in an multicultural
society, will mean that Europeans and their ethnocentrist and racist
culture will have died out by the end of the century," young George
said.
Turning red with anger, the father yelled: "You are a walking cliché
you know that boy? And you think it's a good thing that the European
peoples of the world will have faded out and ceased to exist?" Young
George replied; "I think it's great! It will mean the end of racism
and the end of hate. The oppressed peoples of the world would have
been better off if us racist Europeans had never existed to begin
with."
Suddenly there was a blast of cold wind, an explosion, and a huge
smoke cloud. When the smoke had settled, George found himself alone
and lost in a cold open field. An angel named Clarence then appeared
to him and said "Well George, you've got your wish."
George asked: "Where am I? What's going on here? And who are you?"
The angel answered, "George, I'm Clarence the Angel. I was sent here
to show you what the world would have been like if Europeans, or
Whites, had never existed. You now live in a world where Europeans
never existed."
"Oh. That's cool. I'll have no problem adapting because there's not a
racist bone in my body. And when I get back to my world, I'll be able
to tell my professor and my friends how great this non-racist world
was. Say, I'm freezing my ass off out here. Where's the nearest
motel?"
"Motel?" replied the angel. "There are no motels here in what was once
called North America. But there are some caves up in those mountains
where you can find shelter."
"Caves? No way man. I want a nice warm bed to sleep in."
"I don't think you understand George. There are no buildings here in
non-white America because the evil Europeans never came here to build
them. Whites never existed, remember? The natives live in tents. Would
you like to go meet some local Indians? Perhaps they'll let you stay
in a tent."
"A tent? But it's 10 degrees outside?...Oh well. It's better than a
cave I suppose. Let's go talk to these Indians...... Wait a second,
are these Indians friendly or hostile?"
"Why, George, that's a racist question to ask. Just because some
Indians were brutal savages who scalped their victims alive, it
doesn't mean they all were" said the angel sarcastically.
"I know that Clarence. And I'm not a racist. I hate racism.
Nonetheless, I'd feel safer if I could have a gun to defend myself if
they turn out to be violent."
"Gun?" replied the angel. "There are no guns for you to defend
yourself with. Firearms were invented by evil Europeans. Though we
could make a spear with those twigs over there."
"That's too much work. Give me a telephone then. I'll call the Indians
to ask if it's OK."
"Telephone"? replied the angel. There are no telephones here.
Alexander Graham Bell was another evil white man, so he never existed.
No Europeans remember?" "Forget it then" replied George. "I'll sleep
in the damn cave."
Upon arriving at the cave, a shivering George asked the angel for a
lighter so that he could light a fire. "A lighter?" replied Clarence.
"There are no lighters here, and no matches. Those are European
gadgets and evil Europeans never existed remember? If you want to get
warm, you need to do like the locals do and start rubbing twigs
together."
"Oh come on man! You mean to tell me these people still rub sticks
together for fire?"
"That's right George. The Indians live exactly as they did before the
evil pilgrims arrived from Europe just a few centuries ago." said the
angel sarcastically.
"I refuse to stay in this cold cave and I damn sure ain't gonna light
a fire with twigs, and I refuse to sleep in a teepee. I'll go to South
America. I can make it in a warmer climate and I'll adapt quickly to
the great Incan civilization I learned about at college. Since
European racists like Columbus, Cortez and Pizzaro never existed, the
Incans will still be there.
... I need a car"
"Car?" replied the angel. "There are no cars here. Daimler and Benz,
the evil German inventors of the internal combustion engine, were
never born..nor was Henry Ford. There are no paved roads either. This
is a world without evil Europeans remember?"
"No cars! Oh. I'll just have to take a train."
"There are no trains in this world either George. Evil Europeans
weren't here to build locomotive engines or to discover the many uses
of coal, oil and gas, or to build trains or lay tracks. But I'll allow
you to cheat just a bit. Grab hold of my magic robe and we'll fly
south."
George touched the angel's robe and they flew south until they arrived
in an abandoned mud hut in the midst of Incan territory. George was
grateful for the warm weather but it wasn't long until he began to
complain about the heat and humidity.
"Clarence, this hut is a little shithole and I'm sweating up a storm
here. Get me an air-conditioner please."
"Air-conditioner?" replied the angel. "There are no air-conditioners
here. Air conditioning and refrigeration were inventions created by
evil White men." "What?!! You mean to tell me that in the year 2002
these people still haven't figured out a way to keep themselves or
their food cool? a frustrated George asked.
"No George, they haven't. And they never will."
"This is ridiculous. Let's go to the main city to see the Emperor. I
can't live like this. Where's a car...oh I forget...no cars! Dammit
I'll walk. let's go."
After walking through the jungle for about an hour or so, it began to
get dark. George then asked Clarence to give him a flashlight so that
he could see. "Flashlight? Sorry George, but Thomas Edison was an evil
White man too...and he was never born. There are some branches over
there if you want to make a torch."
"Never mind that!" George shouted back.
By morning time, Clarence and George had arrived at the temple of the
Incans. A bloody human sacrifice was in progress. George turned to
Clarence and cried, "They're going to butcher that poor soul! Somebody
has got to stop this. What horrible murdering beasts! Can't anyone
stop them?"
The angel replied "I'm afraid not. Ritual killings are common place
here."Those evil European racists like Columbus, Cortez and Pizzaro
never existed so the Incans just continued their brutal ways. In fact,
it was the oppressed peoples themselves who made up the bulk of the
Spanish armed forces. The people saw the Spaniards as liberators who
would rid them of the oppressive Incan and Mayan rulers and give them
a better life."
"I can't blame them for helping the Spaniards then. This is a horrible
place. Get me out of this shithole now!" said George.
'Where would you like to go?" Clarence replied.
George said: "Take me to Africa, maybe there's a more advanced and
humane civilization there that I can fit into. Where the nearest
airport?"
"Oh, I forgot...no Wright Brothers." George said. "How about a boat?"
"Boats?" replied the angel. "I'm afraid the most seaworthy rafts
available to you won't be of much help in crossing the vast Atlantic
Ocean. The great Viking sailors and European navigators never existed.
No Phoenicians, no Leif Erickson, no Henry the Navigator, no Columbus,
no Magellan, no Hudson and no Robert Fulton. Even if you could build
your own ship, there would be no compass for you to navigate with and
no sextant either. I'm afraid you're stuck here George."
"Can I touch your robe and fly to Africa then" asked George.
"You're cheating again George, but all right. Touch my robe and we'll
fly to Africa."
When they arrived in Africa, George saw thousands of half-naked
African tribesmen being herded along a dirt path. They were guarded by
other Africans with spears. "What are they doing to those poor men?"
George asked Clarence.
"They are being enslaved by another tribe. Slavery was common in
Africa long before the whites arrived." Clarence said. "In fact, most
of the slaves who were shipped to the Americas were sold to the slave
traders by African tribal leaders."
"That's so sad.' George said. "I want to meet Martin Luther King.
Since his White assassin never existed, this great man should still be
alive. He's probably a great tribal chief somewhere and leader of an
advanced civilization. He will free these slaves from their African
masters. Take me to him Clarence."
Clarence led George to a little hut deep in the heart of Africa. The
naked women and children looked at George in wonder. The young men
were out on a hunt but the older men stayed behind. George was led to
the dingy little hut of the tribal witchdoctor and spiritual leader.
There he saw a wild-looking man with a necklace of teeth around his
neck and a huge ring pierced through his nose. "What the hell is that?
George asked.
"Meet Witch-doctor Matunbo Lutamba Kinga" Clarence said. He never
became Reverend Martin Luther King because there were no universities
or seminaries built to educate him. Europeans weren't there to create
such opportunities. But he did become the tribe's spiritual leader. He
specializes in casting evil spells. Perhaps he can help you?"
The witch doctor gazed in wonder at George. Then he motioned to his
henchmen to seize young George. The tribesmen grabbed hold of George
and tied him to a nearby tree.
"Stop it! Let me go. What are they going to do to me?" cried George
hysterically.
"They're going to perform a ritual killing on you George. The good
doctor King...I mean Kinga -- believes that by cutting your heart out
while you are still alive, it will bring good fortune and fertility to
his tribe," laughed Clarence.
"Clarence! Clarence! Help me Clarence! Help me!
"But George, you told me that you wanted to go to Africa and to meet
your hero Reverend King."
George said: "This part of Africa has not developed yet. I can see
that now. Take me to North Africa where Egypt and Carthage established
great civilizations. Just get me out of here, please."
Just as the witch doctor's spear was about to carve out George's
heart, George vanished into thin air. He then found himself on the
banks of the river Nile in Egypt.
"Thank you Clarence. Thank you," George said. "I don't understand it
Clarence. Why does so much of the world remain so brutal and
primitive? I learned during Black History Month about many talented
black inventors and scientists. Garrett Morgan, George Washington
Carver, Benjamin Banneker, Granville Woods. Then there's Dr. Carson,
the preeminent brain surgeon in all of America. Where are these men?"
Clarence replied: "Don't you understand yet? America, and Africa,
exist exactly as they did before the Europeans discovered them.
Civilization as you had known it had only been introduced to these
people just a few centuries ago by the Europeans. There are no
universities, no hospitals, no means of transportation other than
animals, no science, no medicine, no machines. In fact, the wheel
hasn't even been discovered in Sub-Saharan
Africa! Those black scientists, inventors, doctors, athletes, and
entertainers you speak of were never given the opportunity to realize
their full human potential because Europeans weren't around to
introduce higher civilization and learning to them. There are no
George Washington Carvers in this non-European world, no Dr. Carsons,
no Booker T. Washingtons, no Benjamin Bannekers, no Michael Jordans,
no Oprah Winfreys, no Bill Cosbys, no..."
"Stop it! That can't be!" cried George. "Let's walk over to the great
pyramids of Egypt right now and I'll show you one of the great wonders
of the world .....built by non-Whites"
They walked a few miles before George stopped and asked where the
nearest toilet was. "Toilets?" replied the angel. There are no toilets
or urinals in this world. Plumbing was developed by evil Europeans.
The people in this non-White world still relieve themselves in open
fields."
Clarence turned around so George could do his business. "I need some
toilet paper." George said.
"Toilet paper?" replied the angel. "There..."
"I know. I know. Toilet paper hasn't been invented yet. Just hand me a
rag then".
Clarence obliged and the two of them went on their way.
"I don't understand. According to my recollections from Geography
class, the great pyramids should be near this very spot. We ought to
be able to see them from miles away," said George.
"Well, George, I'm sure your professors at the college never told you
this, but the ancient Egyptians were not black or brown. They were
Caucasians. The anthropologists who examined the Egyptian mummies
confirmed this fact. There are no pyramids and no Sphinx either. And
the Carthaginians were White too."
George became depressed, but he was determined to prove his beliefs.
"What's in Europe?" he asked.
"Europe became populated by Huns and other Asiatic tribes. They've
settled down a bit but life is much the same as it is in North
America. A nomadic existence based on hunting and food gathering. No
great cities, no science, no buildings, no culture, no fine art - just
a hard daily struggle against life and the elements of nature. In a
Europe without evil Whites, the Roman Empire never existed nor did the
Greeks. There was no Renaissance either."
"Take me to Asia then. Surely the great civilizations of Persia,
India, China, and Japan will suit me" George said. "Clarence, to the
Taj Mahal please." "The Taj Mahal?" replied the angel. "Don't you know
that the ancient Persian and Indian civilizations were established by
ancient Indo-European tribes who crossed the Himalayas? They are the
ones who civilized India and built the Taj Mahal. Those are the great
civilizations
that Marco Polo, Columbus, and others were searching for.Did you know
that Iran is Persian for "land of the Aryan?"
George said: "Don't tell me that the Indians were White men! That
can't be. In the world I came from, I knew many Indians and they were
not White!"
Clarence explained: "As the centuries passed, the Indo-Europeans who
created Indian civilization intermarried with the native majorities
who populated the Indian subcontinent. Gradually there were less and
less evil White people until they faded out completely, along with the
advanced civilization they had built. You will notice that there are
still a few white-skinned and fair-haired Indians and Pakistanis
around today -- in the world you came from that is.
George became worried. He knew he could never fit into the harsh
primitive world he had been thrust into. Suddenly he thought of Japan.
"Japan! I'll show you now Clarence. Take me to Japan. If the Japanese
can make TVs and cameras then I'm sure I'll find a decent civilization
that I can live in."
Clarence transported George to Japan. George observed that Japanese
society was the most orderly, advanced and civil that he had seen, but
it seemed as if almost everyone was either a rice farmer, a fisherman,
or a soldier. There were no cars, no skyscrapers, no lights, no
stereos, no sciences, no technologies, no universities. It was a
stagnant agricultural society that seemed to have reached its high
water mark and was incapable of moving forward. George knew he could
not live here either.
Clarence explained to George: "Even the industrious Japanese and
Chinese peoples had to rely on the evil Europeans to build the modern
Asia that you had in mind. In this world, Japan exists exactly as it
did before Commodore Perry's American naval ships arrived in Japan in
the 1850s. There's no industry, no technology, no Fuji film, no Sony,
no Hitachi, no Panasonic, no Toyota, no Sushi bars, no baseball...none
of the trappings or comforts of modern life. These things don't exist
in Japan or anywhere else because
Europeans weren't there to create them and share them with the rest of
the world. Would you care for a bowl of rice George?"
George began to feel sick in both his body and his mind. Not only was
he depressed, but exposure to the harsh elements of nature had left
him physically ill. "Clarence, I seem to have contracted some type of
sickness. I must have some anti-biotics."
"Anti-biotics? There's no...
"Oh Shut up already! Then just take me back to the world as it was!"
"Sorry George. I'm not authorized to do that. Only my boss can make
that call." Clarence said to him: "You see George. Your father was
right. You really had a wonderful race. Don't you see what a foolish
mistake it is to be ashamed and guilty about your own people, and to
let them die out? This is what the world would be like without the
creative spark of Edison and Ford and Pasteur and Marconi. No great
scientists, or mathematicians, or inventors or fine artists. No
Archimedes, no Aristotle, no Socrates, no
Alexander, no Renaissance, no Newton, no Kepler, no Goddard, no
Mendel, no Tesla, no Faraday, no Guttenberg, no Shakespeare, no
Dickens, no Twain, no Mozart, no Beethoven, no Da Vinci, no
Michelangelo, no Galileo, no Copernicus. No Venice, no Paris, no
Lisbon, no Madrid, no Zurich, no Berlin, no St. Petersburg, no
Budapest, no Rome, no Milan, no Vienna, no London, no New York, no
Rio, no Sydney. No orchestras, no museums, no universities, no
hospitals, no libraries, no theaters, no radio, no books, no
television, no electricity, no refrigeration, no heating, no plumbing,
no houses, no steel, no stadiums, no vaccines, no cars, no planes, no
trains, no ships, no
dentists, no surgeons, no computers, no telephones, and most important
- there's no creative genius to be found that could create and sustain
such a high level of civilization. There's nothing for the people of
this world to build upon. It's just a daily struggle for subsistence.
A brutal planet where the few people who aren't mired in eternal
ignorance and darkness have reached their peak of civilization and are
advancing no further."
Clarence went on to lecture the broken and depressed young man for
seven days straight. He covered everything. History, science,
economics, philosophy, art, literature, fine music, architecture,
medicine, politics, agriculture, religion, and all the creations and
contributions that the European peoples had made in every conceivable
field of human endeavor. George listened closely to every word. He
felt like a man who had been
reborn.
After his lecture, Clarence the Angel floated away towards heaven. "I
hope you have found all this to be educational, and I hope you have
learned an important lesson. Enjoy your world George!" mocked the
departing angel.
George began to sob like a baby. It was the year 2002 and he was alone
and hungry in a backwards world where Europeans had never existed. He
cried out to the stars: "Please God. I see what a fool I've been. I
understand now what my father was trying to tell me. I want to go back
to the world that I came from. A world where Europeans not only
existed, but blessed the rest of humanity world with their unique
creative ability. I want to live in a civilized world. Please
God!...take me back!...take me back!...Oh God....please."
Suddenly George was transported back to his college dormitory. Drunk
with joy, George jumped into the showers before he could even take his
clothes off!.
"Warm water! and soap! Life is beautiful!" he screamed.
George's floor mates looked at him as if he was crazy. "George! Have
you gone crazy?" asked a bewildered schoolmate.
"No my friend. I haven't taken leave of my senses. I've come to them!"
George replied. George then began to sing classic European folk songs
in the shower. Miraculously, he was able to sing in many different
languages. He sang O Sole Mio in Italian, Amazing Grace in English,
Gloire Immortelle in French, Das Ist Der Tag in German, and also
Belgian, Spanish and French ballads and waltzes. Tears of sheer joy
began to stream down his cheeks. The degenerate music of Hip-Hop and
Rap lost all of its appeal to young George.
After his shower, George drove to a nearby restaurant and ordered two
whole entrees. One was Lasagna and the other was a delicious Veal
Marsala. With his Italian food he had a Greek salad with Spanish
olives and Russian dressing, drank a whole bottle of French wine,
followed by a German pastry for dessert. He finished his meal off with
a hot cup of English tea and a Cuban cigar.
George said out loud: "Oh those European peoples and their delicious
cuisine. Clarence was right after all. What a wonderful race!"
George was happy, but at the same time he realized there was much work
to be done. He thought of all those poor whites in Rhodesia and South
Africa who were being murdered and raped ever since they gave up
control of those once-European nations. He thought of the many
thousands of qualified Whites who were passed up for good jobs and
college entrance because of racial quotas that discriminate against
Europeans. He thought about the declining birthrates among all the
European nations of the world. He remembered that
Europeans everywhere were dwindling in numbers every year even as
their own nations were being flooded with third world immigration. He
recalled the O.J. Simpson verdict and how millions of blacks in
America cheered when that brutal double murderer was set free by a
black jury after he stabbed two Whites to death. He remembered the Los
Angeles riots of 1992, where dozens of Whites were dragged out of
their vehicles and killed like dogs in the streets by packs of
White-hating monsters who were never even punished! He remembered the
time when Jesse Jackson led a cheer at Stanford University: "Hey Hey
Ho Ho, Western Civ. has got to go!" His European blood began to
boil in righteous indignation when he recalled how Jesse Jackson once
said he had spit in White people's food when he was a young restaurant
worker. George now understood that that his people were on a collision
course with worldwide disaster and genocide. George realized that this
great people must not perish from the face of the earth.
George could not wait to see his father. He longed to embrace him and
apologize for all of the foolish and disrespectful things he had said
to him. But first, George had a score to settle with a certain college
professor. He walked into Dr. Silverstein's auditorium and quietly
took a seat in the back row. The nasal voiced Silverstein was
lecturing on and on
about racial and gender inequalities in European-centered
civilizations. It was vintage Silverstein. George's impressionable
White schoolmates, with their baggy pants, hip-hop clothes and
backwards baseball caps, were swallowing Silverstein's poison pills
hook, line and sinker. After letting Silverstein spew his cultural
poison for about 15 minutes or so, George raised his hand so that he
could give the professor a piece of his newly educated mind.
"George? Is that you? I remember you from last semester. I wasn't
aware that you were here today. I failed to recognize you in that
shirt and tie, and without your earrings. You must have enjoyed my
course so much that you signed up again eh? Class, I'd like for you to
meet George. He was one of my brightest students last semester. He
truly has a thorough grasp of the ideas presented in this course.
George, would you be so kind as to tell my class about that brilliant
term paper you wrote about European racism,
imperialism, and the need for monetary reparations?"
That's when young George let loose on the unsuspecting Professor.
"ENOUGH! You scheming devil! You mendacious fabricator of falsehoods!
You pusillanimous purveyor of pinko propaganda! How dare you try to
corrupt and manipulate our young minds when your filthy lies. We
Europeans have nothing to be ashamed of, nothing to apologize for, and
everything to be proud of. And most of all, we don't owe anybody
jack-shit - not one thin dime! To the contrary, it is the rest of
humanity that owes us a debt which can never be repaid! We are the
rightful heirs and protectors of a rich cultural heritage. You vile
manipulator! We are the sons of the Romans, the sons of
the Greeks, the Celtics, the Vikings, the Normans, the Saxons. Why do
you inflict shame and guilt upon us? We Europeans didn't just
contribute to civilization...WE ARE CIVILIZATION! And I declare that I
will no longer tolerate you shithead "intellectuals" trying to tear
our people down. Never again will we walk on eggshells when we speak,
always fearing that we might be called "racist." I no longer care what
people think. All that matters is the truth which you have sought to
pervert!"
"What are you up to anyway? Why do you to corrupt my young peers by
shoving false heroes down their throats. Enough of your Marxist games
of divide and conquer, you commie pinko subversive! I don't want to
learn anymore about Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or
Black History Month. They would not have amounted to anything without
the institutions of high civilization created by the European peoples.
I'm going to set this class straight about who the truly great men of
history are - the European
statesmen, scientists, explorers, monarchs, navigators, conquerors,
inventors, artists, writers, philosophers - the innovative giants of
history that you and your ilk have erased from our collective
memories. You speak of a world liberated from European influence?
Permit me tell your students about such a world, Silverstein, because
I can speak from personal experience, you wretched little conspiring
monster!"
Silverstein turned white as a ghost. He was shell-shocked and rendered
speechless for the first time in his career! Never in all of his years
at the University had a student dared to so boldly challenge his
falsehoods. Speaking from the heart as well as the mind, and with an
eloquence he never thought he could muster, George broke out into a
60-minute monologue on history, science, philosophy, culture, and all
the other attributes that
constitute high civilization. The young students were captivated by
George's brilliant oratory. Many were moved to tears. By the end of
his tirade, George's reawakened classmates were thundering their
approval of his speech. The class gave George a standing ovation and
they thanked him for helping them rediscover and reclaim their own
sense of pride and lost identity. The unstoppable power of truth had
melted away years of Marxist guilt tripping, self hate, wimpishness
and cultural brainwashing in just one unforgettable hour. The inspired
students proceeded to storm out of Silverstein's class,
throwing their hip-hop baseball caps and nose earrings at him as they
stampeded out and vowed never to return. They lifted George up upon
their shoulders and carried him out of the auditorium like a
conquering hero. With a glint in his eye, George glanced up towards
the sky, winked and said "Thank you, Clarence."
Dr. Silverstein was left humiliated and visibly shaken. He knew that
these reawakened European kids could never again be brainwashed with
"political correctness" and White guilt. Silverstein's greatest fear
was that more of these proud European youths would one day reawaken
and take their country and civilization back from the Silversteins of
the world.
Silverstein was worried, but he remained confident that most young men
and women would never learn the truth about their glorious past and
unique creative abilities. After all, the mass media, Hollywood, the
music industry, the colleges, and the public schools are all
controlled by "liberals" like Dr. Silverstein. With the power of
political correctness in their hands, they can continue to tear down
our European ancestors, destroy our
institutions and traditions, instigate blacks and other races against
the whites, flood America with third-world immigration, and push
"hip-hop" music, homosexuality, and other garbage onto a weak,
confused and morally degenerate youth. After reflecting upon these
facts, Silverstein smiled a devilish grin and muttered to himself: "A
few of these European sheep may wake up to what's being done to them,
but the majority of these idiots never will." And he smiled
again....and laughed with diabolical Marxist glee. Then
he repeated to himself "No...they will never figure it all out until
it's too late."
Or will they?
Topaz
SCHWERIN, GUSTLOFF'S FUNERAL
SPEECH OF FEBRUARY 12, 1936
. . . BEHIND every murder stood the same power which is responsible
for this murder; behind these harmless insignificant fellow-countrymen
who were instigated and incited to crime stands the hate-filled power
of our Jewish foe, a foe to whom we had done no harm, but who none the
less sought to subjugate our German people and make of it its slave -
the foe who is responsible for all the misfortune that fell upon us in
1918, for all the misfortune which plagued Germany in the years that
followed. Those members of the Party and honorable comrades of ours
all fell, and the same fate was planned for others: many hundreds
survived as cripples or severely wounded, blinded or lamed; more than
40,000 others were injured. And among them were so many loyal folk
whom we all knew and who were near and dear to us, of whom we were
sure that they could never do any harm to anyone, that they had never
done any harm to anyone, whose only crime was that they devoted
themselves to the cause of Germany.
In the ranks of those whose lives were thus sacrificed there stood
also Horst Wessel, the singer who gave to the Movement its song, never
dreaming that he would join those spirits who march and have marched
with us.
And now on foreign soil National Socialism has gained its first
conscious martyr - a man who did nothing save to enter the lists for
Germany which is not only his sacred right but his duty in this world:
a man who did nothing save remember his homeland and pledge himself to
her in loyalty. He, too, was murdered, just like so many others. Even
at the time when on January 30 three years ago we had come into power,
precisely the same things happened in Germany, at Frankfort on the
Oder, at Köpenick, and again at Brunswick. The procedure was always
the same: a few men come and call someone out of his house and then
stab or shoot him down.
That is no chance: it is the same guiding hand which organized these
crimes and purposes to do so again. Now for the first time one who is
responsible for these acts has appeared in his own person. For the
first time he employs no harmless German fellow-countryman. It is a
title to fame for Switzerland, as it is for our own Germans in
Switzerland, that no one let himself be hired to do this deed so that
for the first time the spiritual begetter of the act must himself
perform the act. So our comrade has fallen a victim to that power
which wages a fanatical warfare not only against our German people but
against every free, autonomous, and independent people. We understand
the challenge to battle and we take up the gage! My dear comrade! You
have not fallen in vain!
Topaz
"For us there are only two possibilities: either we remain German or
we come under the thumb of the Jews. This latter must not occur; even
if we are small, we are a force. A well-organized group can conquer a
strong enemy. If you stick close together and keep bringing in new
people, we will be victorious over the Jews."
Adolf Hitler
SPEECH OF NOVEMBER 9, 1921
Topaz
The Hitler We Loved and Why , Eric Thomson
What, other than love, can explain the German people's glad welcome
of
this humble, but thoroughly dedicated savior from the Eastern
Marches?
What, other than love, can explain how the people of greater Germany
remained with him in bad times and in good, for better or for worse?
What, other than love, can explain the fact that those who remember
him love him still?
We loved him because he stood for the best that was in us, and as our
Leader, demanded of us our best. It was never Hitler's Germany. It
shall always be: Germany's Hitler, the man loved by his people.
This is why we loved him...
We loved him because he loved us and our children.
We loved him so much that we, the young and not so young, made
pilgrimages to his home in the Alps - not to ask him for favors, but
merely to catch a glimpse of him and to be near him.
We loved him because he was a good listener and lived simply.
We loved him because he spoke the unspoken thoughts of our souls in
such a way that all could understand. He did not "over-simplify" our
problems. He clarified them. He did not beguile us with cheap
solutions and easy panaceas, for there were none. He did not
"guarantee" us a better world. He asked us to FIGHT for one. Fight we
did, for we who heard him knew he was right.
We loved him because he was honest. He did not expound the supposed
virtues of democracy and then corrupt the process with purchased
votes.
We loved him, not because he was a "great dictator", but because he
was a great teacher, a living example of the order he preached.
Without order, nothing can exist. How well we who had suffered knew
this lesson! But when there is no basis for instruction, no racial
pattern, no heredity, the lesson of order cannot be learned, no
matter
how brilliant the instructor. He taught us this all-important truth
of
Race. Hitler's inspiration kindled our racial potential for
construction and creativity. His order was not imposed upon us. It
came from within.
We loved Hitler because he was a White Man. He practiced our White
virtues of forthright honesty and his actions matched his words. If
something was filth, he disposed of it as filth with sanitary
thoroughness. He did not enshrine the excrescence of sick minds. He
was not ashamed to burn shameful enemy propaganda which was aimed at
the destruction of our souls.
He was not like our racial enemy and his democratic stooges who
preached freedom of the press and practiced suppression.
We loved him because he replaced the wasteful idleness of our penal
system with productive labor and punishment with redemption. Even
habitual criminals fulfilled useful roles in our society, roles which
even they could look upon with pride. Not only did he save us from
them, he saved them for us.
We loved him because he protected us from religious charlatans --
preachers for profit who posed as prophets of God in order to batten
like vampires on the trust of simple believers.
We loved him because he defended us against the racial enemy's
campaign to spread perversion among us. He knew that sexual
perversion
was poison and that enough of it could kill any race.
We thanked him for removing from circulation the many Jew smut
publications which championed all manner of sexual deviation,
including abortion, in the name of "freedom of the press."
We loved him because he removed our alien dominators and place them
back among their own kind.
We loved him because he freed us from those corrupted by gold and
replaced them with able and incorruptible men.
We loved him because he did not surround himself with persons who
sought idle privilege, but who sought instead the privilege of
serving
us. No means of helping our people was too humble for our "high and
mighty" leaders. We contributed freely, for we loved our leaders
almost as much as we did our Leader.
We loved him because he made our police force work for us, not
against
us. Our young learned that our police were not against us, but a
necessary help in the establishment of a healthy society. Certainly,
all available help was necessary to protect the honest citizens from
the machinations of traitors, secret societies and minority pressure
groups. We supported our police because they were German police,
working for German government. Thus, we required far fewer police to
"maintain public order" under Hitler than we do today, under alien
domination.
We loved him because he did not persecute our enemies, but prosecuted
them. without fear or favor, according to law -- our law.
We loved him because he saved us from the alien invaders who promoted
the extinction of our Race, the White Race.
We loved him because he kept our entertainment media free of the
perversion of race-mixing and race suicide.
We loved him because he used the entertainment media to educate us
about life and true values. The themes were uplifting in ways which
were never dull. Best of all, they were OUR plays and films, by OUR
people.
We loved him because he taught us the truth about Race and proved,
even to skeptics, that the White Race is the founder of all great
cultures and civilizations and that race-mixing is the great
destroyer.
We loved him because he hid nothing from us. He was confident in our
strength to face the worst atrocities our enemies had to offer -- and
surmount them with courage and determination.
We loved him because he taught our Fellow White men, the Poles, the
truth about their Jewish Soviet "liberators." He showed the world the
ghastly face of communism by revealing the Katyn Forest Massacre of
the Polish officer corps and by proving forever the guilt of the
Soviet system.
We loved him because he had bold plans which benefited man and
harmonized with nature.
We loved him because he gave us the best roads in the world, envied
and emulated by other peoples ever since. Not only did he give us
roads, but a cheap, practical car to run on them, the Volkswagen: the
People's Car.
We loved him for giving us honest money and thereby saving our jobs,
our homes and our industry. He made our lives not only bearable, but
fruitful.
We loved him because he did the Work of the Lord, by driving the
money-changers out of our country. He taught us that true wealth is
not based on gold nor upon credit. but upon the productivity of our
land and people. Honest money is only possible with honest men. No
system of law or gold can protect us from criminals in government.
There is no substitute for honest men.
We loved him because he wrested the creation of our money away from
the Jews, like his American predecessor, Abraham Lincoln. He restored
our economy to peacetime prosperity. It was not preparation for war
that ended our depression. Where the Jews retained their money power,
the depression worsened. Unemployment rose drastically in America and
Britain at this time. As the British military strategist, Liddell
Hart, maintained: The last thing Hitler wanted was war. But war came
at last. and none too soon for the Jewish bankers! War was declared
by
Britain in 1939, but little fighting occurred. Britain announced
Jewish terms for ending the war: Kill Hitler and return to the
international gold standard. For Germany, the choice was certain
death
by starvation or possible death in battle.
The Jewish bankers had created massive unemployment in our country,
just as they had done in England, France, America and throughout the
world. They did this by decreasing the supply of money, which our
racial renegade governments had allowed them to control entirely.
Before Hitler came to power, 7 million Germans were unemployed and
over 6 million only partially employed. In the four bleak years from
1929 to 1933, despair and hopelessness caused the death by suicide of
some 250,000 of our people.
We loved him because he freed us from dire dependency on the whims
and
vagaries of foreign suppliers of domestic necessities. He taught us
that political independence was possible only with economic
independence.
In 4 years, from 1933 to 1937, he made us virtually self-sufficient
in
the production of steel, aluminum, chemicals, petroleum and general
industrial production.
We loved him because he had a deep reverence for our past. A people
whose roots are strong cannot be toppled by gusts of fad, fashion and
foolish innovation.
We loved him because he was a deeply spiritual man who did not allow
the Jews to confuse Christian teachings. Over 40% of the SS were
Catholics.
We loved him because he built churches for us. Christian churches. In
the name of Christianity, our enemies destroyed these churches, later
bragging about the "precision" of their bombing raids. Today, Rabbis
lecture in "Christian" schools. The Talmud of the Jews, their "holy
book." describes non-Jews as "beasts of the field" and "cattle." The
Jews have not changed. Why have the Christians changed?
We loved him because he reaffirmed the goodness and the wisdom of
wholesome work and wholesome food.
We loved him because he trusted his people. He did not find it
necessary to restrict firearms ownership. No true Leader need fear
the
armed members of his Race.
We loved him because he taught us to appreciate beauty by creating it
with our own hands. Perfection and excellence were our goals. As we
worked to master our medium, we learned to observe Nature and to
apply
Her Laws. Thus did we become artists and also National Socialists,
for
National Socialism is simply the application of Nature's Laws to
politics.
We loved him because he encouraged the sexes to realize their full
potentials, as complementary rather than competitive beings. Men were
made for women and women for men. Each was trained for that which he
or she could do best. This did not mean that men could not be
artistic
or creative, nor did it mean that women could not be great
aviatrixes,
photographers, film-directors, athletes. etc. It simply meant that,
whatever we did, our men were manly and our women feminine. Enemy
inculcation of sexual role confusion with the aim of crippling the
sexes' role in child-rearing was thus overthrown and scattered to the
winds.
We loved him because he devoted much effort and care to provide the
unborn and parents to-be with a healthy and pleasant environment.
Beginning with healthy young parents, Hitler encouraged good prenatal
care by stressing healthy diet, exercise and freedom from
intoxicants.
The unhealthy and the mentally-defective were discouraged from
inflicting more of themselves upon our hard-pressed population;
sterilization was recommended for carriers of genetic defects. The
German people could decide who should have children -- not the Jewish
bankers.
We loved him because he protected the rights of the unborn and
because
he treated the young with the love and respect they deserve as our
successors and he made them worthy of that love and respect by
training them for responsible adulthood.
We loved him because he brought us Europeans together. With him, we
knew our strength and felt the awesome importance of our Racial
Mission as never before. He brought all of us together, even
Americans, Russians and Britons. White men from all the countries of
Europe joined his ranks to defend the Holy Swastika Banner of our
Race. Because we fought to the end, the destruction of White
Civilization was avoided. Our sacrifice was not in vain!
We loved him because he brought out the best in our fighting men. He
bestowed upon us a new generation of heroes. He was loyal to our
allies and backed his words with action.
We loved him for his greatness in overlooking the mean propaganda
pricks of enemy gadflies.
We loved him for his chivalry, his conduct of war so as to lose as
few
White lives as possible -- friend or foe.
We loved him because he honored our heroes. A Race without heroes is
a
dead or dying Race. Our White heroes are brave, forthright, strong
and
kind. The "heroes" of our racial enemy are cowardly, devious, weak
and
cruel. A Race is known by its heroes, because heroes are examples to
cherish and to emulate. Thus do we differ from our racial enemy, the
Jew.
We loved him because his spiritual presence prevented our sufferings
and sorrows from overwhelming us.
He was adored like no other mortal, before or since.
Today, his spirit soars beyond the shores of the White Man's home in
Europe. Wherever we are, he is with us.
HEIL HITLER!
Topaz
During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
political opponents and for less reason. At the end of the war there
was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.
Newsweek magazine May 15, 1989 says on page 64:
"the way the Nazis did things: the secrecy, the unwritten orders, the
destruction of records and the innocent-sounding code names for the
extermination of the Jews. Perhaps it was inevitable that historians
would quarrel over just what happened"
The real reason there are no records of an extermination plan is
because there was no extermination plan. The Germans planned to deport
the Jews out of Germany. The records show that they planned to move
them to Madagascar.
Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32 showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are set
out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that the
few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absence
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"
Professional holocaust believers have admitted that the "gas chamber"
which is shown to the tourists at Auschwitz was actually built by the
allies after the war was over. This is what they wrote:
Brian Harmon <har...@msg.ucsf.edu> wrote in article
<080620000051136373%har...@msg.ucsf.edu>...
"You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V. Krema I is a
reconstruction, this has never been a secret. Kremas II-V are in
their demolished state as they were left."
Charles Don Hall <cdhall...@erols.com> wrote in article
<8F4CB71B...@news.erols.com>...
"Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to
deceive.
"The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis
tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their
crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So
it would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully
admit that it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy."
They admit that the "gas chamber" shown to the tourists at Auschwitz
was built by the allies after the war was over. There is no physical
evidence that the Germans had gas chambers. No bodies of people who
died from gas have been found. The Communists were the first to enter
the camps. How do the other allies know the Communists didn't blow up
the buildings? Then they could claim that these demolished buildings
used to be gas chambers.
But then the believers will say the Germans confessed. Their main
confession is from Hoess. Here are the details:
"In the introduction to Death Dealer [Buffalo: Prometheus, 1992], the
historian Steven Paskuly wrote: "Just after his capture in 1946, the
British Security Police were able to extract a statement from Hoess by
beating him and filling him with liquor." Paskuly was reiterating what
Rupert Butler and Bernard Clarke had already described.
In 1983, Rupert Butler published an unabashed memoir (Legions of
Death, Hamlyn: London) describing in graphic detail how, over three
days, he and Clarke and other British policemen managed to torture
Hoess into making a "coherent statement." According to Butler [Legions
of Death, p. 237], he and the other interrogators put the boots to
Hoess the moment he was captured. For starters, Clarke struck his face
four times to get Höess to reveal his true identity.
<quote>
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of Jewish sergeants in
the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an
order signed by Höss.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pajamas ripped from his
body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where
it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off,
unless you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car,
where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his
throat. Höss tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in
Geffnan: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."
For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I
took my orders from Himmler. I was a soldier in the same way as you
are a soldier and we had to obey orders."
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow
was swirling
still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk
completely nude
through the prison yard to his cell.
</quote>
An article in the British newspaper Wrexham Leader [Mike Mason, "In a
cell with a Nazi war criminal-We kept him awake until he confessed,"
October 17, 1986] following the airing of a TV documentary on the case
of Rudolf Hoess included eyewitness recollections by Ken Jones:
<quote>
Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery
stationed at
Heid[e] in Schleswig-Holstein. "They brought him to us when he
refused to
cooperate over questioning about his activities during the war. He
came in the winter
of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls
Mr. Jones. Two
other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Höss in his cell
to help break
him down for interrogation. "We sat in the cell with him, night and
day, armed with
axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to
help break down
his resistance," said Mr. Jones. When Höss was taken out for exercise
he was made
to wear only jeans and a cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three
days and
nights without sleep, Höss finally broke down and made a full
confession to
the authorities.
</quote>
The confession Hoess signed was numbered document NO-1210; later
revamped, as document PS-3868, which became the basis for an oral
deposition Hoess made for the IMT on April 15, 1946, a month after it
had been extracted from him by torture...
Since what people confess to after they have been captured by the
Communists and their liberal comrades is not proof of anything, this
leaves only the stories of survivors. These contradict each other and
not believable. One professional survivor said that he could tell if
the Germans were gassing German Jews or Polish Jews by the color of
the smoke.
The fact that there are so many "survivors" is not proof of an
extermination plan. There may be six million survivors. Just about
every Jew that is old says he is a survivor.
The real "holocaust" was when the Communist Jews murdered millions of
Christians. Communism was Jewish. Here is proof:
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)
Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated in the
heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were neither
Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing Jews at
all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl Marx,
though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two men
who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
The book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomery Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920 "In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the
membership of the Soviet communist party was Jewish, though Jews
comprised only 1.8 percent of the total population." (Stuart Kahan,
The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read
articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I
recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then
I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social
Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the
secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere
the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the
row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One
fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in
its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose
minor representatives I had been disputing for months past."
Solzhenitsyn named in his book the six top administrators of the
Soviet death camps. All six of them were Jews.
Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."
El Patriota©
"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:ljfao3p05e0vml7p5...@4ax.com...
>
> During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
> concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
> political opponents and for less reason. At the end of the war there
> was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
> because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
> the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.
>snip<
Ever thought of visiting a psychiater, moron?
