The Real George Bernard Shaw – Fabian Socialist and Hitlerian Advocate of Mass Murder!

Westminsters favourite brand of Politician- Fabians- THE PLACE STINKS WITH THEM!

The Real George Bernard Shaw – Fabian Socialist and Hitlerian Advocate of Mass Murder!

By Neil Foster, 8th September 2010

Scanning through the Irish papers this morning I came across this piece on George Bernard Shaw in both the Irish Times and the Irish Examiner. These are supposedly competing publication but both carry word for word this sickening tribute to an evil monster who’s been mythologised and portrayed as one of Ireland’s finest.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/shaws-pictures-tell-a-whole-new-story-2329090.html

This disgusting creature was in his day an ardent supporter of Mussolini and Hitler and a founding member of the Fabian Society.

http://www.fabians.org.uk/

The Fabian Society would claim that they are a purely socialist organisation. They were co founded by Shaw’s friend Lady Astor. David Cameron, the ‘con’servative leader and Prime Minister of Britain is also a member as well as being as being related by marriage into the Astor family. Coincidence?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/david-cameron/5245604/David-Camerons-mother-in-law-Lady-Astor-on-the-pain-of-losing-Ivan.html

I’m not going to waste my time going through the article suffice to say that is an insult to the average person who, if they spent 5 minutes researching Shaw would find a far different personality than this sickening portrayal of a supposed genius of his day.

What I want to show you here is the depraved mind of a ‘man’ who thought and stated quite clearly what he thought of the ordinary person on the street far removed from his elitist circle of psychopaths.

The word ‘psychopath’ has been used in many articles on this site and others to describe an attribute of politicians, royalty and the wider aristocracy which they all seem to share to one degree or another. George Bernard Shaw is no different. The only difference between Shaw and many others of his sick fraternity is that he was a man of many words who had trouble containing himself when it came to his views on humanity. Here are just a few examples:

EXTERMINATION OF THE “SOCIALLY INCOMPATIBLE”

“The notion that persons should be safe from extermination as long as they do not commit willful murder, or levy war against the Crown, or kidnap, or throw vitriol, is not only to limit social responsibility unnecessarily, and to privilege the large range of intolerable misconduct that lies outside them, but to divert attention from the essential justification for extermination, which is always incorrigible social incompatibility and nothing else.”

Source: George Bernard Shaw, “On the Rocks” (1933), Preface.

USE OF GAS CHAMBERS

“We should find ourselves committed to killing a great many people whom we now leave living, and to leave living a great many people whom we at present kill. We should have to get rid of all ideas about capital punishment …

A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.”

Source: George Bernard Shaw, Lecture to the Eugenics Education Society, Reported in The Daily Express, March 4, 1910.

KILLING THOSE “UNFIT TO LIVE”

“The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions. If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way. Is it any wonder that some of us are driven to prescribe the lethal chamber as the solution for the hard cases which are at present made the excuse for dragging all the other cases down to their level, and the only solution that will create a sense of full social responsibility in modern populations?”

Source: George Bernard Shaw, Prefaces (London: Constable and Co., 1934), p. 296.

These are not isolated statements made at some point in his life. These statements and many others were made over decades consistently and repetitively. Here’s another:

“Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.”

George Bernard Shaw: The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928, pg. 470)

Read the full article here: http://oneworldscam.com/?p=8032

Whats’ wrong with Britain- need you ask that question?

UK Taxman lets Goldman Sachs escape paying £10 million bill – But if YOU don’t pay? Prison
on November 9,

Pathocracy Paddy
September 8, 2010 at 14:26
There’s only so much you can fit in an article. Let’s pad it out some more.

George Bernard Shaw
“You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world; who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there, and say, now sir or madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can’t justify your existence; if you’re not pulling your weight in the social group; if you’re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then clearly we cannot use the big organisation of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us, and it can’t be of very much use to yourself”.
George Bernard Shaw
Caught on film in The Soviet Story
…see this excellent film

“I appeal to the chemists to discover a humane gas that will kill instantly and painlessly, deadly by all means but humane, not cruel”.
George Bernard Shaw
The Listener Feb 7th 1934
………………………………………………………..chemtrails??????

This mass-murdering vegetarian so-called genius thinks he’s doing you a favour exterminating you for being so thick. Carry on calling these creeps psychopaths Neil. Actually you are being too kind. Scumbag is more appropriate!
Pity the rest of the scumbags haven’t as BIG A MOUTH as Shaw, who said what all the scubags really think of the rest of us tax-slaves.

Dandy
September 9, 2010 at 13:18
Silly creature, he left himself out of these various categories. But of course, I doubt he was thinking of himself when pointing out all the low life miscreants leaching off ‘society’ as if it were its own living organism not made of individual human beings! Thank god he was for humane extermination! Might as well not even tell the special targets that they are marked for death, save them the stress.
I say we take these ‘genius social empaths’ and give them what they want, a world without us peons: lock ‘em in solitary confinement, left only to their own delusions as company for the rest of their lives. It’s the only humane thing to do to take away their suffering, poor fellas.

Guy Jones
September 9, 2010 at 13:54
I think it is a real shame that all of these super keen Eugenecists never think to lead the way joyfully into the gaschamber of brotherly love. For they so Loved the rest of Humanity that they sacrificed themselves freely so that the rest of us could crack on and enjoy our existence in the material plane, without the inconvenience of their laws, taxes, hegeminous wars of conquest and the general daily attack on our liberties and well being. After all if you are going to enforce a cull then those over the age of retirement and therefore unproductive to the greater collective should be considered for termination first. So I propose that Ted Turner, Henry Kissinger, David Rockerfella, Queen Elizabeth the 2nd, Prince Phillip (Mr Queen ER II), Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and all of the rest of the aristo coffin dodger brigade should be forced to lead the charge and do their bit for cleansing the gene pool of unwanted shite. (under their own rules of useless parasites getting the chop of course). And if G.B. shaw was still stealing oxygen from those of us who actully contribute I would say push him up front because it was his idea, so he should do the decent thing and test it out for the rest of us. Of course I jest, or do I? I can never tell these days must be all the GMO food and chem trails and electromagentic pollution making me more angry and less tolerant of unwanted members of my species.

marcus
September 9, 2010 at 14:19
It has always been a shock and a shame to see the honor and affection that has been applied to this old wolf in sheep’s clothing, with everyone believing, or pretending, that he was a nice old chap, amusingly eccentric and feisty. He did write a couple of moderately nice plays but then he spoiled it all by going behind the scenes and planning the utter enslavement and destruction of the masses of the people. Monstrous evil, exhaling from the mouth of hell like a plague of vampires, that was his real legacy. How much egotism and elitism does it take to reach the pinnacle of lunacy that he attained? The world should begin to repudiate such murderous pirates, and begin also to rehabilitate some of its actual heroes who were given just the opposite treatment. Anyway, welcome to Planet Crazy.

Ian de Montfort
September 9, 2010 at 17:29
The Astor’s like many of the leading families are Jewish, although they would openly deny this.

They like many of their Khazar family have been involved with Slavery, War and many other evils foisted upon the unsuspecting Human Race. Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt, and so too possibly Hitler, were all Ashkanazi Jews, Zionist Jews everyone of them. (By the way, nearly 115,000 Jewish soldiers served in combat roles during the third reich).

And if you don’t like what I have written here then do your research. The Fabien Society, like most of the biggest institutions on Earth are run and controlled by the same Cabalistic elite, and are supported by those they greatly reward. This is the truth. The truth that will tell you that they see them selves as superior to every other being in creation. They even see themselves as being superior to the real Jews of Semitic origin.

This is not an anti-Semitic statement as I do not oppose the right of Palestinians, who are Semitic, as are Arabs to the right of their own determination. Most modern day Jews are not Semitic. They are of Khazar, or Ashkenazi origin. These fakes converted to Judaism in and around 750 AD. They have corrupted many aspects of Judaism and are Cabbalists in reality. They are of Sub-Turkic origin, and have no connection to Palestine in a million years. But what they do have a connection to more than any other being is deceit, lies, propaganda and murder. This is the truth.

avs
September 10, 2010 at 18:47
I find it low to associate Hitler with mass murder and to call George Bernard Shaw a mass murderer – all he is to me is a myoptic idiot who should himself be killed – a weak minded individual of no worth whatsoever to my knowledge. A man who seems to like by your standards being associated with people who in my honest to goodness opinion knew how to lead and who weren´t going around marching after somebody who was different just to profit from it. I find it difficult to fully comprehend the allied madness behind what I consider to be this anti – Hitler nonsense. Did this man know Hitler or any of his associates personally? If that is not the case , what right does he have to assert Hitler to have been the ´evil monser´he says he was?

Neil F
September 10, 2010 at 18:52
It’s well documented that Hitler and Stalin were both funded by the same banking families of New York and London, the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Du Ponts, JP Morgan etc, the same banking families who are now dragging the world deliberately into a New World Order feudal system and to suggest Hitler wasn’t a monster is ridiculous.

