Letter from CMM
Posted by alex in Letters, Primers for new nationalists, real American history, World War II at 5:33 pm | 
Permanent Link
Mr. Douglas S. Winnail
c/o Tomorrow’s World
P.O. Box 3810
Charlotte NC 28227-8010
USADear Mr. Winail,
Reading your article “Resurgent Germany: A Fourth Reich?” the words of Harold Nicholson came to mind. In his study PEACE MAKING written in 1919, he said: THE ANGLO SAXONS ARE GIFTED WITH A LIMITLESS CAPACITY, PARTICULARLY IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FOR APPLYING MORAL CANONS TO OTHERS WHICH THEY HAVE NEVER APPLIED TO THEMSELVES. HOW MANY ENGLISHMEN REMEMBER THAT THE BRITISH EMPIRE WAS MAINLY THE RESULT OF SUCCESSFUL NAVAL AND MILITARY ACTIONS IN ALL PARTS OF THE GLOBE? Obviously not you, Mr. Winnail, for according to you, only the Germans are guilty. The twisting of the truth is not very Christian, don’t you think?
Its dream of world conquest foiled… I would have thought that this old canard would have died a peaceful death, but no, you must bring it back. All historians of the period know that it was just propaganda. How can a nation of 80 million go on the rampage to conquer the world? There is of course one which did just that: Great Britain, but which you seem to consider justified in doing so. Have you asked the relatives of the 5 million Irish starved to death or the 30 odd million Indians who died in the same way, or the Boers in South Africa. The British Empire was created not to bring light to the world but because Britain ran out of silver. At the same time the yeomen were being thrown out of their farms to make room for extensive sheep farming by the so-called gentry. Parliament passed a law stating that anybody loitering should be hanged, but there wree so many of these unfortunates that it was found more expedient to press gang them onto ships and send them to other parts of the world to steal, rape and murder. At that time, as now, the trade ran from the East to the West and the silver the other way round, therefore Britain having no silver mines and having plundered the Spaniards, now decided that it would be nice to go and steal the silver from the treasury of Bengal. So they sent Clive and his fleet and found mountains of silver. Britain was back in business for a while. And of course, sinc ethe King was God’s representative on earth, all the mayhem was done in the name of God, which of course for the victims must have been a boon. (Brooke Adams, The laws of civilisation and decay)
During my stay in England in the 60’s, our history teacher stated that Germany started two wars. I raised my hand and said that during the same period, England was involved in 28 wars. The teacher replied that those were COLONIAL wars. so I asked him if the life of an Englishman was more important than the life of a Chinese in God’s eyes. He could not answer that one, but he did not like me so much afterwards. For this is the crux of the matter. Who gave Britain the right to trample on the people of the world? Who gave the Zionist Anglo American Empire the right to murder the people of Iraq or Afghanistan? Who gave a bunch of Turko Mongol Khazars from the North of the Caucasus, converted to Judaism in the 9th Century AD, the right to steal the land of the Palestinians. Did God do that? For you to reply.
Will a Fourth Reich rise? Before it can rise, the Third one must go out of existence. It never capitulated. Only the army capitulated, therefore it is still legally in existence. The Federal Republic is not an independent country as no peace treaty was ever signed. It is just a vassal state of the Zionist Anglo American Empire. It does not even have a final constitution, only a provisional one. As to a “Europeanized” Germany, as you put it, I do not think too many people worry about it, except the empire which controls it. In any case, it would be better than the corrupt, oppressive regime which now runs the country in the name of its imperial masters. The “Americanized” Germany is a sick country. It can only die or become healthy again. And it must be remembered that it is Vidkun Quisling who first proposed a European Union. The idea was taken over by the “elites” who controlled Europe after the war.