--
"Freedom of speech, use it or lose it"
http://communities.zeelandnet.nl/data/novamente/index.php?page=13&showpage=52538
Topaz
The Unraveling of the Witnesses at the First Zündel Trial (1985)
The important victory won by revisionism in France on April 26, 1983,
would go on to confirm itself in 1985 with the first Zündel trial in
Toronto. I would like to dwell a moment on this trial in order to
underscore the impact on one's point of view, and especially as far as
the testimonies on the Auschwitz gas chambers are concerned: for the
first time since the war, Jewish witnesses were subjected to a regular
cross-examination. Moreover, without wanting to minimize the
importance of the second Zündel trial (that of 1988), I should like it
to be understood that the 1985 trial already contained the seeds for
all that was attained in the 1988 trial, including the report by
Leuchter and all the scientific reports which, in the aftermath, would
proliferate in the wake of the Leuchter Report.
In 1985, as also afterwards in 1988, I served as advisor to Ernst
Zündel and his lawyer, Douglas Christie. I accepted this heavy
responsibility only under condition that all the Jewish witnesses
would, for the first time, be cross-examined on the material nature of
the reported facts, bluntly and without discretion. I had noted, in
effect, that from 1945 to 1985, Jewish witnesses had been granted
virtual immunity. Never had any defense lawyer thought or dared to ask
them for material explanations about the gas chambers (exact location,
physical appearance, dimensions, internal and external structure), or
about the homicidal gassing (the operational procedure from beginning
to end, the tools employed, the precautions taken by the executioners
before, during and after execution).
On rare occasions, as at the trial of Tesch, Drosihn and
Weinbacher,[5] lawyers formulated some unusual questions of a material
nature, hardly troublesome for the witness, but these always found
themselves on the fringes of the more fundamental questions which
should have been asked. No lawyer ever demanded clarifications on a
weapon which, indeed, he had never seen and that no one had ever shown
him. At the major Nuremberg Trial of 1945-46, the German lawyers had
manifested total discretion on this point. At the proceedings against
Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1961, the lawyer Dr. Robert Servatius had not
wanted to raise the question; in a letter on this subject dated June
21, 1974, he wrote me: "Eichmann hat selbst keine Gaskammer gesehen;
die Frage wurde nicht diskutiert; er hat sich aber auch nicht gegen
deren Existenz gewandt" [Eichmann himself had not seen any gas
chamber; the question was not discussed; but neither did he raise the
issue of their existence].[6]
At the Frankfurt Trial of 1963-65, the lawyers showed themselves to be
particularly timid. I should mention that the atmosphere was rather
inhospitable for the defense and the accused. This show trial will
remain as a blot on the honor of German justice as on the person of
Hans Hofmeyer, initially Landgerichtsdirektor, then Senatspräsident.
During more than 180 sessions, the judges and juries, the public
prosecutors and the private parties, the accused and their attorneys,
as well as the journalists who had come from around the world,
accepted as a complete physical representation of the 'crime weapon' a
mere map of the camp of Auschwitz and a map of the camp of Birkenau,
whereupon five minuscule geometric figures were inscribed for the
location of each of the alleged homicidal gas chambers, with the
words, for Auschwitz: "Altes Krematorium", and for Birkenau:
"Krematorium II", "Krematorium III", "Krematorium IV", and
"Krematorium V"! These maps[7] were displayed in the courtroom.
The Revisionists have often compared the Frankfurt trial with the
1450-1650 trials against witchcraft. Nevertheless, at least during
those trials, someone sometimes bothered to describe or depict the
witches' sabbath. At the Frankfurt trial, even among the lawyers who
made difficulties for a witness like Filip Müller, not one asked of a
Jewish witness or a repentant German defendant to describe for him in
greater detail what he was purported to have seen. Despite two
judicial visits to the scene of the crime at Auschwitz, accompanied by
some German lawyers, it seems not one of the latter insisted on any
technical explanations or criminological expertise regarding the
murder weapon. To the contrary, one of them, Anton Reiners, a
Frankfurt lawyer, pushed complacency to the point of having himself
photographed by the press while raising the chute cover by which the
SS supposedly sprinkled Zyklon B granules into the alleged Auschwitz
gas chamber.
And so at Toronto in 1985, I had fully decided to do away with these
anomalies, to break the taboo and, for starters, pose, or rather have
Douglas Christie pose, questions to the experts and Jewish witnesses
as one normally poses in every trial where one is supposed to
establish whether a crime has been committed and, if so, by whom, how
and when.
Fortunately for me, Ernst Zündel accepted my conditions and Douglas
Christie consented to adopt this course of action and to pose to the
experts and witnesses the questions that I would prepare for him. I
was convinced that, in this manner, all might change, and the veil
woven by so many false testimonies could be torn away. While I was not
counting on Ernst Zündel's acquittal and we were all resigned to
paying the price for our audacity, I nevertheless had hope that with
the aid of this far-sighted man of character, and thanks to his
intrepid lawyer, history, if not justice, would at last carry him into
historical prominence.
From the moment of the first cross-examination, a tremor of panic
began to creep its way amid the ranks of the prosecution. Every
evening and throughout most of the night, I would prepare the
questions to ask. In the morning, I would turn over these questions,
accompanied by the necessary documents, to lawyer Doug Christie who,
for his part and with the aid of his female collaborator, conducted
the essentially legal aspects of the effort. During the
cross-examinations, I maintained a position close to the lawyer's
podium and unremittingly furnished, on yellow notepads, supplementary
and improvisational questions according to the experts' and witnesses'
responses.
The expert cited by the prosecution was Dr. Raul Hilberg, author of
The Destruction of European Jews. Day after day, he was subjected to
such humiliation that, when solicited in 1988 by a new prosecutor for
a new trial against Ernst Zündel, Prof. Hilberg refused to return to
give witness; he explained the motive for his refusal in a
confidential letter wherein he acknowledged his fear of having to once
again confront the questions of Douglas Christie. From the
cross-examination of Dr. Raul Hilberg, it was definitively brought out
that no one possessed any proof for the existence either of an order,
a plan, an instruction, or a budget for the presumed physical
extermination of the Jews. Furthermore, no one possessed either an
expertise of the murder weapon (whether gas chamber or gas van), or an
autopsy report establishing the murder of a detainee by poison gas.
However, in the absence of evidence regarding the weapon and victim,
did there exist witnesses of the crime?
A testimony must always be verified. The usual first means of
proceeding to this verification is to confront the assertions of the
witness with the results of investigations or expert opinion regarding
the material nature of the crime. In the case at hand, there were
neither investigations, nor expertise relative to the alleged
Auschwitz gas chambers. Here is what made any cross-examination
difficult. Yet, this difficulty should not serve as an excuse, and one
might even say that a cross-examination becomes ever more
indispensable because, without it, there no longer remains any way of
knowing whether the witness is telling the truth or not.
Jewish Witnesses Finally Cross-Examined:
Arnold Friedman and Dr. Rudolf Vrba
For those persons interested in the technical and documentary means by
which we were nevertheless in a position to severely cross-examine the
two principal Jewish witnesses, Arnold Friedman and Dr. Rudolf Vrba, I
can do no better than to recommend a reading of the trial
transcript.[8] Pages 304-371 cover the questioning and
cross-examination of Arnold Friedman; the latter breaks down on pages
445-446 when he ends by acknowledging that he in fact saw nothing,
that he had spoken from hearsay because, according to him, he had met
persons who were convincing; perhaps, he added, he would have adopted
the position of Mr. Christie rather than that of these other persons
if only Mr. Christie had been able to tell him back then what he was
telling him now!
Dr. Vrba was a witness of exceptional importance. One might even say
about this trial in Toronto that the prosecution had found the means
of recruiting 'Holocaust' expert number one in the person of Dr. Raul
Hilberg, and witness number one in the person of Dr. Rudolf Vrba. The
testimony of this latter gentleman had been one of the principal
sources of the famous War Refugee Board Report on the German
Extermination Camps - Auschwitz and Birkenau, published in November
1944 by the Executive Office of President Roosevelt. Dr. R. Vrba was
also the author of I Cannot Forgive,[9] written in collaboration with
Alan Bestic who, in his preface, declares with regard to him:
"Indeed I would like to pay tribute to him for the immense trouble he
took over every detail; for the meticulous, almost fanatical respect
he revealed for accuracy." (p.2).
,Never perhaps, had a court of justice seen a witness express himself
with more assurance on the Auschwitz gas chambers. Yet, by the end of
the cross-examination, the situation had reversed itself to the point
where Dr. R. Vrba was left with only one explanation for his errors
and his lies: in his book he had, he confessed, resorted to "poetic
license" or, as he was wont to say in Latin, to "licentia poetarum"!
In the end, a bit of drama unfolded: Mr. Griffiths, the prosecutor who
had himself solicited the presence of this witness numero uno and yet
now apparently exasperated by Dr. Vrba's lies, fired off the following
question:
"You told Mr. Christie several times in discussing your book I Cannot
Forgive that you used poetic license in writing that book. Have you
used poetic license in your testimony?" (p. 1636).
The false witness tried to parry the blow but prosecutor Griffiths hit
him with a second question equally treacherous, this time concerning
the number of gassing victims which Vrba had given; the witness
responded with garrulous nonsense; Griffiths was getting ready to ask
him a third and final question when suddenly, the matter was cut short
and one heard the prosecutor say to the judge:
"I have no further questions for Dr. Vrba" (p. 1643).
Crestfallen, the witness left the dock. Dr. Vrba's initial
questioning, cross-examination and final questioning filled 400 pages
of transcripts (pp. 1244-1643). These pages could readily be used in
an encyclopedia of law under a chapter on the detection of false
witnesses.
The Prosecution Gives up on Calling Witnesses
Three years later, in 1988, during the second trial against Ernst
Zündel, the public prosecutor deemed it prudent to abandon any
recourse to witnesses. Canadian justice had apparently understood the
lesson of the first trial: there were no credible witnesses to the
existence and operation of the 'Nazi gas chambers'.
Little by little, every other country in the world has learned this
same lesson. At the trial of Klaus Barbie in France, in 1987, there
was talk about the gas chambers of Auschwitz but no one produced any
witnesses who could properly speak about them.[10] The attorney
Jacques Vergès, courageous yet not foolhardy, preferred to avoid the
subject. This was a stroke of luck for the Jewish lawyers who feared
nothing so much as to see me appearing at the side of Mr. Vergès. If
this gentleman had accepted my offer to counsel him, we in France
might have been able to strike a tremendous blow against the myth of
the gas chambers.
All the while in France, during several revisionist trials, Jewish
witnesses sometimes came to evoke the gas chambers but none of them
testified before the court as to having seen one or having
participated in a homicidal gassing by hauling bodies out of the 'gas
chambers'.
Today, gas chamber witnesses are making themselves extremely scarce
and the Demjanjuk trial in Israel, which once again has revealed how
much false testimony is involved in the matter, has contributed to the
suppression. Several years ago, it happened that I was aggressively
questioned at the rear of a law court by elderly Jews who presented
themselves as "living witnesses to the gas chambers of Auschwitz",
showing me their tattoos. It was necessary for me only to ask them to
look me in the eyes and to describe for me a gas chamber that
inevitably they retorted:
"How could I do this? If I had seen a gas chamber with my own eyes I
would not be here today to speak with you; I myself would have been
gassed also."
This brings us back, as one can see, to Simone Veil and her
declaration of May 7, 1983, about which we already know what we should
think…
parsi...@gmail.com
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
And get help.
parsi...@gmail.com
> ADOLF HITLER
> SCHWERIN, GUSTLOFF'S FUNERAL
> SPEECH OF FEBRUARY 12, 1936
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
And get help.
parsi...@gmail.com
> "For us there are only two possibilities: either we remain German or
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
And get help.
parsi...@gmail.com
> The Hitler We Loved and Why , Eric Thomson
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
And get help.
parsi...@gmail.com
> During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
And get help.
parsi...@gmail.com
JTEM
> Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > By Faurisson
>
> fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
> And get help.
But at least fuck off.
Topaz
When I said the Herr Hitler's action was right and inevitable, the
storm of abuse that was about to bust on me was suddenly checked by
Mr. Lloyd George saying exactly the same thing. It is inconceivable
that a single vote should be cast against him."
David Lloyd George, Daily Express 17.9.1936:
I have never met a happier people than the Germans and Hitler is one
of the greatest men. The old trust him; the young idolize him. It is
the worship of a national hero who has saved his country.
Hans Grimm:
I witness with awe and admiration, that he, as nearly the first in
the world, caused multitudes without force or any personal benefits to
follow him of their own free will and volition.
The Observer, John L. Garvin:
I have talked to the humblest type of laborers, with merchants,
professional men. I have yet to discover a single dissenting voice to
the question of loyalty to the Fuehrer.
John F Kennedy, U.S President, Prelude to Leadership, The European
Diary of JF Kennedy, Summer, 1945:
After visiting these two places (the town of Berchtesgaden and
Odersalzberg) you can easily understand how that within a few years
Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of
the most significant figures who ever lived. He had in him the stuff
of which legends are made.
Topaz
"We have the power. Now our gigantic work begins."
Those were Hitler's words on the night of January 30, 1933, as
cheering crowds surged past him, for five long hours, beneath the
windows of the Chancellery in Berlin.
His political struggle had lasted 14 years. He himself was 43, that
is, physically and intellectually at the peak of his powers. He had
won over millions of Germans and organized them into Germany's largest
and most dynamic political party, a party girded by a human rampart of
hundreds of thousands of storm troopers, three fourths of them members
of the working class. He had been extremely shrewd. All but toying
with his adversaries, Hitler had, one after another, vanquished them
all.
Standing there at the window, his arm raised to the delirious throng,
he must have known a feeling of triumph. But he seemed almost torpid,
absorbed, as if lost in another world.
It was a world far removed from the delirium in the street, a world of
65 million citizens who loved him or hated him, but all of whom, from
that night on, had become his responsibility. And as he knew-as almost
all Germans knew on January 1933 -- that this was a crushing, an
almost desperate responsibility.
Half a century later, few people understand the crisis Germany faced
at that time. Today, it's easy to assume that Germans have always been
well-fed and even plump. But the Germans Hitler inherited were virtual
skeletons.
During the preceding years, a score of "democratic" governments had
come and gone, often in utter confusion. Instead of alleviating the
people's misery, they had increased it, due to their own instability:
it was impossible for them to pursue any given plan for more than a
year or two. Germany had arrived at a dead end. In just a few years
there had been 224,000 suicides - a horrifying figure, bespeaking a
state of misery even more horrifying.
By the beginning of 1933, the misery of the German people was
virtually universal. At least six million unemployed and hungry
workers roamed aimlessly through the streets, receiving a pitiful
unemployment benefit of less than 42 marks per month. Many of those
out of work had families to feed, so that altogether some 20 million
Germans, a third of the country's population, were reduced to trying
to survive on about 40 pfennigs per person per day.
Unemployment benefits, moreover, were limited to a period of six
months. After that came only the meager misery allowance dispensed by
the welfare offices.
Notwithstanding the gross inadequacy of this assistance, by trying to
save the six million unemployed from total destruction, even for just
six months, both the state and local branches of the German government
saw themselves brought to ruin: in 1932 alone such aid had swallowed
up four billion marks, 57 percent of the total tax revenues of the
federal government and the regional states. A good many German
municipalities were bankrupt.
Those still lucky enough to have some kind of job were not much better
off. Workers and employees had taken a cut of 25 percent in their
wages and salaries. Twenty-one percent of them were earning between
100 and 250 marks per month; 69.2 percent of them, in January of 1933,
were being paid less than 1,200 marks annually. No more than about
100,000 Germans, it was estimated, were able to live without financial
worries.
During the three years before Hitler came to power, total earnings had
fallen by more than half, from 23 billion marks to 11 billion. The
average per capita income had dropped from 1,187 marks in 1929 to 627
marks, a scarcely tolerable level, in 1932. By January 1933, when
Hitler took office, 90 percent of the German people were destitute.
No one escaped the strangling effects of the unemployment. The
intellectuals were hit as hard as the working class. Of the 135,000
university graduates, 60 percent were without jobs. Only a tiny
minority was receiving unemployment benefits.
"The others," wrote one foreign observer, Marcel Laloire (in his book
New Germany), "are dependent on their parents or are sleeping in
flophouses. In the daytime they can be seen on the boulevards of
Berlin wearing signs on their backs to the effect that they will
accept any kind of work."
But there was no longer any kind of work.
The same drastic fall-off had hit Germany's cottage industry, which
comprised some four million workers. Its turnover had declined 55
percent, with total sales plunging from 22 billion to 10 billion
marks.
Hardest hit of all were construction workers; 90 percent of them were
unemployed.
Farmers, too, had been ruined, crushed by losses amounting to 12
billion marks. Many had been forced to mortgage their homes and their
land. In 1932 just the interest on the loans they had incurred due to
the crash was equivalent to 20 percent of the value of the
agricultural production of the entire country. Those who were no
longer able to meet the interest payments saw their farms auctioned
off in legal proceedings: in the years 1931-1932, 17,157 farms-with a
combined total area of 462,485 hectares - were liquidated in this way.
The "democracy" of Germany's "Weimar Republic" (1918 -1933) had proven
utterly ineffective in addressing such flagrant wrongs as this
impoverishment of millions of farm workers, even though they were the
nation's most stable and hardest working citizens. Plundered,
dispossessed, abandoned: small wonder they heeded Hitler's call.
Their situation on January 30, 1933, was tragic. Like the rest of
Germany's working class, they had been betrayed by their political
leaders, reduced to the alternatives of miserable wages, paltry and
uncertain benefit payments, or the outright humiliation of begging.
Germany's industries, once renowned everywhere in the world, were no
longer prosperous, despite the millions of marks in gratuities that
the financial magnates felt obliged to pour into the coffers of the
parties in power before each election in order to secure their
cooperation. For 14 years the well-blinkered conservatives and
Christian democrats of the political center had been feeding at the
trough just as greedily as their adversaries of the left…
One inevitable consequence of this ever-increasing misery and
uncertainty about the future was an abrupt decline in the birthrate.
When your household savings are wiped out, and when you fear even
greater calamities in the days ahead, you do not risk adding to the
number of your dependents.
In those days the birth rate was a reliable barometer of a country's
prosperity. A child is a joy, unless you have nothing but a crust of
bread to put in its little hand. And that's just the way it was with
hundreds of thousands of German families in 1932…
Hitler knew that he would be starting from zero. From less than zero.
But he was also confident of his strength of will to create Germany
anew-politically, socially, financially, and economically. Now legally
and officially in power, he was sure that he could quickly convert
that cipher into a Germany more powerful than ever before.
What support did he have?
For one thing, he could count on the absolute support of millions of
fanatical disciples. And on that January evening, they joyfully shared
in the great thrill of victory. Some thirteen million Germans, many of
them former Socialists and Communists, had voted for his party.
But millions of Germans were still his adversaries, disconcerted
adversaries, to be sure, whom their own political parties had
betrayed, but who had still not been won over to National Socialism.
The two sides-those for and those against Hitler-were very nearly
equal in numbers. But whereas those on the left were divided among
themselves, Hitler's disciples were strongly united. And in one thing
above all, the National Socialists had an incomparable advantage: in
their convictions and in their total faith in a leader. Their highly
organized and well-disciplined party had contented with the worst kind
of obstacles, and had overcome them…
In the eyes of the capitalists, money was the sole active element in
the flourishing of a country's economy. To Hitler's way of thinking,
that conception was radically wrong: capital, on the contrary, was
only an instrument. Work was the essential element: man's endeavor,
man's honor, blood, muscles and soul.
Hitler wanted not just to put an to the class struggle, but to
reestablish the priority of the human being, in justice and respect,
as the principal factor in production…
For the worker's trust in the fatherland to be restored, he had to
feel that from now on he was to be (and to be treated) as an equal,
instead of remaining a social inferior. Under the governments of the
so-called democratic parties of both the left and the right, he had
remained an inferior; for none of them had understood that in the
hierarchy of national values, work is the very essence of life; …
The objective, then, was far greater than merely getting six million
unemployed back to work. It was to achieve a total revolution.
"The people," Hitler declared, "were not put here on earth for the
sake of the economy, and the economy doesn't exist for the sake of
capital. On the contrary, capital is meant to serve the economy, and
the economy in turn to serve the people."
It would not be enough merely to reopen the thousands of closed
factories and fill them with workers. If the old concepts still ruled,
the workers would once again be nothing more than living machines,
faceless and interchangeable…
Nowhere in twentieth-century Europe had the authority of a head of
state ever been based on such overwhelming and freely given national
consent. Prior to Hitler, from 1919 to 1932, those governments piously
styling themselves democratic had usually come to power by meager
majorities, sometimes as low as 51 or 52 percent.
"I am not a dictator," Hitler had often affirmed, "and I never will
be. Democracy will be rigorously enforced by National Socialism."
Authority does not mean tyranny. A tyrant is someone who puts himself
in power without the will of the people or against the will of the
people. A democrat is placed in power by the people. But democracy is
not limited to a single formula. It may be partisan or parliamentary.
Or it may be authoritarian. The important thing is that the people
have wished it, chosen it, established it in its given form.
That was the case with Hitler. He came to power in an essentially
democratic way. Whether one likes it or not, this fact is undeniable.
And after coming to power, his popular support measurably increased
from year to year. The more intelligent and honest of his enemies have
been obliged to admit this, men such as the declared anti-Nazi
historian and professor Joachim Fest, who wrote:
For Hitler was never interested in establishing a mere tyranny. Sheer
greed for power will not suffice as explanation for his personality
and energy-He was not born to be a mere tyrant. He was fixated upon
his mission of defending Europe and the Aryan race ... Never had he
felt so dependent upon the masses as he did at this time, and he
watched their reactions with anxious concern.
These lines weren't written by Dr. Goebbels, but by a stern critic of
Hitler and his career…
When it came time to vote, Hitler was granted plenary powers with a
sweeping majority of 441 votes to 94: he had won not just two thirds,
but 82.44 percent of the assembly's votes. This "Enabling Act" granted
Hitler for four years virtually absolute authority over the
legislative as well as the executive affairs of the government…
After 1945 the explanation that was routinely offered for all this was
that the Germans had lost their heads. Whatever the case, it is a
historical fact that they acted of their own free will. Far from being
resigned, they were enthusiastic. "For the first time since the last
days of the monarchy," historian Joachim Fest has conceded, "the
majority of the Germans now had the feeling that they could identify
with the state."…
"You talk about persecution!" he thundered in an impromptu response to
an address by the Social Democratic speaker. "I think that there are
only a few of us [in our party] here who did not have to suffer
persecutions in prison from your side ... You seem to have totally
forgotten that for years our shirts were ripped off our backs because
you did not like the color . . . We have outgrown your persecutions!"
"In those days," he scathingly continued, "our newspapers were banned
and banned and again banned, our meetings were forbidden, and we were
forbidden to speak, I was forbidden to speak, for years on. And now
you say that criticism is salutary!"…
Hitler's millions of followers had rediscovered the primal strength of
rough, uncitified man, of a time when men still had backbone…
Gustav Noske, the lumberjack who became defense minister - and the
most valiant defender of the embattled republic in the tumultuous
months immediately following the collapse of 1918 - acknowledged
honestly in 1944, when the Third Reich was already rapidly breaking
down, that the great majority of the German people still remained true
to Hitler because of the social renewal he had brought to the working
class…
Here again, well before the collapse of party-ridden Weimar Republic,
disillusion with the unions had become widespread among the working
masses. They were starving. The hundreds of Socialist and Communist
deputies stood idly by, impotent to provide any meaningful help to the
desperate proletariat.
Their leaders had no proposals to remedy, even partially, the great
distress of the people; no plans for large-scale public works, no
industrial restructuring, no search for markets abroad.
Moreover, they offered no energetic resistance to the pillaging by
foreign countries of the Reich's last financial resources: this a
consequence of the Treaty of Versailles that the German Socialists had
voted to ratify in June of 1919, and which they had never since had
the courage effectively to oppose…
In 1930, 1931 and 1932, German workers had watched the disaster grow:
the number of unemployed rose from two million to three, to four, to
five, then to six million. At the same time, unemployment benefits
fell lower and lower, finally to disappear completely. Everywhere one
saw dejection and privation: emaciated mothers, children wasting away
in sordid lodgings, and thousands of beggars in long sad lines.
The failure, or incapacity, of the leftist leaders to act, not to
mention their insensitivity, had stupefied the working class. Of what
use were such leaders with their empty heads and empty hearts-and,
often enough, full pockets?
Well before January 30, thousands of workers had already joined up
with Hitler's dynamic formations, which were always hard at it where
they were most needed. Many joined the National Socialists when they
went on strike. Hitler, himself a former worker and a plain man like
themselves, was determined to eliminate unemployment root and branch.
He wanted not merely to defend the laborer's right to work, but to
make his calling one of honor, to insure him respect and to integrate
him fully into a living community of all the Germans, who had been
divided class against class.
In January 1933, Hitler's victorious troops were already largely
proletarian in character, including numerous hardfisted street
brawlers, many unemployed, who no longer counted economically or
socially.
Meanwhile, membership in the Marxist labor unions had fallen off
enormously: among thirteen million socialist and Communist voters in
1932, no more than five million were union members. Indifference and
discouragement had reached such levels that many members no longer
paid their union dues. Many increasingly dispirited Marxist leaders
began to wonder if perhaps the millions of deserters were the ones who
saw things clearly. Soon they wouldn't wonder any longer.
Even before Hitler won Reichstag backing for his "Enabling Act,"
Germany's giant labor union federation, the ADGB, had begun to rally
to the National Socialist cause. As historian Joachim Fest
acknowledged: "On March 20, the labor federation's executive committee
addressed a kind of declaration of loyalty to Hitler." (J. Fest,
Hitler, p. 413.)
Hitler than took a bold and clever step. The unions had always
clamored to have the First of May recognized as a worker's holiday,
but the Weimar Republic had never acceded to their request. Hitler,
never missing an opportunity, grasped this one with both hands. He did
more than grant this reasonable demand: he proclaimed the First of May
a national holiday…
I myself attended the memorable meeting at the Tempelhof field in
1933. By nine o'clock that morning, giant columns, some of workers,
others of youth groups, marching in cadence down the pavement of
Berlin's great avenues, had started off towards the airfield to which
Hitler had called together all Germans. All Germany would follow the
rally as it was transmitted nationwide by radio…
In the dark, a group of determined opponents could easily have heckled
Hitler or otherwise sabotaged the meeting. Perhaps a third of the
onlookers had been Socialists or Communists only three months
previously. But not a single hostile voice was raised during the
entire ceremony. There was only universal acclamation.
Ceremony is the right word for it. It was an almost magical rite.
Hitler and Goebbels had no equals in the arranging of dedicatory
ceremonies of this sort. First there were popular songs, then great
Wagnerian hymns to grip the audience. Germany has a passion for
orchestral music, and Wagner taps the deepest and most secret vein of
the German soul, its romanticism, its inborn sense of the powerful and
the grand.
Meanwhile the hundreds of flags floated above the rostrum, redeemed
from the darkness by arrows of light.
Now Hitler strode to the rostrum. For those standing at the of the
field, his face must have appeared vanishingly small, but his words
flooded instantaneously across the acres of people in his audience.
A Latin audience would have preferred a voice less harsh, more
delicately expressive. But there was no doubt that Hitler spoke to the
psyche of the German people.
Germans have rarely had the good fortune to experience the enchantment
of the spoken word. In Germany, the tone has always been set by
ponderous speakers, more fond of elephantine pedantry than oratorical
passion. Hitler, as a speaker, was a prodigy, the greatest orator of
his century. He possessed, above all, what the ordinary speaker lacks:
a mysterious ability to project power.
A bit like a medium or sorcerer, he was seized, even transfixed, as he
addressed a crowd. It responded to Hitler's projection of power,
radiating it back, establishing, in the course of myriad exchanges, a
current that both orator and audience gave to and drew from equally.
One had to personally experience him speaking to understand this
phenomenon.
This special gift is what lay at the basis of Hitler's ability to win
over the masses. His high-voltage, lightning-like projection
transported and transformed all who experienced it. Tens of millions
were enlightened, riveted and inflamed by the fire of his anger,
irony, and passion.
By the time the cheering died away that May first evening, hundreds of
thousands of previously indifferent or even hostile workers who had
come to Tempelhof at the urging of their labor federation leaders were
now won over. They had become followers, like the SA stormtroopers
whom so many there that evening had brawled with in recent years.
The great human sea surged back from Tempelhof to Berlin. A million
and a half people had arrived in perfect order, and their departure
was just as orderly. No bottlenecks halted the cars and busses. For
those of us who witnessed it, this rigorous, yet joyful, discipline of
a contented people was in itself a source of wonder. Everything about
the May Day mass meeting had come off as smoothly clockwork.
The memory of that fabulous crowd thronging back to the center of
Berlin will never leave me. A great many were on foot. Their faces
were now different faces, as though they had been imbued with a
strange and totally new spirit. The non-Germans in the crowd were as
if stunned, and no less impressed than Hitler's fellow countrymen.
The French ambassador, André François-Poncet, noted:
The foreigners on the speaker's platform as guests of honor were not
alone in carrying away the impression of a truly beautiful and
wonderful public festival, an impression that was created by the
regime's genius for organization, by the night time display of
uniforms, by the play of lights, the rhythm of the music, by the flags
and the colorful fireworks; and they were not alone in thinking that a
breath of reconciliation and unity was passing over the Third Reich.
"It is our wish," Hitler had exclaimed, as though taking heaven as his
witness, "to get along together and to struggle together as brothers,
so that at the hour when we shall come before God, we might say to
him: 'See, Lord, we have changed. The German people are no longer a
people ashamed, a people mean and cowardly and divided. No, Lord! The
German people have become strong in their spirit, in their will, in
their perseverance, in their acceptance of any sacrifice. Lord, we
remain faithful to Thee! Bless our struggle!" (A. François-Poncet,
Souvenirs d'une ambassade à Berlin, p. 128.)
Who else could have made such an incantatory appeal without making
himself look ridiculous?
No politician had ever spoken of the rights of workers with such faith
and such force, or had laid out in such clear terms the social plan he
pledged to carry out on behalf of the common people.
The next day, the newspaper of the proletarian left, the "Union
Journal," reported on this mass meeting at which at least two thirds-a
million-of those attending were workers. "This May First was victory
day," the paper summed up.
With the workers thus won over, what further need was there for the
thousands of labor union locals that for so long had poisoned the
social life of the Reich and which, in any case, had accomplished
nothing of a lasting, positive nature?
Within hours of the conclusion of that "victory" meeting at the
Tempelhof field, the National Socialists were able to peacefully take
complete control of Germany's entire labor union organization,
including all its buildings, enterprises and banks. An era of Marxist
obstruction abruptly came to an end : from now on, a single national
organization would embody the collective will and interests of all of
Germany's workers.
Although he was now well on his way to creating what he pledged would
be a true "government of the people," Hitler also realized that great
obstacles remained. For one thing, the Communist rulers in Moscow had
not dropped their guard-or their guns. Restoring the nation would take
more than words and promises, it would take solid achievements. Only
then would the enthusiasm shown by the working class at the May First
mass meeting be an expression of lasting victory.
How could Hitler solve the great problem that had defied solution by
everyone else (both in Germany and abroad): putting millions of
unemployed back to work?
What would Hitler do about wages? Working hours? Leisure time?
Housing? How would he succeed in winning, at long last, respect for
the rights and dignity of the worker?
How could men's lives be improved-materially, morally, and, one might
even say, spiritually? How would he proceed to build a new society fit
for human beings, free of the inertia, injustices and prejudices of
the past?
"National Socialism," Hitler had declared at the outset, "has its
mission and its hour; it is not just a passing movement but a phase of
history."
The instruments of real power now in his hands-an authoritarian state,
its provinces subordinate but nonetheless organic parts of the
national whole-Hitler had acted quickly to shake himself free of the
last constraints of the impotent sectarian political parties.
Moreover, he was now able to direct a cohesive labor force that was no
longer split into a thousand rivulets but flowed as a single, mighty
current.
Hitler was self-confident, sure of the power of his own conviction. He
had no intention, or need, to resort to the use of physical force.
Instead, he intended to win over, one by one, the millions of Germans
who were still his adversaries, and even those who still hated him.
His conquest of Germany had taken years of careful planning and hard
work. Similarly, he would now realize his carefully worked out plans
for transforming the state and society. This meant not merely changes
in administrative or governmental structures, but far-reaching social
programs.
He had once vowed: "The hour will come when the 15 million people who
now hate us will be solidly behind us and will acclaim with us the new
revival we shall create together." Eventually he would succeed in
winning over even many of his most refractory skeptics and
adversaries.
His army of converts was already forming ranks. In a remarkable
tribute, historian Joachim Fest felt obliged to acknowledge
unequivocally:
Hitler had moved rapidly from the status of a demagogue to that of a
respected statesman. The craving to join the ranks of the victors was
spreading like an epidemic, and the shrunken minority of those who
resisted the urge were being visibly pushed into isolation-The past
was dead. The future, it seemed, belonged to the regime, which had
more and more followers, which was being hailed everywhere and
suddenly had sound reasons on its side.
And even the prominent leftist writer Kurt Tucholsky, sensing the
direction of the inexorable tide that was sweeping Germany, vividly
commented: "You don't go railing against the ocean." (J. Fest, Hitler,
pp. 415 f.)
"Our power," Hitler was now able to declare, "no longer belongs to any
territorial fraction of the Reich, nor to any single class of the
nation, but to the people in its totality."
Much still remained to be done, however. So far, Hitler had succeeded
in clearing the way of obstacles to his program. Now the time to build
had arrived.
So many others had failed to tackle the many daunting problems that
were now his responsibility. Above all, the nation demanded a solution
to the great problem of unemployment. Could Hitler now succeed where
others had so dismally failed?…
Unemployment could be combated and eliminated only by giving industry
the financial means to start up anew, to modernize, thus creating
millions of new jobs.
The normal rate of consumption would not be restored, let alone
increased, unless one first raised the starvation-level allowances
that were making purchases of any kind a virtual impossibility. On the
contrary, production and sales would have to be restored before the
six million unemployed could once again become purchasers.
The great economic depression could be overcome only by restimulating
industry, by bringing industry into step with the times, and by
promoting the development of new products…
Nearly ten years earlier, while in his prison cell, Hitler had already
envisioned a formidable system of national highways. He had also
conceived of a small, easily affordable automobile (later known as the
"Volkswagen"), and had even suggested its outline. It should have the
shape of a June bug, he proposed. Nature itself suggested the car's
aerodynamic line.
Until Hitler came to power, a car was the privilege of the rich. It
was not financially within the reach of the middle class, much less of
the worker. The "Volkswagen," costing one-tenth as much as the
standard automobile of earlier years, would eventually become a
popular work vehicle and a source of pleasure after work: a way to
unwind and get some fresh air, and of discovering, thanks to the new
Autobahn highway network, a magnificent country that then, in its
totality, was virtually unknown to the German worker.
From the beginning, Hitler wanted this economical new car to be built
for the millions. The production works would also become one of
Germany's most important industrial centers and employers.
During his imprisonment, Hitler had also drawn up plans for the
construction of popular housing developments and majestic public
buildings.
Some of Hitler's rough sketches still survive. They include groups of
individual worker's houses with their own gardens (which were to be
built in the hundreds of thousands), a plan for a covered stadium in
Berlin, and a vast congress hall, unlike any other in the world, that
would symbolize the grandeur of the National Socialist revolution.
"A building with a monumental dome," historian Werner Maser has
explained, "the plan of which he drew while he was writing Mein Kampf,
would have a span of 46 meters, a height of 220 meters, a diameter of
250 meters, and a capacity of 150 to 190 thousand people standing. The
interior of the building would have been 17 times larger than Saint
Peter's Cathedral in Rome." (W. Maser, Hitler, Adolf, p. 100.)
"That hall," architect Albert Speer has pointed out, "was not just an
idle dream impossible of achievement."
Hitler's imagination, therefore, had long been teeming with a number
of ambitious projects, many of which would eventually be realized.
Fortunately, the needed entrepreneurs, managers and technicians were
on hand. Hitler would not have to improvise.
Historian Werner Maser, although quite anti-Hitler-like nearly all of
his colleagues (how else would they have found publishers?) - has
acknowledged: "From the beginning of his political career, he [Hitler]
took great pains systematically to arrange for whatever he was going
to need in order to carry out his plans."
"Hitler was distinguished," Maser has also noted, "by an exceptional
intelligence in technical matters." Hitler had acquired his knowledge
by devoting many thousands of hours to technical studies from the time
of his youth.
"Hitler read an endless number of books," explained Dr. Schacht. "He
acquired a very considerable amount of knowledge and made masterful
use of it in discussions and speeches. In certain respects he was a
man endowed with genius. He had ideas that no one else would ever have
thought of, ideas that resulted in the ending of great difficulties,
sometimes by measures of an astonishing simplicity or brutality."
Many billions of marks would be needed to begin the great
socioeconomic revolution that was destined, as Hitler had always
intended, to make Germany once again the European leader in industry
and commerce and, most urgently, to rapidly wipe out unemployment in
Germany. Where would the money be found? And, once obtained, how would
these funds be allotted to ensure maximum effectiveness in their
investment?
Hitler was by no means a dictator in matters of the economy. He was,
rather, a stimulator. His government would undertake to do only that
which private initiative could not.
Hitler believed in the importance of individual creative imagination
and dynamism, in the need for every person of superior ability and
skill to assume responsibility.
He also recognized the importance of the profit motive. Deprived of
the prospect of having his efforts rewarded, the person of ability
often refrains from running risks. The economic failure of Communism
has demonstrated this. In the absence of personal incentives and the
opportunity for real individual initiative, the Soviet "command
economy" lagged in all but a few fields, its industry years behind its
competitors.
State monopoly tolls the death of all initiative, and hence of all
progress.
For all men selflessly to pool their wealth might be marvelous, but it
is also contrary to human nature. Nearly every man desires that his
labor shall improve his own condition and that of his family, and
feels that his brain, creative imagination, and persistence well
deserve their reward.
Because it disregarded these basic psychological truths, Soviet
Communism, right to the end, wallowed in economic mediocrity, in spite
of its immense reservoir of manpower, its technical expertise, and its
abundant natural resources, all of which ought to have made it an
industrial and technological giant.
Hitler was always adverse to the idea of state management of the
economy. He believed in elites. "A single idea of genius," he used to
say, "has more value than a lifetime of conscientious labor in an
office."
Just as there are political or intellectual elites, so also is there
an industrial elite. A manufacturer of great ability should not be
restrained, hunted down by the internal revenue services like a
criminal, or be unappreciated by the public. On the contrary, it is
important for economic development that the industrialist be
encouraged morally and materially, as much as possible.
The most fruitful initiatives Hitler would take from 1933 on would be
on behalf of private enterprise. He would keep an eye on the quality
of their directors, to be sure, and would shunt aside incompetents,
quite a few of them at times, but he also supported the best ones,
those with the keenest minds, the most imaginative and bold, even if
their political opinions did not always agree with his own.
"There is no question," he stated very firmly, "of dismissing a
factory owner or director under the pretext that he is not a National
Socialist."
Hitler would exercise the same moderation, the same pragmatism, in the
administrative as well as in the industrial sphere.
What he demanded of his co-workers, above all, was competence and
effectiveness. The great majority of Third Reich functionaries - some
80 percent-were never enrolled in the National Socialist party.
Several of Hitler's ministers, like Konstantin von Neurath and
Schwerin von Krosigk, and ambassadors to such key posts as Prague,
Vienna and Ankara, were not members of the party. But they were
capable…
"Herr Schacht," he said, "we are assuredly in agreement on one point:
no other single task facing the government at the moment can be so
truly urgent as conquering unemployment. That will take a lot of
money. Do you see any possibility of finding it apart from the
Reichsbank?" And after a moment, he added: "How much would it take? Do
you have any idea?"
Wishing to win Schacht over by appealing to his ambition, Hitler
smiled and then asked: "Would you be willing to once again assume
presidency of the Reichsbank?" Schacht let on that he had a
sentimental concern for Dr. Luther, and did not want to hurt the
incumbent's feelings. Playing along, Hitler reassured Schacht that he
would find an appropriate new job elsewhere for Luther.
Schacht then pricked up his ears, drew himself up, and focused his big
round eyes on Hitler: "Well, if that's the way it is," he said, "then
I am ready to assume the presidency of the Reichsbank again."
His great dream was being realized. Schacht had been president of the
Reichsbank between 1923 and 1930, but had been dismissed. Now he would
return in triumph. He felt vindicated. Within weeks, the ingenious
solution to Germany's pressing financial woes would burst forth from
his inventive brain.
"It was necessary," Schacht later explained, "to discover a method
that would avoid inflating the investment holdings of the Reichsbank
immoderately and consequently increasing the circulation of money
excessively."