Neil Foster,
Co-Editor,
The Sovereign Independent

avs
September 10, 2010 at 18:52
I do understand George Bernard Shaw´s desire to kill people nonetheless as presented in this article. I feel that people like George Bernard Shaw may desire to kill large segments of the human population in an unsuccessful effort at mass killings because they themselves in the end will be the biggest losers. Mr. moderator – I am not intending to insult your intelligence or views with my comment. Ian De Montfort I don´t see anything wrong with Kabballah. It´s one of the most beautiful weltanshaungs I have seen evolve into the knowledge systems they have become as of today. There are Jews as of today who oppose Palestinian occupation because according to the Torah it is illegal to construct a State in Palestine. In the Torah Israel is understood as being humanity as a whole and not some kinda land somewhere.
Thank goodness I am not a political zionist and my goodness me how much corruption there is in all this global conspiracy thingy. But I believe honestly that it will be defeated.

avs
September 10, 2010 at 19:01
Hey Neil,

I understand your remarks on that Hitler and Stalin were both funded by whom you assume to be ´the same banking families of New York and London , the Rockefellers , Rotchilds , Du Ponts , JP Morgan , etc´. I believe myself that Adolf Hitler was funded by the numinous and honourable culture of his time – the German people and that he very rarely used money from their financial support. I believe that Adolf Hitler genuinely and sincerely opposed the Union Bank and therefore refosed cooperation with these Rockefellers , Rotchilds , Du Ponts , JP Morgans of your´s. I do not know the Rockefellers , Rotchilds , Du Ponts , JP Morgans myself. I believe that Adolf Hitler sincerely opposed the banking elite of countries whose banks he deemed were detrimental to German interests , and thus , was not a supporter of any banking elite whom he considered to be detrimental to his country or his peoples´interest.
I also believe that when Hitler heard that Stalin had decided to cooperate with these ´elite families´, then Hitler decided to refuse to support Stalin anymore and opposed from then on his domestic and foreign policies. As of ´elitism´ , when I began to recover from my nervous breakdown , I decided to conclude that today´s real elite , are the world´s plants and trees , and thus not those elite which have been considered to be the politically correct ones. In my honest opinion , to suggest that Hitler wasn´t a monser isn´t ridiculous at all. When I look into Hitler´s eyes , I see the eyes of a man I believe was a good person , an honourable person who saw no desire whatsoever to commit most of the crimes he has been associated with.
When I look into the eyes of Barack H. Obama , I see a person who may be very detrimental to the people of the United States as we know most of American civilization as of present. I don´t want to insult you or to be rude – so these are merely my views. I also wish you to know I was not around during World War II , so I am no authority on most or any of those events this era has been part of. Furthermore , I believe that Adolf Hitler´s weltanshaung or world – view , was a kind of Janiism , in where God is considered to be nature. I say so with pride in my heart and with joy , that I believe that Adolf Hitler was a good man – but I do not ask those who may disaggree with my views , to aggree with my belief.

Ian de Montfort
September 14, 2010 at 12:51
A few things that may enlighten AVS

‘The unexpected views of four key diplomats who were close to events:
Just consider the following:

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

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

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

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

Is all of this merely attributable to terrible ‘anti-semitism’?

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

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

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

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

‘It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities.. They did so with such effect that, even in November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real property in the Reich. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation.. But to those who had lost their all this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice. After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions. The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned professions (in spite of constituting) less than one percent of the population.

The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large part of the press all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized country is formed.. The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was a Jewish monopoly.. Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep a foothold in any privileged occupation.. At this time it was not the ‘Aryans’ who exercised racial discrimination. It was a discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a majority. There was no persecution, only elimination.. It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed and lavishly displayed by aliens of cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle.”

Goodness gracious, Sir Arthur! What made you get out of the wrong side of the bed?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

E-mail comment received:

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

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

I once said that the only reason Israel existed was out of Holocaust guilt, and I was immediately labeled a terrorist sympathizer.

I see what is now happening in Israel and I am aghast. The parallels to WW II are frightening. Even today, one cannot bring up this subject without being labeled a Holocaust denier or white supremacist.’

MORE LIKE BLACKMAIL AND CORRUPT POLITICIANS- THE GUILT THING WASN’T AROUND THEN- THAT CAME LATER WITH THE BBC SHIT AND HOLLYWOODS STORIES.

ISRAEL INVENTED TERRORISM- YOU WERE SLOW ON THAT ONE!

http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=7948

3 responses to “The Real George Bernard Shaw – Fabian Socialist and Hitlerian Advocate of Mass Murder!

  1. http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=7948

    VICTORS WRITE THE HISTORY OF WARS THEY TOOK PART IN…..COMMIES- AND THE WEST WHOM I REFUSE TO CALL ANYTHING OTHER THAN TRAITORS TO THEIR COUNTRIES!

    SOLDIERS….LIED TO THEN AS NOW…..JUST WHO IT IS THEY FIGHT FOR!

    BRITAIN IS IN DANGER ONLY FROM THE ZOG ITSELF!

    ENEMIES ARE MADE BY ATTACKING UNLAWFULLY THEIR HOMELANDS— WHAT WOULD WE DO WERE BRITAIN ATTACKED ALL THE TIME- THANK THEM?

    YUGOSLAVIA- IRAQ-AFGHANISTAN- LIBYA- WHO BENEFITTED- YOU?

    IRAN????

    STARTS WITH I ENDS WITH L THATS’ WHO BENEFITS FROM ALL THE WARS!

    A GREATER ISRAEL………………..FROM RIVER TO RIVER.