WWII began in 1939 when Adolf Hitler openly broke agreements with neighboring countries… WRONG. WWII started in 1933, 58 days after Hitler was democratically elected to power. All main newspapers in the world had for headlines: JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY. That declaration in fact meant that every Jew within the ambit of the Reich became an enemy alien and at the time enemy aliens were consigned to concentration camps. Ask the Japanese, Italian, Germans and others in the US of A. In germany, the Jewish Agencies were active till 1941 and were organising the emigration of Jews toward Palestine, the US (see US immigration statistics) and other countries. Germany did not break agreements with its neighbouring nation as you imply. It was negotiating with PPOLAND for a one mile wide rail and road lik to its province of East Prussia. The deal was almost done when Britain and reluctantly France under US pressure (Rooseveldt needed a war afte rthe Great Depression). That guarantee was supposed to secure ALL the Polish borders against ALL aggression, but in fact it was aimed at Germany only. When the Soviets invaded from the east, the guarantee had long been forgotten. With the support of the Western countries, POLAND BROKE ALL NEGOTIATIONS WITH GERMANY, MOBILISED ITS ARMY AND MARCHED TOWARD THE BORDER. A general mobilisation was deemed at the time as a declaration of war. The Poles were so sure of their victory, that they had commissioned a huge painting of the Polish president marching through the streets of Berlin. It was found half finished when the Germans took over the presidential palace. At the same time, Polish communist irregulars were busy mass murdering the German population of the Corridor forcing Hitler to intervene to save his brethren. The rest is history. FRANCE AND BRITAIN DECLARED WAR ON GERMANY (not the other way around). Germany did not attack them till a year later when it had exhausted all possibilities of peace. Then its better led forces smashed the French armies. The British contingent ran for the Channel where HITLER WHO STILL THOUGHT THAT PEACE WAS POSSIBLE, LET THEM ESCAPE AS A GESTURE OF GOODWILL.
Contrary to what you have been told, Germany did not start the blitz on England. ENGLISH BOMBERS HAD BEEN BOMBING GERMAN TOWNS WITHOUT REGARD FOR THE CIVILIAN POPULATION FOR OVER THREE MONTHS BEFORE HITLER RETALIATED.
Millions of Jews, Czechs and Poles were deported to work as slave laborers in German factories etc. There was no need for slave labour in slave factories as thousands upon thousands of Ukrainians, Poles, Czechs, French, Dutch, Belgians etc. worked WILLINGLY for the war effort. They had the same pay and labour conditions as the German workers. A Dutch friend of mine who worked in one at the time even told me that the Jews working there were receiving Kosher food which included more proteins such as beans. He also asked to have the same food and got it. The only sign of discrimination was that the Jews were eating with wooden spoons and non-Jews with metal spoons. He has never been able to find the reason. As to the concentration camps, which were in fact vast industrial estates, there have been so many lies, that it has become a religion where myths must be believed under threat of the Holy Inquisition. In many countries of Europe, you are jailed just for querying aspects of the official truth. BUT IF THE TRUTH MUST BE PROTECTED BY JAIL SENTENCES, IT CANNOT BE THE TRUTH.
The German war machine of WWII stands unequalled in modern Western civilisation for its efficiency (correct), destructiveness (wrong) and brutality (wrong). You must have seen too many Hollywood films and Action Heroes comic books. The German army was efficient, there is no doubt, but it was a disciplined army. Rape was punished by firing squad for example, unlike the US and Russian armies where it was a national sport. After the landing in Normandy, US commanders were complaining that the French were sullen and did not want to be liberated, at least not the US way with waves of darkies raping the French women. Infour years of occupation of France there were less rapes by German soldiers than in ONE WEEK of Western Allied occupation of Germany. Paris, Rome, Brussels and all other Western towns were left untouched by the German army, while the British and US Air force razed French and German towns and the women and children sheltering them. Germany was razed against all the tenets of the Geneva Convention regarding the treatment of civilians in war time. You can talk of brutality and destructiveness…!
Why did Germany descend into tyranny? IT DID NOT. The people democratically elected the National Socialist Party to power. In three years, the unemployment rate passed from 50% to 0%. Its workers had the best protective laws in Europe at the time, they were the first to enjoy paid holidays, canteens in factories, health check-ups, cruises for deserving workers. Those laws are still in existence in Holland, so they must have been good. After the chaos of the Weimar Republic which your Mr Barzini seems to have loved so much, it was a breath of fresh air for the German people. THEY WERE FREE FROM THE SHACKLES OF VERSAILLES AND THEY HAD RECOVERED THEIR DIGNITY. This did not please the International bankers who pushed for boycott of German goods as Hitler refused to borrow money from them. His motto was that a sovereign state should not borrow from a bank. It can create its own money, interest free, in sufficient quantity to finance the needs of the nation. As the Western nations tried to destroy the National Socialist revolution through boycott, Germany went on to barter trade and gave a better deal to the nations of the Third World than the greedy US, Brits and French. Germany grabbed the entire South American market, which did not please the greedy nations. As Churchill said, THE UNFORGIVABLE CRIME OF GERMANY BEFORE THE SECOND WORLD WAR WAS ITS ATTEMPT TO TAKE ITS TRADE STRENGTH OUT OF THE WORLD FINANCE SYSTEM AND TO BUILD ITS SYSTEM OF GOODS FOR GOODS TRADE IN WHICH CASE WORLD FINANCE WOULD NO LONGER RECEIVE ANY PROFIT. (MEMOIRS)
James Baker III, Secretary of State under Reagan and Bush I said in the German magazine Der Spiegel 2/92:
WE PAINTED HITLER AS A MONSTER, A DEVIL AND THAT IS WHY WE COULD NOT MOVE AWAY FROM THAT PORTRAYAL AFTER THE WAR. WE HAD MOBILISED THE MASSES AGAINST THE DEVIL INCARNATE AND SO WE WERE FORCED TO CONTINUE IN THIS SATANTIC SCENARIO AFTER THE WRA. WE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE EXPLAINED TO OUR PEOPLE THAT THE WAR HAD ACTUALLY BEEN ONLY A PREVENTATIVE ECONOMIC MEASURE!