"Therefore," he went on, "I had to find some means of getting the sums
that were lying idle in pockets and banks, without meaning for it to
be long term and without having it undergo the risk of depreciation.
That was the reasoning behind the Mefo bonds."
What were these "Mefo" bonds? Mefo was a contraction of the
Metallurgische Forschungs-GmbH (Metallurgic Research Company). With a
startup capitalization of one billion marks - which Hitler and Schacht
arranged to be provided by the four giant firms of Krupp, Siemens,
Deutsche Werke and Rheinmetall-this company would eventually promote
many billions of marks worth of investment.
Enterprises, old and new, that filled government orders had only to
draw drafts on Mefo for the amounts due. These drafts, when presented
to the Reichsbank, were immediately convertible into cash. The success
of the Mefo program depended entirely on public acceptance of the Mefo
bonds. But the wily Schacht had planned well. Since Mefo bonds were
short-term bonds that could be cashed in at any time, there was no
real risk in buying, accepting or holding them. They bore an interest
of four percent-a quite acceptable figure in those days-whereas
banknotes hidden under the mattress earned nothing. The public quickly
took all this into consideration and eagerly accepted the bonds.
While the Reichsbank was able to offer from its own treasury a
relatively insignificant 150 million marks for Hitler's war on
unemployment, in just four years the German public subscribed more
than 12 billion marks worth of Mefo bonds!
These billions, the fruit of the combined imagination, ingenuity and
astuteness of Hitler and Schacht, swept away the temporizing and
fearful conservatism of the bankers. Over the next four years, this
enormous credit reserve would make miracles possible.
Soon after the initial billion-mark credit, Schacht added another
credit of 600 million in order to finance the start of Hitler's grand
program for highway construction. This Autobahn program provided
immediate work for 100,000 of the unemployed, and eventually assured
wages for some 500,000 workers.
As large as this outlay was, it was immediately offset by a
corresponding cutback in government unemployment benefits, and by the
additional tax revenue generated as a result of the increase in living
standard (sping) of the newly employed.
Within a few months, thanks to the credit created by the Mefo bonds,
private industry once again dared to assume risks and expand. Germans
returned to work by the hundreds of thousands.
Was Schacht solely responsible for this extraordinary turnaround?
After the war, he answered for himself as a Nuremberg Tribunal
defendant, where he was charged with having made possible the Reich's
economic revival:
I don't think Hitler was reduced to begging for my help. If I had not
served him, he would have found other methods, other means. He was not
a man to give up. It's easy enough for you to say, Mr. Prosecutor,
that I should have watched Hitler die and not lifted a finger. But the
entire working class would have died with him!
Even Marxists recognized Hitler's success, and their own failure. In
the June 1934 issue of the Zeitschrift für Sozialismus, the journal of
the German Social Democrats in exile, this acknowledgement appears:
Faced with the despair of proletarians reduced to joblessness, of
young people with diplomas and no future, of the middle classes of
merchants and artisans condemned to bankruptcy, and of farmers
terribly threatened by the collapse in agricultural prices, we all
failed. We weren't capable of offering the masses anything but
speeches about the glory of socialism.
VI. The Social Revolution
Hitler's tremendous social achievement in putting Germany's six
million unemployed back to work is seldom acknowledged today. Although
it was much more than a transitory achievement, "democratic"
historians routinely dismiss it in just a few lines. Since 1945, not a
single objective scholarly study has been devoted to this highly
significant, indeed unprecedented, historical phenomenon.
Similarly neglected is the body of sweeping reforms that dramatically
changed the condition of the worker in Germany. Factories were
transformed from gloomy caverns to spacious and healthy work centers,
with natural lighting, surrounded by gardens and playing fields.
Hundreds of thousands of attractive houses were built for working
class families. A policy of several weeks of paid vacation was
introduced, along with week and holiday trips by land and sea. A
wide-ranging program of physical and cultural education for young
workers was established, with the world's best system of technical
training. The Third Reich's social security and workers' health
insurance system was the world's most modern and complete.
This remarkable record of social achievement is routinely hushed up
today because it is embarrasses those who uphold the orthodox view of
the Third Reich. Otherwise, readers might begin to think that perhaps
Hitler was the greatest social builder of the twentieth century…
Nevertheless, restoring work and bread to millions of unemployed who
had been living in misery for years; restructuring industrial life;
conceiving and establishing an organization for the effective defense
and betterment of the nation's millions of wage earners; creating a
new bureaucracy and judicial system that guaranteed the civic rights
of each member of the national community, while simultaneously holding
each person to his or her responsibilities as a German citizen: this
organic body of reforms was part of a single, comprehensive plan,
which Hitler had conceived and worked out years earlier.
Without this plan, the nation would have collapsed into anarchy.
All-encompassing, this program included broad industrial recovery as
well as detailed attention to even construction of comfortable inns
along the new highway network.
It took several years for a stable social structure to emerge from the
French Revolution. The Soviets needed even more time: five years after
the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, hundreds of thousands of Russians
were still dying of hunger and disease. In Germany, by contrast, the
great machinery was in motion within months, with organization and
accomplishment quickly meshing together…
Hitler personally dug the first spadeful of earth for the first
Autobahn highway, linking Frankfurt-am-Main with Darmstadt. For the
occasion, he brought along Dr. Schacht, the man whose visionary credit
wizardry had made the project possible. The official procession moved
ahead, three cars abreast in front, then six across, spanning the
entire width of the autobahn…
Hitler's plan to build thousands of low-cost homes also demanded a
vast mobilization of manpower. He had envisioned housing that would be
attractive, cozy, and affordable for millions of ordinary German
working-class families. He had no intention of continuing to tolerate,
as his predecessors had, cramped, ugly "rabbit warren" housing for the
German people. The great barracks-like housing projects on the
outskirts of factory towns, packed with cramped families, disgusted
him.
The greater part of the houses he would build were single story,
detached dwellings, with small yards where children could romp, wives
could grow vegetable and flower gardens, while the bread-winners could
read their newspapers in peace after the day's work. These
single-family homes were built to conform to the architectural styles
of the various German regions, retaining as much as possible the
charming local variants.
Wherever there was no practical alternative to building large
apartment complexes, Hitler saw to it that the individual apartments
were spacious, airy and enhanced by surrounding lawns and gardens
where the children could play safely.
The new housing was, of course, built in conformity with the highest
standards of public health, a consideration notoriously neglected in
previous working-class projects.
Generous loans, amortizable in ten years, were granted to newly
married couples so they could buy their own homes. At the birth of
each child, a fourth of the debt was cancelled. Four children, at the
normal rate of a new arrival every two and a half years, sufficed to
cancel the entire loan debt.
Once, during a conversation with Hitler, I expressed my astonishment
at this policy. "But then, you never get back the total amount of your
loans?," I asked. "How so?" he replied, smiling. "Over a period of ten
years, a family with four children brings in much more than our loans,
through the taxes levied on a hundred different items of consumption."
As it happened, tax revenues increased every year, in proportion to
the rise in expenditures for Hitler's social programs. In just a few
years, revenue from taxes tripled. Hitler's Germany never experienced
a financial crisis.
To stimulate the moribund economy demanded the nerve, which Hitler
had, to invest money that the government didn't yet have, rather than
passively waiting-in accordance with "sound" financial principles-for
the economy to revive by itself.
Today, our whole era is dying economically because we have succumbed
to fearful hesitation. Enrichment follows investment, not the other
way around…
Even before the year 1933 had ended, Hitler had succeeded in building
202,119 housing units. Within four years he would provide the German
people with nearly a million and a half (1,458,128) new dwellings!
Moreover, workers would no longer be exploited as they had been. A
month's rent for a worker could not exceed 26 marks, or about an
eighth of the average wage then. Employees with more substantial
salaries paid monthly rents of up to 45 marks maximum.
Equally effective social measures were taken in behalf of farmers, who
had the lowest incomes. In 1933 alone 17,611 new farm houses were
built, each of them surrounded by a parcel of land one thousand square
meters in size. Within three years, Hitler would build 91,000 such
farmhouses…
Everywhere industry was hiring again, with some firms-like Krupp, IG
Farben and the large automobile manufacturers-taking on new workers on
a very large scale. As the country became more prosperous, car sales
increased by more than 80,000 units in 1933 alone. Employment in the
auto industry doubled. Germany was gearing up for full production,
with private industry leading the way.
The new government lavished every assistance on the private sector,
the chief factor in employment as well as production. Hitler almost
immediately made available 500 million marks in credits to private
business.
This start-up assistance given to German industry would repay itself
many times over. Soon enough, another two billion marks would be
loaned to the most enterprising companies. Nearly half would go into
new wages and salaries, saving the treasury an estimated three hundred
million marks in unemployment benefits. Added to the hundreds of
millions in tax receipts spurred by the business recovery, the state
quickly recovered its investment, and more.
Hitler's entire economic policy would be based on the following
equation: risk large sums to undertake great public works and to spur
the renewal and modernization of industry, then later recover the
billions invested through invisible and painless tax revenues. It
didn't take long for Germany to see the results of Hitler's recovery
formula.
Economic recovery, as important as it was, nevertheless wasn't
Hitler's only objective. As he strived to restore full employment,
Hitler never lost sight of his goal of creating a organization
powerful enough to stand up to capitalist owners and managers, who had
shown little concern for the health and welfare of the entire national
community.
Hitler would impose on everyone-powerful boss and lowly wage earner
alike-his own concept of the organic social community. Only the loyal
collaboration of everyone could assure the prosperity of all classes
and social groups.
Consistent with their doctrine, Germany's Marxist leaders had set
class against class, helping to bring the country to the brink of
economic collapse. Deserting their Marxist unions and political
parties in droves, most workers had come to realize that strikes and
grievances their leaders incited only crippled production, and thus
the workers as well.
By the of 1932, in any case, the discredited labor unions were
drowning in massive debt that realistically could never be repaid.
Some of the less scrupulous union officials, sensing the oncoming
catastrophe, had begun stealing hundreds of thousands of marks from
the workers they represented. The Marxist leaders had failed:
socially, financially and morally.
Every joint human activity requires a leader. The head of a factory or
business is also the person naturally responsible for it. He oversees
every aspect of production and work. In Hitler's Germany, the head of
a business had to be both a capable director and a person concerned
for the social justice and welfare of his employees. Under Hitler,
many owners and managers who had proven to be unjust, incompetent or
recalcitrant lost their jobs, or their businesses.
A considerable number of legal guarantees protected the worker against
any abuse of authority at the workplace. Their purpose was to insure
that the rights of workers were respected, and that workers were
treated as worthy collaborators, not just as animated tools. Each
industrialist was legally obliged to collaborate with worker delegates
in drafting shop regulations that were not imposed from above but
instead adapted to each business enterprise and its particular working
conditions. These regulations had to specify "the length of the
working day, the time and method of paying wages, and the safety
rules, and to be posted throughout the factory," within easy access of
both the worker whose interests might be angered and the owner or
manager whose orders might be subverted.
The thousands of different, individual versions of such regulations
served to create a healthy rivalry, with every factory group vying to
outdo the others in efficiency and justice.
One of the first reforms to benefit German workers was the
establishment of paid vacations. In France, the leftist Popular Front
government would noisily claim, in 1936, to have originated legally
mandated paid vacations-and stingy ones at that, only one week per
year. But it was actually Hitler who first established them, in 1933
-- and they were two or three times more generous.
Under Hitler, every factory employee had the legal right to paid
vacation. Previously, paid vacations had not normally exceed four or
five days, and nearly half of the younger workers had no vacation time
at all. If anything, Hitler favored younger workers; the youngest
workers received more generous vacations. This was humane and made
sense: a young person has more need of rest and fresh air to develop
his maturing strength and vigor. Thus, they enjoyed a full 18 days of
paid vacation per year.
Today, more than half a century later, these figures have been
surpassed, but in 1933 they far exceeded European norms.
The standard vacation was twelve days. Then, from the age of 25 on, it
went up to 18 days. After ten years with the company, workers got a
still longer vacation: 21 days, or three times what the French
socialists would grant the workers of their country in 1936.
Hitler introduced the standard forty-hour work week in Europe. As for
overtime work, it was now compensated, as nowhere else in the
continent at the time, at an increased pay rate. And with the
eight-hour work day now the norm, overtime work became more readily
available.
In another innovation, work breaks were made longer: two hours each
day, allowing greater opportunity for workers to relax, and to make
use of the playing fields that large industries were now required to
provide.
Whereas a worker's right to job security had been virtually
non-existent, now an employee could no longer be dismissed at the sole
discretion of the employer. Hitler saw to it that workers' rights were
spelled out and enforced. Henceforth, an employer had to give four
weeks notice before firing an employee, who then had up to two months
to appeal the dismissal. Dismissals could also be annulled by the
"Courts of Social Honor" (Ehrengerichte).
This Court was one of three great institutions that were established
to protect German workers. The others were the "Labor Commissions" and
the "Council of Trust."
The "Council of Trust" (Vertrauensrat) was responsible for
establishing and developing a real spirit of community between
management and labor. "In every business enterprise," the 1934 "Labor
Charter" law stipulated, "the employer and head of the enterprise
(Führer), the employees and workers, personnel of the enterprise,
shall work jointly toward the goal of the enterprise and the common
good of the nation."
No longer would either be exploited by the other-neither the worker by
arbitrary whim of the employer, nor the employer through the blackmail
of strikes for political ends.
Article 35 of the "Labor Charter" law stated: "Every member of an
enterprise community shall assume the responsibility required by his
position in said common enterprise." In short, each enterprise would
be headed by a dynamic executive, charged with a sense of the greater
community-no longer a selfish capitalist with unconditional, arbitrary
power.
"The interest of the community may require that an incapable or
unworthy employer be relieved of his duties," the "Labor Charter"
stipulated. The employer was no longer unassailable, an all-powerful
boss with the last word on hiring and firing his staff. He, too, would
be subject to the workplace regulations, which he was now obliged to
respect no less than the least of his employees. The law conferred the
honor and responsibility of authority on the employer only insofar as
he merited it…
In the Third Reich, the worker knew that "exploitation of his physical
strength in bad faith or in violation of his honor" was no longer
tolerated. He had obligations to the community, but he shared these
obligations with every other member of the enterprise, from the chief
executive to the messenger boy. Finally, the German worker had clearly
defined social rights, which were arbitrated and enforced by
independent agencies. And while all this had been achieved in an
atmosphere of justice and moderation, it nevertheless constituted a
genuine social revolution…
Factories and shops, large and small, were altered or transformed to
conform to the strictest standards of cleanliness and hygiene:
interiors, so often dark and stifling, were opened up to light;
playing fields were constructed; rest areas where workers could unbend
during break, were set aside; employee cafeterias and respectable
locker rooms were opened. The larger industrial establishments, in
addition to providing the normally required conventional sports
facilities, were obliged to put in swimming pools!
In just three years, these achievements would reach unimagined
heights: more than two thousand factories refitted and beautified;
23,000 work premises modernized; 800 buildings designed exclusively
for meetings; 1,200 playing fields; 13,000 sanitary facilities; 17,000
cafeterias.
To assure the healthy development of the working class, physical
education courses were instituted for younger workers. Some 8,000 were
eventually organized. Technical training was equally emphasized.
Hundreds of work schools, and thousands of technical courses were
created. There were examinations for professional competence, and
competitions in which generous prizes were awarded to outstanding
masters of their craft.
Eight hundred departmental inspectors and 17,300 local inspectors were
employed to conscientiously monitor and promote these improvements.
To provide affordable vacations for German workers on a hitherto
unprecedented scale, Hitler established the "Strength through Joy"
program. As a result, hundreds of thousands of workers were now able
to make relaxing vacation trips on land and sea each summer.
Magnificent cruise ships were built, and special trains brought
vacationers to the mountains and the seashore. In just a few years,
Germany's working-class tourists would log a distance equivalent to 54
times the circumference of the earth! And thanks to generous state
subsidies, the cost to workers of these popular vacation excursions
was nearly insignificant…
Was Hitler's transformation of the lot of the working class
authoritarian? Without a doubt. And yet, for a people that had grown
sick and tired of anarchy, this new authoritarianism wasn't regarded
as an imposition. In fact, people have always accepted a strong man's
leadership.
In any case, there is no doubt that the attitude of the German working
class, which was still two-thirds non-Nazi at the start of 1933, soon
changed completely. As Belgian author Marcel Laloire noted at the
time:
When you make your way through the cities of Germany and go into the
working-class districts, go through the factories, the construction
yards, you are astonished to find so many workers on the job sporting
the Hitler insignia, to see so many flags with the swastika, black on
a bright red background, in the most densely populated districts.
Hitler's "German Labor Front" (Deutsche Arbeitsfront), which
incorporated all workers and employers, was for the most part eagerly
accepted. The steel spades of the sturdy young lads of the "National
Labor Service" (Reichsarbeitsdienst) could also be seen gleaming along
the highways.
Hitler created the National Labor Service not only to alleviate
unemployment, but to bring together, in absolute equality, and in the
same uniform, both the sons of millionaires and the sons of the
poorest families for several months' common labor and living.
All performed the same work, all were subject to the same discipline;
they enjoyed the same pleasures and benefited from the same physical
and moral development. At the same construction sites and in the same
barracks, Germans became conscious of what they had in common, grew to
understand one another, and discarded their old prejudices of class
and caste.
After a hitch in the National Labor Service, a young worker knew that
the rich man's son was not a pampered monster, while the young lad of
wealthy family knew that the worker's son had no less honor than a
nobleman or an heir to riches; they had lived and worked together as
comrades. Social hatred was vanishing, and a socially united people
was being born.
Hitler could go into factories-something few men of the so-called
Right would have risked in the past-and hold forth to crowds of
workers, at times in the thousands, as at the huge Siemens works. "In
contrast to the von Papens and other country gentlemen," he might tell
them, "in my youth I was a worker like you. And in my heart of hearts,
I have remained what I was then."
During his twelve years in power, no untoward incident ever occurred
at any factory he visited. Hitler was at home when he went among the
people, and he was received like a member of the family returning home
after making a success of himself.
But the Chancellor of the Third Reich wanted more than popular
approval. He wanted that approval to be freely, widely, and repeatedly
expressed by popular vote. No people was ever be more frequently asked
for their electoral opinion than the German people of that era-five
times in five years.
For Hitler, it was not enough that the people voted from time to time,
as in the previous democratic system. In those days, voters were
rarely appealed to, and when they expressed an opinion, they were
often ill-informed and apathetic. After an election, years might go
by, during which the politicians were heedless and inaccessible, the
electorate powerless to vote on their actions.
To enable the German public to express its opinion on the occasion of
important events of social, national, or international significance,
Hitler provided the people a new means of approving or rejecting his
own actions as Chancellor: the plebiscite.
Hitler recognized the right of all the people, men and women alike, to
vote by secret ballot: to voice their opinion of his policies, or to
make a well-grounded judgment on this or that great decision in
domestic or foreign affairs. Rather than a formalistic routine,
democracy became a vital, active program of supervision that was
renewed annually.
The articles of the "Plebiscite Law" were brief and clear:
1. The Reich government may ask the people whether or not it
approves of a measure planned by or taken by the government. This may
also apply to a law.
2. A measure submitted to plebiscite will be considered as
established when it receives a simple majority of the votes. This will
apply as well to a law modifying the Constitution.
3. If the people approves the measure in question, it will be
applied in conformity with article III of the Law for Overcoming the
Distress of the People and the Reich.
The Reich Interior Ministry is authorized to take all legal and
administrative measures necessary to carry out this law.
Berlin, July 14, 1933.
Hitler, Frick…
From the first months of 1933, his accomplishments were public fact,
for all to see. Before end of the year, unemployment in Germany had
fallen from more than 6,000,000 to 3,374,000. Thus, 2,627,000 jobs had
been created since the previous February, when Hitler began his
"gigantic task!" A simple question: Who in Europe ever achieved
similar results in so short a time?…
In his detailed and critical biography of Hitler, Joachim Fest limited
his treatment of Hitler's extraordinary social achievements in 1933 to
a few paragraphs. All the same, Fest did not refrain from
acknowledging:
The regime insisted that it was not the rule of one social class above
all others, and by granting everyone opportunities to rise, it in fact
demonstrated class neutrality-These measures did indeed break through
the old, petrified social structures. They tangibly improved the
material condition of much of the population. (J. Fest, Hitler, pp.
434-435.)
Not without reason were the swastika banners waving proudly throughout
the working-class districts where, just a year ago, they had been
unceremoniously torn down.
Topaz
struggle), by Hans Hinkel:
"Faster than lightening a lie about us spread throughout the country,
spread in every attic room where poor people lived by newspapers owned
or obedient to the opponent. It took a week of work by us National
Socialists to deal with a three-line lie in an opposing newspaper. As
soon as one lie was dealt with, a hundred more sprang up. Like a
hydra, the opponent's horror stories about National Socialism and its
supporters spread. There was not a speech by the Führer or his
associates that was not immediately twisted and tastefully served up
to the gullible Michael at breakfast or dinner. Adolf Hitler had "spat
out the communion wafer." Hermann Göring was smuggling opium or
morphine. Robert Ley has "lost a 'v'" in his name Pastor Münchmeyer
was guilty of "moral crimes" in Borkum. We often would have laughed
had we not hourly learned the amazing gullibility of millions of
German citizens who were trapped in the enemy's web of lies. The only
answer was for everyone to set to work with the people, going
everywhere to fight, speak and educate. Sooner or later the opponent
would have to face us and be revealed as a liar to the public."
"The city was like an upset anthill on that cold winter night. Roland
Freisler ran out from the chattering council meeting and went with us
to the nearby Friedrich Square where we spoke with the starving
masses. We forgot the middle class niceties! We had to stop Moscow
from winning over these citizens driven crazy by hunger, making them
wiling subjects of the insane ideas of Bolshevism"
"Only a few weeks later, I needed an escort to leave or return to my
apartment. Several loyal S.A. men had to be with me all the time,
since Communist unemployed men, unscrupulously incited against us
National Socialists, wanted to attack me now that they knew who I was.
Every day I joined the unemployed who demonstrated in the large
courtyard of the labor office on Giesberg Street. More than once I had
to be met by party members at the Kassel train station to protect me
from lurking Communist terror troops. It was the same or worse for all
of our prominent Kassel party members and S.A. men, just as for the
storm troops of our movement who risked their lives every day and
every hour in every city and every village of Germany. The enemy
naturally was particularly after us speakers. According to the law, we
had to be unarmed. We would have been in deep trouble if a body search
had found a weapon! A nail file was thought to be a weapon. Later even
a party badge, since it had a long needle!"
"The attempts of our party comrades to hold a National Socialist
meeting failed a half dozen times or more. Most meetings were made
impossible by the thousand-fold numerical superiority of the opponent,
or else broken up before they could finish. Our protective service
-every party member in each local group belongs - is still too weak in
most areas to stand up against the red avalanche, driven more and more
by the Communists. One National Socialist against five hundred or even
a thousand citizens, that is how it always is there!"
"After I had spoken about twenty minutes, a worker jumped up on a
table and called upon the "comrades" to leave the meeting of the
"Fascist band." Several dozen start singing the "Internationale" and
we have no choice but to overpower the growling of the comrades with
"Deutschland, Deutschland über alles." Another several hundred leave
the hall. The singing quieted down and peace was slowly restored. I
spoke to several hundred people at the end, all that were left of the
more than a thousand who were there to start."
"For years now we speakers have been traveling through every Gau in
Germany. I speak primarily in Saxony, Brandenburg, Hessen-Nassau and
in the West. We see that even red Saxony is streaming more and more to
National Socialism. The meetings are difficult, but always
successful."
"For how long? When would this hard battle end? When would more
Germans wake up? When would hundreds of thousands finally be ready to
march into battle behind the banner of National Socialism?! - None of
us thinks about the "when." Forward! - Only forward! Each heart won
over is a victory! The day will come...!"
Topaz
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:
"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.
In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.
Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.
To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."
Topaz
Here are some quotes from the German pamphlet "How they Lie" from
1940. The pamphlet has many pictures but the words alone are
interesting enough:
"For example, what would you say if a colleague of yours, whom you
regarded as a rival and who disliked you, were to spread the rumor
that your household is in disorder, that you murder small children and
rape defenseless women? Rest assured that in our country such a person
would soon be behind bars.
But the international politicians and journalists who slander entire
peoples in a shameless manner not only run around freely, they
impudently put on airs as the saviors of human culture. No lie is too
crude for them, no slander too vulgar-they understand their craft.
Even in World War I they knew how to incite hate with the help of
atrocity propaganda. We all recall those daily lies of the "German
barbarian" who, "like a wild beast rages over the earth and destroys
everything in hate and the fury of annihilation, who tortures children
and delights in the tears of mothers," as a foreign paper once wrote.
In war, man stands against man. Each serves the Fatherland in his own
way, and no soldier will deny the knightly convictions of a noble
opponent. Today, however, a cowardly gang of professional agitators
daily invents new lies and pictures from the safety of their desks.
How was the German soldier once depicted by enemy atrocity propaganda?
We all know them, for we had fathers, brothers, sons, and men out
there. For instance, on 20 March 1915, the newspaper "Le Rire Rouge"
published the following picture of the good German soldier:
A bloodthirsty murderer of women and children, a robber and plunderer,
who nourishes himself with sausages made from human flesh-that was how
it saw the brave and loyal German soldier.
Each of us knows what a crude and baseless lie this is. Every decent
person in the world should have known this. And yet: "Some of it will
always be believed, the stupid and gullible will never see through it
all" - so hope the political liars and slanderers.
We know what to think about this flood of slander flowing over the
German people. We heard the same things between 1914 and 1918. Then as
now, they are attempting to drive a wedge between leaders and people.
The goal of this propaganda is always the annihilation of Germany.
We are also familiar with the old lie about the desecration of
churches and shrines, which are once again in fashion with our
enemies.
This is the undamaged cathedral of Tschenstochau.
The picture of the Polish shrine of the Black Madonna, with the German
soldiers in the foreground, was taken after its alleged destruction by
German bombers.
While the lying and yellow press of the entire world and the enemy
transmitters were inventing hypocritical stories about the presumed
destruction of the holy shrine, the Prior of Tschenstochau wrote the
above letter to the German military authorities that clearly testifies
that the monastery and holy shrine were untouched.
Thus the lie regarding supposed German attack could be immediately
exposed. The English Ministry of Advertising has had nothing to say
since.
In reality, these lies are ancient. Our enemies always babble about
violated sanctuaries, persecuted priests, murdered children and
tortured women in order to prejudice the world against Germany and to
arouse the impression that the world must be defended against "the
barbarians who are threatening human culture."
The picture above is taken from a leafet dated 19 August 1914. The
same lie was used back then. Supposedly the Germans had attacked the
monastery at Jasno-Gora.
They always lied, they lie today, they lie, they lie.
There were countless numbers of these malicious pictures in World War
I. Today we see the new versions of this crude charge. Enemy radio
reports reports of drugged candy and poison gas-filled children's
balloons, with which German troops allegedly killed Polish children.
And our enemies decided to spread this vile slander in the exact
moment that the world heard from neutral journalists about the
unimaginable crimes perpetrated by the Polish on fellow German
countrymen. All of these neutral independent reporters saw and
corroborated the terrible atrocities against Germans with their own
eyes. In light of these proven facts, the shameless enemy presumes to
turn the tables and pin these murders on the Germans, declaring that
the murdered, whose names and addresses are known, are Poles.
They hate the Fuehrer, because he exposes their lies and crimes.
They hate him, because he rescued the hard-working German people from
eploitation. How happy they would be to see the Führer and the entire
German people delivered into the dark machinations of the world
Jewry! It shows the impotence of the Jews, since all they can do is
drag a straw man through the streets and burn it.
What do these subhumans know about the joy of a genuine national
community? These warmongers are hard at work rousing the world against
Germany. How little they know about the indisoluble bond between
Führer and people that is so overwhelmingly clear in this picture:
The Fuehrer speaks with German workers.
He knows that he can trust them, and they know that our cause is in
his good hands.
The enemy countries, who are so worried about the fate of the German
people, also worry about the S. A.
We have often seen them; we know how these men look. They are our
comrades, our colleagues in the workplace, our fathers, brothers, sons
and men.
Do they look like this? Since when are these imagined daggers the true
symbol of the S. A.? Once again some professional liar has taken his
pen in his hand.
They lie, they lie....
German men from all regions and occupations use their free time and
energy in regular practice, so they can be ready to serve the
community. When in the summer of 1939 the agricultural labor force was
too small to bring in the rich harvest, these men freely joined in to
help with the harvest, serving the homeland on peaceful fields. Why
does the enemy press, which loves to speak of its objective reporting,
never carry such pictures of Germany?
The more one examines their endless scribbling and radio news, the
clearer one sees that these expert liars have never spoken the truth,
not even once.
This time a newspaper really outdid itself. Here we see how a German
holiday is libeled.
Christmas and Nazi Winter Relief
We all know this picture. It is the Christmas celebration of a German
family that did not have the means by itself to celebrate this holiday
of love in the way the Führer wishes, in the way that every German
family should experience.
The NSV got involved.
Helpers, men and women, walked upstairs and downstairs, heard the
wishes of the needy, and provided gifts.
We all know the results. In any case, the 80 million people of the
greater German Reich know that the liar who drew the picture on the
previous page of an alleged German Christmas is not only a liar but
also an idiot. If the gentlemen wanted to lie, they should have at
least started out more intelligently, so that they were not found out
immediately.
What National Socialist Germany has done and continues to do for
working people is unique in the entire world.
The foreign plutocratic countries that are dominated by high finance
viewed this new and happy life with envy and ill-will. They never
ceased in their endeavor to compel this new Germany into war, to keep
it in the same miserable state it was in after the Treaty of
Versailles.
But Germany knows what it has to lose. And because it is stronger than
the rest of the world, it will end this struggle victoriously.
Mr. Churchill, English warmonger, First Lord of the Admiralty,
architect of the encirclement campaign had it easy in the fall of
1939.
When he decided to wage war against Germany, he selected four English
passenger ships that were sailing to America. Then he sent the above
telegram, dated 28 August 1939, to Cunard White Star Lines, compelling
them to turn German passengers away from these ships, as they would be
uncomfortable eyewitnesses. See the accompanying letter from the
shipping company, dated 29 August 1939. Churchill then sent suitable
"rescue ships" to be "coincidentally" on the course of these ships,
which were now loaded with Americans. The Athenia was torpedoed and
sunk. If the affair with the "Athenia" not worked, then one of the
other three ships would have been sunk,so that Mr. Churchill would
have more stories for the English Ministry of Lies.
We know the rest. The yellow press of the world blows Churchill's
lying horn obediently: a German submarine allegedly sank the
"Athenia."
But the evil, criminal escapade failed. Germany got hold of the
documents and exposed the criminals.
Once again, one of the vilest and most base of the English lies is
exposed.
The following story is perhaps the best way of showing the reality of
moneybags journalism, and how decent foreign journalists are forced to
invent lie afer lie.
A couple of months ago, a foreign journalist whose name we must hide
in order to protect his job, came to Germany. He wanted to see the
alleged "Nazi hell" with his own eyes, in order to give an eyewitness
account.
He saw workers who had jobs. He saw workers taking vacations with the
KdF. And he saw workers going to the theater. He saw the NSV's charity
for the poor. He saw and was amazed.
He had not expected to see that! How could he, knowing the truth,
continue to write lies and false atrocity stories about Germany, like
the financiers of his newspaper want it?...
In German camps, criminals and misfits live in clean and orderly
accommodations, receive sufficient nourishment and have enough time
for both work and play.
The foreign press reporter visited one of these camps.
The officials of the German concentration camp were outraged when they
later read his article.
The article talked about piles of corpses over which the poor reporter
had to climb, of moaning people in dark dungeons, of caning orgies and
other such imaginary atrocities.
The man had seemed so honest. How could he lie like that? What had
happened? The journalist wrote a letter to explain. He had written a
truthful account of what he had seen at the concentration camp.
But the owner of the newspaper switched everything around. Naturally
there are decent foreign papers that would never falsify the facts
like that, but we are not talking about them here.
The newspaperman begged the Germans not to take action against his
paper or the publisher who falsified the report, because then he would
lose his job.
That is how freedom of the press looks like in other countries; that
is how the lies and fairy tales come to be.
The Fuehrer spoke about the criminal newspaper Jews and the war
profiteers, in his speech on 6 October. They order the journalists and
radio reporters around like schoolboys. These "servants of public
opinion" are not allowed to have convictions or express their true
opinions, and only a very few exceptions prove this rule. They must
lie and slander and blacken Germany and its Fuehrer to keep the
gentlemen behind the plutocratic, moneybag policies in business.
But why do these newspaper moneybags lie so crudely, so stupidly, so
impudently? Why do they spread their slander all over Germany of all
places?
They lie because they are weak and Germany is strong. They lie because
they want to make money by going to war against Germany, even though
the people do not want to go to war and are scared to go to war
against a strong Germany...
Things are a thousand times better here. Things are more honest and
fair here than anywhere in the entire world.
Here we recognize the honor of the worker.
Here there is a right to work.
Here the moneybags are not in control...
In conclusion:
We will not be confused by the lies of the foreign countries! We know
what we are fighting for!
Topaz
this:
"I have seen the famous German leader and also something of the
great change he has effected...
There can be no doubt that he has achieved a marvelous transformation
in the spirit of the people, in their attitude towards each other, and
in their social and economic outlook.
It is not the Germany of the first decade that followed the war -
broken, dejected and bowed down
with a sense of apprehension and impotence. It is now full of hope and
confidence. The people are more cheerful. There is a greater sense of
general gaiety of spirit throughout the land. It is a happier Germany.
I saw it everywhere, and Englishmen I met during my trip and who knew
Germany well
were very impressed with the change. One man has accomplished this
miracle. He is a born leader of men. A magnetic and dynamic
personality with a single-minded purpose, a resolute will and a
dauntless heart.
He is not merely in name the national leader. He has made them safe
against potential enemies by whom they are surrounded. He is also
securing against the constant dread of starvation. which is one of the
most poignant memories of the last years of the War and the first
years of the Peace. Over 700,000 died of sheer hunger in those dark
years. The
fact that Hitler has rescued his country from the fear of repetition
of that period of despair, penury and humiliation has given him an
unchallenged authority in modern Germany.
As to his popularity, especially among the youth of Germany, there
can be no manner
of doubt. The old trust him; the young idolize him. It is not the
admiration accorded to a popular leader. It is the worship of a
national hero who saved his country from utter despondence and
degradation.
To those who have actually seen and sensed the way Hitler reigns
over the heart and mind of Germany, this description may appear to be
extravagant. All the same it is the bare truth. This people will work
better, sacrifice more, and, if necessary fight with greater
resolution because Hitler asks them to do so. Those who do not
comprehend this central fact cannot judge the present possibilities of
modern Germany.
That impression more than anything I witnessed during my short visit
to the new Germany. There was a revivalist atmosphere. It had an
extraordinary effect in the unifying of the nation. Catholic and
Protestant, Prussian and Bavarian, employer and workman, rich and
poor, have consolidated into one people. Religious, provincial and
class origins no longer divide the nation. There is a passion of unity
born of dire necessity."
Topaz
Berlin-Lankwitz,
Dürkheimerstrasse 14,
GERMANY.
August 7th, 1933.
Dear Ken:
Don't think that I am going to be taken to an insane asylum nor
that the world is coming to an end. This is not so, and I must object
very sincerely if the fact of my sitting down again after only several
months write a letter to you gives you such impressions. The reason
for this outstanding event is much rather the hotheaded criticism
about Hitler and his Government which you gave us in your recent
letter to Ruth, and which indeed surprised me very much. However,
before giving you my point of view on the new turn that has taken
place in Germany I should like to ask you to in the first place do me
the favor of keeping your shirt on, otherwise it is you who is making
"an ass of himself". One should never speak the language of a truck
driver, no matter how much one likes it. Now, don't be mad, but calm
down. You did not hurt Ruth's or my feelings at all, but there are two
reasons why I feel I should answer you. The first reason is that your
remarks are very unfair to Hitler and his new Government, and the
other is that I intend to do my share in preventing the American
generation to which you belong to be equally as ignorant as the
generation of the whole world was which tumbled into the last war.
What makes you believe and in such a definite way state that we
are unable to see the things as they are, since, as you write, we are
hypnotized by Hitler. It is not true, that you and all those of your
friends who you claim take the same viewpoint as you are taking are
basing your opinion upon reports and comments of American newspapers
and perhaps upon interviews of American visitors who recently have
been in Germany, and while you are willing to disregard certain
exaggerations you readily accept the rest as the truth? Is it not
possible that thus you are receiving but one side of the story?
You know that the American Press endeavoring to please the so
called taste for sensational news of the American Public is working
according to the countrywide newspaper principal: All the news that's
fit to print, and be it even lies. I do not belong to those who claim
that it is the American people who have such taste, but instead it is
the American Press which in order to obtain the attention of the
reader considers any means good enough to beat competition. You will
never find such crookedness among decent business. Such business
spirit is identified all over the world with the jewish business
spirit. You must not misunderstand me. Such spirit can be found among
Christian Jews as well as among Jewish Christians, if you get what I
mean. Nevertheless it is all over the world condemned as the jewish
spirit. You will not doubt this, I suppose? Perhaps in this connection
you will find it interesting to recall that the inventor of the most
unchivalrous means to fight the enemy, namely the father of all
newspaper liars, Lord Northcliffe was a Jew. When comparing the basis
of your knowledge about present day Germany with the basis of our
knowledge, don't you think that ours at least is a broader basis?
Don't you think that the possibility of witnessing present
developments in Germany combined with the ability of reading and
understanding American newspapers can represent an ideal basis of
knowledge for such person who - and this is the important thing - is
free of all feelings of hatred against either one of the two
countries?
The Berlin Correspondents of the American newspapers are not such
persons. Many of them are jews and many have taken a hostile attitude
towards Germany long before Hitler ever appeared on the stage of
German Public Life. This includes also Mr. Mowrer of the Chicago
Herald Tribune who, as I saw from the New York Times received this
years Pulitzer Prize of Journalism for his "excellent" articles on the
German development. A year ago a German Democrat, mind you, not a
Nazi, expressed astonishment that I should like to call upon Mr.
Mowrer, since this "excellent" American reporter has long enjoyed the
reputation even among German Democrats of being a German hater. This
hostility towards Germany on the part of American Correspondents in
Berlin indeed could much more entitle me to claim that it is you who
is hypnotized namely by the American Press in general.
Dear Kenneth, not until today in August 23rd could I find time to
continue this letter. When rereading what I so far have said above I
doubt if it is of any use to speak to you the way I did. I know you
are not anti-German, and yet while having received your school
education at a time of outright hostility towards Germany your mind is
only to readily inclined to accept any piece of news about Germany as
true and the correct version as long as this piece of news is
presented in such form which is free from obvious sensational
exaggeration. Since, however no piece of news published in the
American papers is reporting favorably on the German National
Socialistic Revolution your mind is systematically kept from turning
pro-German. This is the work of jewish influence in the American
Press. In face of such mental attitude of yours you naturally hesitate
to accept as the correct version anything which is told you by someone
who on one hand is not even a 100% American Citizen and on the other
hand is, as you know pro-German. For this reason I doubt if I can
change anything of your attitude towards Hitlerite Germany and of the
attitude of those of our friends who, as you claim take the same
viewpoint as you are taking. When, however, after reconsideration I
continue this letter it is, because even if I should not convince you
I wish to do my share in trying to destroy this hostile spirit of the
American People towards Germany and especially to contribute to making
the young Americans a more broadminded generation.
In the following I am going to copy part of my last letter to Mr.
Houston. The article I sent him months ago interested him very much.
Unfortunately he told me it was not written in good enough English. I
naturally am rather disappointed that my English still is too poor.
But even if my English had been correct there would have been no
possibility to place my article, Mr. Houston wrote, not saying of
course that any favorable viewpoint is prevented from publication in
the American Press. Here is what I answered him.
" --- Whereas the American papers beyond doubt are carrying a
tremendous amount of material about Germany from their regular
correspondents, and no number of interviews from all kinds of people
who recently have been in Germany, all this material, and be it even
just a report, is skillfully presented in such form which seemingly
intentially aims at being equally offensive for Hitler and his new
Government through ridiculing his deeds as giving nourishment to
anti-German sentiment. Most of the recent American visitors in Germany
seem to be of the type of jews whose hatred towards Hitlerite Germany
is a fanatical one. They of course are not in a position to give a
true picture to their countrymen of what they have seen or heard. Mr.