  2. WHAT THE POOR BRITISH TROOPS DIDN’T KNOW BEFORE WW2 KICKED OFF…ROOSEVELT WAS OF JEWISH STOCK TOGETHER WITH 73 THAT HE SURROUNDED HIMSELF WITH …. HOW THAT FAMILY FROM BUCK PALACE AND POLITICIANS CAN LAY WREATHS AT THE MEMORIAL FOR THOSE THEY SLAUGHTERED IS BEYOND ME….SICK EVIL PIECES OF SHITE THAT THEY ARE!! PEACE GETS THE NELSON’S EYE SIR HARTLEY SHAWCROSS: “Step by step I have arrived at the conviction that the aims of Communism in Europe are sinister and fatal. At the Nuremberg Trials, I, together with my Russian colleague, condemned Nazi aggression and terror. I believe now that Hitler and the German people did not want war. But we declared war on Germany, intent on destroying it, in accordance with our principle of balance of power, and we were encouraged by the ‘Americans’ around Roosevelt. We ignore Hitler’s pleadings not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realise that Hitler was right. He offered us the co-operation of Germany; instead, since 1945, we have been facing the immense power of the Soviet Union. I feel ashamed and humiliated to see that the aims we accused Hitler of, are being relentlessly pursued now, only under a different label.” – British Attorney General, Sir Hartley Shawcross, Stourbridge, March 16th, 1984 (AP) COMPLETE DISARMAMENT OFFERED BY HITLER: On May 17th, 1933, in a speech to the Reichstag, Hitler offered complete German disarmament, if others would do likewise. There was no response. After October 14th, 1933, Hitler again put forward proposals which included arms limitation, particularly the elimination of weapons designed for use against civilian populations, and the preparation of a mutual non-aggression pact. France said ‘non!’ Others did not responds at all, and France, Britain and Russia increased their arms build-up. On May 21st, 1935, Hitler sought to limit the dropping of gas, incendiary and explosive bombs out side of battle zones. He was also ready to agree to the abolition of the heaviest artillery and tanks, and to accept any limitation on the size of naval vessels. Again, there was no response save for France making an aggressive anti-German alliance with the Soviet Union. On March 31st, 1936, Hitler formulated a nineteen-point peace plan that included the reduction of arms, and to bring aerial warfare under the protection of the Geneva Convention. His proposals were ignored. The repeated rejection of Hitler’s proposals to assure equitable peace in Europe would indicate that the Western powers were preparing for armed conflict against Germany, a conflict from which only the allies could benefit. Lord Lothian had predicted such a war in a speech on June 5th, 1934. HITLER PREFERRED CONCILIATION: “It must be possible for our two great people (Germany and France) to join together and collaborate in opposing the difficulties which threaten to overwhelm Europe.” – Adolf Hitler, March, 1935 THE ALLIES, NOT HITLER, BROKE THE TERMS OF THE VERSAILLES TREATY “It was not Germany that unilaterally broke the Versailles Treaty – it was unilaterally broken by those powers who could not decide to carry out in their turn the disarmament which was imposed on Germany and which, in accordance with the Treaty, should have been followed by them. The Versailles Dictate was thus rendered invalid in regard to the points at issue. . . The German Government, consequent on the failure of the other states to fulfil their disarmament obligations, have on their part renounced those articles of the Versailles Treaty which constituted a discrimination against Germany for an unlimited period of time owing to the one-sided burden this laid upon Germany contrary to the provisions of the Treaty.” Adolf Hitler “This Treaty brought in the first division of Europe, namely a division of the nations into the victors on the one side and vanquished on the other, the latter nations being outlawed.” Adolf Hitler, Reichstag speech, Fourth Anniversary “When the German people trusting to the promises made by President Wilson in his Fourteen Points, laid down their arms in November, 1918, a fateful struggle thereby came to an end for which perhaps individual statesmen, but certainly not the peoples themselves could be held responsible. The German nation put up such an heroic fight because it was sincere in its conviction that it had been wrongfully attacked and was therefore justified in fighting. . . the Peace Treaty of Versailles did not seem to be for the purpose of restoring peace to mankind, but rather to perpetuate hatred.” Adolf Hitler “Germany suffered most as a consequence of this Peace Treaty and the general insecurity which was bound to arise from it. The unemployment figure rose to a third of the number usually employed in the nation, which means, however, that by counting the families of the unemployed as well there were 26 million people in Germany out of a population of 65 millions faced by an absolutely hopeless future.” Adolf Hitler “The fantastic political and economic burdens imposed by that treaty have entirely disillusioned the German people and annihilated its belief in justice.” Adolf Hitler “Historians will one day record that never were the peaceful proposals of one man met with more hatred than mine. When Germany became the example to the world of the peaceful solution of social problems and economic difficulties, the hatred of the Bolsheviks and capitalists, the exploiters of nations, was turned against her. Only then did I turn to create the new German Wehrmacht.” Adolf Hitler, 1936 HESS ON THE VERSAILLES TREATY “The masses of the German people could not believe that a pledge so solemnly given by the supreme head of the United States of America could afterwards be openly ignored.” Rudolf Hess, Stockholm THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS “. . . then I would point out that the League has never been a real league of peoples. A number of great nations do not belong to it or have left it. And nobody on this account asserted that they were following a policy of isolation. I should also like to call attention to the fact that up to now the outstanding feature of the League of Nations has been talk rather than action.” Adolf Hitler, Reichstag speech, Fourth Anniversary GERMAN COLONIES “The German people once built up a colonial empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty. And they did so without any war. That colonial empire was taken away from us. And the grounds on which it was sought to excuse this act are not tenable. Moreover, Germany has never demanded colonies for military purposes, but exclusively for economic purposes. Therefore, as a matter of course our demand for colonies for our densely populated country will be put forward again and again.” – Adolf Hitler, Reichstag speech; Fourth Anniversary THE ARMS BUILD-UP AGAINST GERMANY CONTINUED APACE “Czechoslovakia provided Soviet Russia with landing fields for aircraft, thereby increasing the threat against Germany.” – Adolf Hitler 1936, Hitler sent notes to the British Government advocating outlawing bomber type aeroplanes and bombing as a means of warfare. Anthony Eden defended the bomber as an ‘effective and humane police weapon,’ in maintaining law and order among the unruly tribes in some of the British colonies. On April 1st, 1936, Hitler’s proposals for a European pacification plan for Europe were delivered to the Geneva League of Nations. His proposals included the prohibition of the dropping of gas, poisonous or incendiary bombs; the prohibition of dropping any bombs outside fighting fronts, the prohibition of artillery weapons over 12 miles from battle zones. “The German Government hereby declare themselves prepared to accede to every such arrangement insofar as it is internationally valid.” He went on to say that he understood that Germany’s economic prosperity caused problems, and put forward a proposal that soon, after steps being taken for mutual disarmament: “There would be an exchange of opinions on the economic situation in Europe.” As with all Germany’s proposals for arms limitation, non-aggression pacts, the confinement of weapons to battle zones, etc. these proposals were also ignored. “As one who fought in the front line trenches to other front line soldiers throughout the world, as a Leader of the German nation to the leaders of other nations, I ask: Must this thing be? With goodwill and co-operation cannot we save humanity from this?” – Rudolf Hess SPANISH COMMENT “If the powers in Western Europe were not blind they would not hesitate to sign the Pact of Non-Aggression suggested by Germany; a Pact which guarantees the peace of Europe for a period of twenty-five years.” – The influential Spanish newspaper, A.B.C., three months before the outbreak of war “The ex-soldiers who are now in the German Government honourably desire peace and understanding. I appeal to the ex-servicemen and to men of goodwill in the governments of all nations to give us their combined support in striving towards this goal. In peace we desire to build in common what is destroyed in common through war.” Rudolf Hess. Speech to ex-soldiers, Konigsberg HITLER ON PEACE “There is not a single German who wants war. The last war cost us 2 million lives and seven and a half million wounded. At such a price, this could not have been a victory even if we had won. What European statesman today could effect a territorial conquest by means of war? Is it necessary to kill 2 millions in order to conquer a territory with 2 million inhabitants? For us that would mean sacrificing 2 million Germans – the flower of the nation’s manhood – in exchange for a mixed population that is neither wholly German nor has much in common with Germany. Sound common-sense is opposed to such a war.” – Adolf Hitler, Paris Soir, January 26th, 1936 “If the Germany of today takes her stand on the side of peace she does so not because of weakness or cowardice. She takes her stand on the side of peace because of the National Socialist conception of People and State. In each and every war for the subjugation of an alien people, National Socialism recognises a process which sooner or later will alter the inner nature of the victor – will weaken him and therewith render him vanquished in turn. Setting aside a mere transitory weakening of the enemy, the European states have nothing whatsoever to gain from war of any kind, except a trifling alteration of frontiers which could be entirely out of proportion to the sacrifices entailed. The blood that was shed on European battlefields during the past 300 years bears no proportion to the national result of the events. In the end France has remained France, Germany Germany, Poland Poland and Italy Italy.” – Adolf Hitler, ‘The Thirteen Points’, Reichstag Speech “The German Government are ready in principle to conclude pacts of non-aggression with their neighbour states, and to supplement these pacts with all provisions aiming at the isolation of the war-maker and the localisation of the areas of the war.” – Adolf Hitler, ‘The Thirteen Points’, Reichstag Speech Referring to the original aims of the Geneva Red Cross Convention to work towards reducing armaments, Hitler stated his intention to extend this. “. . . In this instance the German Government have in mind to ban all arms which bring death and destruction not so much to the fighting soldiers but to non-combatant women and children. . . they believe that it will be possible to proscribe the use of certain arms as contrary to international law and to excommunicate from the community of mankind – its rights and its laws – those nations who continue to use them.” – Adolf Hitler, ‘The Thirteen Points’, Reichstag Speech “Three times I have made concrete offers for armament restriction. These offers were rejected. The greatest offer which I then made was that Germany and France together should reduce their standing armies to 300,000 men; that Germany, Great Britain and France, should bring down their air forces to parity and that Germany and Great Britain should conclude a naval agreement. Only the last offer was accepted as real limitation of armaments. The other German proposals were either flatly refused or where answered by the conclusion of those alliances which gave Central Europe to Soviet Russia as the field of play for its gigantic forces.” “If the rest of the world entrenches itself in indestructible fortresses, builds enormous flying squadrons, gigantic tanks and casts huge guns, it cannot consider it a menace if German National Socialists march in columns wholly unarmed, thereby giving visible expression of the German feeling of national community and providing it with effective protection. . . the German nation and the German Government have not asked for arms at all, but only for equality of rights. But if every other nation is allowed to have certain arms, we are on principle not prepared to allow ourselves to be excluded