(That is why the best of Europe had to die.)
Lewis Wyndham stated it in a different way…
WHAT HERR HITLER IS REQUIRED TO DO IS TO MERGE GERMANY INTO THE LEAGUE OF MONOPOLIST STATES. THE PEACE-LOVING NATIONS ARE MORE HEAVILY ARMED THAN YOU ARE, HERR HITLER, AND HAVE UNLIMITED RESOURCES AT THEIR DISPOSAL, AND THEY WILL UNQUESTIONABLY MAKE WAR ON YOU IF YOU DO NOT SUBMIT TO THEIR WILL AND IF YOU PERSIST IN GOING ON WITH THIS SOVEREIGN STATE STUFF. Source: “County your dead: they are alive” p. 318.
In 1938, Churchill sent an open letter to Adolf Hitler: “If England should ever suffer a national misfortune like that of Germany’s of 1918, I will pray to God to send us a man of your power of will and spirit.” The self same Churchill, seeing the rise of the Soviet Union, made this strange admission 1945: WE SLAUGHTERED THE WRONG PIG. By that time it was too late.
Tacitus wrote that German men had “no taste for peace” and spent their time in warlike pursuit…and posted a serious threat to the Roman army. It is the same argument as the Zionist Anglo Empire crowd. Only the Romans had a taste for peace and only the Anglo have it now. The Germans did not want the Romans to disturb their life. They did not want Pax Romana, and neither do we want Pax Americana. In fact the Romans should have been grateful to those Germans as they were the backbone of the Roman army. As Brook Adams states, if the empire had been in Spain, instead of the borders of Germany, it would not have lasted very long. Cesar could overcome against Pompey’s superior number of legions because he had German warriors.
To find Germany leading the effort to unite Europe today is not surprising as the idea has been part of German cultural heritage for more than a thousand years…. Is that a crime? Germany is the centre of Europe and it is therefore in its interest that peace prevails on the continent. England on the contrary has always been the troublemaker on the continent… Churchill in his memoirs states: ENGLAND WILL NOT TOLERATE A RISING POWER IN THE MIDDLE OF EUROPE. Any idea who was responsible for the conflict?
Why did so many Germans accept the “master race” concept and the destructive policies of Hitler’s Third Reich? Very strange statement indeed. There is only one people on this Earth who thinks it is the master race. Just read the Old Testament and you will have an idea. The same people calls the rest of us GOYIM, meaning human cattle which can be slaughtered, raped, robbed, fleeced by the Chosen of the Lord as their rightful booty. These are the real UBERMENSCH. In fact the Germans have been the most pacifist of the lot. They did not create an empire outside their territories, except for a few pieces of Africa they inherited from the scramble. As to humility, compassion and charity, please Mr. Winnail, I am sure you find that in the British and the Americans. Ask the victims of the empire! They will tell you. In fact Christianity should be thankful to the Germans for, when corruption threatened to overcome the Church and destroy it, it was first Alaric the Goth who saved the faith when he invaded corrupt Rome and later Martin Luther and its Reformation.