Michael Williams, editor of The Commonweal, president of the Calvert
Association, and a member of the Committee appointed by the American
Committee on Religious Reports and Minorities to go to Germany and
investigate conditions published a report (New York Times of June
14th) of his own private visit, since the committees visit was
postponed. He claimed to have spent "nearly" two weeks in Berlin
interviewing members of the Hitler Government, leading business and
professional men, both German and American, as well as Protestant,
Catholic, and Jewish leaders. Not one single name is mentioned in his
report. "One of the most prominent German political leaders"(?) told
him that the outlawing of the Jews was a mistake comparable only to
the invasion of Belgium at the outbreak of the World War. It is plain
that such a remark, if it really was made, could be made only by a
person equally hostile towards Germany as Mr. Williams himself. Maybe
this interview took place at a concentration camp. When returning to
America these people cry: Democracy is at an end in Germany. But they
are anxiously concealing the truth that before Hitler came jewish
democratic corruption has brought Germany on the verge of Communism.
Such "Democracy" indeed is at an end now in Germany. All this
excitement about democracy being at an end and about "persecutions"
and outlawing of the German Jews who amount to but 1% of the total
German population seems very strange indeed when compared with the
calmness with which the world took the cruelty and terrorism of the
Russian Revolution which, as everyone knows, was prepared and created
by Jews and by jewish money.
Too bad that Mr. James G. McDonald, chairman of the Foreign Policy
Association, can find nothing better for him to do than to call upon
all American Christians to step into line with Rabbi Jonah B. Wise, as
I see from the New York Times of June 15th and July 11th. He too has
recently been in Germany, and on July 11th the New York Times
published his address in Chautauqua, N.Y. dealing with his visit in
Germany and with the situation there as it existed more than three
months ago, namely on April 1st, at the time of the (24 hours)
anti-Jews boycott. The report in the paper was headed by the remark:
Statements that Jews are not being cruelly treated in Germany were
termed "an insult to the intelligence" by James G. McDonald. Thus the
American Public is made to believe that Mr. McDonald is furnishing an
up-to-date denial for all new reports about improving conditions in
Germany. Such is the way matters about Germany are twisted in the
American Press. Senator Wagner too has stepped into line with Rabbi
Wise as I have noticed. I regret it, but I am convinced that many
people have done so because of absolute misinformation about present
day Germany. People trying to argue in favor of Hitlerite Germany, as
Mr. Bernard Ridder tried to do, are quickly being ridiculed as one may
see from the New York Times comment of June 14th, and I doubt if the
well known Radio announcer Douglas Brinkley who during his visit in
Germany in Berlin Talkies expressed his admiration for Hitler and this
new Germany ever again will be allowed to broadcast in America.
The Berlin correspondents of the American Press fall in line with
the above mentioned general attitude towards Germany. I suppose they
have to in order to keep their jobs. This might be easy for them,
since many of them are Jews and some are known to be hostile towards
Germany long before Hitler ever appeared in front of German Public
Life. Under such circumstances it seems plain to me that any viewpoint
favorable for Germany would today not be considered by the big
American papers, since jewish influence in the American Press is much
too strong.
Dear Mr. Houston, when in the above I have given you my opinion
about American Public Opinion it was done, because I feel confident
that you will not misunderstand me. When I am arguing for Hitler and
in favor of present day Germany it is not only because of the many
great deeds of Hitler (uniting the German people, crushing Communism,
successfully fighting unemployment) but also because I positively know
that the only way to serve the purpose of German American friendship
is to bring about mutual respect between the people of the two
countries. To accomplish this one must fight for mutual respect
between Opinion in America and in Germany. German Public Opinion and
the German People are showing this respect for America. Everyone here
is speaking of the courage and leadership of Franklin D. Roosevelt in
terms of admiration. It is up to American Public Opinion to give honor
where honor is due.
So much about my letter to Mr. Houston. Now I shall give you part of
my article which I sent to Mr. Houston and which he showed to Dr.
Wilbur Thomas, the Director of the Carl Schurz Foundation, and to Dr.
Carl Ackerman, the Dean of the School of Journalism at Columbia
University. Although, as I said above it is not written in good
English, Mr. Houston as well as the two other gentlemen found the
article very interesting. Here is what I said back in May 1933.
After a short introduction I wrote: "The world war was won not with
the sword but with the pen. This is a German opinion which is shared
also by a good many Americans. Apart from now one might think on this
subject nobody today would deny the fact that the pen, if used as a
weapon, can prove to be a mighty deadly sword. If now we wish to
liquidate the world war, if we seriously endeavor to promote world
peace, to promote good relationship between the nations of the world
it seems to be absolutely essential that we should stop using war
weapons and stop tolerating warlike propaganda. In other words, we
should do all we can to prevent endangering good relationship between
countries. Claiming to be well acquainted with German political
troubles of past years as well as with the mentality of the German
People I feel that the American newspaper reader is not at all put in
a position to get a clear and true conception about Germany. Above all
it is to my mind equally silly as it is preventing the education of
the American people if the American newspaper reader is left to
believe that the Germans are a barbaric nation. The absurdity of such
statements does not make them less dangerous to good relationship
between the American and the German people. If in the following I am
dealing with the fundamental achievement and the fundamental aim of
the German national socialistic revolution I am doing it for the
benefit of a better understanding between the American and the German
people. This better understanding is the more necessary the more we
wish to prevent that a few years of animosity between the two
countries should be permitted to destroy a century old friendship
between the American and the German people.
Contrary to political custom Hitler said in his address to the
masses on the Tempelhof field on May 1st that he is not going to tell
the workman how important for the Nation the labourman and his work
are, and turn around and speak to the intelligent class of people as
if to the cream of the Nation, and turn around again and speak to the
peasant telling him how valuable he is. On the contrary he is going to
demonstrate to one class of people the importance and the value of the
other. This attitude is not only wise, but it also reveals the mystery
of this sudden sense of unity that has come over the German people.
When I am going to apply the same methods while writing to America
about Germany, it is because making one people understand and respect
another people might equally well prove to be the best method to bring
about the much longed for mutual understanding between the nations of
the world.
The German national socialistic revolution beginning on January
30th, still in full swing today, and going to be carried out
furthermore for an indefinite time to come is a revolution of mind. It
is a revolution of the national mind as well as of the social mind of
the people. Only a short time ago American Correspondents and
traveling newspapermen used to report from Germany that the growing of
the Hitlerite Party was the outcome of general dissatisfaction and
hardship. If this had been the case, if Hitler had gained support
merely on the ground of promising the same bread and work with all of
his
(page missing)
possibility of such development before taking place in Germany, Hitler
succeeded in changing the minds of his followers from the Communist
rank and file. They no more are Communists, but National socialists.
They have killed in themselves that hatred they felt towards the rich
and towards the white-collar-man, in general to an equal extent as
this white-collar-man and this rich man have been made to no more look
down upon the workman or anybody doing manual labor. It is true, not
all of Germany has turned to national socialism. However while for
this very reason Hitler's revolution still is in full swing, and will
be carried out furthermore until such time when this final aim is
reached, a new election, if held today, might well show an increase of
the nationalsocialsit vote from 17.5 million on March 5th to close to
30 million out of a total electorate of about 44 million votes.
Hitler's revolution of mind, as I have tried to explain it, in no
way is representing a danger to world peace, and again it seems
strange that Hitler's assurances to keep peace frequently are ignored
in reports printed in the foreign Press. As impressive as this German
revolution of mind might be to the foreign observer who knows Germany
and the German people it is only reasonable that it cannot be equally
impressive to those Americans who not yet have had a chance to visit
and get acquainted with Germany. After all, this new German spirit is
nothing new to us in America. Republicans and Democrats, both call it
the true democratic spirit. The workman in America always has been as
much respected as the white-collar-man, and our boys have long been
working their way through College through manual labor. However, for
this very reason it seems to me that no people is better equipped
mentally to understand this new Germany and its leader than the
American people.
If when writing about the Germany nationalsocialistic revolution I
would fail to touch the jewish problem in Germany the reader indeed
would miss an important explanation to a new German attitude which has
created worldwide interest and partly even new animosity. Endeavoring
to from and impartial point of view seek an explanation for this
change in Germany one must realize two outstanding facts. One is that
the percentage of Jews in Germany indeed is exceptionally small and
the other is that this small percentage in postwar years has enjoyed
an undue large share of public influence. While moreover a great many
Jewish names are connected with all kinds of affairs of administrative
corruption of postwar Germany thus making it all the easier for Hitler
and his followers to gain countrywide support when calling for a
radical reduction of the Jewish influence, it is wrong to regard this
attitude as an affront to the Jewish religion. This it is not. Instead
this attitude is directed against a postwar political system which has
discredited the Marxist parties in Germany and the Jews, since many of
them have played such prominent part in cooperation with those parties
and the many cases of disloyalty and dishonesty they have been
connected with. When I said above that the small percentage of Jews in
Germany in postwar years so far have enjoyed an undue large share of
public influence, this was possible because of their close cooperation
with the Marxist parties. In other words it was not superior ability
which entitled them to such share but political pull. Until recently
conditions in Germany indeed were of such kind that many a Christian
student would cease studying, since he had to realize that his road of
future was blocked by political interests, whereas the jewish student
would keep on studying knowing perfectly well that his father,
although perhaps a businessman and not a politician, nevertheless had
sufficient political pull to pave his way. In such development the new
Germany sees a controlling increase of the Jewish element in the field
of education which the Jewish population percentage in Germany does
not justify.
Hand in hand with this development the possibility of marrying has
thus been made so much easier for the young Jewish generation, which
fact in turning no doubt is contributing to increasing the population
percentage of the German Jews to the disadvantage of the other
confessions. Such developments are of no little importance for
Germany, and while today under the Hitler Government a radical change
is being made this radicalism is not directed against each single
Jewish citizen. On the contrary the form in which the new laws are
being applied show a liberal spirit and reveal the truth that the
attitude of Hitler Germany towards this Jewish problem ought to
correctly be regarded as directed against a political system of
corruption with which the German Jews unfortunately so impressively
have identified themselves."
So much from my article. I hope I have put it clear enough to
realize that the Jewish problem in Germany is a question of life or
death of the German race. If such development as was tolerated before
Hitler came should be permitted to continue it should be obvious for
everyone that in the course of time the face of the German population
would change considerably. Germany, as you know, has a population of
66 million people. Among these 66 million are but about 600,000 Jewish
citizen. Under those circumstances as described above this small
percentage in the course of time could increase rapidly because of
conditions of life being more protected against all hardship,
marriages being made easier because of professional and business
protection which safeguard in turn enables the Jewish woman to give
birth to children. Moreover it should be easy to realize that favoring
the Jewish element to such an extent as was done before Hitler came
necessarily leads to giving away the top positions in Government,
industry, and education to Jews, while on the other hand the German
race of Protestant and Catholic confession is being pushed back into
positions of no influence which in turn in the course of time will
make them unable to lead their own country because of being deprived
the necessary educational training in matters of administration, big
business, and education. At the same time their population percentage
of now 99% is rapidly decreasing because of the German woman through
hardship of life and uncertainty because of the German woman through
hardship of life and uncertainty of the husbands future being unable
to give birth to children.
Dear Kenneth, my English might be very poor, but I hope you get what
I am trying to explain. I hope you see that Hitler's anti-Semitism is
not directed against the Jewish religion nor against each single Jew.
No Jewish citizen here is being molested. News to the contrary are
lies and nonsense. Such news naturally are being spread by Jews, since
the Jews realize very well, as the newspaper "Jewish Chronicle"
published in South Africa recently admitted, that the Jewish fight for
world control through the Hitler Revolution in Germany has received a
setback of 100 years of strenuous work. The Jewish citizen in Germany
shall continue to enjoy a peaceful living as he did before Hitler came
with the only exception that he shall enjoy no influence beyond the
frame of his own population percentage. In the interest of the German
race I do not hesitate to call such attitude, as queer as it might
seem to you, a "democratic persecution" and I regard it as very sound.
The Jewish citizen who does not like such democratic persecution might
leave the country and immigrate somewhere else. And when I say
immigrate somewhere else you perhaps will realize how harmful it was
and still is that the USA for such a long time had kept its doors open
especially at times of business prosperity. In America the Jew saw a
vast country with tremendous resources and no end of business
possibilities. But he had no intention to go out and work. You will
find no Jew being busy as farmer. No, such common work is good enough
for the children and grandchildren of the Christian pilgrims of
German, French and English birth who alone have built up the country
which is called the United States. The Jew was doing the business of
his own race, namely lending out money and waiting in his armchair for
the return. Thus he gradually got hold of this and that business
undertaking, thus he gradually got hold of the entire country. There
is today no country in the whole world with a more powerful influence
of the Jewish element except perhaps England, than the USA. The fact
that such a powerful Christian businessman as Henry Fold is flatly
denying everything he said in his book against the Jews speaks for
itself. The German element among the American population used to have
a great influence in the country. And when I recall the name of
Steuben do you doubt that such influence was for the benefit of the
country? Where are the Steubens of today? Don't tell me there are
none. That is not correct. But it is true that in the course of time
the German American element has been degraded to the influence of a
butcher and grooceryshopowner. Where there are exceptions you will
possibly find that the exception is a Jew. The USA was not governed by
Washington but by Wall Street. Franklin D. Roosevelt is the first
President to challenge this. It remains to be seen if the power he has
been given is sufficient for the success. You may be absolutely sure
that Washington and Berlin are in perfect accord although this
sometimes does not seem so.
Washington is not fighting against Hitler, but instead is watching
Hitler's experiment with the Jewish problem with very keen interest
knowing perfectly well that this experiment might lead the whole
world. Watch Ireland, watch the increase of fascism in England, watch
the change in France that will come, remember the American Postmaster
Generals order forbidding anti-German boycott stamps on the back of
envelopes.
October 2nd 1933.
Dear Kenneth: Not until today could I find time to continue this
letter, and I must admit that since your last letter arrived which
again was full of insulting remarks about Adolf Hitler I feel little
inclined to do so. I must state that you have changed greatly. You
were much more grown-up when in May 1932 you left us. I don't know
whose influence it is and I don't care. I only know that while you
were with us you grew accustomed to argue in a serious way seeking
effect only through the sincerity of your argument and not through a
strong language. The letter method is used only by children and
hysteric women and men. If I wanted to argue with you on the basis of
your last letter I indeed could easily come back and picture a great
many Americans who have been making an ass of themselves and still are
making an ass of themselves, and I could speak much more convincing,
since I know America, whereas you in your highhatted ignorance are
adopting nothing but what jewish reporters publish and you fall for
any line of talk as long as the lies are presented in a somewhat
plausible form. You need not boast about not having Nationalsozialism
in America. It is quite doubtful if such is an advantage, and the fact
that the American Democratic system given to the country by men who
justfully can be called great Americans has grown into a system of
rotten corruption might bring about American Nationalsozialism quicker
than you think.
Any system of government stands and falls with its leaders. Are the
leaders rotten the system will turn to be rotten too. Such was the
case in Germany, and such might be the case in America too. Moreover
America some day might be happy to turn to Nationalsozialism instead
of turning to Communism. However as long as there are many of young
Americans thinking the way you do, namely from one moving picture to
another I see great trouble ahead for the country, trouble which will
be far more serious than the Russian revolution was. When in face of
your calling us being hypnotized I answer you that I am a great
admirer of Adolf Hitler I am doing so in order to warn you to remain
as narrow-minded as you now are. You never will hear the truth about
present day Germany, for America at present is a jewish country.
Jewish influence is dominating, and sooner or later the American
Aryans will realize what they shall have to fight for.
Nationalsozialism would never come to America from Germany but from
the Aryan population in America and such will bring about a rebirth of
Washington's United States.
Why cry about the poor little children who are called upon to join
Hitler's junior leagues, when they themselves are crazy to do so.
Little Jobi has joined and he is tickled to death about it. Why throw
out your chest and condemn militarism when there is no country on the
face of the earth more militaristic than the United States? Or do you
deny that American boys in their small years even are receiving
military training? Is such a sign that America intends to go to war?
You say: No. Well, I answer you, Germany won't either. A picture of
Hindenburg and Hitler published in an American paper was called: A
business conference between H. and H., whereas truly it was a picture
of the celebration of the battle of Tannenberg. Such shows how much
even in matters of minor importance American newspapers are making an
ass of themselves. Even if you don't like it, Adolf Hitler is one of
the greatest and at the same time one of the most modest men Germany
has ever had. Future will show that I am right. Goodbye now, and don't
think that I am sore, I am just a little disappointed in you.
Hearty greetings,
Topaz
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"The man who is not opposed and vilified and slandered in the
Jewish Press is not a staunch German and not a true National
Socialist. The best rule whereby the sincerity of his convictions, his
character and strength of will, can be measured is by the hostility
which his name arouses among the mortal enemies of our people.
"The followers of the movement, and indeed the whole nation,
must be reminded again and again of the fact that, through the medium
of his newspapers, the Jew is always spreading falsehood and that if
he tells the truth on some occasions it is only for the purpose of
masking some greater deceit, which turns the apparent truth into a
deliberate falsehood. The Jew is the Great Master of Lies. Falsehood
and duplicity are the weapons with which he fights.
"Every calumny and falsehood published by the Jews are tokens of
honor which can be worn by our comrades. He whom they decry most is
nearest to our hearts and he whom they mortally hate is our best
friend.
"If a comrade of ours opens a Jewish newspaper in the morning
and does not find himself vilified there, then he has spent yesterday
to no account. For if he had achieved something he would be
persecuted, slandered, derided and abused. Those who effectively
combat this mortal enemy of our people, who is at the same time the
enemy of all Aryan peoples and all culture, can only expect to arouse
opposition on the part of this race and become the object of its
slanderous attacks.
"When these truths become part of the flesh and blood, as it
were, of our members, then the movement will be impregnable and
invincible."
" Then I began to examine my favorite 'World Press', with that fact
before my mind. "The deeper my soundings went the lesser grew my
respect for that Press which I formerly admired. Its style became
still more repellant and I was forced to reject its ideas as entirely
shallow and superficial. To claim that in the presentation of facts
and views its attitude was impartial seemed to me to contain more
falsehood than truth. The writers were- Jews.
"Thousands of details that I had scarcely noticed before seemed
to me now to deserve attention. I began to grasp and understand
things which I had formerly looked at in a different light."
"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the Press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."
Topaz
There was a book in ordinary bookstores called "An Empire of
Their Own". It was a pro-Jewish book but it showed that the Jews ran
Hollywood.
Here are some quotes from a magazine for Jews called "Moment".
It is subtitled "The Jewish magazine for the 90's" These quotes are
from the Aug 1996 edition after the Headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So
What?":
"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish
power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most
influential production executives at each of the major movie studios
will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."
"the famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt
Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-Semetic
attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most
powerful positions."
The head of Walt Disney studios is now the Jew Michael Eisner.
On studios that were bought out by the Japanese the magazine says:
"When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to
undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legendary - and
all Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg, and
Tom Pollack."
Here are some quotes from the paper "Jews Control the Media
and Rule America"
It may be rather out of date but it still explains why things are the
way they are.
"American Broadcasting Companies (ABC), Columbia Broadcasting
System (CBS), and National Broadcasting Company (NBC). Each of these
three has been under the absolute control of a single man over a long
enough period of time--ranging from 32 to 55 years--for him to staff
the corporation at every level with officers of his choosing and then
to place his imprint indelibly upon it. In each case that man has been
a Jew.
"Until 1985, when ABC merged with Capital Cities
Communications, Inc...the chairman of the board of directors and chief
executive officer (CEO) of the network was Leonard Harry Goldenson, a
Jew...In an interview in the April 1, 1985 issue of Newsweek,
Goldenson boasted 'I built this company (ABC) from scratch.'"
"CBS was under the domination of William S. Paley for more than
half a century. The son of immigrant Jews from Russia..."
"There has been no move by top G-E management to change the
Jewish "profile" of NBC or to replace key Jewish personnel. To the
contrary, new Jewish executives have been added: an example is Steve
Friedman..."
"The man in charge of the television entertainment division at
CBS is Jeff Sagansky. At ABC the entertainment division is run by two
men....nearly all of the men who shape young Amercians' concept of
reality, of good and evil, of permissible and impermissible behavior
are Jews. In particular, Sagansky and Bloomberg are Jews. So is
Tartikoff. Littlefield is the only Gentile who has had a significant
role in TV entertainment programming in recent years."
"American Film magazine listed the top 10...entertainment
companies and their CEOs...Time Warner Communications (Steven J Ross,
Jew) Walt Disney Co. (Michael D. Eisner, Jew)...Of the 10 top
entertainment CEOs listed above, eight are Jews."
"The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than a
lack of real competition among America's daily newspapers; it also
illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all organs of
opinion... The Newhouse's own 31 daily newspapers, including several
large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the
Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; the nation's
largest trade book publishing conglomerate, Random House, with all
its subsidiaries; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television
broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the
countries largest cable networks- the Sunday supplement Parade, with a
circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen
major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Mademoiselle,
Glamour, Vanity Fair, HQ, Bride's, Gentlemen's Quarterly, Self,
Home&Garden...."
"Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership
and management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising..."
"the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington
Post. These three...are the newspapers which set trends and guidelines
for nearly all others. They are the ones which decide what is news and
what isn't, at national and international levels. They originate the
news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in
Jewish hands...The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York
Times Co. 36 other newspapers; twelve magazines, including McCall's
and Family Circle..."
"New York's other newspapers are in no better hands than the
Daily News. The New York Post is owned by billionaire Jewish
real-estate developer Peter Kalikow. The Village Voice is the personal
property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of..."
"There are only three newsmagazines of any note published in the
United States: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report....The CEO
of Time Warner Communications is Steven J. Ross, and he is a Jew.
"Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington
Post Co., under the Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham..."
"U.S. News & World Report... owned and published by Jewish real
estate developer Mortimer B. Zuckerman..."
" The three largest book publishers...Random House... Simon &
Schuster , and Time Inc. Book Co....All three are owned or controlled
by Jews...The CEO of Simon & Schuster if Richard Snyder, and the
president is Jeremy Kaplan; both are Jews too."
"Western Publishing...ranks first among publishers of children's
books, with more than 50 per cent of the market. Its chairman and CEO
is Richard Bernstein, a Jew."
"Jewish spokesmen customarily will use evasive tactics. "Ted
Turner isn't a Jew!" they will announce..."
"We are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence
on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also
are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children..."
cactus
<snip more slumming from our resident neonazi>
cactus
> Leon Degrelle
<snip bizarre screed from our resident neonazi>
cactus
> Here are some quotes from the book "Kampfzeit",
<snip bad writing>
cactus
> Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:
<snip bizarre screed from our resident neonazi>
cactus
>
> Here <is more snippage from our resident neonazi>
cactus
<snip private correspondence>
cactus
> David Lloyd George, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, wrote
> this:
>
So what?
cactus
> Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
cactus
> There was a book in ordinary bookstores called "An Empire of
> Their Own". It was a pro-Jewish book but it showed that the Jews ran
> Hollywood.
>
> Here are some quotes from a magazine for Jews called "Moment".
> It is subtitled "The Jewish magazine for the 90's" These quotes are
> from the Aug 1996 edition after the Headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So
> What?":
>
> "It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish
> power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most
> influential production executives at each of the major movie studios
> will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."
Jealous topaz?
>
> "the famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt
> Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-Semetic
> attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most
> powerful positions."
And Disney is doing better now than it ever did. Maybe there is a
connection.
>
> The head of Walt Disney studios is now the Jew Michael Eisner.
> On studios that were bought out by the Japanese the magazine says:
>
> "When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to
> undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legendary - and
> all Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg, and
> Tom Pollack."
>
The Japanese know a good thing when they see it.
Face it topaz, Jews are smarter as a group than you will ever be. Maybe
you should repent your evil ways and convert.
Topaz
I myself was brought up in a small village in the southwest of
Germany. In 1939, when the war broke out, we left for the less exposed
Odenwald area until the possible danger of a French invasion had
passed. Shortly after that my father was transferred to the Ruhr
region. He as requested work as a foreman for the Mauser arms factory.
The government, true to their claims to be national and socialist,
took their promises seriously and provided young people starting a
family, as well as those who already had children, with affordable
housing. The first child brought a reduction of the mortgage by 25
percent, and when the fourth child arrived the mortgage was no more.
My parents already had four children then and thus were eligible for a
free newly built house from the government.
This was but one of the many programs the government established in
order to improve the quality of life for its citizens..
Then there was the "Kinderlandverschickung" program. It was started
before the war and enabled mothers in need of recreation to spend some
time in rural settings together with their children..
Another very popular social program of the government was "Fraft
durch Freude" (strength through joy). Here deserving workers could
take all-inclusive tours on luxury liners that were built especially
for this purpose. On these ships there was only one class and
everybody was treated the same. They visited the Azores and
Spitsbergen among other places. Those ships were not allowed to dock
in and English port however. The reason was that the British
government did not want it's citizens to see what it also could have
done for them..
The most misinterpreted program in Germany was the so-called
"Lebensborn". It was the exact opposite of what people are made to
believe it was, or should I say, of what people like to believe.. The
Lebensborn was the institution to help unwed mothers who did not know
where to turn for help. They were taken care of during their
pregnancies and afterward as well. This was the Lebensborn, and any
other interpretation is plain hogwash..
My father was able to buy not one but three guns plus two pistols,
together with plenty of ammunition. All it took him was proof that he
was indeed a German citizen without a criminal record. Then in 1945,
when the French "liberated" us, they disarmed him. I know that he was
not the only one to have guns at home, because I saw the many, many
arms that were handed over to the French, and this was in a very small
village..
Then, after the war was over, we had our first experience with a real
democracy. The French introduced it and gave us some shining examples;
one was that the lived off the country and stole everything which
wasn't nailed down..
It was not until many years later that I learned that Hitler held at
least five plebiscites during the first half of his rule. In
democratic Germany, from 1945 until today there has never been a
plebiscite.
There were foreign workers employed in Germany during WWII. I knew
one of them. He worked on a farm and was treated exactly like the son
who was in the army. After the war he stayed on and married the
daughter of the house. He was a prisoner of war from Poland and I
never saw him guarded by any policeman. This is how foreigners were
treated in Germany. They earned the same wages as the Germans, they
took part in the social insurance program, had paid-for holidays
including free train fares, and many came back with friends who also
wanted to work for these "horrible" Germans. Today they are called
slave laborer.
Not everyone was entitled to go on to a university. Only good marks
and above-average performance in schools qualified. But good
performers were promoted with all means available. Today we are much
more democratic; everyone is entitled to a university education and if
the parents are wealthy enough, the son or daughter can study until
they are 35..
Germany was also the country to introduce, in 1933, the first-ever
comprehensive animal protection law. Farm animals had to be kept in
strictly natural environments and no animal factories were allowed. Of
course, no testing of products on animals was permitted, and no kosher
slaughter.
If new industrial facilities were built they had to conform to the
highest standards with adequate lighting and air inside, canteens
where the workers were served nutritious meals at affordable prices,
and beautiful lawns outside: all for the benefit of the workers.. In
national socialist Germany, no child labor was allowed as it still was
in other European countries.
And finally, although I could still go on for a while, I would like to
mention that on express orders from Hitler himself, it was strictly
forbidden to use corporal punishment in the army. He was of the
opinion that in was incompatible with the honor of a German to be
punished by such degrading means.
That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.
Topaz
Here are some quotes from a German pamphlet titled "Why the Aryan
Law?":
"In 1793 the famous philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, author of
"Speeches to the German Nation," wrote a pamphlet titled "A
Contribution to Correcting Judgments about the French Revolution." It
contained the following significant sentence:
"In nearly all the nations of Europe, a powerful, hostile government
is growing, and is at war with all the others, and sometimes oppresses
the people in dreadful ways: It is Jewry!"
The French Revolution, with its "ideas for the improvement of
humanity" thundered past, and in the noise the people who had believed
in world brotherhood entirely missed this serious warning. What Fichte
warned the word about then has today become fact in nearly all the
nations of the world. The Jewish people, once only tolerated, knew how
to raise a hue and cry about discrimination and persecution, winning
the sympathy of the world for the "poor Jews." They increasingly
infiltrated deep within our national organism, growing to have power
over every single area of our national life. The old saga, the "Edda,"
observes that one blocks a river at its source. The failure to do that
was the great mistake of the German people. Thank God, it is not too
late. Our Fuehrer Adolf Hitler recognized the importance of the
problem for Germany's rebirth, and outlined its solution in his
program.
Martin Luther wrote this of the Jews in his book "The Jews and their
Lies": "They hold we Christians captive in our own land. They have
seized our goods by their cursed usury, they mock and insult us
because we work. They are our lords, and we and our goods belong to
them." If in the coming days the Jewish race is driven out of the
non-Jewish world, it will have at least this consolation: It has made
clear to them for all time the value of maintaining the purity of race
and blood in clear, understandable and unforgettable ways.
National Socialist racial legislation has reduced the influence of
Jewry in all professions, and above all excluded them from the leading
offices of the nation. That is an important step in the relationship
between Germans and Jews, but one cannot ignore the fact that we have
not yet fully eliminated the influence of the Jewish foreign body in
German national life. It is not a question of German-Jewish
coexistence, rather of making as great as possible a separation
between blood and blood.
Three things are involved here:
A knowledge of the basic principles of National Socialist racial
thinking,
An understanding of the growth and expansion of Jewry,
The dominant sociological position of Jewry, to show how it dominated
the German people economically, intellectually and politically..."
"In discussing the Jewish Question, even today one encounters
resistance and misunderstandings, especially in intellectual circles.
This can only be explained by the intellectual education of the
political past. This is especially evident when one discusses the
fundamental issues.
Whenever a new thought arises in the world and calls people to
practical action, the old world resists because it feels its
foundations threatened. Its old standpoint has ruled for decades, and
it looks uncomprehendingly at a new idea that does not fit into the
accustomed patterns of thinking. That is natural. When the new idea
and worldview are truly revolutionary, they are on a different level
of human thought and feeling, and there can be no compromise. Its
realization depends on people who support it, and who are ready to
fight to transform the life of the individual and of the nation in
every way..."
"In the long run, no idea is better suited to guarantee peace between
nations than National Socialist racial thinking, which calls for the
furtherance and maintenance of one's own race and one's own people,
and supports similar efforts on the part of other nations..."
"The new Germany that views its own race and ethnicity positively must
therefore distinguish within its territory between one race and
another, between one people and another. Mixing of blood harms both
sides. Race is an issue for every people if they are to live according
to their nature. The German people is not so arrogant as to believe
that is is the chosen people. The familiar quotation from Geibel, "The
world should enjoy German ways," should be understood in the context
of the dreams of world betterment of those past days.
The National Socialist racial viewpoint has clear consequences for the
relationship between Germans and Jews. People have often said that
National Socialism's approach to the racial question is purely
negative and destructive, and that its essential characteristic is
radical anti-Semitism. One must grant that we made the Jewish question
clearer than anyone else, and taught an entire generation that had
been taught to see all people the same to recognize the importance of
the Jewish question not only for our people, but for the entire world.
Our treatment of the Jewish problem in the years before we took power
must be seen as the political education of the German people, which
had lost its racial instincts to a dangerous degree.
The question took on its own nature in Germany, Many citizens had
their eyes opened, and the simultaneous appeal to all the heroic and
manly virtues of the German man resulted in a racial selection of
political fighters who today stand at the head of the new state.
Formerly, the Jewish question, as seen by the state, was a matter of
complete equality and the unhindered immigration of Jews from the
East. This is the best proof of how racial feeling and consciousness
had been lost. Our tone was not purely negative or the simple
rejection of others, rather the emphasis was on the positive values of
our own people. This does require noting that Jewry through its
Marxist class struggle leadership role and its international financial
measures aimed at Germany supported every kind of anti-national action
in the cultural and political fields. Jewry should not complain if its
anti-German activities, which have no counterpart in any other
country, call forth from the people the defensive reaction of
anti-Semitism.
The starting point of the discussion is the scientific fact that the
Jew is different than the German. This is neither arrogant nor
boastful, it simply is the way things are. For us, the Jewish question
is a question between two peoples. Its characteristics are determined
by the racially determined differences between the two, and through
the unusual sociological and numerical development of Jewry in the
course of its history, developments that are particularly evident in
the last decades through a constantly growing process of foreign
infiltration that has reached an intolerable level for the German
people.
More than once over its history, the German people has absorbed
foreign elements, but they were racially identical or similar
population groups, as for example was the case with the Huguenots.
With the Jews, things are fundamentally different. They are seen
everywhere as foreigners, and see themselves that way as well. Walter
Rathenau said it most clearly as early as 1897: "How strange! In the
middle of German life there is a separate, foreign tribe that stands
out in every way with its hot-tempered behavior. An Asiatic horde has
settled on the sands of Mark Brandenburg." Einstein said something in
1931: "I have to laugh when I hear the phrase 'German citizen of the
Jewish faith.' These citizens first of all want nothing to do with my
poor Eastern European brothers, and second do not want to be sons of
my (Jewish) people, but only members of the Jewish cultural community.
Is that honest? Can a non-Jew respect such people? I am not a German
citizen. I am a Jew, and am happy to belong to the Jewish people."
The most remarkable thing about Jewry is that it has not disappeared
over the millennia, even though it lacks its own territory and
language. Even more remarkable is that it lacks the main
characteristic of a minority population, its own pockets of settlement
to which it could if necessary retreat. Only time will tell if
Palestine will someday fill this gap. That question is made more
difficult by the fact that the Arabs maintain their claim on
Palestine. Whatever the twists of history, the Jew has always remained
the same, whether as a grain speculator in ancient Rome or as a bank
or stock exchange potentate in the modern era. They were always able
to control the wealth of whole nations. Nations and peoples once their
contemporaries have vanished, leaving only words and crumbled
monuments behind; only the Jew remains. In ancient days we see him
carrying on his business in the trading centers of the Mediterranean.
In the Middle Ages he provided money for German nobles and free
cities. Today he rules the banks and stock exchanges of the whole
world, forcing the nations under the yoke of financial capitalism. The
power of this people of 15 million rests on these international
relations. This is how they seem to fulfill the commandment of Jehovah
- the world domination of the chosen people.
The secret of the Jewish people, which has enabled them to survive
through all of history's twists and turns, is that it has always
recognized the laws of blood, even anchoring them in the laws of its
religion. The consciousness of blood and family that believing Jews
have has been stronger than all the other forces of history, giving us
a unique example of a people without its own land and language, which
still meets the criteria for being a people, and which has outlasted
many other peoples.
This historic manifestation of Jewry, which is unique, brings to the
fore the question of the relationship between the host and guest
peoples. It has been answered in differing ways throughout history,
depending on the worldview and thinking then predominant.
Since the Jews were dispersed they have been held together by the laws
of their religion and their faith that they were the chosen people.
Until the middle of the 18th Century, Germans and Jews lived apart
from each other. The Jews had no opportunity to become involved in the
religious of political-intellectual life of their host people. On the
other hand, they could practice their own customs without
interference. They had their own religion and their own laws. During
the Middle Ages, the Ghetto was the way Jewry could maintain itself in
the midst of other peoples and fulfill its Jewish duties, which grew
out of its race, origins and laws. The values and ideals of other
peoples were not affected. This separation was only possible because
the views of the host people were as strong as those of the Jews.
According to the writer Grau: "There was no racial defilement or
baptism, no attempt to join a nation that one could never be a member
of, and no attempt to intellectually silence the host people." In the
Ghetto of the Middle Ages, the Jew developed his nature and
characteristics, which were later to become significant, while
maintaining the community of blood and race. The latter is
particularly important, since the strict physical separation between
the host and guest peoples maintained the foreign nature that we daily
see so clearly, now that the barriers between have long since fallen.
Even in the Middle Ages, the most important thing was not the
difference between the Christian and Mosaic faiths. Rather, there was
on the one hand the natural sense that the Jew was of a foreign race,
and on the other hand the strict law of blood which demanded a clear
separation if the Jews were to fulfill Jehovah's mission, which had
guided them from the beginning. Just this has always been kept in the
background by historians, who present the Ghetto as a tolerated asylum
for Jewish martyrs persecuted on account of their faith. There is a
gap to be filled here. The task of historians writing from our new
viewpoint will be to examine the portrait of the Ghetto of the Middle
Ages to discover its importance for the development of Jewry and the
relationship between the guest and host peoples. Even the Jewish side
is demanding that. O. Karbach criticizes historical writing because it
"in significant ways conceals the historical fact that the Jews in the
centuries before their emancipation possessed a legal standing that
was better than the greater part of the rest of the population, namely
complete or partial agricultural freedom. (Ordnung in der Judenfrage,
edited by E. Czermak, Reinhold, Vienna, 1933).
The barriers between Germans and Jews fell as a result of the
Enlightenment and the French Revolution. The path to Jewish world
domination would take a different direction than pious, observant Jews
had expected. Emancipation made it possible to build Jewish dominance
through secular means. With the disappearance of racial consciousness,
only religious differences seemed to remain. It seemed at the time
unjust to give someone a preferred position only because of his
religious beliefs, which are an entirely personal matter. At the time,
this was tied to a belief in human equality and freedom. It was
revolutionary. It shattered the church dogmas that had ruled for
centuries and was the foundation of liberal thinking during the last
two hundred years. The new goal was humanity itself, and nothing stood
in the way of racial mixing. Some had the quiet hope that assimilation
would mean the absorption of Jewry. Jewry itself, however, was more
than willing to use the opportunities of religious assimilation, which
opened the path to all important positions, even to political
leadership. As H. Heine said, "baptism was the ticket to European
culture." Gradually, an intermixing with the German people developed,
particularly in its cultural elite. Foreign blood infiltrated to a
degree that we realize only today now that the "Law to Reestablish a
Professional Bureaucracy" has exposed numerous sources of foreign
blood. This process has greatly accelerated during the last fourteen
years.
Today the age of raceless thinking is being displaced by the ideals of
human variability. Values are rooted in origin and territory, and each
group has a historic mission based on its own unique and eternal
values. Such new racial thinking will of course secure the opposition
of those who either through faith or reason still believe in the unity
of humanity in culture, social order and organization. The Jews will
naturally oppose any discussion of race, since the denial of any
significant differences between people is the foundation of his
infiltration of Western European society. The Jew finds any mention of
the racial question as an attack on his current existence. His leading
role in every anti-national area is characteristic of his mimicry, and
is necessary for his continued existence. That explains the phrase
"German citizen of the Jewish faith."
The recognition that the Jew is of a foreign and different race along
with the reawakening of German racial consciousness must necessarily
lead to a change in the relations between Germans and Jews.
There is one point to keep in mind before examining the statistics.
Only those people who claimed to be Jews and were members of the
Mosaic faith were counted as Jews, not those who for internal or
external reasons belonged to another religion, or those who claimed to
be dissident Jews and therefore did not belong to the standard groups.
This is regrettable for our purposes, since we are interested not in
the influence of those who still claimed the Jewish religion, rather
those who belonged to the Jewish race! That includes all Jews, whether
of the Mosaic faith or baptized Christians. That is just what the
supporters of the Talmud and the Old Testament always said. They
complained that the state opened all offices to those "without
character," to "Christmas Jews," even admitting them to the officer
corps! The statistics given here must therefore be increased
significantly. The Jews are a race, and baptism does not in any way
change the foreign characteristics that are hostile to the German
people..."
Of course, the intellectual atmosphere that enabled the Jew to
infiltrate the German body politic quickly led the Jew himself to see
that conditions for his advancement were favorable, and that the way
to the top was open. He also realized what the population statistics
meant, indeed they were particularly clear to him, since 2/3 of his
kind lived in the big cities, the centers of the liberal worldview..."
"Nothing shows the differences between our people and the Jews more
clearly than their likes and dislikes for certain occupations. In some
occupations, particularly those that are most important for the nation
as a whole, the foreign influence on German life has reached an
intolerable extent not seen elsewhere in Europe. The preference for
certain occupations also gives us an interesting insight into the
spiritual nature of Jewry.
The following figures show how much critical occupations in Germany
have been infiltrated.
112,188 Jews, or 58.8%, far more than half, are employed in the area
of "commerce and transportation, including restaurants and taverns,"
but only 17.11% (3,248,145) of the population as a whole. In the area
of "industry and craft work, including mining and construction,"
19,318 Jews (25.85%) were employed, including 31.82% of foreigners.
For the population as a whole, the figure was 40.94% (7,771,799).
The figures in the field of "public administration, the judiciary, the
army and navy, churches, legal professionals and the independent
professions." 11,324 Jews were employed there, or 5.94% , over against
921,048 (4.85%) in the general population..."
In 1925, 0.81% of Jews were active as civil servants and the army and
navy, as opposed to 2.3% of the general population. In the church,
religious occupations, the legal system and the other independent
professions, the Jewish percentage is 4.3% as opposed to 2% of the
general population. This shows that the Jews are over-represented when
compared to the general population, particularly in the independent
professions.