from this rule as a nation with lesser rights! The German nation has more than fulfilled its disarmament obligations. It is now the turn of those states that have been increasing their armaments to fulfil their own obligations in the same way. Germany has as much right to security as other nations.” – Adolf Hitler “May the time not be far off when all other European nations will come to the realisation that the primary necessity is putting an end to the quarrels and strife of centuries and of building up of a finer community of all peoples is: The recognition of a higher common duty arising out of common rights.” – Adolf Hitler MY FIRST PROPOSAL: “Germany demands at all costs equality with other nations, but it is prepared to renounce all further armaments if other nations will do the same. In other words, general disarmament down to the last machine-gun. This proposal was not even deemed worthy of the rest of the world as fit for a single discussion.” “I MADE A SECOND PROPOSAL: Germany was willing to restrict her army to 200,000 men on the condition that other nations would do the same. This also was rejected.” I MADE A FURTHER PROPOSAL: Germany was prepared, provided other nations wanted this, to renounce all heavy artillery, tanks, bombing planes and if necessary all types of aeroplanes. But this was also rejected.” “I WENT FURTHER and proposed to limit by international agreement all European armies to 300,000 men. This was also rejected.” I SUBMITTED STILL FURTHER PROPOSALS: Limitation of all aircraft, abolition of air bombing and gas warfare, security for those in non-warfare areas, abolition of at least all heavy artillery and tanks. All these proposals were also declined. All had been in vain.” Adolf Hitler THE RHINELAND The German re-occupation of the de-militarised Rhineland in 1936 is often held up as proof of Hitler’s willingness to break his word. In fact, France was the first to break the Rhine Pact, and the Locarno and League of Nations Agreements too, by signing a Pact with the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia, thereby collaborating in an aggressive military build-up encircling Germany. Hitler reminded the French that as early as winter, 1935/36, the Soviet Union, with which France was collaborating, was mobilising the world’s largest army, tank and air forces along eastern Europe’s borders. “Then a completely new state of affairs has been brought about and the political system of the Rhine Pact had been destroyed both in the letter and in the spirit. . . with a military pact with the Soviet Union exclusively directed against Germany and in violation of the Rhine Pact.” – Adolf Hitler In the same speech, Hitler offered “to negotiate with France and Belgium for the establishment of a bilateral demilitarised zone, proposed the conclusion of a non-aggression pact between Germany, France and Belgium for a period of twenty-five years, invited England and Italy as guarantors with the same inclusion of the Netherlands should they so wish. He at the same time offered agreements with countries to the east of Germany.” Adolf Hitler, March, 1936 These proposals were rejected. GERMANY PLEADS FOR PEACE “I speak in the name of the entire German nation when I say that all of us most sincerely desire to root out an enmity whose sacrifices are out of all proportion to any possible gain. The German people are convinced that their honour has remained pure and unstained upon a thousand battlefields, just as they see in the French soldier only their ancient but glorious opponent. We, and the whole German nation, should all be happy at the thought that we could spare our children and our children’s’ children what we ourselves as honourable men have had to watch in the long and bitter years and have, ourselves had to suffer. The history of the last one hundred and fifty years, with all its varied changes and chances, should have taught both at least one lesson; that important and permanent changes can no longer be purchased by a sacrifice of blood. I, as a National Socialist, and all my followers, absolutely refuse, however, by reasons of our national principles, to acquire, at the cost of the life-blood of those who love and are dear to us, men and women of a foreign nation who, in any case, will never love us. It would be a day of untold blessing for the whole of humanity if the two nations once and for all would banish the idea of force from their mutual relationships; the German nation is prepared to do this. While boldly asserting the rights which the treaties themselves give us, I will, however, declare equally boldly that in future there will be for Germany no more territory conflicts between the two countries. After the return of the Saar Basin to the Reich it would be insanity to think of a war between the two states. For such a war there could no longer be, from our point of view, any reasonable or moral excuse. For nobody could demand that millions of young lives be destroyed in order to correct the present frontiers. Such a correction would be of a problematical extent and even more problematical worth. “The German nation has more than fulfilled its obligations with regard to disarmament. It is now the turn of the highly armed states to fulfil similar obligations to no less extent.” Adolf Hitler, October, 14th, 1933 A LAST CHANCE APPEAL FOR PEACE On August, 25th, days before the outbreak of war, Hitler made a generous and comprehensive offer of a final understanding with England. On August, 27th, 1939, an emissary, Dahlerus, took these proposals to 10 Downing Street for presentation to Prime Minister Chamberlain and Foreign Minister Lord Halifax. These proposals in essence were: 1. Germany would sign a Pact of Alliance with Britain 2. Britain would act as mediator with Poland for the return of Danzig and the corridor to Germany with Poland being allowed the use of the port of Danzig. 3. Germany would guarantee the sovereignty of Poland. 4. Agreement on Germany’s confiscated colonies. 5. Adequate guarantees for the well-being of German minorities in Poland. 6. Germany would provide aid in the defence of the British Empire when called upon to do so. Britain ignored these proposals choosing instead to guarantee Poland’s unjust occupation and retention of territory given to her as ‘victors booty’ following the first world war under the terms of the Versailles Treaty. “I hope that the outside world will realise that Hitler’s government has no idea of steering towards war, even though this has often been asserted abroad. As Adolf Hitler himself has said, Germany has no need of another war to avenge the loss of her military honour, because she never lost that honour. Germany does not want war of any kind. Germany wants real and abiding peace.” – Rudolf Hess “I owe it to me position not to admit any doubt as to the possibility of maintaining peace. The peoples want peace. It must be possible for governments to maintain it. We believe that if the nations of the world could agree to destroy all their gas and inflammatory and explosive bombs it would be a much more useful achievement than using them to destroy each other.” – Adolf Hitler “National Socialist Germany wishes for peace because it recognises the simple fact that no war would be likely to substantially to ameliorate the state of distress in Europe. The distress would probably be made the greater thereby. . . If only the leaders and rulers had wanted peace, the people would never have wished for war.” – Adolf Hitler “The Fuhrer is one of the soldiers who fought in the trenches. I am one also. Nearly all the Fuhrer’s collaborators are men who fought in the most terrible war of all time. We know what war is, and for that reason we are lovers of peace.” Rudolf Hess “The world which we are not harming in any way, and from which we only ask that it will allow us to go about our business in peace, has been submerging us for months under a flood of untruths and calumnies.” – Adolf Hitler, 14th October, 1933 “The German Government has the honest intention to do everything in its power to discover and permanently set up such relations with the British people and State as will forever guard against a renewal of the only conflict that has ever been between two peoples.” – Adolf Hitler, May 21st, 1935 “As far as concerns our two countries, there is no longer any point whatsoever in dispute between Great Britain and Germany. This, I believe, became clear to everybody after the conclusion of the German-English Naval Pact, on June 18th, 1935, which marks the first step on the road to a practical peace policy.” Adolf Hitler, June 18th, 1935 Agreeing to limit German naval strength to just 35% of Royal Navy tonnage – in respect of her Empire commitment – and 15% below that of France, he said: “There has only been one struggle between these two nations, and the German Government has the straight-forward intention to try and form, and maintain, a relationship with the British people and State which will for all time prevent a repetition of this.” “The British Heir Apparent, his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, recently uttered a word which has called forth a warm re-echo in our country. He said: ‘No one is more fitted to stretch out the hand of friendship to Germany than we, the English ex-servicemen who fought them – and have forgotten all that.’ “I believe that I cannot better supplement this thought of our English comrades than by saying: We gladly grasp your hand in friendship.” BRITISH/GERMAN EX-SERVICEMEN FOR PEACE “Through your visit you have found a road which ought to lead to an understanding between our two nations. That our people feel as we do has been proved to you by the welcome which the population of Berlin accorded you on your arrival. When we who had fought against one another have now come together this may be the beginning of relations which shall develop from country to country, from ex-soldier to ex-soldier. And just as we who are now comrades have forgotten the quarrel that once led us to fight one another as brave soldiers, so it is our wish that with the passing of the years our people will see those wounds healed which the war inflicted. You, my English comrades, used to call us Fritz when we were fighting against you, and we used to call you by your old soldier name, Tommy. May both our peoples so understand one another in the future as we, Tommy and Fritz, understand one another now.” – Reich Leader, National Socialist War Victims Relief to a British Legion deputation visiting Germany “There is a tremendous desire on the part of all German ex-servicemen for world peace. Their main desire appeared to be the closest possible co-operation between Great Britain and Germany. An Anglo-German organisation would perhaps be scarcely practicable, but this strong feeling for co-operation ought to be turned to good purpose. It is hoped in the not too distant future to have ex-servicemen throughout the world linked together in some way as to pursue the common objective of world peace. In Germany it is difficult to divorce ex-service matters from national affairs, because the present government is so largely composed of ex-servicemen. “The youth of Germany is obviously being trained to regard peace as the greatest ideal, realising that the future of civilisation depends on its maintainance.” – Major F.W.C. Fetherstone-Godley, British Legion Delegate. Daily Mail “Our aim is to make our people happy once more by guaranteeing to them their daily bread. The work involved is great, and the world should leave us to carry it out in peace.” Adolf Hitler, 22nd October, 1933 “We Germans don’t like this war. We think it is needless and silly.” – Joseph Goebbels, Daily Mail, January, 13th, 1940 “In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Britain. I consider myself in a position to make this appeal since I am not the vanquished begging favours, but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I see no reason why this war must go on. I am grieved to think of the sacrifices which it will claim. I would like to avert them.” – Adolf Hitler, July 19th, 1940 to the Reichstag “After the victories against Poland and in the West, I again decided – and for the last time – to hold out my hand to England and to point out that a continuation of the war could only be senseless for England, and that there was nothing to prevent the conclusion of a reasonable peace. Indeed there were no differences between England and Germany except those artificially created.” – Adolf Hitler, November, 1941 And this time the German government was still working for a negotiated peace and issued the following statement: “It is quite certain that the peace which will follow the German victories will not be of the Versailles type but will be a peace for the benefit of all nations. The people of those countries occupied today will regain their freedom