The same idea of uniting Europe under the banner of Christendom… Now you contradict yourself. First you say that they cannot be Christians due to their lack of humility, compassion and charity, then you tell us that they want to fight under the banner of Christianity. Those qualities of humility, compassion and charity (which of course permeate the Anglo establishment) are the sign of slavery, not of a proud nation. That is why Christianity appealed to the wretched of the earth, the oy polloi. Its goal was the destruction of the Roman Empire through pacifism. Christianity in opposition gave us this biblical quote: OUR ENEMIES ARE THE RULERS OF THE WORLD (the Romans), but Christianity in power told us that GOVERNMENTS ARE ORDERED BY GOD (obey the Church or be burnt at the stake).
Prussia was recognized as the most thoroughly militarized power in Europe and one of the most self sufficient and prosperous. Nothing wrong with that. Militarization brings discipline and discipline brings prosperity. One could say the same of China today, while the US is floundering in a sea of iniquity. Nothing can be built without discipline. That is the reason for the success of the German nation.
As to blood and iron, I cannot quite understand your argument. How do you think the British Empire was built? What do you think George Bush is doing in Iraq? Why has the US over 700 bases all over the world? That is really the pot calling the kettle black.
It was this Prussian tradition – authoritarian, anti-democratic, militaristic and expansionist – that paved the way for the rise of Imperial Germany, the Nazis, and the military adventures, atrocities and diasters of the Third Reich. I do not know Barzini, but the man is deluded. Germans are good at everything they do, be it in peace or in war. In fact Germany is the only country in Europe which lost territories over the centuries. Wherever there have been German settlers, those countries prospered. In fact the largest population group in the US is that of German Americans. Those were the builders of America. The present Zionist rulers of America, on the other hand, will drag it to the ground.
As to alleged German atrocities, the numbers are coming down every year. Auschwitz for example passed from 4 million to 1.5 million to 74,000 according to the 1994 report of the International Red Cross, only 30% being Jews. Treblinka is a joke. 800 000 alleged killed in a camp with an open fence, one km from a Polish village whose inhabitants never saw a thing. These victims were supposed to have been buried in a hole 70 x 90 m and to have been exhumed and burned at the rate of 3000 a day on huge pyres nobody ever saw, not even allied surveillance planes. The curator of the Majdanek State Museum stated in a Polish magazine that to the great maximum only 86 000 could have died in the camp, down from the original 1.5 million. The trees of the ravine of Babi Yar in the Ukraine where up to 100 000 chosen were supposed to have been buried were exactly in the same place in 1945 as in 1939 according to aerial surveys, just bigger. Had all those victims been buried there, the trees would have been uprooted to make place for graves. In 1991 the Yad Vashem Museum admitted that the stories of Jewish soap and tattooed skin were just propaganda. In 2004, the Washington Holocaust Memorial Museum admitted what the prestigious French magazine stated in 1995 about Auschwitz. Everything is fake. The alleged gas chambers shown to the public were built after the war by the communist authorities for the tourist trade. Suddenly the real one was in Birkenau and the Holocaust had shifted 11 km. Unfortunately, those buildings have no hole in the ceiling, as the legend wants it. NO HOLE, NO HOLOCAUST. I would leave the last words on the subject to J.C. Pressac, Auschwitz expert of the Jewish Beate Klaarsfeld Foundation in Paris, author of 18 books on the camp who finally threw in the towel and said:
BUNGLING, EXAGGERATIONS, OMISSIONS AND LIES ARE THE SIGNPOST OF MOST REPORTS OF THAT EPOQUE… IT IS INEVITABLE THAT NEW DOCUMENTS WILL COME TO LIGHT WHICH WILL SHATTER MORE AND MORE THE OFFICIAL AUSCHWITZ STORY. THE PRESENT, SEEMINGLY TRIUMPHANT PORTRAYAL OF THE UNIVERSE OF CONCENTRATION CAMPS (AUSCHWITZ) IS DESTINED TO BE DOOMED. WHAT CAN BE SAVED OF IT? VERY LITTLE!
If Germany will now rise again, there is no doubt about it. You cannot keep a good man down. The country now rising in Europe is Russia, with its immense resources. As Russia rises further, US influence will diminish and a new Europe will be born, from Dublin to Vladivostock, which will throw out the invaders from the South. Interestingly former Chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder understood this. He became a firm friend of Vladimir Putin. Merkel is just a puppet of the Zionist Anglo American Empire which is now in its twilight. Still dangerous, but nearly on its deathbed. Whatever the outcome, we do live in interesting times, as the Chinese curse states it so well.
I enclose a bundle of documents, which will, I hope, allow you to write with more authority on the subject and remain,
YOURS SINCERELY,
CMM
5 November, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Good article and hope to see more writings by Mr. Mathey.