The percentage of the Jewish population in government positions may
seem less than that of the general population, but the difference is
not as great as the figures first suggest. The most recent figures,
not yet entirely complete, suggest that a not insignificant number of
them are baptized Jews or dissidents formerly of the Jewish faith who
denied their Jewishness to gain an official position.
4.35% of Jews are employed in the medical and health care system,
including welfare, and 2.0% of foreign Jews. The figure for the
general population is 1.88%. The Jewish percentage is thus 2 1/2 times
as high as that of the general population.
In summary, Jewish occupational patterns differ from those of the rest
of the population. Jewry seems to have an aversion to agricultural
work, industrial labor and crafts. They are greatly over-represented
in commerce and transportation, including the entire banking system.
They are also over-represented in the independent professions and the
health care system. These figures alone demonstrate a clear difference
between the native German population and alien Jewry.
Very similar conditions prevail in all Western European nations and
also in North America, since Jews have spread throughout the world in
areas with growing industry and in cities that are centers of economic
and financial power. It is not true, as is often claimed, that the Jew
was systematically forced into commerce by the laws of the various
nations; rather, commerce particularly suits the Jew's nature. This is
supported by Dr. Arthur Ruppin, a scholar respected by the Jews. He
writes in his book The Jews of the Present (2nd edition, Cologne and
Leipzig, 1911, p. 45):
"Thanks to their significant commercial gifts (!), the Jews soon
enjoyed great success in commerce and industry. For 2000 years they
have seemed predestined to work in commerce. It is false to claim, as
some do, that Jews became merchants primarily because the Christians
denied them other occupations during the Middle Ages. The Jews did not
become merchants in Europe, rather they entered the profession in
growing numbers ever since the Babylonian Captivity in Syria, Egypt
and Babylon [because they dislike labor and prefer to have others work
for them! The Editor]. In Palestine until the dispersion they did live
primarily by agriculture. In the Diaspora, there was hardly anywhere
that the Jews lived by agriculture. The Middle Ages did not make them
into merchants. It only affirmed legally that which history had
already established. It is after all the rule that economic laws
generally do not create new conditions, but only legalize and regulate
that which already exists. The law would never have limited the Jews
to commerce in Europe if they had not already immigrated primarily as
merchants..."
Nearly all national economists agree that the Jews owe their role as
merchants not to chance, but to their excellent abilities as
merchants. As W. Sombart wrote: "The Jewish race is by nature the
incarnation of the capitalism-mercantile spirit." (Der moderne
Kapitalismus, Vol. 2, p. 349. Leipzig, 1902). Many others agree..."
"Similarly differences in the relative proportion of Jews by the
self-employed are evident in the medical field, which employs 0.5% of
the general population but 2.8% of the Jews, nearly six times as many.
Similar statistics are found in the cultural area (theater, film,
radio, education, teaching, etc.). The 0.4% of the general population
are employed there, 2.6% of the Jews, also about six times as many.
In the area of public administration and the judiciary, the percentage
of Jews in high positions is 2.0%, over against 1.3% of the general
population, nearly twice as high. The significance of these figures
becomes clear that when one realizes that the 2.3% of professional
Jews in public administration and the judiciary are in a branch where
the Jewish percentage of employees is only 0.81%. That means that the
Jews are especially represented in the important positions that
influence the whole government and leading branches of the economy.."
"The statistics may be interesting. The Jewish workers included 11,406
in industry, 2,220 in commerce and transportation, and 726 in
agriculture.
The following figures show most clearly the different social structure
of Jewry in Prussia over against the general population, and reveal
clearly Jewry's leading role in public life:.."
"On 19 May 1933 Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler gave an interview to
Bernard Ridder, an American journalist for the New York State
Newspaper. Discussing the Jewish Question in Germany, he said: "Should
I allow thousands of German-blooded people to be destroyed so that the
Jews can live and work in luxury while millions starve, falling victim
to Bolshevism out of desperation?"
Can the justice of his words be doubted when one recalls that,
according to the Prussian census of 16 June 1925 6.9% of all
independent pharmacists, 17.9% of all independent physicians, 4.8% of
all independent artists, 27% of all independent attorneys, 4.6% of
editors, 11% of theater directors, 7.5% of actors, and 14.8% of all
independent dentists were Jews! And these huge figures when the Jews
were only 1% of the population! Is that anything other than a
Jewdification of our entire cultural system?! And what would these
figures look like if one had had the ability to include baptized Jews
and dissidents?..."
"Berlin is the Jewish metropolis in Germany. The process of
Jewdification is considerably further along. That is understandable,
since one is in the immediate vicinity of the protective arms of
democracy and social democracy, where developments can occur
unhindered. Thus in Berlin on 16 June 1925 32.2% of the pharmacists
were Jews, as were 49.9% of the physicians, 7.5 of the graphic
artists, 50.2% of the attorneys, 8.5% of the editors, 14.2% of the
directors and theater heads, 12.3% of the actors and 37.5% of the
dentists.
These figures cry out for legal limitations on Jewry, and it is
surprising that former governments did not take the appropriate action
to tell the Jews "this far and no further."
The Jewish influence gave the rest of the world an entirely false
impression of the nature of the German people. Inside the Reich, they
poisoned the soul of the people, and all social and political
relationships. Until the national uprising, the leaders of the
National Socialist movement were persecuted, defamed and suppressed by
a system that was a willing tool in the hands of a foreign and
different race. The national revolution freed the German people from
this foreign influence, which had also dominated and ruined the German
press and public life in significant ways.
He who wants to understand the German revolution of 1933 must
understand that it had this goal: 'Germany must be governed by Germans
for Germans.' The central idea of the National Socialist revolution
was the longing of the German people to once more be master in every
area of its own life. As a great, confident people, we demand only
this of the other peoples: that they permit us, as their equals, to
govern ourselves as we wish and find our own way to happiness (Reich
Minister of the Interior Dr. Frick)..."
"The Jewdification of our colleges and universities over the years has
reached almost frightening proportions. We begin with a publication
from 1931. Karl Hoppmann, in his volume "On the State of Jewdification
in the Academic professions" found the following figures:
1. University of Berlin:
Medical faculty . . . . over 50%
Philosophical faculty . . . . 25%
2. University of Göttingen, 32% of the professors were Jewish:
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40.0%
Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 23.0%
3. University of Breslau
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.0%
4. University of Frankfurt (Main)
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0%
Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 28.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.0%
Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.0%
Jewry has a dominating role on the stock exchange. The board of the
Berlin stock exchange is almost exclusively Jewish. In the various
committees, the percentage of the Jewish race is sometimes many times
as high as the Aryan. The committees include:
That means that 117 or 147 members are Jews, or nearly 80%.
The extent of the Jewdification of German theater and film is evident
from 1931 figures. Of 234 theater directors, 118 (50.4%) were Jews, 92
(39.3%) were non-Jewish.
Berlin led in this area as well, with 23 of 29 theater directors (80%)
Jewish.
The situation in film is similar. The Viennese Catholic periodical
"Schönere Zukunft," which certainly cannot be accused of
anti-Semitism, wrote the following in its 3 February 1929 issue:
"The percentage of Jewry in today's film industry is so high, at least
by us in Germany, that there is only a tiny part left for Christian
firms."
Jewry has long sought political influence as well. This formerly
happened in covert ways, mostly through direct or indirect control of
money matters. Nearly every noble once had his financial Jew. Since
1848, the birth of political parties in Germany, Jewry has openly
sought to become a political power. The Jew Marx was the founder of
Marxist doctrine, the Jew Lassalle was the founder of the Social
Democratic Party. The founders of the Independent Social Democratic
Party of Germany were the Jews Bernstein, Haase, Kautsky, Hilferding,
Cohn, Davidsohn, Simon, Rosenfeld, Eisner, Levi, etc. Carl Liebknecht
and Rosa Luxemberg were the leaders of the Communist Party, and
recently the Jews Rosenfeld and Seydewitz founded the Socialist
Workers Party. Jews sat in the press offices and the various editorial
offices of party newspapers, and above all in the various
parliamentary factions..."
"We think it necessary to mention that the Communist wave that
threatened to destroy Germany politically, economically and
intellectually can primarily be traced back to Jewry.
Is it any wonder that the Jew is arrogant? The greater the Jewish
influence the more secure they feel, and the more ominously and
clearly their character and goals becomes clear: Pride, intolerance
and superiority on the one hand, a drive for world domination on the
other. Several pointed Jewish statements are examples:
Hochmut: The familiar "Dorfgeschichte"-Auerbach says: "We Jews are the
most intelligent race." "We are the chosen ones," says Dr. Berhard
Cohn (Jüdisch-Politische Streitfragen, 20, 22). He continues: "We may
carry our head high and demand particular respect. We must not only be
treated equally, but better. We deserve the particular respect of
other peoples."
Rabbi Dr. Rulf wrote a book ("Aruchas bar-Ammni," Israel's Healing,
Frankfurt a. M. 1883) in which he says: "The Jewish people is a
blessing for all peoples. The blessing has followed on the heels of
the Jews. A whole world lives from the Jews, who feed everyone, and
everywhere spread wealth and pleasure, comfort and prosperity. Only
the commerce of the Jews creates value. Work alone does not do that.
Half of the world's population would starve without the Jews."
The Jew Dr. Duschak wrote: "The world could not exist without the
Jews." The well-known Jew Sacher-Masoch explained the hatred of
anti-Semites against the Jews in this way: It is the same hatred a
Negro feels against the whites because of their superiority.
That the Jews even went so far as to suggest to Bismark that he make
the Jewish Day of Atonement a national holiday is certainly no sign of
modesty.
Intolerance: The Jew Klausner (Society, edited by Conrad, Volume 12)
wrote: "Anti-Semitism and criminality are nearly the same thing. There
are criminals who were not anti-Semites, but no anti-Semites who were
not criminals."
The work by Dr. E. Fuchs. "The Future of the Jews," (Berlin,
Philo-Verlag, 1924) judges our greatest historians, Hartmann and
Treitschke, who see the Jews as our misfortune: "Men blinded by
prejudice and hatred. Small, tiny men."
World Domination: The Jewish attorney Maurthner in Vienna said back in
the 1880's: "It is not just a matter of fighting anti-Semitism. We
want to oppose it with Jewish domination!"
They made the attempt. If the German people had not recovered their
senses at the last moment, and if they had not had a Fuehrer and
Chancellor named Adolf Hitler who recognized the danger and woke the
German people, we would have fallen into slavery. As we have already
noted, the Jew has always known how to rouse sympathy when things were
rough for him. Consider this report from the meeting of the PEN Club
in Ragusa at the end of May of last year: "Schalom Asch in his keynote
address noted that the suffering of the Jews in Germany had aroused
the sympathy of the entire world. Only the German government remained
untouched. He claimed the Jews has given Germany its deepest thoughts,
its most beautiful songs, its greatest poets, artists and
philosophers. Today one had crucified them in Germany and covered them
with their own blood." Mr. Schalom Asch began crying in the midst of
these outrageous lies. He spoke in the hope that his words would be
heard for the sake of justice and humanity throughout the world.
The Jew Asch cries! The German people are not moved. They want no
torture or persecution, but also no unjustified sympathy, only
justice! Remember always the worlds of Field Marshall Moltke: "The Jew
is a state within the state." Remember also the works of our great
historian Mommsen: "In antiquity too the Jew was the ferment of
cosmopolitanism and national decomposition." And remember Goethe: "The
Israelites have never done much; they possess few virtues, and most of
the deficiencies of other peoples!"
The Racial Question has an important role in the laws of other
nations, though other peoples and races are affected than in the
German Reich. It is in no way new or unusual that the German Reich is
active in this area. Contrary to opinions that surface here and there,
our laws are in no way directed against the Jewish religion, its
practice, or the freedom of the Jewish faith.
The German Reich has done nothing but introduce constitutional
legislation to provide the kind of civil service necessary to
guarantee the secure administration of the Reich. The laws do not
render it impossible for a citizen of a foreign state to become a
civil servant. Indeed, if he is appointed to such a position, he
receives full citizenship in the Reich. German civil servants should
however be of Aryan descent. The so-called Aryan Law requires that
each civil servant be of German blood. Since the vast majority of
non-Aryan civil servants were Jews, the first guidelines to the law
paid particular attention to those who were members of the Jewish
race. But we did not simply throw out the non-Aryan civil servants,
but retired them with honor and a pension. The people's state could
hardly proceed in a more legal and mild manner. Germany did not want
to attack Jewry wildly, rather only deal with its results, is clear
from the fact that the Law of 7 April 1933 left untouched all
non-Aryan civil servants who had been appointed before 1 August 1914,
and by the fact that the private sphere not affected. Some complain
that the law extends to half and quarter Aryans. The answer is that
the foreign influence in the civil service had grown to such a
dangerous extent that it was almost impossible for young Germans to
enter these professions." (Reich Minister of the Interior Dr.
Frick..."
Topaz
"... he has succeeded in restoring Germany to the most powerful
position in Europe, and not only has he restored the position of his
country, but he has even, to a very great extant, reversed the result
of the Great War... whatever else might be thought about these
exploits they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole
history of the world."
Topaz
Der Stürmer, #23/1944, What is Americanism
"The family ties between hundreds of thousands of German families and
their American relatives led many to think that America would never
join a second war against Germany. Now that that has happened, many
Germans still believe that America will never allow Bolshevism to
conquer and destroy Germany. Recent events have proven how false and
dangerous this idea is. One has to be be foolish or irredeemably
stupid to believe that anything good can come to Europe from the land
of presumed opportunity. That that did not happen after the First
World War, and will not happen after the second. The Jews have made
America what it is today: a nation raped by the Jews , a nation whose
130,000,000 people of many colors and races have been forced into
helping the Jews achieve world domination!"
Topaz
by Paul Findley
Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused
to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express
this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe
the catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during
the past 35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S.
aid until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967
Arab-Israeli war.
The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any
determined president-even President Bush this very day-could prevail
and win overwhelming public support for the suspension of aid by
laying these facts before the American people:
Israel's present government, like its predecessors, is determined to
annex the West Bank-biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel will become
Greater Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in
Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until
Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are
committed, aggressive, and influential. Because of deep religious
conviction, they are determined to
prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West
Bank.
In its violent assaults on Palestinians, Israel uses the pretext of
eradicating terrorism, but its forces are actually engaged advancing
the territorial expansion just cited. Under the guise of
anti-terrorism, Israeli forces treat Palestinians worse than cattle.
With due process nowhere to be found, hundreds are detained for long
periods and most are tortured. Some are assassinated. Homes, orchards,
and business places are destroyed. Entire cities are kept under
intermittent curfew, some confinements lasting for
weeks. Injured or ill Palestinians needing emergency medical care are
routinely held at checkpoints for an hour or more. Many children are
undernourished. The West Bank and Gaza have become giant concentration
camps. None of this could have occurred without U.S. support. Perhaps
Israeli officials believe life will become so unbearable that most
Palestinians will eventually leave their ancestral homes.
Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in
most countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli
violations of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the
precepts of all major religious faiths.
How did the American people get into this fix?
Nine-eleven had its principal origin 35 years ago when Israel's U.S.
lobby began its unbroken success in stifling debate about the proper
U.S. role in the Arab-Israeli conflict and effectively concealed from
public awareness the fact that the U.S. government gives massive
uncritical support to Israel.
Thanks to the suffocating influence of Israel's U.S. lobby, open
discussion of the Arab-Israeli conflict has been non-existent in our
government all these years. I have firsthand knowledge, because I was
a member of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee in
June 1967 when Israeli military forces took control of the Golan
Heights, a part of Syria, as well as the Palestinian West Bank and
Gaza. I continued as a member for 16 years and to this day maintain a
close watch on Congress.
For 35 years, not a word has been expressed in that committee or in
either chamber of Congress that deserves to be called debate on Middle
East policy. No restrictive or limiting amendments on aid to Israel
have been offered for 20 years, and none of the few offered in
previous years received more than a handful of votes. On Capitol Hill,
criticism of Israel, even in private conversation, is all but
forbidden, treated as downright unpatriotic, if not anti-Semitic. The
continued absence of free speech was assured when those few who spoke
out-Senators Adlai Stevenson and Charles Percy, and Reps. Paul
"Pete" McCloskey, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hilliard, and myself-were
defeated at the polls by candidates heavily financed by pro-Israel
forces.
As a result, legislation dealing with the Middle East has been heavily
biased in favor of Israel and against Palestinians and other Arabs
year after year. Home constituencies, misled by news coverage equally
lop-sided in Israel's favor, remain largely unaware that Congress
behaves as if it were a subcommittee of the Israeli parliament.
However, the bias is widely noted beyond America, where most news
media candidly cover Israel's conquest and generally excoriate
America's complicity and complacency. When President Bush welcomed
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, sometimes called the Butcher of
Beirut, as "my dear friend" and "a man of peace" after Israeli forces,
using U.S.-donated arms, completed their devastation of the West Bank
last spring, worldwide anger against American policy reached the
boiling point.
The fury should surprise no one who reads foreign newspapers or
listens to BBC. In several televised statements long before 9/11,
Osama bin Laden, believed by U.S. authorities to have masterminded
9/11, cited U.S. complicity in Israel's destruction of Palestinian
society as a principal complaint. Prominent foreigners, in and out of
government, express their opposition to U.S. policies with
unprecedented frequency and severity, especially since Bush announced
his determination to make war against Iraq.
The lobby's intimidation remains pervasive. It seems to reach every
government center and even houses of worship and revered institutions
of higher learning. It is highly effective in silencing the many U.S.
Jews who object to the lobby's tactics and Israel's brutality...
Today, a year after 9/11, President Bush has made no attempt to
redress grievances, or even to identify them. In fact, he has made the
scene far worse by supporting Israel's religious war against
Palestinians, an alliance that has intensified anti-American anger. He
seems oblivious to the fact that nearly two billion people worldwide
regard the plight of Palestinians as today's most important
foreign-policy challenge. No one in authority will admit a calamitous
reality that is skillfully shielded from the American people but
clearly recognized by most of the world: America suffered 9/11 and its
aftermath and may soon be at war with Iraq, mainly because U.S. policy
in the Middle East is made in Israel, not in Washington.
Israel is a scofflaw nation and should be treated as such. Instead of
helping Sharon intensify Palestinian misery, our president should
suspend all aid until Israel ends its occupation of Arab land Israel
seized in 1967. The suspension would force Sharon's compliance or lead
to his removal from office, as the Israeli electorate will not
tolerate a prime minister who is at odds with the White House.
If Bush needs an additional reason for doing the right thing, he can
justify the suspension as a matter of military necessity, an essential
step in winning international support for his war on terrorism. He can
cite a worthy precedent. When President Abraham Lincoln issued the
proclamation that freed only the slaves in states that were then in
rebellion, he make the restriction because of "military necessity."
If Bush suspends U.S. aid, he will liberate all Americans from long
years of bondage to Israel's misdeeds.
Mr. Paul Findley, who served as a Republican congressman from Illinois
for 22 years, is the author of 'They Dare to Speak Out' and a member
of the American Educational Trust's Foreign Relations Committee.
Also See: http://www.stop-us-military-aid-to-israel.net/
Citizens for Fair Legislation ALERT: NO NEW AID TO ISRAEL
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/01/1556560.php
Congressman Paul Findley: Liberating America From Israel
http://www.mediamonitors.net/findley2.html
Pat Buchanan: Why Politicians Prefer Israel over American
Interest?
http://amconmag.com/01_13_03/buchanan7.html
Israeli Minister - 'We've Become Barbarians'
http://rense.com/general33/become.htm
Wales Politician Compares Apartheid Israel to Nazi Germany
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/page.cfm?objectid=12498073
&method=full&siteid=50082
Israel's image of liberal democracy takes a battering
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/04/wisr04.xml&s
Sheet=/news/2003/01/04/ixworld.html
Israel Bans Christian Politician and Party from Election
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1845530.stm
Israel to Expel Christian Politician and non-Jewish Parties from
Knesset
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,866348,00.html
Row over Arabs' election ban
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/01/wisr01.
xml&sSheet=/news/2003/01/01/ixnewstop.html
How Americas Zionist controlled media spin the facts.
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/98414_comment.php
American Media Controlled by Israeli Supporters
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Eric+Alterman+MSNBC+Israel&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT
F-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3caaa1d0_1%40news.tm.net.my&rnum=1
The Myth of Barak's Generous Offer
http://fair.org/extra/0207/generous.html
Direct Financial Cost of Israel to US: $1.6 trillion and
growing
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html
MAKING MERCHANDISE OUT OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD: SELLING THE UPCOMING
WAR IN
IRAQ http://www.endtimesnetwork.com/m2_s1.html
Zionism Unbound - Vidal Gored 16 Years Ago
http://www.rense.com/general32/unbound.htm
'It's Time To Get Tough With Israel' - Patriotic US Army Brig
General
http://www.rense.com/general33/tough.htm
Israel's Policy Of 'Covert Aggression'
http://www.rense.com/general31/ze.htm
ISRAEL'S SACRED TERRORISM
http://abbc.com/historia/zionism/rokach.html
The Men From JINSA and CSP
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&c=1&s=vest
JINSA Behind Drive To Cover-Up Israeli Spy Scandal
http://rense.com/general18/JINSA.HTM
Christian Coalition Abandonment of Palestinian Christians is
Hypocritical http://www.mediamonitors.net/sherri64.html
Where does world-famous televangelist's money go?
http://www.msnbc.com/news/845747.asp#BODY
Christian Patriarch of Holy Land calls for end of Oppressive
Israeli
occupation http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2604761.stm
Zionism versus the Bible - Peace and Jutice on Earth or the
Extremism of
the 'Christian' Right? http://www.mediamonitors.net/williamson4.html
THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE - Christianity & The NWO
http://www.rense.com/general20/unholy.htm
No Joy in Bethlehem
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,865083,00.html
'Saddest Christmas Ever' in Bethlehem
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=021225&cat=news&st=newsmideas
tdc
For Unbiased News, visit:
http://www.commondreams.org
http://www.rense.com/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
http://www.independent.co.uk/
http://www.thenation.com/
http://www.mediamonitors.net/
http://www.antiwar.com/
http://www.fair.org/
http://www.counterpunch.com/
http://www.indymedia.org/
http://www.progressive.org/
http://www.yellowtimes.org/
http://www.latimes.com/
For Good Analysis and Commentary, visit:
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/
http://www.robert-fisk.com/
http://www.iacenter.org/
http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/index.cfm
http://www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h-col.html
http://www.nader.org/public_interest.html
http://reese.king-online.com/
http://fair.org/media-beat/
http://avnery-news.co.il/english/
Please distribute....
Topaz
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)
Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated in the
heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were neither
Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing Jews at
all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl Marx,
though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two men
who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
The book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomey Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920
"In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the membership of the Soviet
communist party was Jewish, though Jews comprised only 1.8 percent of
the total population." (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read
articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I
recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then
I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social
Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the
secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere
the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the
row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One
fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in
its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose
minor representatives I had been disputing for months past."
Solzhenitsyn named in his book the six top administrators of the
Soviet death camps. All six of them were Jews.
Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."
Topaz
Eisner and His Kind Must Stop Harming Our Children
by William L. Pierce
We've spoken about the Jewish control of the news and entertainment
media before, but it's a matter of such urgency that we need to talk
about it again and again. It is absolutely essential for us to
understand who controls our mass media and how they use their control
to undermine America.
Very recently a major rearrangement in the media world took place when
the Walt Disney company paid $19 billion to take control of Capital
Cities/ABC, the company that owns the ABC television network. That
makes the Disney company the biggest of the media conglomerates. And
it makes the man who controls Disney, Michael Eisner, the most
powerful media boss in the world.
What does this mean for the future of our people? Should we be
concerned that the company which brought us Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck,
and Snow White will in the future be playing a much bigger role in
forming the opinions of American television viewers and setting the
moral and cultural standards of our nation?
I'll answer that question: Yes, we certainly should be concerned,
because the Walt Disney company is not what it used to be. It has been
transformed from a wholesome producer of children's entertainment into
a malign instrument of subversion.
To understand how this happened, let's go back to the beginning. Walt
Disney was born in 1901 in a working-class, Midwestern American
family. He spent his early years on the family farm in Missouri. As a
teenager he helped support his family by delivering newspapers. He
later attributed his ability to overcome obstacles and achieve success
to the work discipline that he developed as a boy with the newspaper
route.
Although young Walt came from a typical American background, with no
advantages or privileges, he was a person of exceptional talent and
drive. He felt a strong artistic urge while he was still in grade
school, and he took a correspondence course in drawing. He continued
to develop his drawing skills in high school as a cartoonist for his
school paper. He dropped out of school at 16 and served in the First
World War. After the war, instead of finishing high school, he and
another young artist began experimenting with animated films in a tiny
studio of their own in Kansas City. Using very primitive equipment,
they made short, animated cartoons based on fairy tales. They tried to
market their films through a New York film distributor, but the New
Yorker took advantage of the struggling, young filmmakers: he stole
their work and left them destitute.
In 1922, at the ripe age of 20, Walt Disney decided to make a fresh
start in Hollywood. He sold his camera to raise enough money to make
the trip to California. There he enlisted the support of his brother
Roy as a business manager, and he persuaded his fellow artist in
Kansas City to come join him. With Walt's drive and determination,
they opened a new film studio. They invented a film character they
called Oswald the Rabbit, and a series of animated cartoons featuring
Oswald enabled the small studio to gain a foothold in the film
business.
Later, when sound films were introduced in 1927, Walt invented Mickey
Mouse. Walt himself provided Mickey's voice. Mickey Mouse was an
enormous success and helped Walt Disney Productions prosper and grow.
Over the years Walt Disney's fertile imagination gave us Donald Duck,
Goofy and Pluto, Dumbo the elephant, and a score of other animal
characters which have fascinated children all over the world for more
than 60 years. In 1937 Disney produced his great masterpiece, Snow
White and the Seven Dwarfs. This beautifully animated fairy tale
appealed to adults as well as to children. Like many fairy tales its
roots lie deep in the consciousness of our people.
After Snow White came Pinnochio, Fantasia, and Bambi. Walt Disney
Productions became a major power in the American film industry. And it
was unique, in that it was the only major film producer in Hollywood
not owned or controlled by Jews. The fact that Walt Disney was not a
Jew caused problems for him, however. He was surrounded by Jews who
resented his influence on American culture. A whispering campaign was
organized against him. Stories were spread that he was a fascist. He
began having labor problems.
The real problem, of course, was that Walt Disney's vision of the
world, as reflected in the films he produced, was wholly different
from that of the Jewish film producers around him. As long as Walt was
making Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck cartoons, this problem could be
overlooked. When he began animating feature-length fairy tales like
Snow White and Cinderella, the Jews in Hollywood became increasingly
nervous. The world of Snow White was an entirely White world, a
European world. It stirred deep feelings in European Americans, and
the aim of the Jewish media bosses then as now was to make White
Americans forget their roots. They wanted to begin promoting
multiculturalism as soon as the Second World War was over, and Walt
was in their way. They couldn't push racial mixing in their films and
have someone as popular as Walt Disney refuse to go along: the
contrast would be obvious to the public. Even Disney's extremely
popular Nature films were resented by the rest of Hollywood. Films
which promoted a love for animals and the natural world were viewed
with suspicion by men whose view of life was entirely economic and
metropolitan.
These may seem like subtle differences, and in fact most people
outside of Hollywood were oblivious to the ideological and cultural
conflict between Walt Disney and the other film producers. The closest
that the conflict came to attracting public attention was during the
1940s and early 1950s, when Walt Disney's total lack of sympathy for
Communism and his refusal to let Communist propaganda be introduced
into any of his productions set him apart from the rest of Hollywood.
While Walt was alive, however, there wasn't much that Hollywood could
do about him. He was too popular with the American people.
After Walt died in 1966, however, the situation changed. His company
had depended on his genius for its prosperity, and without him it had
a difficult time keeping up with the competition. After Disney company
profits had declined for several years, Jewish corporate raiders Saul
Steinberg and Irwin Jacobs moved in for the kill. In 1984, after
Steinberg had milked the company of $32 million, Disney family
shareholders were too weak to resist a takeover by Michael Eisner, the
Jewish boss of Paramount Pictures. Eisner in turn brought in as his
second in command another Jew, Jeffrey Katzenberg. The company that
Walt Disney built-the company that gave us Snow White and Fantasia --
has been in Jewish hands ever since.
During his first day as chairman of the Disney company-his first day,
believe it or not-Eisner ordered the production of an R-rated film,
about the kinky sexual misadventures of a typically neurotic Jewish
family in the Los Angeles area. This was the first R-rated film ever
produced by the Disney company-but certainly not the last.
Actually, what Michael Eisner has done to the Disney company is far
worse than cutting the soul out of it. He has transformed it into
another instrument in the Jewish campaign to multiculturalize America.
He has made it into a spiritually destructive propaganda instrument
aimed at our children.
There are no better examples of this than a couple of recent
children's films produced by the Disney company under Eisner: The
Jungle Book and Pocahontas. Actually, in 1967, the year after Walt
Disney's death, the original Disney company made an animated film
based on Kipling's Jungle Book stories of India. It was a film in the
Disney tradition, made to entertain children and not to brainwash
them. Last year Mr. Eisner produced a new, Politically Correct version
of The Jungle Book. The new version, which uses live characters
instead of animation, promotes interracial sex. In Mr. Eisner's
version, White males are portrayed as contemptible, cowardly, inept,
and disloyal. The White heroine rejects her British-officer fiancee',
and lets herself be wooed and won by an Indian jungle boy, played by a
Chinese actor. And, of course, it bears no resemblance at all to
anything written by Rudyard Kipling. I hardly need comment on the film
Pocahontas, which has received so much publicity recently, except to
say that its message is the same as that of Eisner 's version of The
Jungle Book: namely, that racial mixing is A-OK, that there's
absolutely no reason why a White man should not marry an Indian woman
or why a White woman should not have an affair with a Chinaman.
It took Mr. Eisner ten years to drag the Disney company down to the
Pocahontas level. He is a careful man. He knows that there is a lot at
stake. He certainly doesn't want to move too fast and cause a negative
reaction from the American public. He didn't want to alert the
American public to his intentions ten years ago. So he started with
R-rated sex films and gradually moved to films which tell White
children that miscegenation is fine and noble, and that non-Whites
really have much more character than Whites. But I believe that Mr.
Eisner had this outcome clearly in his mind from the first day that he
took over the Disney company and began degrading it.
And now Mr. Eisner will have the ABC television network under his
control too. I don't expect that to change the party line at ABC very
much. ABC, like the other TV networks, has been pretty solidly Jewish
from the beginning. It was headed by Jewish media boss Leonard
Goldenson for more than 30 years. The fact that Capital Cities
Communications, whose chairman is Thomas Murphy, a Gentile, merged
with Goldenson's ABC ten years ago didn't really have much influence
on programming. Goldenson's people remained in the policy-making
positions. Eisner's buyout of ABC just consolidates things in Jewish
hands a bit. It takes Murphy out of the picture and makes it easier
for ABC to become even more Politically Correct than it was. It means
that we will be seeing programs on the ABC television network
promoting miscegenation and undermining White self-confidence a little
more frequently than before. It speeds up the schedule a bit for
introducing even more destructive propaganda than before. It means
that our children will be subjected to somewhat more intense
brainwashing than before.
The situation with the rest of the mass media of news and
entertainment isn't really different, of course. Just as Jews took
over Hollywood in the 1930s, they also took over the other media, and
today they have such an overwhelming influence that even those who are
not Jews go along with their policies in order to get along.
Often when I point out this fact of Jewish media control to persons
who are Politically Correct, they will respond by saying that it makes
no difference who controls the media. Why does it bother me that Jews
run Hollywood, they ask in a sneering, condescending tone. I know that
people who respond in this way aren't being honest. They would
certainly think it made a difference if I controlled the media, for
example. And actually I'd be concerned if any group with an agenda of
its own had control of the media. I'd be concerned if all of the media
were in the hands of Southern Baptists, for example, or radical
vegetarians.
I am especially concerned about the Jewish control of the media,
however, for two reasons. First, the people who control the media also
control the political process in America: they control, in effect, the
policies of our government and the course taken by our society. That's
because the politicians, whether they're Democrats or Republicans,
will not stand up to the Jews. Instead they grovel at the Jews' feet.
Every politician knows that he must be portrayed favorably by the
media if he is to be elected, and every politician knows who controls
the media.
The second reason why Jewish control of the media is such a disaster
for us is based in the unique nature of the Jews. If Baptists
controlled the media perhaps they'd persuade the government to have a
law against making love on Sunday. If radical vegetarians controlled
the media, we might have to eat soyburgers instead of hamburgers.
But we can survive those things. We might not be happy, but we could
survive: our people could survive. Neither the Baptists nor the
vegetarians would be trying to corrupt us spiritually or to destroy
our race.
But corrupt and destroy are exactly what Mr. Eisner is doing. That's
the purpose of films like The Jungle Book and Pocahontas. They are
aimed, first, at the spiritual corruption of our children and,
ultimately, at the destruction of our people.
I know that statement sounds extreme to some people who are not
familiar with the facts of Jewish media control. They think that two
recent children's films from the Walt Disney company which promote
racial mixing aren't enough evidence to condemn all of the people who
control our news and entertainment media. And I must agree. One needs
much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone
who is not afraid to look at it, for anyone who is not so determined
to be Politically Correct that he refuses to see it.
For example, consider what has happened to the popular music industry
in recent years. It's not just the "gangsta rap" that we've heard a
few Republican politicians complaining about because the media people
who've been pushing "gangsta rap" moved a little too fast and caused a
negative reaction from the American people. It's the whole trend of
popular music away from traditional White forms and toward non-White
forms. I don't have to tell you who controls the popular music
industry in America, but I will anyway. In particular, the biggest
music companies promoting Black "rap" music among White children-
companies like Time Warner and MTV-are solidly Jewish. A Jew named
Gerald Levin is to Time Warner what Michael Eisner is to Disney. And
MTV is owned by Sumner Redstone, another Jew, through his Viacom
Corporation. These three companies that I've just mentioned-Disney,
Viacom, and Time Warner-are America's three biggest producers of mass
entertainment-they're number one, number two, and number three,
respectively-and they're all controlled by Jews. Is that just a
coincidence? Think about it!
I could spend the next hour talking about the genealogy of the biggest
media bosses. What you really need to do to be convinced, however, is
to study the matter for yourself. I'll be happy to send you enough
facts to get you started. Just write to me.
The idea I want to leave you with today is this: In this era in which
the mass media have such a powerful influence over our people's ideas
and attitudes and values, it is essential that we take the control of
those media away from a group which is utterly alien to us. It's a
group whose primary aim is to deaden our sense of identity and kill
any sense of racial consciousness among us, so that we will not be
able to resist the poisonous doctrines which they're promoting. These
doctrines are multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism and egalitarianism
-- and, of course, "diversity"-all of the racially destructive "isms"
of Political Correctness.
In this era when the single most important influence on the
development of a child's self-image is television entertainment, it is
essential that people like Michael Eisner and Sumner Redstone not be
the ones setting the tone for that entertainment.
We all know that America has lost its sense of purpose and is
drifting. We all know that American society is coming apart. We all
know that our traditional values, our traditional life-style, our
traditional heroes and role models have been disparaged and ridiculed
by the controlled media. We all know that the idea of White racial
guilt, the idea of deferring to minorities, the idea that we should
tolerate perversion and accept it as "normal"-all of these ideas have
been pushed by the mass media. Alienation and delinquency among our
young people are increasing. The traditional American family is in
serious decline. Racial intermarriage is on the rise. Non-White
immigrants are pouring across our borders, and no serious effort is
being made to stop them. Our political system has become hopelessly
corrupt.
The only way that we can even begin to cure this illness is to regain
complete control of our mass media. Our media must be used to give our
people a sense of identity; a sense of racial community; a sense of
kinship, of belonging; a sense of racial and national purpose. We must
take control away from the people who are using the media now to
confuse and alienate and mislead us. Only when our own people are
setting the standards for the media, only when our own people are
deciding what attitudes and values should be taught to our children,
can we become strong and healthy again-and that means breaking the
Jewish control of the media. Let me hear from you on this most
important of all the issues facing our people.
Topaz
Party's magazine for
women:
The Educational Principles of the New Germany:
What Schools and Parents Need to Know About the Goals of National
Socialist Education
German people, German parents! The new Germany created by our people's
chancellor Adolf Hitler places special demands on the German youth.
The German youth are a foundation of the rebuilding of the German
people and the German fatherland. The people and the fatherland place
their hands on the shoulders of the youth and determine what
educational and cultural values and goals are necessary for this youth
to meet the needs of people and fatherland. This requires a truly
national and social education for the German youth, and all involved
in education has to serve these educational and cultural goals with
their full energy. Parents and teachers above all!
All those involved in education must have a clear and unified idea of
the educational tasks before them. The four iron pillars of the
national school and educational system are: race, military training,
leadership, and religion!
Race
National Socialist education is an education in the thinking of the
German people, in understanding German traditions, in awakening the
pure, uncorrupted and honest people's consciousness, their sense of
belonging to the people. Only a pure member of the German race can
have such an understanding of his people, crowning it with the
willingness to sacrifice all for the people. He must know that without
his people he is a miserable nothing, and that it is better if he
himself die than that his people and fatherland perish! He who thinks
that National Socialist education has as its goal a kind of
hyperpatriotism has not understood it. Something entirely different is
intended. Something should be awakened in the soul of young Germans
that will fill their hearts and whole being until their souls can no
longer restrain the overflowing, until a powerful and jubilant "Hail
Germany" springs from their lips! That call itself is not the first or
most significant goal: rather it is its foundation in the soul, a
foundation that jubilantly, freely, confidently, cheerfully and
passionately expresses itself. It is the holy sense of people and
fatherland! Awakening this in the German youth requires that they have
a clear understanding of the value of people and fatherland. They must
realize that the German people has a right to independence and
freedom, honor and power. They must learn that it has a right to its
own fate among the peoples of the earth, and it must gain with the
other peoples the place in the sun that belongs to it. It must do this
not through force, rather because the German people is a noble nation
that has created values for the entire world that no other people was
capable of. We want to awaken in the German youth this free, righteous
and noble national pride so that at the thought of Germany's past,
present and future their hearts will pound and their eyes will gleam.
That is the first foundation of National Socialist education.
Military Training
It is clear that the German youth must be resolved to defend their
fatherland with their lives. Despite all the nonsense about promises
and disarmament, Germany is surrounded by weapons. The German youth
must learn military virtues. Their bodies must be steeled, made hard
and strong, so that the youth may become capable soldiers who are
healthy, strong, trained, energetic and able to bear hardships.
Gymnastics, games, sports, hiking, swimming, and military exercises
must all be learned by the youth. Our youth should not sit in stuffy
rooms and develop crooked backs and weak eyes. Alongside the basic and
truly important education of the mind, they should develop healthy
bodies by being outdoors. The idea of the healthy and strong German
should not be mere empty talk. Parents can help here. They will train
our youth in simplicity and cleanliness. They will train them, even
when they are older, not to waste their spare time by dubious or even
harmful activities such as card playing, drinking alcohol and bad
music, rather to prepare their bodies for their future tasks.
Leadership
A youth being trained for such important national duties must accept
the idea of following the Führer absolutely and without question,
without unhealthy carping criticism, without selfishness or
opposition. They must learn to obey so that they, having themselves,
having learned to obey, can believe in and trust their own leadership
and can grow to be leaders themselves. Only he who has learned to obey
can lead. Germany no longer believes that the masses can lead
themselves by majority rule! The masses themselves are nothing! We
need not a people ruled by majority votes, but a people with the will
to leadership. The German youth must learn that and act accordingly!
Thus the German youth belongs in organizations where they will learn
the nature of leadership in its most noble form, where they can learn
to obey and-if they are called to it-also learn to lead. They will not
bend to an empty mass will expressed through useless votes, rather
look with enthusiasm to the nation's strong and noble Führer. They
must learn that once again. We parents want to exhibit such authority
to our youth by strengthening family authority and establishing in our
homes a healthy and natural obedience on the part of our children.
This will not suppress the youth, rather provide them the controlled
freedom and authority they need to develop their abilities.
Religion
Life comes from God and returns to God. All life and all races follow
God's ordinances. No people and no race can ignore them. We want the
German youth to again recognize the religious nature of life. They
must realize that God wants the individual as well as the whole
people, and that they lose contact with life when they lose contact
with God! God and nation are the two foundations of the life of the
individual and the community. We want no shallow and superficial
piety, rather a deep faith that God guides the world, that he controls
it, and a consciousness of the relationship between God and each
individual, and between God and the live of the people and the
fatherland. The National Socialist state will promote such a deeply
religious educational system. We want parents to support and
strengthen this by honesty and by good example.