but in the common interests of all nations they will have to compromise with certain legalities and conditions.” – Adolf Hitler This was Hitler’s last great peace initiative which was declined. Britain went on to suffer 350,000 dead, £25,000,000, 000,000 (in 1945 values), the loss of her Empire, Britain impoverished and beholden to American finance, middle Europe destroyed, and eastern Europe subjugated and enslaved by the Soviet Union; their erstwhile allies. “I realised that the fight was not against enemy nations, but against international capital.” – Adolf Hitler “There you are! Unrestricted warfare in the whole Pacific Ocean, where America really doesn’t belong! And when we make a Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia which belonged to Germany for a thousand years, it is considered aggression.” – Joachim von Ribbentrop, Germany’s Foreign Minister from his Nuremberg cell “Just imagine going to war over Danzig – such a world catastrophe, just to prevent Germany from getting a piece of territory that belonged to her, because Britain was afraid Germany was getting too strong.” – Joachim von Ribbentrop, Germany’s Foreign Minister “Do you think gentlemen, that I am an idiot and will let myself be forced into war because of the question of the Danzig Corridor?” – Adolf Hitler FRANCE ATTACKS GERMANY – GERMANY RESPONDS On September 3rd, 1939, Britain and France declared war against Germany; the French piercing the German border and occupying German territory between the Rhine and the Moselle. Rather than retaliating, Hitler again offered peace on October 6th, which was again rebuffed. Fearing that a prolonged defensive war in the West along similar lines to those fought at such appalling loss of life in the First World War, would leave Germany weakened and vulnerable to the Red Army waiting at Germany’s eastern borders, Hitler was forced to counter attack in the hope that the defeat of France would bring Britain to the negotiating table. On May 10th, with forces far inferior to those of France and Britain, Hitler finally decided to close Germany’s front door. The French and British (BEF) armed forces were routed and a fortnight later retreated across the English Channel on anything that would float. “A colossal military disaster.” – Winston Churchill “This is the end of the British Empire.” – Anthony Eden “Whilst as in all battles there were genuine tales of derring do which were reported with understandably a little embroidery, it was not until twenty-years after the event that Richard Collier recounted stories never rebutted, of anarchic servicemen abandoned by officers, drunken revelry between French, British and Senegalese troops, mutiny; of a Kentish Police Officer who recalled ‘only too well the sight of dispirited men hurling their rifles from the trains carrying them from Dover.” – Richard Collier, The Sands of Dunkirk, London, Collins, 1961 The Sunday Dispatch put the success of the evacuation down to divine intervention following a nation-wide service of prayer following which the notoriously rough channel “became as smooth as a pond” and “a fog descended to shield our troops from devastating attack by the enemy’s air strength.” – ‘The First Casualty’, Phillip Knightley, Andre Deutsch. London. 1975 “In 1962, General Sir Harold E. Franklyn, who had been a divisional commander at Dunkirk, complained that the evacuation had been ‘over-glamourised’. He said reports of ‘ merciless bombing’ and ‘the hell of Dunkirk’ were quite ridiculous. ‘I walked along the beach on several occasions and never saw a corpse. . . there was very little shelling.” – The First Casualty, Phillip Knightley, Andre Deutsch. London. 1975 “Never was a great disaster more easily preventable,” said Captain Sir Basil Liddell Hart. Military historian who pointed out that the German breakthrough reported as being due to overwhelming superiority, was actually achieved with armies inferior in numbers to those opposing them. In fact, the ‘miracle of Dunkirk’ owes more to Hitler’s conciliatory stance than to the Almighty calming the waters and placing a fog between the retreating British Expeditionary Force and its German pursuers. FRIENDSHIP WITH BRITAIN – 338,000 BRITISH AND FRENCH TROOPS – SAVED BY HITLER In explaining why Hitler intervened in the military operations to allow the escape of 188,000 British and 150,200 French troops at Dunkirk, General Blumentritt said: “He then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought to the world. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church – saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support British troops, if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard as compatible with her honour to accept.” Blumentritt said: “The German generals in charge were dumbfounded and outraged at Hitler’s attitude in thus preventing them from pressing an advantage which they believed would result in the capture of the entire British Expeditionary Force. But Hitler was adamant in his refusal and issued the most peremptory orders for the German armoured forces to stay at a distance while the British embarkation went on.” Thus, the success of the British retreat at Dunkirk being described as ‘the miracle of Dunkirk’ owes its miraculous nature more to the French Army fighting a rearguard retreat and Hitler again behaving in a conciliatory way. As William Joyce cynically put it: “England is fighting to the last Frenchman.” Very often, the Wehrmacht (and Waffen SS) found their military advantage removed by the more conciliatory Hitler, and it was not unknown for the armed forces to disregard such orders: “During the pursuit of the British forces towards Dunkirk the Leibstandarte (regiment) was ordered to cross the heavily defended Aa Canal and seize the town of Watten. On the afternoon of 24th May, 1940, however the Fuehrer’s Headquarters countermanded the crossing. Dietrich (Sepp) simply disregarded Hitler’s order and a few hours later his troops were over the canal.” – Heinz Hoehne, The Order of the Death’s Head, p. 481/482 It is interesting but hardly surprising to note that even fifty years on, Hitler’s Germany is held to be the aggressor in attacking a weaker France, when the undeniable fact is that the far more militarily powerful France – without in anyway being threatened by Germany, invaded her neighbour and throughout the autumn and spring 1939 – 1940 shelled German communities; in the face of which Germany showed remarkable tolerance before retaliating. In doing so and as the foremost British historian A.J.P. Taylor pointed out, Hitler was motivated to do so ‘only on preventive grounds.’ THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN Likewise the myths that surround the ‘Battle of Britain’ have been repeated so often that they are now accepted as gospel. It was Phillip Knightley, the special correspondent (Sunday Times) and author who in his book, The First Casualty – The War Correspondent as Hero, Propagandist, and Myth Maker from the Crimea to Vietnam’, revealed that Britain in ‘its finest hour’ was far from being the underdog of legend. British air defence consisted of 1,416 aircraft against 963 German aircraft. Britain had the further advantage of retrieving downed pilots and salvaging downed aeroplanes whereas German aircraft and pilots were irretrievably lost. “. . . yet throughout the battle the RAF regularly lost more fighters than the Luftwaffe – it was the German bombers that swelled the score and to break even the British had to shoot down a great many of them.” which in fact he goes on to point out owed more to the radar advantage. Fighter pilots often found Churchill’s rhetoric embarrassing, not the least such descriptions as ‘crusaders’ who ‘grin when they fight’. It was in many respects an ignoble and bloody confrontation in which German pilots, knowing that the parachuting enemy could be airborne again within hours had no compunction about firing on them. Similarly, the RAF had no qualms about shooting down a Heinkel 59 clearly marked with a Red Cross and civilian markings, as it engaged itself in rescuing downed German pilots. In fact, the only RAF pilot to win a Victoria Cross, Flight-Lieutenant J.B. Nicholson, was wounded by the Home Guard who mistaking him for a German pilot, blazed away at him as he parachuted to earth. FIGHTING ON THE BEACHES – OF NEW ENGLAND (U.S.A) The Duke of Windsor was appointed Governor of the Bahamas, the gold reserves of the Bank of England were shipped off to Ottawa, the Minister of Information, Alfred Duff Cooper sent his son Julius to Canada – but failed to inform everyone. Parents who could afford to shipped their families out to America or the Commonwealth. Royal Navy ships were placed on standby to evacuate members of the Royal Family and key members of the government to the United States. “In June, July and August of 1940, over 6,000 children took part in the exodus of the rich.” – The Fears that Flawed the Finest Hour, P. Addison, Sunday Times Magazine, May 21st, 1972 “The working class began to feel, with some justification, that the rich had plans to get out whilst the going was good.” – The First Casualty, Phillip Knightley, Andre Deutsch. London. 1975 RUDOLF HESS AND HIS FLIGHT FOR PEACE “The Fuhrer does not want to defeat England and wants to stop fighting.” – Rudolf Hess on his peace mission to England “The decision to go was the hardest I have ever made in my life. It was rendered easier, however, when I visualised the endless rows of coffins, both in Germany and in England, with mothers in dire distress following behind. I am convinced that the mothers on both sides of the channel will have understood my action.” – Rudolf Hess Hess was imprisoned and never released. He died under suspicious circumstances which have never adequately been explained, nearly fifty years on. In terms of the rank he held, the length of imprisonment and the denial of a properly constituted trial, the imprisonment of Rudolf Hess must rank as the first and worst example of peace emissary detention. “During the whole of my political activity I have always propounded the idea of a close friendship and collaboration between Germany and England. In the NSDAP, I found innumerable others of like mind. This desire for Anglo-German friendship and co-operation conforms not merely to sentiments based on the racial origins of our two peoples but also to my realisation of the importance of the existence of the British Empire for the whole of mankind.” – Hitler’s Reply to Roosevelt. April 15th, 1939 “Now there is no doubt that the Anglo-Saxon people of Britain have accomplished immense colonising work in the world. For this, I have sincere admiration.” – Hitler’s Reply to Roosevelt, April 15th, 1939 When asked by Joachim von Ribbentrop, his Foreign Minister, what he should do if it came to the point of surrender, Hitler replied that he should try to remain on good terms with Britain. “He always wanted that you know.” Ribbentrop sadly concluded. “It is not true that I wished for war in 1939, neither I nor anyone else in Germany. War was provoked exclusively by those international statesmen who were of Jewish race or who worked in the interests of international Jewry. . .” – Adolf Hitler, Last Will and Testament. April 29, 1945 CHAPTER 9 THE ‘RACE NATION’ DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY “There is only one power which really counts. The power of political pressure. We Jews are the most powerful people on earth, because we have this power, and we know how to apply it.” – Jewish Daily Bulletin, July 27th, 1935 Adolf Hitler’s election to chancellorship marked the beginning of the end of presumptuous and unregulated Jewish influence in German affairs. A nation without a homeland, a nation whose frontiers are decided by its racial genes and which maintains its nationhood whilst existing among host nations, cannot countenance the existence of a state that excludes them. To the ‘race nation’ all other countries are a legitimate homeland, the denial of which threatens their existence. To the Jewish Diaspora, the world’s most powerful trading and political bloc, Hitler’s election meant interruption and interference with the world’s commercial and political cohesion in which they are heavily involved. Furthermore, he stood alone and defiant against the tidal wave of Jewish organised Communism then sweeping all before it. The Communists had seized Russia and were at the bottom of civil unrest and revolution throughout eastern Europe; Britain, France, – the Spanish Civil War – the British dominions and the United States. Germany alone repelled and held in check this tidal wave of subversion and insurrection. The ‘race nation’ was quick to organise economic warfare against Hitler’s Germany as a means of bringing the National Socialist state to its knees. WHILST HITLER WAS BEING CONCILIATORY READ IT ALL BLOW THEIR LIES AWAY! VICTORS WRITE THE HISTORY,,, WE KNOW JUST WHO THE VICTORS ARE- AND IT AIN’T US!! http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/witness2.htm#8 Fabian Commies hold the power in Westminster- thats a fact and has been since 1945… CHAPTER 8 PEACE GETS THE NELSON’S EYE SIR HARTLEY SHAWCROSS: “Step by step I have arrived at the conviction that the aims of Communism in Europe are sinister and fatal. At the Nuremberg Trials, I, together with my Russian colleague, condemned Nazi aggression and terror. I believe now that Hitler and the German people did not want war. But we declared war on Germany, intent on destroying it, in accordance with our principle of balance of power, and we were encouraged by the ‘Americans’ around Roosevelt. We ignore Hitler’s pleadings not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realise that Hitler was right. He offered us the co-operation of Germany; instead, since 1945, we have been facing the immense power of the Soviet Union. I feel ashamed and humiliated to see that the aims we accused Hitler of, are being relentlessly pursued now, only under a different label.” – British Attorney General, Sir Hartley Shawcross, Stourbridge, March 16th, 1984 (AP) COMPLETE DISARMAMENT OFFERED BY HITLER: On May 17th, 1933, in a speech to the Reichstag, Hitler offered complete German disarmament, if others would do likewise. There was no response. After October 14th, 1933, Hitler again put forward proposals which included arms limitation, particularly the elimination of weapons designed for use against civilian populations, and the preparation of a mutual non-aggression pact. France said ‘non!’ Others did not responds at all, and France, Britain and Russia increased their arms build-up. On May 21st, 1935, Hitler sought to limit the dropping of gas, incendiary and explosive bombs out side of battle zones. He was also ready to agree to the abolition of the heaviest artillery and tanks, and to accept any limitation on the size of naval vessels. Again, there was no response save for France making an aggressive anti-German alliance with the Soviet Union. On March 31st, 1936, Hitler formulated a nineteen-point peace plan that included the reduction of arms, and to bring aerial warfare under the protection of the Geneva Convention. His proposals were ignored. The repeated rejection of Hitler’s proposals to assure equitable peace in Europe would indicate that the Western powers were preparing for armed conflict against Germany, a conflict from which only the allies could benefit. Lord Lothian had predicted such a war in a speech on June 5th, 1934. HITLER PREFERRED CONCILIATION: “It must be possible for our two great people (Germany and France) to join together and collaborate in opposing the difficulties which threaten to overwhelm Europe.” – Adolf Hitler, March, 1935 THE ALLIES, NOT HITLER, BROKE THE TERMS OF THE VERSAILLES TREATY “It was not Germany that unilaterally broke the Versailles Treaty – it was unilaterally broken by those powers who could not decide to carry out in their turn the disarmament which was imposed on Germany and which, in accordance with the Treaty, should have been followed by them. The Versailles Dictate was thus rendered invalid in regard to the points at issue. . . The German Government, consequent on the failure of the other states to fulfil their disarmament obligations, have on their part renounced those articles of the Versailles Treaty which constituted a discrimination against Germany for an unlimited period of time owing to the one-sided burden this laid upon Germany contrary to the provisions of the Treaty.” Adolf Hitler “This Treaty brought in the first division of Europe, namely a division of the nations into the victors on the one side and vanquished on the other, the latter nations being outlawed.” Adolf Hitler, Reichstag speech, Fourth Anniversary “When the German people trusting to the promises made by President Wilson in his Fourteen Points, laid down their arms in November, 1918, a fateful struggle thereby came to an end for which perhaps individual statesmen, but certainly not the peoples themselves could be held responsible. The German nation put up such an heroic fight because it was sincere in its conviction that it had been wrongfully attacked and was therefore justified in fighting. . . the Peace Treaty of Versailles did not seem to be for the purpose of restoring peace to mankind, but rather to perpetuate hatred.” Adolf Hitler “Germany suffered most as a consequence of this Peace Treaty and the general insecurity which was bound to arise from it. The unemployment figure rose to a third of the number usually employed in the nation, which means, however, that by counting the families of the unemployed as well there were 26 million people in Germany out of a population of 65 millions faced by an absolutely hopeless future.” Adolf Hitler “The fantastic political and economic burdens imposed by that treaty have entirely disillusioned the German people and annihilated its belief in justice.” Adolf Hitler “Historians will one day record that never were the peaceful proposals of one man met with more hatred than mine. When Germany became the example to the world of the peaceful solution of social problems and economic difficulties, the hatred of the Bolsheviks and capitalists, the exploiters of nations, was turned against her. Only then did I turn to create the new German Wehrmacht.” Adolf Hitler, 1936 HESS ON THE VERSAILLES TREATY “The masses of the German people could not believe that a pledge so solemnly given by the supreme head of the United States of America could afterwards be openly ignored.” Rudolf Hess, Stockholm THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS “. . . then I would point out that the League has never been a real league of peoples. A number of great nations do not belong to it or have left it. And nobody on this account asserted that they were following a policy of isolation. I should also like to call attention to the fact that up to now the outstanding feature of the League of Nations has been talk rather than action.” Adolf Hitler, Reichstag speech, Fourth Anniversary GERMAN COLONIES “The German people once built up a colonial empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty. And they did so without any war. That colonial empire was taken away from us. And the grounds on which it was sought to excuse this act are not tenable. Moreover, Germany has never demanded colonies for military purposes, but exclusively for economic purposes. Therefore, as a matter of course our demand for colonies for our densely populated country will be put forward again and again.” – Adolf Hitler, Reichstag speech; Fourth Anniversary THE ARMS BUILD-UP AGAINST GERMANY CONTINUED APACE “Czechoslovakia provided Soviet Russia with landing fields for aircraft, thereby increasing the threat against Germany.” – Adolf Hitler 1936, Hitler sent notes to the British Government advocating outlawing bomber type aeroplanes and bombing as a means of warfare. Anthony Eden defended the bomber as an ‘effective and humane police weapon,’ in maintaining law and order among the unruly tribes in some of the British colonies. On April 1st, 1936, Hitler’s proposals for a European pacification plan for Europe were delivered to the Geneva League of Nations. His proposals included the prohibition of the dropping of gas, poisonous or incendiary bombs; the prohibition of dropping any bombs outside fighting fronts, the prohibition of artillery weapons over 12 miles from battle zones. “The German Government hereby declare themselves prepared to accede to every such arrangement insofar as it is internationally valid.” He went on to say that he understood that Germany’s economic prosperity caused problems, and put forward a proposal that soon, after steps being taken for mutual disarmament: “There would be an exchange of opinions on the economic situation in Europe.” As with all Germany’s proposals for arms limitation, non-aggression pacts, the confinement of weapons to battle zones, etc. these proposals were also ignored. “As one who fought in the front line trenches to other front line soldiers throughout the world, as a Leader of the German nation to the leaders of other nations, I ask: Must this thing be? With goodwill and co-operation cannot we save humanity from this?” – Rudolf Hess SPANISH COMMENT “If the powers in Western Europe were not blind they would not hesitate to sign the Pact of Non-Aggression suggested by Germany; a Pact which guarantees the peace of Europe for a period of twenty-five years.” – The influential Spanish newspaper, A.B.C., three months before the outbreak of war “The ex-soldiers who are now in the German Government honourably desire peace and understanding. I appeal to the ex-servicemen and to men of goodwill in the governments of all nations to give us their combined support in striving towards this goal. In peace we desire to build in common what is destroyed in common through war.” Rudolf Hess. Speech to ex-soldiers, Konigsberg HITLER ON PEACE “There is not a single German who wants war. The last war cost us 2 million lives and seven and a half million wounded. At such a price, this could not have been a victory even if we had won. What European statesman today could effect a territorial conquest by means of war? Is it necessary to kill 2 millions in order to conquer a territory with 2 million inhabitants? For us that would mean sacrificing 2 million Germans – the flower of the nation’s manhood – in exchange for a mixed population that is neither wholly German nor has much in common with Germany. Sound common-sense is opposed to such a war.” – Adolf Hitler, Paris Soir, January 26th, 1936 “If the Germany of today takes her stand on the side of peace she does so not because of weakness or cowardice. She takes her stand on the side of peace because of the National Socialist conception of People and State. In each and every war for the subjugation of an alien people, National Socialism recognises a process which sooner or later will alter the inner nature of the victor – will weaken him and therewith render him vanquished in turn. Setting aside a mere transitory weakening of the enemy, the European states have nothing whatsoever to gain from war of any kind, except a trifling alteration of frontiers which could be entirely out of proportion to the sacrifices entailed. The blood that was shed on European battlefields during the past 300 years bears no proportion to the national result of the events. In the end France has remained France, Germany Germany, Poland Poland and Italy Italy.” – Adolf Hitler, ‘The Thirteen Points’, Reichstag Speech “The German Government are ready in principle to conclude pacts of non-aggression with their neighbour states, and to supplement these pacts with all provisions aiming at the isolation of the war-maker and the localisation of the areas of the war.” – Adolf Hitler, ‘The Thirteen Points’, Reichstag Speech Referring to the original aims of the Geneva Red Cross Convention to work towards reducing armaments, Hitler stated his intention to extend this. “. . . In this instance the German Government have in mind to ban all arms which bring death and destruction not so much to the fighting soldiers but to non-combatant women and children. . . they believe that it will be possible to proscribe the use of certain arms as contrary to international law and to excommunicate from the community of mankind – its rights and its laws – those nations who continue to use them.” – Adolf Hitler, ‘The Thirteen Points’, Reichstag Speech “Three times I have made concrete offers for armament restriction. These offers were rejected. The greatest offer which I then made was that Germany and France together should reduce their standing armies to 300,000 men; that Germany, Great Britain and France, should bring down their air forces to parity and that Germany and Great Britain should conclude a naval agreement. Only the last offer was accepted as real limitation of armaments. The other German proposals were either flatly refused or where answered by the conclusion of those alliances which gave Central Europe to Soviet Russia as the field of play for its gigantic forces.” “If the rest of the world entrenches itself in indestructible fortresses, builds enormous flying squadrons, gigantic tanks and casts huge guns, it cannot consider it a menace if German National Socialists march in columns wholly unarmed, thereby giving visible expression of the German feeling of national community and providing it with effective protection. . . the German nation and the German Government have not asked for arms at all, but only for equality of rights. But if every other nation is allowed to have certain arms, we are on principle not prepared to allow ourselves to be excluded from this rule as a nation with lesser rights! The