These “Tomorrow’s World” people are the remnants of Herbert W. Armstrong’s Ambassador College empire. This organization, which held up the Jews as master-race exemplars to all Christians, floundered on the rocks of reality when it was revealed that Garner Ted Armstrong was a womanizer, Herbert Armstrong molested his own daughter for about ten years, and Stanley Rader, in typical Jewish fashion, was engaging in shady financial shennanigans.
Herbert is dead, doods! Stop being a JWAF!
(A JWAF [pronounced like Barney Frank would say the word, “giraffe”] is a Jew Worshipping Armstronite F**k)
5 November, 2007 at 6:21 pm
This should perhaps be put behind a cut tag.
5 November, 2007 at 6:56 pm
I can still hear Garner Ted Strongarm’s voice from the sixties: “WHAT WE NEED IS A WORLD RULING GOVERNMENT- not a government of man, but a government of G$d.”
So until tomorrow, this is Garner Ted Strongarm saying- goodbye friends. I believe he was on the same station as Wolfman Jack- megawatts from mexico.
5 November, 2007 at 7:29 pm
A most accurate history of 20th Century Geopolitics. Britain has always been the nation of bad guys, inferior in every way to the Germans, whose stock they actually arose from. Pity. Insufferable bunch.
See how easy the truth is?
I for one am now a devotee of Mr. Mathey.
Take the Holocaust away from the Jews and you turn them into a tribe of swindlers, cheats, and cutthroats. Which is, of course, what they are. That, and a tragedy for sentient life on this planet.
So many nice nuggets in that article!
5 November, 2007 at 7:33 pm
Very interesting….
Can anyone give the source and / or some background to this? I would like to find out more….
5 November, 2007 at 8:14 pm
WHERE IS ALEX???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????+
5 November, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Reader asks:
Can anyone give the source and / or some background to this?
Start HERE. (Pdf, 3.6 MB.)
5 November, 2007 at 11:44 pm
Great letter–I hope the author is able to expand on it further. It contains the outline of a very persuasive essay or long article.
6 November, 2007 at 1:30 am
A great revisionist retort to the German baiters by Mr. Mathey! His letter contains some new facts and quotes about Anglo duplicity and German fairness that need to be heard. The essay is briming with elucidation about many of the canards and lies about Germany that pass, a priori, as “history” in the Western world. It exposes the depths of the toxified and Judaized Anglo mindset. Heinz
Roth, Carlos Porter, Udo Walendy, Michael McLaughlin and others have done the same in the past, and are to be commended.
6 November, 2007 at 7:53 am
There’s little point to Mr Mathey retorting so eliquently when the recipient is a mindless brainwashed Goy with no capacity for rational thought.
Winail can’t be reasoned with. He’s in denial! What’s more, the most disturbing part of this pillock’s oozing kikeatribe is in showing the extent Christianity has become Judaized.
Hooked on the prospect of real time rapturing, they’ll do anything to see it happen and that includes sleeping with the devil.
6 November, 2007 at 9:16 am
History, as we know, is written by the winners. Jewish Zionist bankers and their allies clearly won the victory in 1945. They have been a malignant cancer upon the Earth consuming every nation in their path since. I looked up Winnail’s article and it was more than obvious to see where his allegiance lies (note the Jewish references). Winnail also perpetuates the End Times scenario and plays upon resurgent fears of German aggression. Thankfully, C.M. Mathey squarely puts him in his place with the real truth. It was refreshing to see it in print for a change, since becoming aware that the whole world has been lied to for over a century. I am saving a copy for the sake of posterity.
6 November, 2007 at 9:27 am
The article is well written, correctly and truthfully explained .It should be made mandatory reading in all history classes !
6 November, 2007 at 10:19 am
Alex is changing diapers, leave him alone!
6 November, 2007 at 1:14 pm
VNN should include much more work like this. This article is fascinating reading and will be saved to ebook format so I can carry it in my PDA for frequent consulting when speaking to the un-enlightened. Bravo Mr. Mathey!
6 November, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Alex is around, and will be on FTL this Friday evening with Bud White.