Race, military training, leadership, religion! These are the four
unshakable foundations of the new German National Socialist education!
Topaz
higher average IQ than Whites, at least Whites as loosely defined
by the designers of the IQ tests. [ <http://tinyurl.com/ihhe> ]
According to Professor Richard Lynn, writing in Personality and
Individual Differences on April 2d, 2003, the average verbal IQ
of American Jews is about 108, which, some people argue, might
explain the disproportionate number of Jews in certain positions.
[ <http://tinyurl.com/ihif> ] For example, although Jews are only
about 2 to 3% of the U.S. population, they constitute 23% of the
wealthiest Americans, 30% of the faculty at "elite" universities,
11% of Nobel Physics prizes, 60% of Yale graduate students, 60%
of "top Hollywood positions" (according to 60 Minutes), and 76%
of "most influential intellectuals" (according to Alan
Dershowitz).
It's in verbal IQ-not mathematical or visuospatial ability --
that Jews excel, and, when you consider that the fast-talking,
quick-thinking sharpster or con man is almost a Jewish
stereotype, then common experience confirms the data. [
<http://tinyurl.com/ihje> ] This would mean that the Jewish
advantage would show itself mainly in areas like law, politics,
journalism, media, advertising, public relations, and other
fields in which verbal skills, persuasion, word-weaving, or
illusion-weaving are especially valuable. And that's what the
statistics indicate. Though Jews are overrepresented in physics
and math, they are far more overrepresented in Hollywood and law.
This is another case where our day-to-day experience perfectly
matches the science, and is essentially undeniable.
According to Professor Lynn, in the article cited above, we would
expect that the Jewish population would produce highly
intelligent individuals, with an IQ over 130, at a rate four
times higher than that of Whites. Even if we put the Jewish
percentage at 3% of the total population, that would mean that we
would expect that Jews would constitute some 12% of
high-achievers in the United States. But that isn't the case,
especially in areas well-known to be dominated by Jews. Instead
we see them at 76% of "influential intellectuals," 60% of
Hollywood executives, and 30% of "elite" college faculty. Why
this wild overrepresentation, far beyond what we'd expect based
on the IQ scores? [ <http://tinyurl.com/ihk2> ] Some have argued
that Jewish families are far more concerned than White families
about the academic and professional success of their offspring,
and concentrate far more of their time and energy and money on
making sure that their children succeed in school and go on to
the best careers possible. Others point out that Jews have a far
higher degree of group consciousness-of racial identity --
than Whites, and that this intense ethnic identity makes Jews
willing and eager to put their group interests above other
interests, even individual economic interests. Thus Jews are more
willing to help their fellow Jews because they are Jews (which
experience tells us they do in so many different ways that it
boggles the mind) than Whites are willing to help their fellow
Whites because they are Whites (which happens far too seldom, and
which is socially unacceptable anyway-even illegal-in the
insane social and "moral" system which crafty Jews and decadent
Whites have imposed on us). So Jews will preferentially hire
other Jews; Jews will openly organize themselves to advance
Jewish interests; Jews will portray Jews as sympathetic
characters in their entertainment media; Jews will show Jewish
interests as morally right in their news media; and, most
importantly in my view, Jews will demonize any who oppose Jewish
interests or who promote White interests. All of these things
have an effect on the Jewish success rate in various fields, and
the last mentioned has a profound effect in making many Gentiles,
many Whites, act to promote Jewish success and Jewish interests
and also makes them, in many cases, act against their own
individual interests and their own racial interests. In fact,
Jewish influence has been paramount in constructing the 'liberal'
moral paradigm of the 20th century, which in effect says that
acting in the interest of White people and doing anything which
tends to support our continued existence in the world-whether
opposing racial mixing or working for an exclusive living space
for Whites-is "racism" and of course "racism" is the ultimate
in evil according to this Jewish-created "morality...
cactus
> By Walter Ruthard
<snip more mindless parroting by our resident nazi wannabe>
cactus
> Here are some quotes from a German pamphlet
cactus
cactus
> Here is a quote from an article by Julius Streicher
You sure have despicable role models. Get a life.
cactus
> Liberating America
<snip>
You know if you put some energy into making a better life for yourself
you would not have to be such a hate-besotted loser.
cactus
<snip>
cactus
> Disney and the Jews:
<snip>
Disney is doing much better since it stopped its antisemitic practices.
If you don't like that, just boycott them.
cactus
> Here is an article from Frauen Warte magazine,
More nazi anti-woman drivel from our resident nazi wannabe.
cactus
> It is said that the Jews, at least the Ashkenazi Jews, have a
<snip>
Topaz
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:
"In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In
those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
the 'freedom of the press.'
In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in
Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always
one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a
liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three
sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common
attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected
people' actually form a community which operates and controls all
these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is
really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in
agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the
medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One
might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the
people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the
contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the
masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich
Britain.'
She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a
hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living
must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England
itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means!
In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is
poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible
wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The
workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the
masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to
have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions
of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs,
and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole
world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish
unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a
half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such
are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters
is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the
factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The
masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are
interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times
- only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise,
the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.
To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous
to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a
member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say:
'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'?
It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business
concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished
all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of
Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from
accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case
in other countries.
They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I
can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very
well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is
another matter.
The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible
in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in
return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train
once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace.
On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory
that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some
astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his
brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something
and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible
for idle drones to inhabit this country.
I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that
two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite
right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National
Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to
my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and
cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the
ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our
problems.
To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be
fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency
basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We,
too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I
came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold
standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the
gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part
with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign
exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the
previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret
it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different
basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an
agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated.
When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to
build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the
German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers,
technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which
animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to
perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which
spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though
we have no gold, we have capacity for work.
The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with
this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We
want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must
build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work.
My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work.
We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist
countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy.
Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will
step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by
no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed
by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable.
German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold
itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German
farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to
the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In
seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the
unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find
workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have
declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to
support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.'
Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for
us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.
Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone
can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The
work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to
work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to
its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the
world's goods.
We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic
system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into
full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid
for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime.
In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to
devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war
production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of
Germany...
One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today
a state with a different economic and political orientation from that
of the Western democracies.
Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel.
It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that
traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the
people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In
the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure -
the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of
democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone.
It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want
our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The
English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But
they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany
are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own
people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no
harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they
prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish
to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact.
They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have
destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully,
because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to
wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to
pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have
wrought enormous changes.
I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the
capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy
is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in
turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making
capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for
the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is
but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of
feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a
few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good,
excellent; my dividends are splendid.'
However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn
the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we
mean. You jeopardize liberty.'
Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense
of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British
capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76,
80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry.
Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove
victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'
They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of
affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from
this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have
definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a
whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose
arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the
country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.
To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called
directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a
board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey.
They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and
travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at
about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the
report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They
may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward
journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly
surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation
for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time
it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we
have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled
profiteering and even bribery.
In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence.
They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been
possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into
the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing
millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people
themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks.
For the first time in German history, we have a state which has
absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political
appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of
this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing
the best among the people for every position. We have
Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or
locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in
a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces.
Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have
done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In
this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we
are building up our life for the future.
As you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we
send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men,
farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher
education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are
educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take
their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest
posts....
Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the
world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for
family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a
means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know
perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only
be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the
end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of
coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses
dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone
are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact.
On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide
capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold.
It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that
work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We
shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion
can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their
dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and
the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all
costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has
been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a
state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons
to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or
national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the
sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of
the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions
over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State.
These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb.
Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people
would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced
that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not
fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against
them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We
demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or
that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you
because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we
fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are
carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to
the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But
they have made a great mistake.
If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting
against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the
progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be
victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the
others.
I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other
world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the
restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would
have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out
my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest
wish to rearm.
For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who
regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ
the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is
already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my
mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make
the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I
want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to
have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the
theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all
the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the
case in England.
The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers
in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made
proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I
received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of
armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be
altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested
that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is
just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ...
Topaz
"He was born into humble circumstances, the son of an obscure civil
servant in a remote corner of a crumbling empire, yet his name
resounds throughout the world to this day.
He was rejected by the universities of his time for formal enrollment
in art and in architecture, and yet he erected mighty buildings and
monuments, and today a simple postcard that he drew in ink or charcoal
fetches staggering sums at auction.
He fought as a front line soldier through all four years of the
greatest war in history up to that time, never rising above the rank
of corporal, but he won both of his country's highest decorations for
bravery under fire and rose to command the mightiest armies on earth.
Almost unique in the history of his century, he was not a lawyer or an
aristocrat or a man of inherited wealth and privilege, but a man who
once earned his daily bread with the labor of his hands, and yet he
conquered politics and rose to the leadership of the most brilliant
and creative nation on earth. So that his people might travel across
the land he loved quickly and cheaply, he created a simple and sturdy
automobile still in use today, and a network of highways that still
spans Germany. His game and forestry laws are still in force, and are
praised by ecologists as a model of environmental protection. His
economic program received the sincerest form of flattery from the
loathsome Roosevelt, who stole it and copied it into the context of
the American Depression as his own.
Every man who ever met him personally, even those who became his
bitterest enemies, spoke of him forever afterwards with awe and
admiration. His courtesy and his gallantry toward women were
legendary. With his power and his prestige he could have had any woman
he wanted, but the woman he chose as his life's partner, and who
eventually died by his side, was a simple and humble daughter of the
people.
He did not drink. He did not smoke. He was a lifelong lover of animals
and children and was happiest in the company of toddlers rather than
statesmen and soldiers, and no one ever overheard him use a profane
word or tell a smutty joke. He lifted his people up from the mud of
defeat and despair and alien domination, and he died trying to do the
same for all of us.
To this day, his memory is kept green by the Aryan peoples of Germany
and the world, even though it means prison, and in some countries
death, to honor him or his legacy within the sight or hearing of the
tyrant. He has been slandered, vilified, lied about, cursed,
distorted, and damned every day since his death by the most powerful
and evil tyranny mankind has ever known, and yet his name and his
Symbol cannot be suppressed by force or by propaganda. As we begin
this new Millennium, his book is read and his name is on more lips
than ever before and his image and his strength fills the hearts of a
whole new generation of young Aryan men and women."
"When your mother has grown older,
When her dear, faithful eyes
no longer see life as they once did,
When her feet, grown tired,
No longer want to carry her as she walks -
Then lend her your arm in support,
Escort her with happy pleasure.
The hour will come when, weeping, you
Must accompany her on her final walk.
And if she asks you something,
Then give her an answer.
And if she asks again, then speak!
And if she asks yet again, respond to her,
Not impatiently, but with gentle calm.
And if she cannot understand you properly
Explain all to her happily.
The hour will come, the bitter hour,
When her mouth asks for nothing more."
Those lines were written by Adolf Hitler, in 1923."
In the Thicket of the Forest at Artois
"It was in the thicket of the Artois Wood.
Deep in the trees, on blood-soaked ground,
Lay stretched a wounded German warrior,
And his cries rang out in the night.
In vain ... no echo answered his plea ...
Will he bleed to death like a beast,
That shot in the gut dies alone?
Then suddenly ...
Heavy steps approach from the right
He hears how they stamp on the forest floor ...
And new hope springs from his soul.
And now from the left ...
And now from both sides ...
Two men approach his miserable bed
A German it is, and a Frenchman.
And each watches the other with distrustful glance, And threatening
they aim their weapons.
The German warrior asks:
"What do you do here?"
"I was touched by the needy one's call for help."
"It's your enemy!"
"It is a man who suffers."
And both, wordless, lowered their weapons.
Then entwined their hands
And, with muscles tensed, carefully lifted
The wounded warrior, as if on a stretcher,
And carried him through the woods.
'Til they came to the German outposts.
"Now it is over. He will get good care."
And the Frenchman turns back toward the woods.
But the German grasps for his hand,
Looks, moved, into sorrow-dimmed eyes
And says to him with earnest foreboding:
"I know not what fate holds for us,
Which inscrutably rules in the stars.
Perhaps I shall fall, a victim of your bullet.
Maybe mine will fell you on the sand
For indifferent is the chance of battles.
Yet, however it may be and whatever may come:
We lived these sacred hours,
Where man found himself in man ...
And now, farewell! And God be with you!"
Adolf Hitler, 1916
Topaz
After the death of Hindenburg on 2 August 1934, Hitler called a
referendum to approve his assumption of full power as Fuehrer and
Chancellor of Germany. 90% of the voters approved Hitler's increased
powers.
Rudolf Hess gave this speech on 14 August 1934, shortly before the 19
August referendum:
"National Socialists! Fellow German citizens!
I have rarely given a speech as difficult as this one. It is a
challenge to attempt to prove the good of something as obvious as
Hitler's assumption of Hindenburg's position. For fourteen years I
have been convinced that he is the only man able to master Germany's
fate. This conviction has grown over the years, as the original
emotional feeling found new support in endless ways that have
demonstrated Adolf Hitler's remarkable leadership abilities. It is
hard for me, now that I see the realization of fourteen years of
hopes, to gather the various reasons that explain how Adolf Hitler has
become the highest and only Fuehrer of the German people.
Whether through good luck or providence, I found in the summer of 1920
a small room in the Sterneckerbräu in which one Adolf Hitler, whom I
had never heard of, gave a speech to a few dozen people. His clear,
logical and persuasive speech laid out a new political program. This
man expressed my own vague feelings as a veteran of the war, making
clear what was necessary for the nation's salvation. He outlined a new
Germany from the heart of a front soldier, a Germany that I suddenly
realized was the one that had to become reality!
This man had driving passion, persuasive logic, and astonishing
knowledge. A powerful faith streamed from him - I had never
experienced its like. What was most remarkable was that I and the
other entirely rational members of the audience did not laugh as he in
all seriousness explained that the flag of the new movement for which
he and his movement fought would one day fly over the Reichstag, over
the Palace of Berlin, indeed over every German building. It would be
the victorious symbol of a new, honorable, nationalist and socialist
Germany.
At that moment in the Sterneckbräu there were really only two
possibilities. Either I would leave this fool immediately, or - as I
did - accept the conviction: This man will save Germany, if anyone
can!
I pledged my conviction to a friend, and on that very evening become
the most passionate admirer and loyal follower of this Fuehrer.
In the long years that followed, the rest of the world laughed and
mocked us, and the newspapers spread their poison and scorn about this
"madman," but nothing could shake my faith and readiness to give my
all for this man, so long as he did not lose faith in himself or his
mission.
I remember well even today a visit I made to Hitler in the small room
he sublet in Munich. He raged against a Munich newspaper that mocked
him and his idea. "I will show them whether I am to be taken seriously
or not," he exclaimed.
Still, his opponents did not take him seriously then, or for many
years after. Luckily so! For the most serious error his enemies made
was that they did not recognize early enough what a danger he was to
them. They missed the opportunity to destroy him and his small
following when it was still possible. The mighty tree of today, able
to withstand any storm, was then only a tender plant.
But like so many other things in the Führer's life, fate probably
determined that those around him were blind enough to lose valuable
time by fighting him only with ridicule. Providence, of which the
Fuehrer often speaks with such faith, preserved him and his movement
from destruction, preserving both for its purposes.
I knew Adolf Hitler as he walked through the streets of Munich in a
shabby gray coat, often hungry, accompanied only by a few friends,
posting flyers. He was armed only with a thick oak walking stick,
which he only too often had to use when his opponents from the then
USPD, or the Spartakus Bund, or some middle class party found the
primitive truths on these flyers unpleasant.
I can still remember how he, at the head of his "whole party" broke up
a meeting of Bavarian separatists, always putting himself in the way
of the greatest danger. Astonishingly, amidst all the daily tasks and
annoyances, he never lost sight of the larger goal. He always
presented his vision vividly to his followers.
In later years I saw this man during the triumphs and defeats of his
movement. At the moments of the worst defeats when his followers often
were near desperation, it was always he who restored the faith of the
doubters, gave them new enthusiasm, new faith. I was with him in the
Landsberg prison, when all seemed lost and his movement disintegrated
as his subordinates fought. I remember when there was the danger that
his parole would be canceled and he would have to stay behind bars for
another four or five years! The chances of realizing his ideas seemed
absolutely nonexistent then, but at that very moment he laid out the
methods he would use to rebuild the movement under the new
circumstances and by rejecting illegal methods. Then as always he
proved himself a master at adapting to new situations, in breaking
radically with methods he saw as outdated or ineffective.
With the certainty of a great leader, in the middle of what seemed to
be the total collapse of all his efforts, he explained to me that he
would need several years to rebuild the movement, and that it would be
seven years before he had the power to force his enemies to bend to
his will. That was in the winter of 1924/25. Seven years later it was
1932!
That was the year in which the forces of the past attempted in vain to
stop the final victory of National Socialism, the year in which every
attempt to stop Adolf Hitler and his movement failed, in which in fact
every shameless lying attack worked in the end to his advantage.
The Fuehrer said more often than in the past: "The others can do what
they want. When an idea is right, when it is fought for consistently,
when the movement that fights for it is well organized, and when the
leadership is determined to go its way regardless of the difficulties,
one day with mathematical certainty it will be victorious! The longer
they succeed in holding back our victory, the more powerful it will
be! It will fall into our laps like overripe fruit!"
These words from the decisive year 1932 explain the sudden and total
National Socialist seizure of power in 1933, which so surprised the
rest of the world.
Looking back I am convinced that our delayed victory, the fourteen
years that sometimes seemed to us as if they would never end, was
fate's way of preparing our people for the seizure of power. It was a
necessity of fate, just as the early death of the Fuehrer's parents
acquainted him with bitter poverty. That poverty forced him to become
a construction worker. He came to understand the poverty of his fellow
human beings and the lot of the "proletariat." The daily struggle for
survival in the primitive cultural conditions of the era gave the
Führer a deep understanding of his fellow working class citizens.
It was also a necessity of fate that he served at the Front during the
World War, for he learned a contempt of danger. He became hard. The
war brought him together with all levels of the German people and
showed him the destructiveness of class and rank. Most importantly, it
taught him to understand the people and to speak their language.
The revolutionary year 1918 was a necessity of fate for Adolf Hitler,
for despite its criminal leadership it cleared away relics of the past
that later would have created difficulties for the National Socialist
Revolution. And the revolt of 1918 brought signs of collapse and
revealed with naked clarity the international forces and their
destructive effects on Germany in a way that created the psychological
prerequisites that enabled the hard measures of the later National
Socialist government to succeed.
The attempt to seize power in November 1923 was ordained by fate, just
as was its bloody collapse. If the Fuehrer had not acted then, the
masses would later have lost faith in him as a Fuehrer when he
constantly called for patience and postponed the seizure of power.
Only his willingness to act resolutely when necessary, as demonstrated
in November 1923, provided the proof that he would when necessary take
the most forceful course. It proved that he chose to renounce force in
the years before 1933 not because he was a coward. And National
Socialism could not have taken power in 1923, since the people were
not yet ready for National Socialism, nor was National Socialism ready
to lead the people. What was obvious to everyone in Germany in 1933
would have seemed arrogance in 1923. The supporters of the parties of
that day had not yet had sufficient time to recognize the weaknesses
of their leaders.
The narrowest chance of fate prevented the Führer from entering the
government in 1932. He would have been joined with men who inwardly
were still his enemies and would have caused great damage as members
of the government.
And surely it was providence that preserved the life of the old Field
Marshall and Reich President to enable his good name and protecting
hand to guard the young National Socialist government until Adolf
Hitler's abilities as a leader had been proven to everyone at home and
abroad, until his reputation was sufficient to assume the full
leadership of the Reich.
Providence has clearly been at work in Adolf Hitler's life. Only so
can we understand how this man, the son of a minor official, withstood
hunger and privation and fought unaided powerful enemies in the press
and business, powerful parties at home and abroad, to become the
Führer of one of the great nations of the world, chancellor of the
German Reich, holder of the office of Reich President. This is a
miracle without precedent in the history of the world. In the midst of
bitter need, a people finds the man to rescue it. There is a force of
history at work here which we still do not understand.
The need of our people was great. A great man was required to meet it.
Providence gave him the gifts and the strength to move on both in good
times and bad, enabling him over the course of time to reach his goal:
the salvation of Germany!
Providence works through in a way both inexplicable yet clear to all
who have the good fortune to be near to him. How often has he said to
me: "I know that my decision or action is correct. I cannot explain at
the moment why, but I feel that it is right and the future will prove
it so." Invariably the course of events proved that the inexplicable
feelings of the Führer led him down a sure path.
The great historian Treitschke held the ability to see things
correctly as the decisive ability of a statesman, more important even
than talent. What leader has ever had this ability more than Adolf
Hitler? The proof is in his speeches, even those from 1920. Rarely
have political conditions and developments been predicted more
accurately, seldom have conclusions been drawn more clearly, thanks to
his ability to see the fundamental nature of the most difficult and
complicated things.
The "simple understanding" of the genius is able to see the essential
and the obvious.
The Fuehrer adds to the ability to see correctly, which the historian
sees as more critical than talent, not only talent, but also genius.
The ability to see correctly, along with genius, to which must be
added the workings of providence, gives us an explanation for the
miracle that has happened before our eyes in the past few years,
particularly since Hitler's assumption of power.
Is not the transformation of our people a miracle! It shows itself in
its return to its essence, to the sources of its strength, in its
reawakening pride and honor, in its will to self assertion in the
world, in its ability to free itself from international poisons and
from signs of corruption in all areas of life! Is it a miracle that
Adolf Hitler won the battle against unemployment in so short a time?
That he put people to work to meet daily needs as well as to advance
culture? The great highways, canals and buildings will proclaim to
coming generations the Hitler Era of the German people. Is it not a
miracle that a nation once divided by class and rank, divided by petty
state pride in Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony and elsewhere-now works
together with mutual understanding for the great common tasks and for
the preservation of the nation and its people?
As I said when I began, I cannot explain why Hitler, and only he, can
be the Fuehrer. Who could suggest someone worthier and more able to
fill the office of Reich President, the highest leader of the Reich?
Someone might say that it is not good to put all power in one hand.
Let me reply that in a difficult time the Romans gave full power to a
young and capable leader - and the Romans knew something about
governing! They knew that "men make history." They knew that in times
of crisis, strong personalities must guide the state, personalities
bound to the living essence of their people.
Someone may say that it is not good to put all power in one hand,
since Adolf Hitler might use his authority arbitrarily and
thoughtlessly!
To that I can only say: The conscience of a moral personality is a far
greater protection against the misuse of an office than is the
supervision of parliament or the separation of powers. I know no one
who has a stronger conscience, or is more true to his people, than
Adolf Hitler.
Over the years I have seem him struggle to make difficult decisions,
always checking again and again with the experts in the field until he
was certain that his decision was absolutely correct. I know how many
sleepless nights his decision to take Germany out of the League of
Nations cost him, how he listened to all who had objections. I know
that he was unable to rest until he had refuted them by clear logic.
Only then did he decide, and accepted the full responsibility.
The Fuehrer's highest court is his conscience and his responsibility
to his people and to history.
He will also from time to time allow the people itself to pass
judgment on his general policy. This will regularly reaffirm his
leadership.
He knows that both his honor and his work are at risk. He cannot pass
the responsibility for his decisions to irresponsible parliamentary
majorities, as do the statesmen of all other nations. That also means
that his freedom of action is not restricted or watered down by
parliamentary bodies or other forces. This above all is why in
desperate times people and nations need an absolute leader - assuming
he possesses the necessary abilities - and why such a leader can be
necessary to the continued existence of the government and people.
Treitschke said that absolute leadership is either the best or the
worst form of government, depending on the personality of the leader.
We know that Adolf Hitler is both born and called to be a leader, and
that he has shown himself through all his actions to be a morally
upright person. As sole ruler he is the best possible form of
government for Germany - and Heaven knows that in its current crisis
Germany needs the best possible form of government!
A Fuehrer whose goal is to serve his people is in times of crisis a
better guarantee of peace to other nations than is a parliamentary
majority, which may lack the will at the critical moment to keep its
people from stumbling into misfortune, as Lloyd George suggested the
nations stumbled into the World War. In recent weeks, Adolf Hitler has
made rapid and firm decisions advancing the cause of peace in Europe
that demonstrate his statesmanship. Those states who today oppose us
may not be willing to admit it, but history will.
German citizens! Consider with all seriousness the international
significance of the referendum on 19 August. Talk with everyone in
your circle of acquaintances-family members, workmates, relatives,
with everyone you come in contact with. Remember that the world is
watching to see if a united German people will be loyal to its
Fuehrer.
Hundreds of thousands of journalists are waiting to announce the
expected collapse of National Socialism to their readers. They will do
this if even a few less Germans go to the polls than did on 12
November of last year. They hope for a collapse of National Socialism,
for they know this would mean the collapse of Germany.
By voting yes on 19 August, the German people will demonstrate to the
world that we see in Adolf Hitler the Fuehrer given to us by
providence. We Germans approve of what he has done at home and abroad
for Germany and trust his decisions for the future. Germany sees Adolf
Hitler as Hindenburg's proper successor. The entire German people now
gives Hitler the name of honor that the National Socialist movement
has long given him: the Fuehrer!
This word is more that a title, it is a confession and a certainty: My
Fuehrer!
Furthermore, the entire German people says to the world: Adolf Hitler
is and will remain our Fuehrer, because his policies are the policies
of the entire German nation. His rule guarantees Germany's stability.
Through him and his movement, Germany has become a unified Reich.
Since we want to remain a united German Reich, we want Adolf Hitler at
our head. Since we know that power struggles between individuals or
interest groups are unthinkable and impossible under his leadership,
we want him as Germany's leader.
Through him, Fate realizes its purpose: Saving Germany from the hunger
of misery of Bolshevism. We firmly believe that saving Germany from
Bolshevism also rescued Europe from the danger of red annihilation. We
Germans see it as our duty to thank Fate by affirming this man as the
Fuehrer of Germany.
One more thing the German people want to say to the world on 19
August: We want the work begun in Hitler's name to continue: the
battle against unemployment, the freeing of our conscience, the moral
renewal of Germany's youth, the strengthening of our sense of honor.
We Germans know that Hitler wants what we all want: economic equality
with the other nations of the world, the political and military peace
with the other peoples of the world, a return to prosperity and
culture after decades of decline and decay.
This we say to our Fuehrer on 19 August: We are bound to you in an
indissoluble unity in the fight for Germany's future. With you, we
long for the preservation of peace and are prepared to follow your
command to defend our people's peace.
We are proud and happy to have one of history's greats, a son of our
people, among us during our life times. The yes that we give affirms
his leadership to the world, and thanks him at the same time.
German workers! I speak particularly to you. Be proud that you may on
19 August affirm as leader of Germany a man of the German working
class. Be proud that you may symbolically say to one of your own on 19
August: We want you, Adolf Hitler, as German Chancellor and German
Reich President, you, a German worker! Where once kings, Kaisers and
presidents ruled Germany, now by our will and the will of the German
people stands for the first time a German worker. He is a worker who
knows how hard the life of his former comrades still is, those who
must struggle daily for their basic needs, and whose goal is above all
to improve their lot as quickly as possible.
My fellow German citizens! You will vote yes for Adolf Hitler! And if
you are asked why you voted for him, you will be able to answer:
We voted for Adolf Hitler:
Because he is the man who from his experiences as a Front soldier
developed a world view that is the foundation for all that is
happening in Germany.
Because his fifteen year struggle against a hostile world is a model
of strength and courage.
Because he always acts at the right moment, thereby showing that he is
a heroic leader.
Because he does nothing for himself, but everything for Germany and
for the future of his people.
Because he has given all of us a new faith in Germany.
Because he has given our lives meaning once more by showing us why we
Germans are on the earth.
Because he is the instrument of the will of a higher power.
In sum, because he is a true Fuehrer!
With our yes votes, we Germans will say on 19 August:
To you, our Fuehrer, we pledge our loyalty - Adolf Hitler, we believe
in you!
Topaz
"I know you expect no deep expression of feelings, for feelings cannot
be clothed in words. But please imagine this: jobless, without any
money. For two years! For four years! For six years! A desperate
woman, broken in body and soul, with three young children.
How often did I see their hungry eyes looking toward me with vain
expectation. Nothing is more tortuous than such looks from children.
My faith in him, the fanatical fighter, was what kept me and mine from
what lured us - and anyone else in our situation - Suicide!
And today?
A happy mother who is always singing with her children. No one can see
in her the miserable, desperate woman she once was. Instead of three
unhappy hollow-cheeked children, four little devils making noise far
and wide.
Look at them! There may be families with better behaved children, but
none with children as cheerful and happy! That is what the Führer
means to me and mine.
I turned my back very early to a foreign worldview because it left my
whole life meaningless. The Führer gave me his worldview a firm place
to stand, for it is nothing but a knowledge of the eternal laws that
are behind the universe.
His deeds are a joyful fulfillment of these laws. His successes do not
seem to me, as one hears all too often, the result of good luck,
rather as the natural consequences of his nature. This faith, no, this
certainty, enables me to understand the Führer when his actions would
otherwise require blind confidence.
Such obvious confidence is the most wonderful feeling that I can
imagine. Admiration? Recognition? Thanks? They are nothing when
compared to the full understanding of a people of 80 million for the
mission of its Führer. That alone would be crowning of his sacrificial
struggle.
This fulfillment of this wish is my prayer for the Führer."
Fred. Ch., Poppelau
"The Führer is everything to us, he is our faith, security and hope.
As a bearer of the blood medal, I have always believed in this man,
who guided and inspired us, who led us in the fight for Germany's
greatness. We, me, my wife and our seven children, believe only in
him, Adolf Hitler. Is there a belief more understandable, more real,
more natural than this?
Has the Führer not done everything for us that one could do for the
good of a family? Did he not give me a job and the ability to decently
feed and clothe my family? Has he not given my children a future that
no other country could so easily give?
The Führer is with us in every situation! Look, sometimes the world is
hard on a family. There are difficult situations that cannot be
overcome. In just such hours I go to my living room, and there is a
picture of my Führer.
I look Adolf Hitler in the face and remember his great struggle, his
great will and accomplishments, and my miserable mood is gone and
thinking of the Führer gives me new strength.
How can I fail when I see the greatness in and around Adolf Hitler?
My children know the Führer as the man who rules all, arranges all,
who built their world. The Führer is the embodiment of what people had
such difficulty describing to us children before. But this is the
enormous difference: The Führer moves among the people so that one can
celebrate him, so that our love for him is rewarded through his ever
new deeds.
The Führer is hope for us in every situation. Look, my dear comrade,
according to the Führer's own words, raising seven children is a great
responsibility to the state and a holy duty.
To form these young souls, to raise them to be decent adults, is such
a wonderful task only because the Führer has given us the sure
foundations that are necessary. He is our hope, for only through his
generous measures are we with many children also able to "lead an
decent life," as anyone should be able to do. He protects our strength
through the NSV, through subventions for children, through the support
the state gives women and children, through the high status he gave
children.
Once people mocked those with many children. Today people honor them.
Now my wife and I have become respected members of the state. That is
why we have such hope for the future of our children, for the Führer
has provided all that is necessary for them so that they too will be
able to establish families and contribute to the security and
protection of the great Fatherland.
Is it not wonderful to know what a wonderful future awaits our
children. One cannot but remember our own youth during the postwar
period, during the inflation, the days of hunger and so much that had
terrible effects on our youth and development.
Our children have no fears of such things, for they know that our
Führer plans everything, foresees everything, and prepares the best
for us.
Is it not obvious why the Führer means everything to us?"
Toni Dominik Sch., Unterammergau
"I can still remember the first time I saw and heard the Führer in
1920 in the Zirkus Krone in Munich. This was the introduction: "Adolf
Hitler will speak!" A somewhat slight young man stood before me, with
a short coat, soft collar and crumpled tie, poorly clothed. I was
curious to hear what this man had to say to me.
As I heard his voice, the passion of his words (something unheard of
at the time), the growing tension of his words, it became clear to me:
This man or no one! To this day, this inner feeling has not left me.
The greatness of this man, his deeds, his historic successes seem
enormous to me. But yet I always see him as a man of the people, one
of us in my mind's eye. It fills me with pride that Providence choice
one of our brothers to fulfill German history.
I honor the great figures of German history, but my feelings for the
Führer are different. I believe that love is the best word to describe
them.
One of us, who came from the people, has done amazing deeds, yet
remained the same from the first day I saw him until today.
I admire this man so much that I would defend him even if he were in
the wrong, but he cannot be wrong since he is truth and justice
themselves."
Gr. F., Munich
Topaz
From a German pamphlet:
Do you remember the state of Germany and the German people in the days
before the aged Reich President von Hindenburg chose Adolf Hitler and
his party as the last hope of saving Germany from certain political,
social and economic collapse that would lead to chaos? Tens of
thousands of factories had closed their gates. Millions of workers and
employees lost their jobs and were thrown ruthlessly into the gray
misery of mass unemployment. There seemed no way out...
By the end of 1933, 2 million citizens had jobs again. By September
1936, the number of unemployed had fallen beneath a million. By 1937
unemployment had vanished...
One of the foundations of National Socialism is the knowledge that
only work creates value and prosperity...
But not only the dreadful misery before 1933 reduced the desire of
countless Germans to have children. Crass egotism and materialism also
played a role. The System Era saw having children as foolish and
backward. The transformation that has occurred is clear in the rising
German birth rate...
The National Socialist state gives major tax reductions to fathers for
each child. Families with three or more children receive payments of
10 and 20 marks monthly. By the end of 1937, 510,000 children were
receiving such support...
By the end of 1937, 252,000 mothers had received free vacations...
The Winterhilfswerk is the most beautiful expression of the new German
people's community. It is not the work of a small group of rich
people. No, each German, all of us, rich and poor, manual laborers,
farmers and city-dwellers cooperate in fulfilling the Führer's will:
No German may be hungry or cold!
One does not know whom to admire more: the cheerful willingness of
those who collect, or the rising amount of the gifts, to which even
the poorest contribute their share. The success of the
Winterhilfswerk, written permanently into the law of 1 December 1936,
demonstrates the efforts of the entire German nation. Gifts of money
alone totaled over 920 million marks during the four winters from
1933/34 to 1936/37. An additional 570 million marks of goods were
contributed. 50,000 freight cars alone would have been needed for the
potatoes contributed in the past years. The three million meters of
clothing given out by the WHW would stretch from Berlin to the Middle
East. The two million kilograms of coal would form a wall ten meters
high around all of Germany. These few examples, and more could be
given, prove the strength of the German people's will to be active
socialists..
Another sign of this socialism is the entirely different status of the
German worker in factories. The social honor of each working German is
guaranteed by law. The state's representatives ensure that exploiting
workers is impossible. The legal working conditions correspond to
National Socialism's high opinion of work. Workers have a right to a
vacation and for paid holidays, even hourly and temporary workers.
There is nothing like this elsewhere in the world.
The dignity of labor is evidenced by improvements in the appearance of
the work place. Wherever one looks in Germany, ugly dark buildings are
vanishing. The "Beauty of Labor" movement in today's Germany is not
empty talk or an impossible demand, but living reality. Large sums
that formerly would have been wasted in strikes and lockouts have been
used since 1933 to improve work places. 23,000 places have been
transformed form soulless drudgery to pleasant places to work. 6,000
factory courtyards now offer space for real relaxation, which was not
true in the past. 17,000 canteens and lounges, 13,000 shower and
changing rooms have been transformed. The dirtier the work, the
cleaner the workers. More than 800 community buildings and 1200 sport
facilities , including over 200 swimming pools, have been established.
The crew quarters in over 3500 ships have also been improved.
The NS Society Kraft durch Freude brings cheer and pleasure to
workplaces through concerts and art exhibits. The art exhibits alone
introduced more than 2,5 million workers to the creations of true
German art. Just five years ago, it was obvious that the great works
of German culture belonged to a small group of the upper class.
Besides the factory concerns and art exhibitions, the NS Society Kraft
durch Freude uses theatrical performances, other concerts, singing and
musical groups to introduce the creations of German art to every
working German. 22 million citizens have attended theatrical
performances..
Of no less importance is the KdF's vacation program. Earlier, German
workers did not know what to do with their, at best, five days of
annual vacation. They could not visit the beauties of the German
landscape, much less travel abroad. The NS Society Kraft durch Freude
gave German workers the possibility of vacationing at the beach or in
the mountains, or to explore the homeland. Over 20 million have
participated in KdF trips since 1934. That is more than a quarter of
Germany's population. 19 million citizens participated in 60,000
vacation trips at home. Hand to hand, they would stretch from Berlin
to Tokyo. KdF trains have traveled 2,160,000 kilometers, or 54 times
around the world. The nine large KdF cruise ships have covered a
distance equal to twice the distance from the earth to the moon. They
have carried German workers to Madeira, Italy and Norway, broadening
their horizons and giving them unforgettable experiences. Three
additional ships will be added the KdF's own fleet of four. A KdF
resort is being built on the island of Rügen. It will not be the only
one. A series of other vacation and spa resorts will be built. They
will fulfill the Führer's wishes at the start of the NS Society Kraft
durch Freude: to lead a cheerful, creative and strong people to
success in the world.
The goal of bringing German culture to the entire German people,
regardless of their income, is especially clear with the German radio.
Thanks to the People's Radio Set, a solid, inexpensive and capable
receiver, the number of radio listeners has risen from around 4
million in 1932 to 9.1 million today. The un-German programming of the
System Era has been transformed by National Socialism. Now radio
acquaints the German people with the work of their great masters of
music and literature. Alongside these artistic programs, the
entertaining programming provides for the relaxation of hard-working
people.
Clear proof for the rising prosperity of the German people is provided
by the growing consumption of foodstuffs and luxury items of every
variety. During the prewar year 1913, only a little more than 2.9
million tons of meat were consumed. In 1937, that figure had risen to
3.7 million, up about 5% from 1932. Thanks to the elimination of
unemployment, bread consumption increased by about 10%, sugar by 15%.
Butter consumption rose from 420,000 to 519,000 tons. Milk production,
both for drinking and for making butter and cheese, rose from 23.5 to
25.4 billion liters from 1932 to 1937. Coffee consumption rose from
104,000 to 140,000 tons. Beer consumption has risen from 3.3 to 4.4
billion liters. That is an increase of about 3 billion glasses of
beer...
The growing prosperity and rising consumption of foodstuffs and luxury
items required hard work. A people can only consume what it produces.
In the face of this obvious truth, which however only became clear to
us after 1933, all the parliamentary resolutions, all the decisions of
international conferences and the demands of the international unions
become silly talk. The German people have proved that by our own work.
Germany has worked untiringly since 1933, producing itself the goods
it needs to improve its standard of living.
The rising production in all areas, which has never before been seen,
is the fruit of our work. The foundation of our life is agriculture,
whose task is to guarantee that the nation is fed. When the Führer
took power, agriculture was in a ruinous state. Officers of the court
were regular visitors at German farms. The animals and the harvest
were seized ruthlessly because taxes and interests had risen to
impossible levels that German soil could not meet. Forced auctions
drove tens of thousands of German farmers from their land. Desperation
prevailed in the villages. As a result of the desperate situation,
agriculture could not ensure the feeding of the German nation. The
ghost of hunger threatened.
Here too the Führer set to work immediately. Interest and taxes were
lowered, and the German soil was freed from usurious capital. Between
1927 and 1931, German agricultural debt rose by 2,9 billion marks.
From 1933 to 1936, it fell by 800 million marks. The interest burden,
which was over a billion marks in 1931/32, was reduced by National
Socialist actions to 630 million marks. The crowning achievement was
the creation of the Reich Inherited Farm Law, which guaranteed that
the German family farm will always remain the wellspring of the
nation...
Just as for farmers and agricultural workers, the urban population is
also being cared for. Although more than enough willing and able
workers were available in 1932, and although the housing need was
certainly great, the government put workers on the dole and built only
141,265 dwellings. This was an area in which the need for new jobs was
particularly clear. Even in 1933, the number of new dwellings rose to
178,000, with particular attention being given to small and mid-sized
units for those with limited incomes. This number grew year by year,
reaching 340,000 dwellings in 1937, double the number of 1932. In all,
National Socialist has built more than 1.4 million new, and above all
healthy and affordable, dwellings for the German people since 1933.
This is enough to house the entire population of Berlin...