German nation has more than fulfilled its disarmament obligations. It is now the turn of those states that have been increasing their armaments to fulfil their own obligations in the same way. Germany has as much right to security as other nations.” – Adolf Hitler “May the time not be far off when all other European nations will come to the realisation that the primary necessity is putting an end to the quarrels and strife of centuries and of building up of a finer community of all peoples is: The recognition of a higher common duty arising out of common rights.” – Adolf Hitler MY FIRST PROPOSAL: “Germany demands at all costs equality with other nations, but it is prepared to renounce all further armaments if other nations will do the same. In other words, general disarmament down to the last machine-gun. This proposal was not even deemed worthy of the rest of the world as fit for a single discussion.” “I MADE A SECOND PROPOSAL: Germany was willing to restrict her army to 200,000 men on the condition that other nations would do the same. This also was rejected.” I MADE A FURTHER PROPOSAL: Germany was prepared, provided other nations wanted this, to renounce all heavy artillery, tanks, bombing planes and if necessary all types of aeroplanes. But this was also rejected.” “I WENT FURTHER and proposed to limit by international agreement all European armies to 300,000 men. This was also rejected.” I SUBMITTED STILL FURTHER PROPOSALS: Limitation of all aircraft, abolition of air bombing and gas warfare, security for those in non-warfare areas, abolition of at least all heavy artillery and tanks. All these proposals were also declined. All had been in vain.” Adolf Hitler THE RHINELAND The German re-occupation of the de-militarised Rhineland in 1936 is often held up as proof of Hitler’s willingness to break his word. In fact, France was the first to break the Rhine Pact, and the Locarno and League of Nations Agreements too, by signing a Pact with the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia, thereby collaborating in an aggressive military build-up encircling Germany. Hitler reminded the French that as early as winter, 1935/36, the Soviet Union, with which France was collaborating, was mobilising the world’s largest army, tank and air forces along eastern Europe’s borders. “Then a completely new state of affairs has been brought about and the political system of the Rhine Pact had been destroyed both in the letter and in the spirit. . . with a military pact with the Soviet Union exclusively directed against Germany and in violation of the Rhine Pact.” – Adolf Hitler In the same speech, Hitler offered “to negotiate with France and Belgium for the establishment of a bilateral demilitarised zone, proposed the conclusion of a non-aggression pact between Germany, France and Belgium for a period of twenty-five years, invited England and Italy as guarantors with the same inclusion of the Netherlands should they so wish. He at the same time offered agreements with countries to the east of Germany.” Adolf Hitler, March, 1936 These proposals were rejected. GERMANY PLEADS FOR PEACE “I speak in the name of the entire German nation when I say that all of us most sincerely desire to root out an enmity whose sacrifices are out of all proportion to any possible gain. The German people are convinced that their honour has remained pure and unstained upon a thousand battlefields, just as they see in the French soldier only their ancient but glorious opponent. We, and the whole German nation, should all be happy at the thought that we could spare our children and our children’s’ children what we ourselves as honourable men have had to watch in the long and bitter years and have, ourselves had to suffer. The history of the last one hundred and fifty years, with all its varied changes and chances, should have taught both at least one lesson; that important and permanent changes can no longer be purchased by a sacrifice of blood. I, as a National Socialist, and all my followers, absolutely refuse, however, by reasons of our national principles, to acquire, at the cost of the life-blood of those who love and are dear to us, men and women of a foreign nation who, in any case, will never love us. It would be a day of untold blessing for the whole of humanity if the two nations once and for all would banish the idea of force from their mutual relationships; the German nation is prepared to do this. While boldly asserting the rights which the treaties themselves give us, I will, however, declare equally boldly that in future there will be for Germany no more territory conflicts between the two countries. After the return of the Saar Basin to the Reich it would be insanity to think of a war between the two states. For such a war there could no longer be, from our point of view, any reasonable or moral excuse. For nobody could demand that millions of young lives be destroyed in order to correct the present frontiers. Such a correction would be of a problematical extent and even more problematical worth. “The German nation has more than fulfilled its obligations with regard to disarmament. It is now the turn of the highly armed states to fulfil similar obligations to no less extent.” Adolf Hitler, October, 14th, 1933 A LAST CHANCE APPEAL FOR PEACE On August, 25th, days before the outbreak of war, Hitler made a generous and comprehensive offer of a final understanding with England. On August, 27th, 1939, an emissary, Dahlerus, took these proposals to 10 Downing Street for presentation to Prime Minister Chamberlain and Foreign Minister Lord Halifax. These proposals in essence were: 1. Germany would sign a Pact of Alliance with Britain 2. Britain would act as mediator with Poland for the return of Danzig and the corridor to Germany with Poland being allowed the use of the port of Danzig. 3. Germany would guarantee the sovereignty of Poland. 4. Agreement on Germany’s confiscated colonies. 5. Adequate guarantees for the well-being of German minorities in Poland. 6. Germany would provide aid in the defence of the British Empire when called upon to do so. Britain ignored these proposals choosing instead to guarantee Poland’s unjust occupation and retention of territory given to her as ‘victors booty’ following the first world war under the terms of the Versailles Treaty. “I hope that the outside world will realise that Hitler’s government has no idea of steering towards war, even though this has often been asserted abroad. As Adolf Hitler himself has said, Germany has no need of another war to avenge the loss of her military honour, because she never lost that honour. Germany does not want war of any kind. Germany wants real and abiding peace.” – Rudolf Hess “I owe it to me position not to admit any doubt as to the possibility of maintaining peace. The peoples want peace. It must be possible for governments to maintain it. We believe that if the nations of the world could agree to destroy all their gas and inflammatory and explosive bombs it would be a much more useful achievement than using them to destroy each other.” – Adolf Hitler “National Socialist Germany wishes for peace because it recognises the simple fact that no war would be likely to substantially to ameliorate the state of distress in Europe. The distress would probably be made the greater thereby. . . If only the leaders and rulers had wanted peace, the people would never have wished for war.” – Adolf Hitler “The Fuhrer is one of the soldiers who fought in the trenches. I am one also. Nearly all the Fuhrer’s collaborators are men who fought in the most terrible war of all time. We know what war is, and for that reason we are lovers of peace.” Rudolf Hess “The world which we are not harming in any way, and from which we only ask that it will allow us to go about our business in peace, has been submerging us for months under a flood of untruths and calumnies.” – Adolf Hitler, 14th October, 1933 “The German Government has the honest intention to do everything in its power to discover and permanently set up such relations with the British people and State as will forever guard against a renewal of the only conflict that has ever been between two peoples.” – Adolf Hitler, May 21st, 1935 “As far as concerns our two countries, there is no longer any point whatsoever in dispute between Great Britain and Germany. This, I believe, became clear to everybody after the conclusion of the German-English Naval Pact, on June 18th, 1935, which marks the first step on the road to a practical peace policy.” Adolf Hitler, June 18th, 1935 Agreeing to limit German naval strength to just 35% of Royal Navy tonnage – in respect of her Empire commitment – and 15% below that of France, he said: “There has only been one struggle between these two nations, and the German Government has the straight-forward intention to try and form, and maintain, a relationship with the British people and State which will for all time prevent a repetition of this.” “The British Heir Apparent, his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, recently uttered a word which has called forth a warm re-echo in our country. He said: ‘No one is more fitted to stretch out the hand of friendship to Germany than we, the English ex-servicemen who fought them – and have forgotten all that.’ “I believe that I cannot better supplement this thought of our English comrades than by saying: We gladly grasp your hand in friendship.” BRITISH/GERMAN EX-SERVICEMEN FOR PEACE “Through your visit you have found a road which ought to lead to an understanding between our two nations. That our people feel as we do has been proved to you by the welcome which the population of Berlin accorded you on your arrival. When we who had fought against one another have now come together this may be the beginning of relations which shall develop from country to country, from ex-soldier to ex-soldier. And just as we who are now comrades have forgotten the quarrel that once led us to fight one another as brave soldiers, so it is our wish that with the passing of the years our people will see those wounds healed which the war inflicted. You, my English comrades, used to call us Fritz when we were fighting against you, and we used to call you by your old soldier name, Tommy. May both our peoples so understand one another in the future as we, Tommy and Fritz, understand one another now.” – Reich Leader, National Socialist War Victims Relief to a British Legion deputation visiting Germany “There is a tremendous desire on the part of all German ex-servicemen for world peace. Their main desire appeared to be the closest possible co-operation between Great Britain and Germany. An Anglo-German organisation would perhaps be scarcely practicable, but this strong feeling for co-operation ought to be turned to good purpose. It is hoped in the not too distant future to have ex-servicemen throughout the world linked together in some way as to pursue the common objective of world peace. In Germany it is difficult to divorce ex-service matters from national affairs, because the present government is so largely composed of ex-servicemen. “The youth of Germany is obviously being trained to regard peace as the greatest ideal, realising that the future of civilisation depends on its maintainance.” – Major F.W.C. Fetherstone-Godley, British Legion Delegate. Daily Mail “Our aim is to make our people happy once more by guaranteeing to them their daily bread. The work involved is great, and the world should leave us to carry it out in peace.” Adolf Hitler, 22nd October, 1933 “We Germans don’t like this war. We think it is needless and silly.” – Joseph Goebbels, Daily Mail, January, 13th, 1940 “In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Britain. I consider myself in a position to make this appeal since I am not the vanquished begging favours, but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I see no reason why this war must go on. I am grieved to think of the sacrifices which it will claim. I would like to avert them.” – Adolf Hitler, July 19th, 1940 to the Reichstag “After the victories against Poland and in the West, I again decided – and for the last time – to hold out my hand to England and to point out that a continuation of the war could only be senseless for England, and that there was nothing to prevent the conclusion of a reasonable peace. Indeed there were no differences between England and Germany except those artificially created.” – Adolf Hitler, November, 1941 And this time the German government was still working for a negotiated peace and issued the following statement
  3. THIS MAKES SIR OSWALD MOSLEY ..TO HAVE BEEN TELLING THE TRUTH….COMMIES AND JEWS- MYTH OF THE BATTLE OF CABLE STREET….THE MARCH HAD BEEN REDIRECTED BY THE POLICE…..MOSLEY THOUGH DID NOT WANT WAR- HE’D SEEN ENOUGH IN WW1 IN THE TRENCHES EUROPEANS KILLING EUROPEANS…………………………