Growing prosperity and production led to a growth in traffic. The
entirely neglected German highway system had to be repaired and
expanded. 40,000 kilometers of highway have been repaired since 1933.
That is enough to go all the way around the world! Then there are the
Reich Autobahns, the most splendid construction project in the world.
2,000 kilometers were open to traffic by the end of 1937. 1,000
kilometers more will be added yearly, until Germany has a highway
network unique in all the world.
Automobile production has reached a level that no one would have
thought possible a few years ago.
The number of motor vehicles in Germany has doubled, exceeding the 3
million mark in 1937. Thanks to the growing prosperity, broad circles
of our nation can now afford a car. 137,141 of the new vehicles in
1937, well over half, were purchased by workers and employees. 30,015
workers and employees were able to buy a car the previous year. Cars
are becoming both better and cheaper. The increase in cars will be
even more striking when the Volkswagen comes on the market. Enormous
factories are even now being built. The best proof for the quality and
good pricing of German cars is the fact that automobile exports have
increased by a factor of eight since 1932!..
The great improvements in the German transportation system have
resulted in a growing stream of foreign visitors. The pulsing life in
Germany is drawing more and more visitors to the Third Reich. The
number of overnights by foreigners has risen from 2.7 million in 1932
is far above 7 million in 1937. These foreigners, who often come to
Germany with false ideas, see with their own eyes the work of the
Führer and the remarkable efforts of the German people. They return
home as the best witnesses of the greatness and strength of the German
Reich...
The Führer has repeatedly reminded the German people that strong
policies are the absolute prerequisite to our economic, social and
cultural health. Only intentional hostility and stupidity can still
deny that the Führer was right in every respect...
Topaz
"For us there are only two possibilities: either we remain German or
we come under the thumb of the Jews. This latter must not occur; even
if we are small, we are a force. A well-organized group can conquer a
strong enemy. If you stick close together and keep bringing in new
people, we will be victorious over the Jews."
Adolf Hitler
SPEECH OF NOVEMBER 9, 1921
parsi...@gmail.com
> Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
> on December 10, 1940:
Fuck off, nazi piece of shit.
And get help.
parsi...@gmail.com
> "He was born into humble circumstances, the son of an obscure civil
parsi...@gmail.com
> After the death of Hindenburg on 2 August 1934, Hitler called a
parsi...@gmail.com
> "I know you expect no deep expression of feelings, for feelings cannot
parsi...@gmail.com
parsi...@gmail.com
> "For us there are only two possibilities: either we remain German or
cactus
> Here is part of Hitler's speech
responsible for 50 Million deaths, posted by a nazi wannabe>
cactus
<snip another panegyric to a psycopathic sexual pervert who was
cactus
<snip>
cactus
cactus
> From a German pamphlet:
cactus
> "For us there are only two possibilities: either we remain German or
> we come under the thumb of the Jews.
This latter must not occur; even
> if we are small, we are a force. A well-organized group can conquer a
> strong enemy. If you stick close together and keep bringing in new
> people, we will be victorious over the Jews."
Guess what - they lost! The Germans followed a psychopathic, psychotic,
drug addicted sexual pervert to not just defeat, but infamy. And you
are so stupid that you won't learn from the experiences of your betters.
Bigoted loser!
<snip>
Topaz
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:
"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.
In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.
Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.
To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."
Topaz
"He was born into humble circumstances, the son of an obscure civil
Adolf Hitler, 1916
Topaz
Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews America
didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.
Americans had a revolution when they were ruled by the British. If
the British accused
them of being "anti-British" would the Americans throw down their guns
and apologize?
Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.
The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.
This is what President Nixon said:
http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html
"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
consideration."
Topaz
By Dr. William Pierce
"A time-honored saying is , "All is fair in love and war." Certainly,
it seems a reasonable saying and one in accord with Nature. It
expresses the fact that when at war even otherwise honorable men
resort to trickery, deceit, and outright lying. In a strictly personal
conflict a man may feel obliged by his sense of honor to be truthful;
at least, it used to be that way before we got so much democracy and
multiculturalism, and we still had some understanding of the concept
of personal honor. But when a nation or a race is at war, and survival
depends upon victory-or at least, upon avoiding defeat-a man must
think of more than his personal honor; he must put the survival of his
people above all else, and he must do whatever is necessary to win.
It's stretching things a bit, however, when we lie in order to make
our job of beating up someone much smaller and weaker a little easier
for us. When our government lies not because it's a matter of national
survival but just for the sake of convenience, that should be
troubling for all of us. That's the case of our propaganda war in
Afghanistan, for example. We drop leaflets with doctored photographs
and lies all over the place, in order to turn the people against their
former Taliban leaders and Osama bin Laden.
Well, lying is the way of democrats and multiculturalists-and that
includes Republicans-but I question whether or not it really makes our
job easier. We air-dropped leaflets on Afghanistan with a phony
photograph of Osama bin Laden wearing a Western suit and with his
beard shaved and his hair cut short and announced that he had given up
the fight so that he could escape to a life of luxury and ease in the
West. That really didn't fool anyone, and it was a completely
unnecessary lie. Then a little later Mr. Bush produced a video tape
that he claimed had been found in an al-Quaida hideout and showed
Osama bin Laden confessing, in effect, to the September 11 attack.
Should we be surprised when Muslims all over the Middle East don't
believe Bush and denounce the video tape as phony?
The fact is that politicians are so accustomed to lying about
everything that they don't even stop to consider the consequences of
their lies. If a lie seems more convenient than the truth at any
moment, they lie- and not just to little people they're beating up at
the moment. American politicians will lie just as readily to their
fellow Americans as they will to Afghans or Pakistanis. And one can
hardly blame them, because the American people have come to expect it
of them and don't seem to hold it against them. Teddy Kennedy murdered
his girlfriend Joann Kopechne and lied outrageously about it, and yet
he's still in the U.S. Senate today. Bill Clinton lied outrageously
about nearly everything, and the voters reelected him.
And as I said, it's not just Democratic politicians. George Bush may
not be as skillful a liar as Bill Clinton, but he's just as much a
liar. That's the democratic way-with a small "d." We live in a
culture of lies, a culture shaped for us by the controlled mass media,
in which lying not only is acceptable, it is required whenever it
helps the cause of Political Correctness. Consider the current
twittering in New York about the 19-foot bronze statue being erected
in honor of the city's firemen. The statue is based on a news
photograph of three New York firemen raising an American flag, Iwo
Jima style, on a mound of rubble at the site of the former World Trade
Center. The three firemen who raised the flag are all White men, as
are 94 per cent of New York City's firemen, and the Whiteness of the
firemen raising the flag can be seen quite clearly in the news
photograph.
Well, that's a Politically Inconvenient fact, and so the 19-foot
statue based on the photograph will show one Negro fireman, one
mestizo fireman, and one White fireman raising the flag. Naturally,
the White firemen who actually raised the flag on the rubble were not
happy when they saw the multicultural model for the statue, and
neither were many of their fellow White firemen.
Tough luck. I suspect that the media bosses, the politicians, and the
Jewish businessmen who favor the multicultural statue will have their
way, and groups of schoolchildren who are shown the statue will be
told that it's an actual depiction of the flag-raising. I'm surprised
they didn't include a female fireman and an Asian fireman helping to
raise the flag and show a couple of gay firemen fondling each other in
the background.
Perhaps it's unfair of me to put too much blame on politicians and
Jewish businessmen for this sort of lying and distortion of reality
for the sake of Political Correctness. Gentile businessmen seem about
as willing to lie as Jewish businessmen. Jesse Jackson, the Black
rabble rouser, con man, and extortionist whose empire seems to be
collapsing now, made a very good living for many years by persuading
businessmen- most of them Gentiles-to lie about race for him. With the
Jewish media backing him, Jackson would threaten White businessmen
with Black boycotts unless they multiculturalized their operations to
his satisfaction-and kicked in a nice, big payoff to Jesse himself.
Jesse would demand that the White businessmen hire Black executives,
picture Blacks in their advertising, and subcontract to Black-owned
businesses.
Instead of standing up to Jackson and calling him an extortionist,
virtually all of the White businessmen decided it would be cheaper to
pay him off, make the changes in personnel and advertising and
subcontracting he demanded, and pretend that they liked it. They paid
for advertising showing White women cuddling up to Black men in order
to please Jesse and pretended that they were doing this of their own
free will. They wanted everyone to know that they were on the
multicultural bandwagon. To me, this is at least as bad as the sort of
lying the politicians do.
And the Gentile academics and publicists are just as crooked these
days. There was a bit of nervous twittering among academic historians
last month when a supposedly scholarly study of firearms ownership in
18th-century America by an Emory University history professor, Michael
Bellesiles, turned out to be fraudulent. Bellesiles claimed to have
studied thousands of 18th-century probate records and found that very
few American families-fewer than 10 per cent-actually owned firearms
in the 18th century; therefore, the legislators who wrote the Second
Amendment obviously didn't intend to guarantee the right of
individuals to keep and bear arms, just militias. Well, that pleased
the nutcase feminist gun-control crowd, but as it turned out,
Bellesiles had faked it. Professional historians professed
embarrassment and outrage over Bellesiles' chicanery, but what
Bellesiles did in trying to scuttle the Second Amendment is quite
innocuous compared to the fraud committed by thousands of other
professional historians, who don't have to worry about being called to
account for their deceit.
I'm talking about the historians of the Second World War and related
subjects, such as the so-called "Holocaust." Every academic historian
worth his salt understands that nearly all the histories of the Second
World War are fraudulent through commission, omission, or both, yet
almost none of these historians will challenge the fraud in the way
Bellesiles' work has been challenged. Why is that?
The reason is that Jews as a whole have a vested interest in the
fraudulent version of the war and of the "Holocaust." Anyone who
questions even the smallest detail of the fraud is attacked viciously
as a-quote-"Holocaust denier" or a-quote-"Nazi sympathizer." In the
case of gun control, nearly all Jews are for it, but they don't have
the vested interest in it that they have in the "Holocaust" and a
number of other myths about the Second World War. So it is still
permissible to be objective in writing about the history of firearms
ownership in America-but it is not permissible to write or teach
anything contrary to revealed dogma about the Second World War. Even
the historians who aren't partisans of the Jews and who don't want to
lie don't have the courage to be truthful.
Imagine that a history professor is teaching his students 20th-century
history, and to avoid violating any taboos he teaches the approved,
"kosher" version. He teaches that in the years prior to the Second
World War the Germans wanted the Jews out of Germany, but he doesn't
explain why. He doesn't talk about what the Jewish commissars were
doing to Russians and Ukrainians in the Soviet death camps. He doesn't
mention the murder of millions of kulaks by the communists, and he
doesn't mention the extraordinarily high percentage of Jews in the
Soviet bureaucracy and in the Soviet secret police and among the
administrators of the Soviet death camps. He doesn't tell his students
that while these things were kept quiet by the media in the United
States, the media in Germany talked openly about them, and the German
people were aware of how the Jews had turned on the helpless Gentiles
under communist rule and butchered them by the millions. He leaves his
students with the impression that the German desire to get the Jews
out of Germany was entirely irrational or was based on jealousy of
Jewish wealth and success.
When he talks about the year preceding Pearl Harbor, he is not likely
to mention that the Roosevelt government was so hot to get the United
States involved in the war against Germany at the behest of the Jews
that the United States was waging undeclared war against Germany in
the Atlantic, hoping for an "incident" that could be used as a pretext
for full-scale hostilities, but that the German Navy was under strict
orders not to respond to U.S. provocations, or that when the Pearl
Harbor attack came it was more of a surprise to the Germans than it
was to the war party in the Roosevelt government, which previously had
broken the Japanese naval code. He leaves his students with the
impression that the United States wanted only peace, and the Germans
wanted only to wage war against us in their mad campaign to conquer
the world.
When he talks about the behavior of the various combatants during the
war, he is likely to follow the Jewish party line and paint the
Germans as barbarians who committed more atrocities than anyone else,
and to paint the Jews as the principal victims of the war. He may not
feel obliged to repeat all of the more fanciful Jewish lies, such as
Jews being skinned by the Germans to make lampshades and then boiled
down to make soap, but he certainly will not describe these lies for
what they are, and he will not challenge the central myth of "six
million" innocent, blameless Jews killed in "gas ovens" by the wicked
Nazis. He will skim lightly over the genocide committed by the Soviets
against the Germans, the Poles, the Balts, and other nationalities
during and after the war, and he will not even hint at the leading
role played by the Jews in this genocide. He is likely to leave his
students believing the oft-repeated lie that the so-called "Holocaust"
was the greatest crime ever committed.
Is such a history professor less culpable than the most mendacious
politician? I think not. And what about the professor of biology or
anthropology who, knowing of the profound differences in mentality, in
psychology, in inborn behavioral patterns that separate the races,
lets his students use a textbook that asserts the sameness of the
races and fails to point out this lie? Should he be forgiven for
betraying the trust placed in him simply because he wants to keep his
job?
As I said, we live in a culture of lies. It's not just the politicians
and the businessmen and the teachers and the news reporters who lie to
us: it's everyone to whom the Jews have a string tied, and that means
most people involved in shaping the popular culture: advertisers and
entertainers and editors and publishers and writers and the rest.
Here's an example: the February issue of Playboy magazine has been on
the newsstands for a couple of weeks now. There's an article in the
magazine titled "Virtual Reich," with a subhead that reads, and I
quote: "Fascism is back, featuring a strange cast of Islamic
fundamentalists, skinheads, and homegrown terrorists. Here's the
sinister part: they're all talking to one another."-end of quote-
It's a trashy article in a trashy magazine, but It mentions me at
length, and that was my reason for choosing it as an example. And with
a circulation of more than 3 million copies each month and probably
half again that many readers, Playboy does have a significant role in
the popular culture. The article is almost entirely make-believe. It
has a few quotations from things I've written, a few quotations from
other people, most of whom I've never met or even corresponded with,
and then it throws us all into one pot and stirs us up as if we're
part of a giant, worldwide, terrorist conspiracy: me along with Muslim
fundamentalists, German and English nationalists, anti-abortionists,
Tim McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski, nutcase Christian millennialists,
environmental activists, and elderly SS veterans-just about everyone
the Jews don't like. It's not only the basic theme of the article that
is wrong-claiming one giant conspiracy where there is none-but the
details are chock full of errors too. It's clear that no one bothered
to check the article for accuracy.
But of course, no one really cared about truthfulness or accuracy in
this article: certainly not the publisher or any of Playboy's editors
or the author, Mike Reynolds, who used to write for the Southern
Poverty Law Center, the ultra-sleazy Jewish propaganda outfit run by
direct-mail fundraising huckster Morris Dees. The purpose of the
article was to frighten America's Joe Sixpacks and Sally Soccermoms,
to send a cold shiver down their spines with the specter of all the
bad guys who want to throw a crimp into their mall shopping and
ballgame watching, ganging up on them. If you can scare them more
easily by lying, then lie. That's the American spirit these days. The
politicians lie, the teachers and professors lie, the media people
lie, the businessmen lie, the magazine writers lie, and for the most
part the American people don't care. Just keep those shopping malls
well stocked and keep plenty of ball games on TV, and they don't care.
It's the acquiescence of the American people in all of this lying,
rather than the liars themselves, that convinces me that the end times
are near. At least, I hope so.
You know, a few minutes ago I mentioned that before the Second World
War the Germans wanted to get the Jews out of their country, and I
told you part of the reason for that. The Germans saw what the Jews
were doing to the Russians and the Ukrainians, and they didn't want to
give the Jews a chance to do the same thing to them. From the end of
the First World War in 1918 until 1933, there was combat in the
streets of Germany's cities between the communists, whose leadership
was heavily Jewish, and the Nazis. There was a real danger that the
communists would win and take over Germany the way they had taken over
Russia. And the German people also knew the role the Jews had had in
bringing the United States into the First World War, causing Germany's
defeat, and leaving the country open to the possibility of a communist
takeover.
But these weren't the only reasons the Germans wanted to be rid of the
Jews. The Jews were very influential in Germany after the First World
War. They were strongly entrenched in the legal profession, in
banking, in advertising and merchandising, in show business, in
organized vice, in publishing and other media. They were trying hard
to change the spirit of Germany. They were pushing modernism in art,
music, and literature. They were pushing for "diversity" and
"tolerance." They were ridiculing German tradition and culture and
morality and the German sense of personal honor, trying hard to make
young Germans believe that it was "cool" to be rootless and
cosmopolitan. They were promoting the same culture of lies that they
have been promoting here.
That was the so-called "Weimar" period, because right after the First
World War some important government business, including the
ratification of a new German constitution, took place in the city of
Weimar. The Jews loved the Weimar period, but it was, in fact, the
most degenerate period in Germany's history. The Jews, of course,
didn't think of it as degenerate. They thought of it as "modern" and
"progressive" and "cool." Really, it was a very Jewish period, where
lying was considered a virtue. The Jews were riding high. Many books
have been written by Jews in America about Weimar Germany, all
praising it to the skies and looking back on it with nostalgia. Even
without the so-called "Holocaust," they never have forgiven the Nazis
for bringing an end to the Weimar period.
There was a Hollywood film made 30 years ago, in 1972, about Weimar
Germany. The film was called Cabaret, and it starred Liza Minelli. It
depicted Berlin night life, with all its degeneracy, including the
flourishing of homosexuality, and also depicted the fight between the
communists and the Jews and the other proponents of modernism on the
one hand and the Nazis on the other hand. The Hollywood filmmakers, of
course, were solidly on the side of the degenerates and portrayed the
Nazis as the bad guys, but this film is another example of the Jews
outsmarting themselves. The Jews who made the film saw everything from
their viewpoint, through their own eyes, and the degenerate Gentiles
under their spell also saw things from the Jewish viewpoint, but the
Jews apparently didn't stop to think-or didn't care-that a normal,
healthy White person would view things differently. Check it out for
yourself. Cabaret is still available in video stores.
The point I am making is this: In the 1920s, after the First World
War, the Jews were trying to do to Germany what they began doing to
America after the Second World War, in the 1960s. Many Germans, the
healthiest elements in Germany, resisted the Jews' efforts, just as
many Americans have resisted the Jews' efforts in America. In Germany
the Jews were a bit premature. Although they had much of the media
under their control, they didn't control all of the media. They tried
to move too fast. The healthiest Germans resisted and beat them.
In America, in the 1960s, the Jews had almost total media control
before they began their big push, and they proceeded more carefully.
In America they are winning. The culture of lies has prevailed in
America. It's still possible for Americans to win, but it's going to
be a lot tougher this time. We'd better get started. The first step is
to regain at least partial control of our media, so that we can begin
contradicting the lies. This American Dissident Voices broadcast is a
part of that first step.
Topaz
To most people statistics don't have much meaning. They're just
numbers. Tell people that 50 years ago 90 per cent of the citizens of
the United States were White, that today only 70 per cent are White,
and that 50 years hence less than half the U.S. population will be
White, and it doesn't move most of them. They can't remember what it
was like 50 years ago, when the United States was unquestionably a
White man's country, and they don't have enough imagination to
visualize what it will be like when Whites are a minority and are
completely at the mercy of Blacks, Asians, mestizos, and Jews. Tell
most people about this trend toward a darker and darker America, and
they will just shrug. They don't see how America's changing
demographics will affect what they can buy at the mall or watch on
television. What is happening to America is happening so slowly that
they aren't alarmed.
That's most people. In a few places in America, however, the changes
are occurring more rapidly, and people are forced to pay attention.
Many of these people are alarmed. I receive letters every week from
listeners who lament what has happened to the towns or the
neighborhoods they grew up in. They tell me that 15 years ago every
family in their neighborhood was White. The streets were clean and
safe. They could leave their doors unlocked without worry. Their kids
could walk to school or play with other kids in the neighborhood in
safety. They could take a stroll in the evening with a wife or a
girlfriend without danger of having lewd comments directed at them.
Today half their neighborhood has become non-White. Streets and yards
are littered with trash, bars have been installed on all first-floor
windows, Their kids get beaten up and have their lunch money stolen,
and no White man in his right mind will expose his woman to the
catcalls and deliberate jostling by the non-White thugs who roam the
streets and hang out in the malls.
We've come to expect changes of this sort in the decaying cities of
the East Coast or in California or Florida or Texas, where the impact
of non-White immigration has been especially heavy during the past few
decades. But the White heartland also is being corrupted now. In fact,
there is a deliberate campaign to corrupt and pollute the White
heartland as quickly as possible.
Iowa is an excellent example of this. One of the Whitest states in the
country, a land of corn-fed, blue-eyed, blond farm boys and girls,
Iowa is looked upon with undisguised hatred and distrust by the
muticultural planners and diversity mongers of the East Coast. From
their point of view Iowa, with less than three per cent minorities in
1990, was far too White, far too Aryan. Something really had to be
done about Iowa. And so they're doing it, with the help of their
natural allies in the statehouse, in the Christian churches, in big
business, and in the media.
Under Iowa's new Democratic governor, Tom Vilsack, state officials
have launched a campaign to bring more non-Whites into Iowa.
Recruiting teams are sent to ghettos and barrios around the country to
persuade Blacks and mestizos to move to Iowa. The government in
Washington is pumping money into a number of special programs in Iowa
to help in the process of multiculturalization. Non-Whites are even
being recruited in Mexico, Africa, and other non-White areas and then
brought to Iowa as government-approved immigrants. A story which
appeared last month- that was May 4 -- in the Chicago Tribune praising
the efforts to darken Iowa contained interviews with several of these
non-White immigrants, including a physician from Ghana married to a
White woman, a meat-packing plant employee from Puerto Rico married to
a Filipina, and a high school student from Laos.
Governor Vilsack and the other politicians justify this program to
racially pollute Iowa with the argument that Iowa's population isn't
growing fast enough through natural increase. Iowa's population
increased by only 5.4 per cent during the 1990s, while the population
of the country as a whole increased by 9.6 per cent. Without a faster
growth in population, claim the multiculturalizers, the economy will
be hurt. The pretense is made that there will be no one to do
essential jobs. The Chicago Tribune quotes Governor Vilsack: "Who is
going to farm the land? Who is going to teach our children? Who is
going to care for our medical needs?"
This same spurious argument is being used by the enemies of our people
in Europe to justify opening the borders of European countries to the
Third World. Europeans aren't breeding fast enough to maintain the
various welfare programs and social services needed to provide for an
aging White population, so fast-breeding Third Worlders should be
brought in to keep the population growing, say the multiculturalizers.
Of course, any scheme which depends upon a continually growing
population must eventually come to grief, when the land can support no
more people. Did you catch that? Any plan, any program, which requires
a continually growing population for its success is fundamentally
flawed and eventually must fail. But the people pushing such schemes
onto a gullible White public don't really care about the long-range
prospects. For them the scheme is simply a trick to get as many
non-Whites as possible mixed in with the White population as quickly
as possible. They believe that once they have done that it will be too
difficult-too bloody-a task for us to unmix what they have mixed. They
will be surprised at what we are willing to do to repair the damage
they have done.
Listen: If Iowans need more teachers and doctors, the law of supply
and demand will take care of that. Iowans may have to offer higher pay
to attract needed White workers from other parts of the country, but
that is the way things always have worked. The argument that
non-Whites are necessary to keep the economy alive is fraudulent, but
the politicians, the Christian churches, the big businessmen, and
above all the media- the untouchable Jewish media-are supporting this
fraud-this genocidal lie-and few citizens, in Europe or in Iowa, are
bold enough to challenge it.
The fact is that much of the 5.4 per cent increase in Iowa's
population during the 1990s has been mestizos brought in by the owners
of meat-packing plants looking for cheap labor. This has resulted in
those Iowa communities with meat-packing plants being especially hard
hit by the multicultural onslaught. Storm Lake, a town of 10,000
residents in northwestern Iowa, is an example. In 1990 Storm Lake was
virtually all White, a nice place to live and to raise a family. Today
a third of Storm Lake's residents are non-White, and the quality of
life has changed accordingly. In all of the 1980s there was just one
homicide in Storm Lake. Between 1990 and 2000, as the town went from
all White to one-third non-White, there were 10 murders, and other
crime also rose proportionately.
This sudden destruction of their community and their life-style in the
course of only a decade shocked a few of Storm Lake's White residents
into speaking out. The multiculturalists have responded by bringing
their road show to town, proclaiming Storm Lake a wonderful example of
how a diverse group of people can live and work together, and
denouncing anyone who doesn't want to go along with the continued
destruction of Iowa as a "racist" and a "bigot." With the Christian
clergy and the media noisily on their side and the big businessmen
providing support from behind the scenes, the multiculturalists have
been moderately successful at shouting down the dissidents even in
heavily impacted areas such as Storm Lake.
The local high school students, raised on MTV, have been taught that a
White Iowa is a boring Iowa, and that having lots of non-Whites around
adds some buzz to an otherwise dull life. The Chicago Tribune article
I cited earlier had an interview with a 17-year-old White high school
girl in Storm Lake. Looking around at the non-Whites who make up
nearly half of her high school classmates, Jill Parman said, and I
quote: "I know that Iowa doesn't look like this, but it would be a
whole lot less boring of a state if it did."
Thoroughly jaded young people such as Jill Parman, taught by
television that life should, above all else, be entertaining, are
quite susceptible to the poison disseminated by the multiculturalists.
And the multiculturalists are indeed proud of their ability to use
their control of the mass media-especially television-to take over the
minds of the younger generation and alienate them from their people
and from their people's traditions and values. They have become quite
self-confident-arrogant, really-in their ability to keep dissent
within manageable limits as they continue their genocidal work.
An even better example of this than Storm Lake is the small town of
Postville, in northeastern Iowa. Postville is undergoing an even more
traumatic racial and cultural transformation than Storm Lake. A decade
ago Postville was an all-White, all-Christian farming community of
1,000 souls, most of German and Norwegian ancestry. Then Aaron
Rubashkin, a Hasidic Jew who owns a kosher meat market for supplying
his fellow Hasids in New York City, opened a kosher slaughterhouse in
Postville. He had bought Postville's bankrupt meat-packing plant from
its Gentile owners and converted it to kosher use, because he could
get his meat slaughtered much more cheaply in Postville than in New
York, even when the cost of shipping the meat from Iowa to New York
was included. Today he and his son Shalom run the slaughterhouse,
which employs 300 workers, nearly all of them non-Whites recruited by
Aaron and Shalom outside Iowa and brought to Postville specifically to
work in the slaughterhouse. They also brought more than 30
Ultra-Orthodox rabbis and their families to town. The rabbis do the
actual slaughtering of the animals according to Jewish ritual, a
shockingly inhumane procedure, which has been outlawed in many
jurisdictions.
The White people of Postville feel overwhelmed. Their town has been
stolen from them. Ten years ago everyone they met on the sidewalk or
in the local pizza parlor was a neighbor, someone they had gone to
school with, someone they shared values and traditions with. Now they
see Orthodox Jews wearing black hats and prayer shawls and talking to
each other in Hebrew. They see Mexicans and Nigerians and Vietnamese
lounging against the lampposts and jabbering at one another in other
strange languages. They see their schools, which used to be entirely
White, swamped with dusky aliens.
But it is the Jews who are the most difficult for the people of
Postville to accept. The Jews are all from New York City. They are
loud and pushy. They are fast-talking hustlers. They are arrogant.
They make no effort to adapt themselves to the ways of Postville.
Instead they demand that Postville adapt itself to them. They even
ignore the local laws with contempt. The Rubashkins dump the waste
from their kosher slaughterhouse into the local river, polluting it so
badly that it no longer is suitable for fishing or swimming or
boating. Postville imposed a $2 million fine on the Rubashkins, who
simply refuse to pay and keep on polluting, knowing that the governor
and the media are on their side.
And unfortunately, some of the White people of Postville are on their
side too. The City Council members, for example. And the people at the
local newspaper. The newspaper hired a Jewess to write a regular
column. When there was a vacancy on the City Council, the council
members appointed a Jew to the council, saying that it would be good
for the local economy. When local citizens circulated a petition
protesting the appointment, they were accused of anti-Semitism by the
newspaper. That intimidated most of the White citizens into silence,
but not 81-year-old Dorothy Radloff. She said that she didn't want a
Jew on the City Council. She went further, saying what many other
Whites in Postville were feeling but were afraid to say, and I quote:
"We're just afraid if they get one in, then pretty soon the whole
council will be Jewish, and they're going to run the town. They're
working to take the town over and push the rest of us out."-end of
quote-
But with the support of the newspaper and the other council members
and the mayor, the Jew, Aaron Goldsmith, won a special election two
months ago. There's something about politicians and journalists. And
the gullibility and blind tolerance of our people for getting kicked
in the teeth and not fighting back seem to know no limits. Perhaps if
the White citizens of Postville, Iowa, had known a little more about
the Hasidic Jews who are taking over their town and flooding it with
non-Whites, besides the fact that they are pushy and arrogant, the
election to the City Council might have turned out differently.
The Rubashkins and the other Jews associated with the kosher
slaughterhouse all are members of the Ultra-Orthodox Lubavitcher sect.
The Lubavitchers are those strange-looking Jews one sees in New York
wearing long, black coats and black hats, with sideburns down to their
shoulders. The late leader of the sect, Rabbi Menachem Mendel
Schneerson, was worshipped like a divinity by his followers, including
the Rubashkins and all of the other Jews they brought to Postville.
Rabbi Schneerson was a real Old Testament Jew, a Talmud Jew, who
preached to his followers the unadulterated doctrines of the Talmud,
including the doctrine of Jewish superiority and the doctrine that the
Jews are the chosen people of God, ordained to rule all the other
nations of the world and own all their possessions. His sermons have
been published, although you're not likely to find them in the New
York Times or any other place where Gentiles might read them. But I'll
read you a selection from one of them, just to give you the flavor.
Rabbi Schneerson preached, and I quote:
"The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from
the body of a member of any other nation of the world . . . . The
Jewish body looks as if in substance it were similar to the bodies of
non-Jews, but . . . the bodies only seem to be similar in material
substance, outward look, and superficial quality. The difference of
the inner quality, however, is so great that the bodies should be
considered as completely different species. This is the reason why the
Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about
the bodies of non-Jews. . . . Their bodies are in vain. . . . An even
greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of
soul exist. A non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while
the Jewish soul comes from holiness."-end of quote-
Well, Rabbi Schneerson had much more to say in his preaching to his
followers about the satanic nature of Gentiles and the holy nature of
Jews, but perhaps you've gotten the general idea from what I've just
read. The general idea is that Jewish superiority has been bestowed on
them by their deity. The Jews are so superior to us that they are
justified in doing to us whatever they want. They are entitled to
deceive us and plunder us and take all our possessions from us, and it
is a transgression against their deity for us to attempt to protect
ourselves. That's what the Hasids believe. That's what the Rubashkins
and all the other Jews in Postville believe. It's too bad that there
was no one to tell the White citizens of Postville what the Jews
really think about them before they elected one of the Jews to their
City Council.
Perhaps Dorothy Radloff had some inkling of the truth when she told
her fellow citizens. "They're working to take the town over and push
the rest of us out." Indeed. Unfortunately, too many of her fellow
citizens failed to heed her warning. They listened instead to their
Christian preachers and their local politicians and their newspaper.
They have for all practical purposes lost their town. They are too
confused and demoralized and disunited to put up an effective
opposition to the Jews. And if they really started to clean up their
town and take it back, Mr. Bush would send in the FBI to stop them.
They would be arrested and charged with "hate crimes."
At this point we might ask: Why are the Jews and their allies doing
it? Why are they hell bent on destroying White areas like Iowa? Why
aren't they satisfied with what they have done to California and to
the big cities of the East? Why do they want to make the whole country
look like New Jersey and New York? Why do they deliberately destroy
all-White communities such as Storm Lake and Postville?
I'll read you a few words written by Professor Earl Raab of Brandeis
University's Institute for Jewish Advocacy. I quote: "The Census
Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population
will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American
citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party
will be able to prevail in this country.
"We have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to ethnic
bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been
perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to
make it irreversible . . . ."-end of quote-
In plain language, Professor Raab is boasting that he and his fellow
Jews have changed the immigration laws-and prevented the government
from enforcing what immigration laws we still have-in order to make
the American population more heterogeneous, or, to use the more
familiar term, more diverse. Their goal is to make Whites a minority
in their own country so that the Whites can never combine against the
Jews and regain control of their own destiny. You can read more of
Professor Raab's sinister scheming in a book which is available from
my sponsor, National Vanguard Books. That book is Alien Nation, by
Peter Brimelow.
Professor Raab and his fellow Jews aim not only at eliminating the
White majority in the country as a whole, but also at polluting and
corrupting every White area inside the country, so there will be no
one capable of organizing an effective opposition to the Jews. They
will be the only racially conscious group still able to wield power.
What the Jews have done to Postville and are busy doing to the rest of
Iowa is just one step in their grand scheme for implementing a Final
Solution to the Gentile problem. This Final Solution is not being
implemented with concentration camps and gas chambers, but with bought
politicians, with corrupt preachers, and above all with television and
other mass media. It is being implemented by flooding the country-and
every White area inside the country-with non-Whites and by encouraging
miscegenation. It is being implemented through programs aimed at
increasing diversity. It is being implemented by deceiving and
brainwashing White people to collaborate in their own destruction.
The hour for our people is late indeed-but it's still not too late.
It's still not too late to fight back.
Topaz
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
Topaz
Kevin MacDonald's The Culture of Critique
Reviewed by Stanley Hornbeck
In The Culture of Critique, Kevin MacDonald advances a carefully
researched but extremely controversial thesis: that certain 20th
century intellectual movements -- largely established and led by Jews
-- have changed European societies in fundamental ways and destroyed
the confidence of Western man. He claims that these movements were
designed, consciously or unconsciously, to advance Jewish interests
even though they were presented to non-Jews as universalistic and even
utopian. He concludes that the increasing dominance of these ideas has
had profound political and social consequences that benefited Jews but
caused great harm to gentile societies. This analysis, which he makes
with considerable force, is an unusual indictment of a people
generally
thought to be more sinned against than sinning.
The Culture of Critique is the final title in Prof. MacDonald's
massive, three-volume study of Jews and their role in history. The two
previous volumes are A People That Shall Dwell Alone and Separation
and
its Discontents, published by Praeger in 1994 and 1998. The series is
written from a sociobiological perspective that views Judaism as a
unique survival strategy that helps Jews compete with other ethnic
groups. Prof. MacDonald, who is a psychologist at the University of
California at Long Beach, explains this perspective in the first
volume, which describes Jews as having a very powerful sense of
uniqueness that has kept them socially and genetically separate from
other peoples. The second volume traces the history of Jewish-gentile
relations, and finds the causes of anti-Semitism primarily in the
almost invariable commercial and intellectual dominance of gentile
societies by Jews and in their refusal to assimilate. The Culture of
Critique brings his analysis into the present century, with an account
of the Jewish role in the radical critique of traditional culture.
The intellectual movements Prof. MacDonald discusses in this volume
are
Marxism, Freudian psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt school of sociology,
and Boasian anthropology. Perhaps most relevant from a racial
perspective, he also traces the role of Jews in promoting
multi-culturalism and Third World immigration. Throughout his analysis
Prof. MacDonald reiterates his view that Jews have promoted these
movements as Jews and in the interests of Jews, though they have often
tried to give the impression that they had no distinctive interests of
their own. Therefore Prof. MacDonald's most profound charge against
Jews is not ethnocentrism but dishonesty -- that while claiming to be
working for the good of mankind they have often worked for their own
good and to the detriment of others. While attempting to promote the
brotherhood of man by dissolving the ethnic identification of
gentiles,
Jews have maintained precisely the kind of intense group solidarity
they decry as immoral in others.
Celebrating Diversity
Prof. MacDonald claims that one of the most consistent ways in which
Jews have advanced their interests has been to promote pluralism and
diversity -- but only for others. Ever since the 19th century, they
have led movements that tried to discredit the traditional foundations
of gentile society: patriotism, racial loyalty, the Christian basis
for
morality, social homogeneity, and sexual restraint. At the same time,
within their own communities, and with regard to the state of Israel,
they have often supported the very institutions they attack in gentile
society.
Why is this in the interests of Jews? Because the parochial group
loyalty characteristic of Jews attracts far less attention in a
society
that does not have a cohesive racial and cultural core. The Jewish
determination not to assimilate fully, which accounts for their
survival as a people for thousands for years -- even without a country
-- has invariably attracted unpleasant and even murderous scrutiny in
nations with well -defined national identities. In Prof. MacDonald's
view it is therefore in the interest of Jews to dilute and weaken the
identity of any people among whom they live. Jewish identity can
flower
in safety only when gentile identity is weak.
Prof. MacDonald quotes a remarkable passage from Charles Silberman:
"American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their
belief -- one firmly rooted in history -- that Jews are safe only in a
society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well
as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for
example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming
majority of American Jews to endorse 'gay rights' and to take a
liberal
stance on most other so-called 'social' issues."
He is saying, in effect, that when Jews make the
diversity-is-our-strength argument it is in support of their real goal
of diluting a society's homogeneity so that Jews will feel safe. They
are couching a Jewish agenda in terms they think gentiles will accept.
Likewise, as the second part of the Silberman quotation suggests, Jews
may support deviant movements, not because they think it is good for
the country but because it is good for the Jews.
Prof. Silberman also provides an illuminating quote from a Jewish
economist who thought that republicans had more sensible economic
policies but who voted for the Democratic presidential candidate
anyway. His reason? "I'd rather live in a country governed by the
faces
I saw at the Democratic convention than those I saw at the Republican
convention." This man apparently distrusts white gentiles and voted
for
a racially mixed party even if its economic policies were wrong. What
is good for Jews appears to come before what is good for the country.
Earl Raab, former president of heavily Jewish Brandeis University
makes
the diversity argument in a slightly different way. Expressing his
satisfaction with the prediction that by the middle of the next
century
whites will become a minority, he writes, "We have tipped beyond the
point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this
country." He is apparently prepared to displace the people and culture
of the founding stock in order to prevent the theoretical rise of an
anti-Jewish regime. Prof. Raab appears to see whites mainly as
potential Nazis, and is willing to sacrifice their culture and
national
continuity in order to defuse an imagined threat to Jews. This passage
takes for granted the continued future existence of Jews as a distinct
community even as gentile whites decline in numbers and influence.
In the same passage, Prof. Raab continues by noting that, "[w]e [Jews]
have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for
about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the
heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it
irreversible..." -- just as it tends to make the ultimate displacement
of European culture also irreversible.
Prof. MacDonald traces the development of this diversity strategy to
several sources. It is widely recognized that the German-Jewish
immigrant Franz Boas (1858-1942) almost single-handedly established
the
current contours of anthropology, ridding it of all biological
explanations for differences in human culture or behavior. Prof.
MacDonald reports that he and his followers -- with the notable
exceptions of Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict -- were all Jews with
strong Jewish identities: "Jewish identification and the pursuit of
perceived Jewish interests, particularly in advocating an ideology of
cultural pluralism as a model for Western societies, has been the
'invisible subject' of American anthropology."
By 1915, Boas and his students controlled the American Anthropological
Association and by 1926 they headed every major American university
anthropology department. From this position of dominance they promoted
the idea that race and biology are trivial matters, and that
environment counts for everything. They completely recast anthropology
so as to provide intellectual support for open immigration,
integration, and miscegenation. They also laid the foundation for the
idea that because all races have the same potential, the failures of
non-whites must be blamed exclusively on white oppression. The
ultimate
conclusion of Boasian anthropology was that since environment accounts
for all human differences, every inequality in achievement can be
eliminated by changing the environment. This has been the
justification
for enormous and wasteful government intervention programs.
The entire "civil rights" movement can be seen as a natural
consequence
of the triumph of Boasian thinking. Since all races were equivalent,
separation was immoral. The color line also sharpened white
self-consciousness in ways that might make whites more aware of Jewish
parochialism. Thus it was, according to Prof. MacDonald, that Jews
almost single-handedly launched the desegregation movement. Without
the
leadership of Jews, the NAACP might never have been established, and
until 1975 every one of its presidents was a Jew. Prof. MacDonald
reports that in 1917, when the black separatist Marcus Garvey visited
NAACP headquarters, he saw so many white faces that he stormed out,
complaining that it was a white organization.
Prof. MacDonald concludes that the efforts of Jews were crucial to the
"civil rights" transformation of America. He quotes a lawyer for the
American Jewish Congress who claims that "many of these [civil rights]
laws were actually written in the offices of Jewish agencies by Jewish
staff people, introduced by Jewish legislators and pressured into
being
by Jewish voters."
While the Boas school was promoting integration and racial
equivalence,
it was also critical of, in Prof. MacDonald's words, "American culture
as overly homogeneous, hypocritical, emotionally and aesthetically
repressive (especially with regard to sexuality). Central to this
program was creating ethnographies of idyllic [Third-World] cultures
that were free of the negatively perceived traits that were attributed
to Western culture."