    Hitler regularly attended concerts; one of his favourite composers being Gustav Mahler (1860-1911), who is of course Jewish.

    HITLER NOT ANTI-SEMITIC BUT ANTI-TALMUDIC

    “. . . in that the Third Reich treated Christianised Jews preferentially. The National Socialist Third Reich carefully distinguished between Talmudic and Christianised Jews.” (Philip Freedman, ‘Their Brothers Keepers’ N.Y 1957)

    “In early 1938, Jewish doctors and dentists were still participating in the German State compulsory insurance program (Ortskrankenkassen) which guaranteed them a sufficient number of patients.”

    “In 1938, 10% of the practicing lawyers in Germany were Jews, although the Jews constituted less than 1% of the population.” (United States Ambassador Hugh Wilson to Secretary of State Hull)

    “The United States took exception to a German law on March, 30th, 1938, which removed the Jewish church from the established German church roll which deprived it of state funds. In fact, this brought German law into line with English Law.” (Daniel L. Hoggan. Historical Revisionist)

    On February, 27th, 1943, when 10,000 Jews were being deported from Berlin: “The Christian wives of those arrested were able to wring concessions from the Nazis, who released the men.” (Philip Freedman. Their Brothers Keepers. NY 1957)

    One may also wonder that as late as 1943, three and one half years into the war and eleven years after Hitler was elected, there were still 10,000 Jews living openly and freely in the German capital, and married to German wives. Such facts disprove allied propaganda and so they are hidden carefully from sight. It is also interesting to note that whilst in Hitler’s capital city, such numbers of Jews were allowed to go about their business freely, had they been of Japanese descent and living in the United States, all would have been rounded up; men, women and children; orphans and the offspring of mixed marriages, and confined to concentration camps.

    Clearly it was healthier to be a Jew in Berlin, 1943 than it was to be the unfortunate child product of a Japanese-American marriage!

    “In 1939, six years after Hitler was elected, there were still 120,000 Jews living voluntarily in Germany.” (Heinz Roth. Why Are We Being Lied To?)

    The question increasingly being asked is, if Hitler’s intention was to exterminate the Jews, why had he given them every assistance to emigrate throughout his years of government, and how does it explain that years after the alleged program of extermination was begun, 120,000 having had every opportunity and assistance to leave the country had refused to do so?

    JEWS NOT SERIOUSLY HINDERED:

    “The German Jews were being treated like a humbled minority, out of favour. . . the activity of the Jews was in reality not seriously hindered.” (Heinz Roth. Why Are We Being Lied To? – p. 29, 121)

    What is a matter of public record is that by 1939, 400,000 resident Jews had received every assistance, compensation and indeed training to re-settle elsewhere; Madagascar being the chosen destination. This was done in open collaboration with Jewish organisations. Other countries too had a program of assisted emigration not just for Jews but for their own nationals too. The French long before the outbreak of war were planning the emigration of 10,000 Jews.

    Emigration was a normal means of population dispersal and settlement practiced by most countries of which it can safely be said that Britain led from the front. It is well to remember that at this time and for a long time afterwards, the great shipping companies of the world were making enormous profits from the government-subsidised emigration of British nationals to the United States and the Dominions. These included 130,000 British children, many of them without parents, even babes in arms, taken from orphanages and care wards and against their wishes and often without the knowledge of parents, where they had them, forced to leave their homeland and often settled in institutions where they were to suffer every kind of abuse and deprivation.

    Many were lied to and told that they had no parents; often split from their brothers and sisters. This expulsion of our country’s children, and adults too, is a shameful blot on its history and it is interesting to suppose that the Third Reich’s policy of re-settlement was a great deal more enlightened than was Britain’s. Incredibly, this enforced re-settlement of children without parents continued until 1967 and is still cloaked in a veil of secrecy.

    It is equally interesting to reflect that whilst the British governments of the time by a combination of deception and financial inducements (£10 assisted passages to Australia) were draining orphanages of unwanted British children, they were simultaneously assisting the colonisation of Britain by West Indians and others from far-flung territories.

    Hitler’s Germany had no policy of forced re-settlement of its own citizens; quite the opposite in fact. A great deal of effort and investment was made to encourage the return of Germans who had previously emigrated to escape the shortcomings of German administrations prior to the Third Reich era.

    Despite Germany’s enormous and by comparison more liberal policy of resettlement, 680,000 Jews were still living in the Third Reich by 1939.

    VIOLENCE EXAGGERATED:

    Hitler’s antagonism towards sections of the international Jewish community has been deliberately falsified and exaggerated to create the impression that Jews in Germany were treated badly. The determination of 680,000 of them to stay suggests otherwise.

    AN ENGLISHMAN’S OBSERVATIONS:

    “My private conversations with Jews were illuminating. They did not bear out what the British newspapers suggested. Mountains had been made out of molehills; melodrama out of comic opera. The majority of the ‘assaults’ were committed by over-zealous youths, and in nearly every instance consisted of ‘ratting’ unfortunate men who were not particularly respectful of the new regime. Physical harm very little, mental, probably much.

    This is what I learned from my Jewish friends, who are staying in Germany and have no intention of leaving the country, nor have they ever been asked to leave the country. Those who wish to leave and return may do so at their own pleasure. The laws relating to the freedom of Jews are substantially the same as those of other people.

    The trouble that has risen has nothing to do with the domiciled Jew, many of whom are still employed by government in various spheres of usefulness. There are about 80,000 undesirable Jews that Germany wants to get rid of for all time, and willingly would she deport them all to Great Britain or the United States of America if the request was made. These are Jews who since the Armistice have penetrated the country and created a situation that has wrought considerable social and political harm in Germany. Among these undesirables are murderers, ex-convicts, potential thieves, fraudulent bankrupts, white slave traffickers, beggars of every description that beggars description, and political refugees. Many have come from Baltic states, others from Poland, and not an inconsiderable number from Russia.” (G.E.O. Knight, In Defence of Germany) “Before the revolution of last March, the Jews in the Reich overran every government department, and enjoyed the highest privileges in every profession and calling. They were the principle organisers of the Communist Party, and became identified with every one of the seventy-two warring political sects in the country. In every way they proved themselves eminently capable businessmen and politicians. Many had grown very wealthy. Nearly every German war profiteer was a Jew; the native German seems to have regarded with feelings of shame and horror the idea of making money out of his country during times of great stress. . .

    That one per cent of the population of Germany should impose their rule and culture – however eminent that culture may be – on more than sixty-million native born Germans is unreasonable, to use no stronger word. . .

    So when the Nazi worm turned, and the services of many Jews were dispensed with, Jewry throughout the world rose in arms and through the medium of the Press here, and public meetings in London and the provinces, denounced the German Government in violent terms.

    The Germans have assumed control of their country, and for weal or woe they mean to maintain their position. The German people are perfectly entitled to possess what form of government they please; it ill becomes us to dictate to them.” (G.E.O. Knight, In Defence of Germany)

    SPREADING DEMOCRACY TODAY IN THE MIDDLE EAST- NOPE- THEY’RE SPREADING TALMUDIC GOVERNMENTS!

    Note the date. We are told that ‘Nazi’ Germany’s intention was to exterminate Jewry, even at enormous expense to the war effort, shipping them in from France, Russia and suchlike. One wonders then at the contrary – and proven evidence – that in fact the beleaguered country was sparing no expense to assist the emigration of Jews to any country that would take them in.

    “That the German Government at that time, in spite of everything, even when the war of total destruction against Germany was drawing to its tragic close, still did not give way to the correspondingly radical course; indeed, it intervened in individual incidents of persecution (against the Jews), when brought to its attention. Even at the end of 1944, it repeated its previously made suggestions (Madagascar, etc.) to remove the Jews from the whole German area of influence. See the statements of Joel Brand in the Kastner proceedings in Jerusalem.” (Scronn)

    BRAINWASHED WESTERN SHEEP………….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s