The Role of the anthropologist became one of criticizing everything
about Western society while glorifying everything primitive. Prof.
MacDonald notes that Boasian portrayals of non-Western peoples
deliberately ignored barbarism and cruelty or simply attributed it to
contamination from the West. He sees this as a deliberate attempt to
undermine the confidence of Western societies and to make them
permeable to Third World influences and people. Today, this view is
enshrined in the dogma that America must remain open to immigration
because immigrants bring spirit and energy that natives somehow lack.
Authoritarian Personalities
In order to open European-derived societies to the immigration that
would transform them, it was necessary to discredit racial solidarity
and commitment to tradition. Prof. MacDonald argues that this was the
basic purpose of a group of intellectuals known as the Frankfurt
School. What is properly known as the Institute of Social Research was
founded in Frankfurt, Germany, during the Weimar period by a Jewish
millionaire but was closed down by the Nazis shortly after they took
power. Most of its staff emigrated to the United States and the
institute reconstituted itself at UC Berkeley. The organization was
headed by Max Horkheimer, and its most influential members were T.W.
Adorno, Erich Fromm, and Herbert Marcuse, all of whom had strong
Jewish
identities. Horkheimer made no secret of the partisan nature of the
institute's activities: "Research would be able here to transform
itself directly into propaganda," he wrote. (Italics in the original)
Prof. MacDonald devotes many pages to an analysis of The Authoritarian
Personality, which was written by Adorno and appeared in 1950. It was
part of a series called Studies in Prejudice, produced by the
Frankfurt
school, which included titles like Anti-Semitism and Emotional
Disorder. The Authoritarian Personality, which was particularly
influential because, according to Prof. MacDonald, the American Jewish
Committee heavily funded its promotion and because Jewish academics
took up its message so enthusiastically.
The book's purpose is to make every group affiliation sound as if it
were a sign of mental disorder. Everything from patriotism to religion
to family -- and race -- loyalty are sign of a dangerous and defective
"authoritarian personality." Because drawing distinctions between
different groups is illegitimate, all group loyalties -- even close
family ties! -- are "prejudice." As Christopher Lasch has written, the
book leads to the conclusion that prejudice "could be eradicated only
by subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective
psychotherapy -- by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum."
But according to Prof. MacDonald it is precisely the kind of group
loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences
central to Jewish identity that Horkheimer and Adorno described as
mental illness in gentiles. These writers adopted what eventually
became a favorite Soviet tactic against dissidents: Anyone whose
political views were different from theirs was insane. As Prof.
MacDonald explains, the Frankfurt school never criticized or even
described Jewish group identity -- only that of gentiles: "behavior
that is critical to Judaism as a successful group evolutionary
strategy
is conceptualized as pathological in gentiles."
For these Jewish intellectuals, anti-Semitism was also a sign of
mental
illness: They concluded that Christian self-denial and especially
sexual repression caused hatred of Jews. The Frankfurt school was
enthusiastic about psycho-analysis, according to which "Oedipal
ambivalence toward the father and anal-sadistic relations in early
childhood are the anti-Semite's irrevocable inheritance."
In addition to ridiculing patriotism and racial identity, the
Frankfurt
school glorified promiscuity and Bohemian poverty. Prof. MacDonald
sees
the school as a seminal influence: "Certainly many of the central
attitudes of the largely successful 1960s countercultural revolution
find expression in The Authoritarian Personality, including idealizing
rebellion against parents, low-investment sexual relationships, and
scorn for upward social mobility, social status, family pride, the
Christian religion, and patriotism."
Of the interest here, however, is the movement's success in branding
ancient loyalties to nation and race as mental illnesses. Although he
came later, the French-Jewish "deconstructionist" Jacques Derrida was
in the same tradition when he wrote:
"The idea behind deconstruction is to deconstruct the workings of
strong nation-states with powerful immigration policies, to
deconstruct
the rhetoric of nationalism, the politics of place, the metaphysics of
native land and native tongue... The idea is to disarm the bombs... of
identity that nation-states build to defend themselves against the
stranger, against Jews and Arabs and immigrants... "
As Prof. MacDonald puts it, "Viewed at its most abstract level, a
fundamental agenda is thus to influence the European-derived peoples
of
the United States to view concern about their own demographic and
cultural eclipse as irrational and as an indication of
psychopathology." Needless to say, this project has been successful;
anyone opposed to the displacement of whites is routinely treated as a
mentally unhinged "hate-monger," and whenever whites defend their
group
interests they are described as psychologically inadequate. The irony
has not escaped Prof. MacDonald: "The ideology that ethnocentrism was
a
form of psychopathology was promulgated by a group that over its long
history had arguably been the most ethnocentric group among all the
cultures of the world."
Immigration
Prof. MacDonald argues that it is entirely natural for Jews to promote
open immigration. It brings about the "diversity" Jews find comforting
and it keeps America open to persecuted co-religionists throughout the
world. He says Jews are the only group that has always fought for mass
immigration; a few European ethnic organizations have made sporadic
efforts to make it easier for their own people to come, but only Jews
have consistently promoted open borders for all comers. Moreover,
whatever disagreements they may have had on other issues, Jews of
every
political persuasion have favored high immigration.
This, too, goes back many years, and Prof. MacDonald traces in
considerable detail the sustained Jewish pro-immigration effort.
Israel
Zangwill, author of the eponymous 1908 play The Melting Pot, was of
the
view that "there is only one way to World Peace, and that is the
absolute abolition of passports, visas, frontiers, custom houses... "
He was nevertheless an ardent Zionist and disapproved of Jewish
intermarriage.
Although the statue of liberty, properly known as Liberty Enlightening
the World, was a gift to the United States from France as a tribute to
American political traditions, the sonnet by the Jewish Emma Lazarus
helped change it into a symbol of immigration. Affixed to the base of
the statue several decades after its construction, the poem welcomes
to
America "huddled masses yearning to breath free/The wretched refuse of
your teeming shore."
Prof. MacDonald has discovered that implausible arguments about
diversity being a quintessentially American strength have been made by
Jews for a long time. He reports that in 1948 the American Jewish
Committee was urging Congress to believe that "Americanism is the
spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to
people of all races, all religions, all nationalities." Of course,
there had never been such a tradition. In 1952, the American Jewish
Congress argued in hearings on immigration that "our national
experience has confirmed beyond a doubt that our very strength lies in
the diversity of our peoples." This, too, was at a time when U.S.
immigration law was still explicitly designed to maintain a white
majority.
It is often said that when the old immigration policy was scrapped in
1965, scarcely anyone knew, and no one predicted, that the new law
would change the racial makeup of the country. Prof. MacDonald
disputes
this, arguing that this had been the objective of Jewish groups from
the beginning.
Prof. MacDonald finds that Jews have been the foremost advocates of
immigration in England, France, and Canada, and that Jewish groups
were
the most vocal opponents of independence for Quebec. Australian Jews
led the effort to dismantle the "white Australia" policy, one reason
for which was cited in an editorial in the Australian Jewish Democrat:
"The strengthening of multi-cultural or diverse Australia is also our
most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day
Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would feel more
confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian." Like Earl
Raab
writing about the United States, this Australian Jew is prepared to
sacrifice the traditional culture, people, and identity of Australia
to
specifically Jewish interests. It would not be surprising if such an
openly expressed objective did not have the opposite effect from the
intended, and increase anti-Jewish sentiment.
Jews and the Left
It is well known that Jews have been traditionally associated with the
left, and Prof. MacDonald investigates this connection in some detail.
Historically it was understandable that Jews should support movements
that advocated overthrowing the existing order. After emancipation,
Jews met resistance from gentile elites who did not want to lose
ground
to competitors, and outsiders easily become revolutionaries. However,
in Prof. MacDonald's view, Jewish commitment to leftist causes has
often been motivated by the hope that communism, especially, would be
a
tool for combating anti-Semitism, and by expectation that universalist
social solutions would be yet another way to dissolve gentile
loyalties
that might exclude Jews. The appeal of univeralist ideologies is tied
to the implicit understanding that Jewish particularism will be
exempt:
"At the extreme, acceptance of a universalist ideology by gentiles
would result in gentiles not perceiving Jews as in a different social
category at all, while nonetheless Jews would be able to maintain a
strong personal identity as Jews."
Prof. MacDonald argues that Jews had specifically Jewish reasons for
supporting the Bolshevik revolution. Czarist Russia was notorious for
its anti-Semitic policies and, during its early years, the Soviet
Union
seemed to be the promised land for Jews: it ended state anti-Semitism,
tried to eradicate Christianity, opened opportunities to individual
Jews, and preached a "classless" society in which Jewishness would
presumably attract no negative attention. Moreover, since Marxism
taught that all conflict was economic rather than ethnic, many Jews
believed it heralded the end of anti-Semitism.
Prof. MacDonald emphasizes that although Jewish Communists preached
both atheism and the solidarity of the world's working people, they
took pains to preserve a distinct, secular Jewish identity. He reports
that Lenin himself (who had one Jewish grandparent) approved the
continuation of an explicitly Jewish identity under Communism, and in
1946 the Communist Party of the United States voted a resolution also
supporting Jewish peoplehood in Communist countries. Thus, although
Communism was supposed to be without borders or religion, Jews were
confident that it would make a place for their own group identity. He
writes that despite the official view that all men were to be
brothers,
"very few Jews lost their Jewish identity during the entire soviet
era."
Jewish Communists sometimes betrayed remarkable particularism. Prof.
MacDonald quotes Charles Pappoport, the French Communist leader: "The
Jewish people [are] the bearer of all the great ideas of unity and
human community in history... The disappearance of the Jewish people
would signify the death of humankind, the final transformation of man
into a wild beast." This seems to attribute to Jews an elite position
incompatible with "unity and human community."
Prof. MacDonald argues that many Jews began to fall away from
Communism
only after Stalin showed himself to be anti-Semitic. And just as Jews
had been the leading revolutionaries in anti-Semitic pre-Revolutionary
Russia, Jews became the leading dissidents in an anti-Semitic Soviet
Union. A similar pattern can be found in the imposed Communist
governments of Eastern Europe, which were largely dominated by Jews.
The majority of the leaders of the Polish Communist Party, for
example,
spoke better Yiddish than Polish, and they too maintained a strong
Jewish identity. After the fall of Communism many stopped being Polish
and emigrated to Israel.
Prof. MacDonald writes that in Bela Kun's short-lived 1919 Communist
government of Hungary, 95 percent of the leaders were Jews, and that
at
the time of the 1956 uprising Communism was so closely associated with
Jews that the rioting had almost the flavor of a pogrom. He argues
that
in the United States as well, the hard core among Communists and
members of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was mainly Jewish.
Here, too, a revolutionary, atheist, and universalist world-view was
fully compatible with strong identification as Jews. Prof. MacDonald
quotes from a study of American leftists:
"Many Communists, for example, state that they could never have
married
a spouse who was not a leftist. When Jews were asked if they could
have
married Gentiles, many hesitated, surprised by the question, and found
it difficult to answer. Upon reflection, many concluded that they had
always taken marriage to someone Jewish for granted." Their commitment
as Jews was even more fundamental and unexamined than their commitment
to the left.
Prof. MacDonald reports that many American Jews also abandoned
Communism as it became increasingly anti-Semitic. For a large number,
the Soviet Union's severing of diplomatic ties with Israel during the
1967 war was the last straw. A former SDS activist no doubt spoke for
many when he explained, "If I must choose between the Jewish cause and
a 'progressive' anti-Israel SDS, I shall choose the Jewish cause. If
barricades are erected, I will fight as a Jew." According to Prof.
MacDonald, American neoconservatism can also be described as a surface
shift in external politics that leaves the more fundamental commitment
to Jewish identity unchanged. Thus, former leftists abandoned an
ideology that had turned against Israel and refashioned American
conservatism into a different movement, the one unshakable theme of
which was support for Israel. Neoconservatives also support high
levels
of immigration and were active in excluding white racial
identification
from the "respectable" right.
Objections
There are many possible objections to Prof. MacDonald's thesis. The
first is that it is largely built on the assumption that Jews are
dishonest. It is always risky to assume one understands the motives of
others better than they do themselves. Jews have traditionally thought
of themselves as a benevolent presence, even as a "light unto the
nations" or a "chosen people." This is echoed today in the Jewish self
image as champions of the excluded and the oppressed. Most of the time
what passes for "social justice" has the effect of undermining the
traditions and loyalties of gentile society, but are Jews deliberately
undermining these things rather than righting what they perceive to be
wrongs?
Prof. MacDonald concedes that many Jews are sincere in their support
for liberal causes, but then escalates his indictment by arguing that
"the best deceivers are those who deceive themselves." In other words,
many Jews who are actually working for Jewish interests have first
convinced themselves otherwise. A Jew who mainly wants America to
become less white may also have convinced himself that America
benefits
from a multitude of cultures. Having convinced himself he can more
effectively convince others.
Many Jews, Prof. MacDonald argues, are not even conscious of the
extent
to which their Jewishness is central to their identities or their
political views. He quotes Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel on his
surprise
at how passionately he embraced the Israeli side during the 1967 war:
"I had not known how Jewish I was." This is an arresting statement
from
a man who was thought to be perhaps the greatest Jewish spiritual
leader of his time. And whether or not it affects their politics, Jews
certainly appear to have a very vivid sense of peoplehood. Prof.
MacDonald quotes theologian Eugene Borowitz as saying,"most Jews claim
to be equipped with an interpersonal friend-or-foe sensing device that
enables them to detect the presence of another Jew, despite heavy
camouflage." Always to think in terms of "friends or foe" is no
insignificant matter.
Prof. MacDonald is therefore skeptical of Jewish disavowals: "Surface
declarations of a lack of Jewish identity may be highly misleading."
He
notes that Jewish publications write about the power and influence of
American Jews in language Jews would immediately denounce as
"anti-Semitic" if used by gentiles. He agrees with Joseph Sobran, who
has said "they want to be Jews among themselves but resent being seen
as Jews by Gentiles. They want to pursue their own distinct interests
while pretending that they have no such interests ... "
Prof. MacDonald argues that the success of Jewish-led intellectual
movements has been possible only because their Jewish character was
hidden. If multi-culturalism or mass immigration or The Authoritarian
Personality had been promoted by Orthodox Jews in black coats the
Jewish element would have been clear. Prof. MacDonald writes that in
fact, "the Jewish political agenda was not an aspect of the theory and
the theories themselves had no overt Jewish content. Gentile
intellectuals approaching these theories were therefore unlikely to
view them as aspects of Jewish-gentile cultural competition or as an
aspect of a specifically Jewish political agenda." Prof. MacDonald
also
claims that Jews have often tried to conceal the Jewish character of
an
intellectual movement by recruiting token gentiles for visible
positions as spokesmen. He writes that this tactic was so common in
the
American Communist Party that gentiles often saw through it and
resigned.
But how can motives ever be completely known? Prof. MacDonald sets a
difficult test: "The best evidence that individuals have really ceased
to have a Jewish identity is if they choose a political option that
they perceive as clearly not in the interest of Jews as a group. In
the
absence of a clearly perceived conflict with Jewish interests, it
remains possible that different political choices among ethnic Jews
are
only differences in tactics for how best to achieve Jewish interests."
This standard may seem unduly harsh -- until it is applied to white
gentiles. Third-World immigration, affirmative action,
anti-discrimination laws, and forced integration are clearly not in
the
interests of whites, yet many whites embrace them, thus demonstrating
how completely they have abandoned their racial identity.
Finally, Prof. MacDonald raises the disturbing possibility that some
Jews, because of centuries of conflict with gentiles, actively hate
gentile society and consciously wish to destroy it: "a fundamental
motivation of Jewish intellectuals involved in social criticism has
simply been hatred of the gentile-dominated power structure perceived
as anti-Semitic." He describes the 19th century German-Jewish poet
Heinrich Heine as "using his skill, reputation and popularity to
undermine the intellectual confidence of the established order."
In defense of this highly provocative view, Prof. MacDonald quotes
Benjamin Disraeli on the effects of centuries of Jewish-gentile
relations on Jews: "They may have become so odious and so hostile to
mankind as to merit for their present conduct, no matter how
occasioned, the obloquy and ill-treatment of the communities in which
they dwell and with which they are scarcely permitted to mingle."
Apart from any questions of motives, however, is the question of
numbers. Jews are a tiny minority in the United States and within that
minority there is disagreement even on matters that clearly affect
Jews. How can Jews possibly be responsible for dramatic changes in the
intellectual landscape? In Prof. MacDonald's view, the explanation
lies
in the intelligence, energy, dedication, and cohesiveness of Jews. He
attributes a great deal to the average IQ of Jews -- at 115, a full
standard deviation above the white gentile average -- and to "their
hard work and dedication, their desire to make a mark on the world,
and
their desire to rise in the world, engage in personal promotion, and
achieve public acclaim... " He also believes Jews have worked together
unfailingly on any question they consider necessary for survival:
"Intellectual activity is like any other human endeavor: Cohesive
groups outcompete individual strategies." He notes that there has
never
been a time when large numbers of white Americans favored non-white
immigration; it was a cohesive, determined minority that beat down the
disorganized resistance of the majority.
Prof. MacDonald believes that because of the effectiveness of some
Jews, it was not even necessary that most Jews actively support
anti-majoritarian movements, but that Jewish activity was still
decisive. As he puts it, "Jewish-dominated intellectual movements were
a critical factor (necessary condition) for the triumph of the
intellectual left in late twentieth-century Western societies." This,
of course, can never be tested, but there can be no doubt that
American
Jews have had a disproportionate effect on the American intellect.
Prof. MacDonald quotes Walter Kerr, writing in 1968, to the effect
that
"what has happened since World War II is that the American sensibility
has become part Jewish, perhaps as much Jewish as it is anything
else... The literate American mind has come in some measure to think
Jewishly."
Aside from the question of whether Prof. MacDonald is right is the
further question of what difference it makes if he is right. If
correct, his thesis certainly sheds light on the rapidity with which
whites lost their will. Just a few decades ago whites were a confident
race, proud of their achievements, convinced of their fitness to
dominate the globe. Today they are a declining, apologetic people,
ashamed of their history and not sure even of their claim to lands
they
have occupied for centuries. It is very rare for fundamental concepts
to be stood on their heads in the course of just a generation or two,
as has happened with thinking about race. Such speed suggests there
has
been something more than natural change.
Topaz
Did you ever wonder why America is declining in popularity around
the world, and especially in Europe?
Perhaps it might have something to do with America's increasingly
common image as a puppet-state of International Jewry. Perhaps it
might also have something to do with growing European resentment
toward being bossed around by U.S. Congressmen who are first and
foremost lackeys of the Jewish power structure. Yes, that's right
-- United States Congressmen are spending more and more of their
time instructing European nations about what steps they should
take to control the growing awareness of destructive Jewish
behaviors throughout Europe. Not only has entrance into NATO for
some nations been predicated upon approval by the American Jewish
Committee, but there exists a little known official U.S.
Government agency called "The Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe", also known as "The Helsinki Commission,"
which consists of nine members from the United States Senate,
nine members from the House of Representatives, and one member
each from the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce. A
professional staff assists the Commissioners in their work -- and
a glance at their website at <http://www.csce.gov> will readily
confirm that their work has recently focused on squelching
justifiable criticism of Jewish involvement in the national and
international affairs of European nations -- or what they refer
to as "combating anti-Semitism." Our American tax dollars are not
only being spent to support an illegitimate Jewish theocracy
(Israel), but we are also funding American intervention in
European affairs on behalf of International Jewry.
Led by Congressman Christopher Smith of New Jersey, "our"
congress is working feverishly to coerce European leaders to
further suppress any criticism of Jewish activities, no matter
how mild that criticism may be. In the April 30, 2003 edition of
the Congressional Record you will find examples of Smith's
shameless application of political pressure on sovereign European
nations:
From [United States of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
108th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 149 Washington, Wednesday,
April 30, 2003], we read Smith's own words as he says
"The U.S. Helsinki Commission, which I co-chair, has worked with
the Museum on several occasions, from pushing for the release of
documents from the Romani concentration camp in Lety, Czech
Republic, to urging Romania to give greater meaning to its stated
commitment of rejecting anti-Semitism by removing Antonescu
statues from public lands. In response to the alarming spike of
anti-Semitic incidents found last summer in Europe, myself and
other Members of the Commission have been very active in urging
governments and elected officials to denounce the violence and
ensure their laws are enabled to prosecute the perpetrators. In
support of this effort, I have introduced H. Con. Res. 49,
urging, among other things, European states to 'promote the
creation of educational efforts throughout the region
encompassing the participating States of the OSCE to counter
anti-Semitic stereotypes and attitudes among younger people,
increase Holocaust awareness programs, and help identify the
necessary resources to accomplish this goal.' It is my hope that
other countries will copy the unique and effective model of the
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum."
Smith is not alone in his demands. Congressman Joseph Crowley of
New York wants to suppress any critical discussion of Jewish
behavior: [ Ibid., SUBMITTED REMARKS OF HON. JOSEPH CROWLEY,
MEMBER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES]
"Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to address this
distinguished forum. I am greatly concerned by the rise of
anti-Semitism throughout the OSCE region....In the 21st century,
countries in Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia should not
witness attacks against Jews... Nor should these countries
tolerate the hatred spewed by skinheads and other radical groups
throughout the region. Such hatred has brought catastrophe to the
region in our lifetimes already, and we must ensure that the
fields of Europe and Asia are not sown with the seeds of
intolerance ever again. It is the responsibility of the OSCE
governments to set a zero tolerance policy for anti-Semitic
speech and acts. In their OSCE commitments, all governments
pledged to condemn anti-Semitism unequivocally and take effective
measures to... prosecute those who commit such hate crimes..."
The OSCE site also features the speech of one Juliane
Danker-Wetze, who bewails the fact that some European thinkers
are starting to connect the dots and find that they form a Star
of David:
"Jews are imagined [sic] to be a national and international
influential group who allegedly exert a bad influence on or even
steer politics, the economy and the media, which is a way of
expressing the old anti-Semitic prejudice of hidden Jewish
power."
[<http://tinyurl.com/cuam> ]
And the so-called Helsinki Commission, which was founded in 1976
supposedly to further human rights under Soviet Communism,
recently heard from one of the main opponents of the right of
free speech, none other than the Jewish ADL. [
<http://www.ncsj.org/AuxPages/121102JTA.shtml> ] Though they
sugar-coat the language, what the ADL is really "pushing" (their
word) the supine Congressmen to do is to make criticism of our
'superhuman' self-chosen masters illegal. The Jewish Telegraphic
Agency informs us:
"Jewish leaders are pushing the White House and Congress to take
a firmer stance against European anti-Semitism. A group of German
and American lawmakers heard Tuesday from Jewish leaders who
expressed concern about the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. The
Jewish leaders also suggested ways to combat anti-Semitism in
states that participate in the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe. 'Many European Jews today feel more
vulnerable, disillusioned and frightened than at any time since
the Holocaust,' said Ambassador Alfred Moses, past president of
the American Jewish Committee and a former U.S. ambassador to
Romania. 'I know from my personal experience that anti-Semitism
is never far below the surface in Central and Eastern Europe.'
The Anti-Defamation League presented a series of recommendations
on combating the problem, including urging political leaders to
speak out against bigotry, strengthening administrative, legal
and monitoring instruments and using educational initiatives.
'While the last century witnessed the most heinous results of
bigotry unchecked, fortunately we also have witnessed in our
lifetime powerful examples of how strong U.S. and German
leadership have brought about dramatic change,' said Kenneth
Jacobson, ADL's associate national director. 'America and
Germany, each having learned painful lessons from their
respective past experiences with the danger of bigotry, are
uniquely positioned to lead the OSCE' ...The visit to Washington
by members of the German Bundestag was a follow-up to a July
session in Berlin on anti-Semitism. Moses noted that incidents of
anti-Semitism have risen in Europe because of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israel's ties to the United States
and the momentum that right-wing groups have been gaining in some
European countries. U.S. and German lawmakers signed a letter of
intent to strengthen their work against anti-Semitism, use
educational initiatives and urge other parliaments to follow
their lead."
As Robert Faurisson once said at a meeting in Washington, D.C.
"by 'human rights' is usually meant 'Jewish rights'" -- which
follows the notion, enshrined in the Jewish 'holy book,' the
Talmud, that only Jews are human and that non-Jews are equivalent
to beasts. And isn't that what the Helsinki Commission is
currently all about? -- keeping the European cattle from getting
too uppity and questioning their keepers and questioning why they
are kept in economic and political pens?
The Helsinki Commission isn't the only group under the thumb of
organized Jews, manipulating governments behind the scenes. A
secretive group with the Orwellian-sounding name of the 'Office
of Special Plans' also deserves our attention.
The 'Office of Special Plans' is nominally within the Pentagon
and is headed by a Jew named Abram Shulsky. It is of very recent
incarnation, having been created by several Jewish handlers of
George Bush with the explicit purpose of expanding the U.S.-led
war for Israel in the Mideast.
The Jews who came to power under Bush, or rather over Bush, saw
9/11 as an almost heaven-sent opportunity to get the despised
Americans crying tears for their dead countrymen (the deaths of
whom the Israeli Mossad, who had been following Mohammed Atta for
months, probably condoned to create that very opportunity), and
to get the same stupid American goyim fired up for having
themselves and Moslem goyim slaughtered in the Middle East for
Holy Israel's sake. Afghanistan was their first and easy target,
but Iraq was a harder nut to crack.
The neoconservative Jews' thirst for Iraqi blood began years
before 9-11, of course, as did their determination to find a
justification for spilling it. As early as March 2001, Richard
Perle, then Bush's new chairman of the Defense Policy Board, made
the claim that Iraq almost certainly had nuclear weapons. [
<http://tinyurl.com/cukp> ] In one of the most bizarre cases of
Jewish triplespeak I have ever heard, Perle actually argued
before Congress that Saddam had to have these weapons
specifically because our intelligence indicated that he did not:
"Does Saddam now have weapons of mass destruction? Sure he does.
How far he's gone on the nuclear-weapon side I don't think we
really know. My guess is it's further than we think. It's always
further than we think, because we limit ourselves, as we think
about this, to what we're able to prove and demonstrate." Now,
limiting yourself to what you can prove and demonstrate is
certainly dangerous. At least it is dangerous to Jews, as with
their fantastic tales of World War II persecution that are as
profitable as they are fictitious. Instead of limiting ourselves
to facts, far better for us to believe whatever tales the Jews
want us to believe and launch another world war. Now that's safe!
The Jews wanted to destroy Iraq because Iraq's secular Arab
government was a bulwark against Israeli expansionism and
aggression in the region. But that reason wasn't enough to
convince the American people. Since the hated-by-Jews Americans
were still somewhat exercised over the deaths of Americans on
9-11, the Jews decided that a case had to be made that Iraq was
somehow involved in international terrorism and possessed
so-called Weapons of Mass Destruction which could, conceivably,
threaten Americans.
The problem was that there was no evidence for this claim.
Neither the Central Intelligence Agency nor the Defense
Intelligence Agency could discover any credible evidence showing
that Iraq supported al-Qaeda -- in fact, the opposite was true.
And the CIA and the DIA also could find no evidence whatever that
Iraq possessed any of the dreaded 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'
that could threaten America. Bush's Jewish handlers found this
situation intolerable. They wanted their war and they were going
to get their war, by hook or by crook.
In the same way that they 'know' that 'God is the Jewish people'
they also 'knew' that Saddam must have nuclear, chemical, and
biological weapons capable of harming or at least frightening
Americans. It would serve their purposes if that were true, so it
must be true. The trouble was that the CIA and the DIA weren't
buying it. The facts that their extensive intelligence networks
turned up all indicated the opposite.
The frustration of Bush's Jewish handlers was profound. What to
do? Create their own intelligence-agency-lite. And so the Office
of Special Plans was born. The small group of influential Jews
who run this secretive outfit even call it -- in typically Jewish
mockery of those who expose Jewish conspiracy -- "the Cabal." [
<http://tinyurl.com/b26r> ]
Starting with just two staff people and never having more than
five (compared to the CIA and DIA with their thousands of agents
and analysts worldwide) and led by the Jew Abram Shulsky, the
Office of Special Plans was designed at the outset to feed
Rumsfeld and Bush, via Wolfowitz and Feith, a series of lies
which would cause them to question the intelligence agencies'
reports.
Jewish writer Robert Dreyfuss describes the procedure:
"Rumsfeld noted that a primary purpose of the unit was to provide
him with ammunition that he could use to harass the CIA staffer
who briefs him every morning. 'In comes the briefer, and she
walks through the daily brief and I ask questions,' said
Rumsfeld. 'What I could do is say, Gee, what about this? Or what
about that? Has somebody thought of this?' Using powerful
computers and having access to reams of intelligence factoids,
Feith's team could create a steady stream of data bits that
Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Feith himself could use to pick apart the
CIA's conclusions, sending the CIA's collectors and analysts back
to rewrite their reports." And, of course, preventing the real
intelligence reports from being believed and from giving the
President any second thoughts about obeying any of the orders of
the neoconservative Jews who surround him.
W. Patrick Lang, former chief of Middle East intelligence at the
D.I.A., admitted that this group has pulled a real coup and has
"...banded together to dominate the government's foreign policy,
and they've pulled it off. They're running Chalabi. The D.I.A.
has been intimidated and beaten to a pulp. And there's no guts at
all in the C.I.A.."
Jewish writer Seymour Hersh, writing in The New Yorker, quotes an
unnamed Pentagon advisor who worked with the Office of Special
Plans as crowing about Wolfowitz, Shulsky, and their coup: "I'd
love to be the historian who writes the story of how this small
group of eight or nine people made the case and won," defeating
the combined might of the CIA and DIA.
Shulsky has had a long relationship with the Jewish power
structure, and is described as the intellectual heir of Jewish
philosopher Leo Strauss of the University of Chicago, a person
who, for some unknown reason, decided to flee Europe in 1937.
Shulsky and Wolfowitz both received their doctorates under
Strauss in 1972. It is most revealing, I think, to consider
Wolfowitz and Shulsky as students of Strauss when one of
Strauss's major themes as a philosopher, according to Stephen
Holmes, a law professor at New York University, was the idea that
"philosophers need to tell noble lies not only to the people at
large but also to powerful politicians." I'll say that again -- a
guiding principle of this small Jewish cabal that even calls
itself "the Cabal" that tells our government what to do is that
"philosophers need to tell noble lies not only to the people at
large but also to powerful politicians." "Noble lies," of course,
are lies which advance the interests of the Jews.
Vincent Cannistraro, the former head of anti-terrorism operations
and analysis at the C.I.A., stated of this Jewish group: "...they
all work together. This has been going on since the
nineteen-eighties, but they've never been able to coalesce as
they have now. September 11th gave them the opportunity, and now
they're in heaven. They believe the intelligence is there. They
want to believe it. It has to be there."
The Office of Special Plans also had a very cozy relationship
with the criminal and con-man Ahmed Chalabi of the so-called
Iraqi National Congress, who is very eager to become the Jews'
front man in Iraq, and who "cooperated" by making up stories
which could then be attributed to "Iraqi defectors" when recited
for the President. Experienced intelligence analysts dismiss the
tales told by Chalabi as totally worthless fictions.
[ <http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/22/dreyfuss-r.html> ]
Columnist Harold Meyerson calls what the Office of Special Plans
did "faith-based intelligence." I call it Shilling for Sharon.
The short name of course, is simply lying. And these liars not
only influenced our not-so-bright leaders, but fed their false
stories to the mainly Jewish-controlled media who used them
influence the public to support the Jews' new war.
The Jews' plan worked quite well. They got the ear of the
President, his superstitious heart, and his easily-befuddled
brain. They got their war. But it was all based on lies. It has
been many weeks since the fall of Iraq, and no evidence of Iraqi
"Weapons of Mass Destruction" have been found. Even Task Force
75, the armed services team specifically created to root out
Saddam's supposedly hidden and supposedly illegal arsenal has
found nothing and is actually closing up shop.
The Office of Special Plans is nothing but an odious Jewish lie
factory.
It is this Jewish lie factory that will soon attempt to start
another war, this time for 'regime change' in Iran. [
<http://tinyurl.com/cusy> ] They're already gearing up for a battle
with diplomats in the State Department who oppose the Iranian
step in the Jews' world war. They're already arranging meetings
between a pretender to the Iranian throne and Ariel Sharon.
William Kristol's Weekly Standard is already banging the war
drums against Iran, and another Jew, Michael Rubin, is already
concentrating on Iran from within Shulsky's Office of Special
Plans. We told you months ago on American Dissident Voices that
this was going to happen, and the Office of Special Plans is
making our prediction come true.
It is from this Jewish lie factory that came the tales that Colin
Powell told the UN about Iraq's purchase of nuclear material from
Nigeria. It is from this Jewish lie factory that the story of a
"ring" of chemical weapons around Baghdad originated. It is from
this Jewish lie factory that came the 'revelation' that al-Qaeda
and Saddam were allies. It is this Jewish lie factory that killed
innocent children and blew off their heads and arms and legs. It
is this Jewish lie factory that killed your son and maimed your
daughter.
Their intelligence was worthless. Their lies were priceless.
You're being killed because you believe in the emperor's new
clothes. The purpose of this program is to stop you from
believing in lies; to help you understand how you are being
ruled; to help you see reality; to save your family, your
country, and your life.
Topaz
During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
political opponents and for less reason. At the end of the war there
was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.
Newsweek magazine May 15, 1989 says on page 64:
"the way the Nazis did things: the secrecy, the unwritten orders, the
destruction of records and the innocent-sounding code names for the
extermination of the Jews. Perhaps it was inevitable that historians
would quarrel over just what happened"
The real reason there are no records of an extermination plan is
because there was no extermination plan. The Germans planned to deport
the Jews out of Germany. The records show that they planned to move
them to Madagascar.
Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32 showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are set
out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that the
few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absence
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"
Professional holocaust believers have admitted that the "gas chamber"
which is shown to the tourists at Auschwitz was actually built by the
allies after the war was over. This is what they wrote:
Brian Harmon <har...@msg.ucsf.edu> wrote in article
<080620000051136373%har...@msg.ucsf.edu>...
"You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V. Krema I is a
reconstruction, this has never been a secret. Kremas II-V are in
their demolished state as they were left."
Charles Don Hall <cdhall...@erols.com> wrote in article
<8F4CB71B...@news.erols.com>...
"Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to
deceive.
"The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis
tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their
crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So
it would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully
admit that it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy."
They admit that the "gas chamber" shown to the tourists at Auschwitz
was built by the allies after the war was over. There is no physical
evidence that the Germans had gas chambers. No bodies of people who
died from gas have been found. The Communists were the first to enter
the camps. How do the other allies know the Communists didn't blow up
the buildings? Then they could claim that these demolished buildings
used to be gas chambers.
But then the believers will say the Germans confessed. Their main
confession is from Hoess. Here are the details:
"In the introduction to Death Dealer [Buffalo: Prometheus, 1992], the
historian Steven Paskuly wrote: "Just after his capture in 1946, the
British Security Police were able to extract a statement from Hoess by
beating him and filling him with liquor." Paskuly was reiterating what
Rupert Butler and Bernard Clarke had already described.
In 1983, Rupert Butler published an unabashed memoir (Legions of
Death, Hamlyn: London) describing in graphic detail how, over three
days, he and Clarke and other British policemen managed to torture
Hoess into making a "coherent statement." According to Butler [Legions
of Death, p. 237], he and the other interrogators put the boots to
Hoess the moment he was captured. For starters, Clarke struck his face
four times to get Höess to reveal his true identity.
<quote>
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of Jewish sergeants in
the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an
order signed by Höss.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pajamas ripped from his
body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where
it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off,
unless you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car,
where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his
throat. Höss tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in
Geffnan: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."
For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I
took my orders from Himmler. I was a soldier in the same way as you
are a soldier and we had to obey orders."
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow
was swirling
still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk
completely nude
through the prison yard to his cell.
</quote>
An article in the British newspaper Wrexham Leader [Mike Mason, "In a
cell with a Nazi war criminal-We kept him awake until he confessed,"
October 17, 1986] following the airing of a TV documentary on the case
of Rudolf Hoess included eyewitness recollections by Ken Jones:
<quote>
Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery
stationed at
Heid[e] in Schleswig-Holstein. "They brought him to us when he
refused to
cooperate over questioning about his activities during the war. He
came in the winter
of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls
Mr. Jones. Two
other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Höss in his cell
to help break
him down for interrogation. "We sat in the cell with him, night and
day, armed with
axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to
help break down
his resistance," said Mr. Jones. When Höss was taken out for exercise
he was made
to wear only jeans and a cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three
days and
nights without sleep, Höss finally broke down and made a full
confession to
the authorities.
</quote>
The confession Hoess signed was numbered document NO-1210; later
revamped, as document PS-3868, which became the basis for an oral
deposition Hoess made for the IMT on April 15, 1946, a month after it
had been extracted from him by torture...
Since what people confess to after they have been captured by the
Communists and their liberal comrades is not proof of anything, this
leaves only the stories of survivors. These contradict each other and
not believable. One professional survivor said that he could tell if
the Germans were gassing German Jews or Polish Jews by the color of
the smoke.
The fact that there are so many "survivors" is not proof of an
extermination plan. There may be six million survivors. Just about
every Jew that is old says he is a survivor.
The real "holocaust" was when the Communist Jews murdered millions of
Christians. Communism was Jewish. Here is proof:
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)
Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated in the
heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were neither
Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing Jews at
all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl Marx,
though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two men
who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
The book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomery Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920 "In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the
membership of the Soviet communist party was Jewish, though Jews
comprised only 1.8 percent of the total population." (Stuart Kahan,
The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read
articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I
recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then
I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social
Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the
secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere
the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the
row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One
fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in
its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose
minor representatives I had been disputing for months past."
Solzhenitsyn named in his book the six top administrators of the
Soviet death camps. All six of them were Jews.
Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."
Topaz
"Jews always position themselves as mediators. These
nasties hold it cardinal they accredit and interpret *everything*.
Nothing has worth or meaning until it's pronounced upon by a generous
scoop of shit in a hate hat. Nothing must be expressed save in jewish
terms. Invaders become undocumented workers. Queers become gays.
Freakins become African-Americans. Attack on Iraq becomes defense of
America. Nothing is legitimate save Big Kike stamp off on it.
BK doesn't like it when a Sheehan steps forward and foghorns facts to
fodder. Instantly, like mosquitoes at twilight, a flock of
bloodthirsty kikes appears, buzzing and sucking and whining. Have you
ever noticed that it is impossible to criticize jews and keep your
character? The jews have literally billions of enemies worldwide, yet
not a single one of them is an honest man of laudable motive. It is
impossible to carry off this charade without controlling the media
and a hell of a lot of other things too. The minute jew-criticism
appears, the ashkenazis and appeaser annies begin the smear. No one
ever opposed a loving kike except invidiously. Smear campaigns are
media control in action. There are other aspects of media control, but
day in day out, making horrible shrieks and gurgles to keep the goyish
herd away from the healthy green fields is the workaday business of
the controllers. Jews determine which issues may be debated, and in
what terms. Jews make up more than fifty percent of the experts on
both sides of these tiny debates. A few vetted goyim are allowed
through to keep up the charade of democratic discussion. The Internet
is the only medium that prevents the illusion of popular conformity
with jewthink being carried off. All that is necessary for jews to
maintain control is to create a congenial if bogus reality through
television and the main dailies, and relentlessly enforce this
orthodoxy through smear campaigns against any who breach it.
The death of a son is one of the few motives strong enough to drive
average goy fodder to breach etiquette and speak truth to kikes. She
must be shut down. How to do that? You can see the jews' uncertainty.
They attack her, at the same time, as both a lefty and a nazi.
Illogical, but in time they'll settle on an approach. Sometimes just
throwing shit and see what sticks is the best way. How dare Sheehan
value her own son more than the interests of Israel?
I say my son died for LIES. George Bush LIED to us and he knew he
was LYING.
And none of the thick rancid honkings Limbaugh and the freeper
patriotards can gainsay it. Remember that bushy came out of manly
Barbara, the wizened maw who asked why she should trouble her
"beautiful mind" about the body bags coming back from Iraq. You know -
the ones you never see, because they have to show you endless pictures
of $440,000-compensated jews being "ethnically cleansed," sniff, yet
again. Only an anti-Semite puts his own life before Israel. The jews
are the one people on earth who routinely are absolved of guilt for
that for which they and they alone are guilty. Isn't that odd?
DaX
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/