6 November, 2007 at 9:55 pm
I’d like a more specific cite for this quote, I can’t find anything solid on the internet:
As Churchill said, THE UNFORGIVABLE CRIME OF GERMANY BEFORE THE SECOND WORLD WAR WAS ITS ATTEMPT TO TAKE ITS TRADE STRENGTH OUT OF THE WORLD FINANCE SYSTEM AND TO BUILD ITS SYSTEM OF GOODS FOR GOODS TRADE IN WHICH CASE WORLD FINANCE WOULD NO LONGER RECEIVE ANY PROFIT. (MEMOIRS)
6 November, 2007 at 10:58 pm
A really top-notch rebuttal there: chock full o’ nutritious facts.
7 November, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Very wholesome read! Yes, the judeo-saxon empire IS thrashing about in its stinking, shit-piss-blood-cum stained deathbed, still raving and waving it’s Kosher Atomic Pistol and capable of much evil, but HUMANITY WILL LIVE TO DANCE ON JEW-SAXONDOM’S GRAVE!!!! Our job is to avoid being pulled down into the grave with the sick bastards and to finish THEM off!
DEATH TO AMERICA!
DEATH TO FREEMASONRY!
DEATH TO I$RAEL!
DEATH TO JEWRY!
HAIL HUMANITY!
HAIL ARYANA TO BE!
7 November, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Fantastic read..I liken it to walking face-first into an autumn rainstorm..a little uncomfortable…but bracing. I for one am grateful that the author has such a gift for taking the strongest points from several sources and assembling them in such a fashion as to deliver the greatest impact. Damned good propaganda, and that’s a compliment! This is the sort of thing that actually has a french fry’s chance in hell of getting through to the ruminating bipeds in human clothing. Not the torpor-inducing tomes of let us say..the typical apologetic revisionist (dare I say..English) historian..with their great love for footnotes. Thanks again, C.M.M
7 November, 2007 at 11:55 pm
Important and worth post, thank you.
The enemy aliens have known this for a long time, and their paranoia and hate has resulted in this ex Nation having 40 million invaders in attack US in the last 20 years.
One thing about this section of VNN the defectives and alphabet trolls are not roaming here free as a nigger.
8 November, 2007 at 6:53 am
I found this screed to be rather rambling and confused. For starters, he refers to the “Zionist Anglo American Empire” and equates America’s imperialism with Anglo-Saxons, but then turns around and points out that Americans are of majority German descent. Well, which is it? Are Anglos to take the blame for all of America’s misdeeds and Germans all the credit?
Regarding imperialism: I’m sympathetic to criticism of Anglo imperialism (being of half Celtic stock myself), but it strains credibility to suggest that Nazi Germany is a victim of this in the same way Ireland or India were. Germany was arming all through the 30s, and it wasn’t for “self-defence”. Moreover, Britain and the United States were justified in trying to force Germany to remain within a globalised finance system, because such a system would allow economic sanctions to be used to cripple an aggressive power before military intervention became necessary. To have refrained from this in the aftermath of the stupid and pointless bloodbath of WW1 (another artifact of German idiocy and belligerence) would have been irresponsible. It’s just too bad the screws weren’t tightened on Germany earlier, and then the great fratricidal slaughter of the 20th century could have been averted. Regarding the double standard applied to Germany’s aggression and England’s colonial wars, this is warranted because Germany was invading fellow European nations. Aggression against a brother should be frowned on more harshly than aggression against a stranger (though that should not be excused either). To top it all off, Germany’s ultimate treason against Europe was allying with the Japanese throughout their butchery in South East Asia, which left Australia and NZ open to the threat of invasion. It’s pretty weak to be complaining about our alliance with the Soviets when you’re making common cause with non-Europeans.
When it comes down to it Germans are just sore losers. Germans were defeated in a conflict they created for themselves on the field of battle by those whom Germans had arrogantly dismissed as their “inferiors”: Anglos, Celts, Slavs & “mongrel Americans”. Germans need to drop their ridiculous pretense to being the “master race” of Europe if White Europeans are to show any kind of solidarity against the threat of third world inundation. This kind of jingoistic German nationalism is about 50 years out of date, and is totally nonconstructive.
(Anglo-Celtic New Zealander).
8 November, 2007 at 5:51 pm
ANZU Says: “Germany was arming all through the 30s, and it wasn’t for “self-defence”.”
Germany had a right to build an army, just like any other country. Maybe Britain shouldn’t have started a world war over Poland?
Furthermore, re: WWI: Germany mobilized for war third, after the others. That means that, contrary to what Jewish high-school teachers tell us, Germany didn’t start WWI.
Hitler, during WWII, was merely trying to undo the horrible Versailles Treaty, which Britain knew. So why did Britain have to declare war? In fact, British Prime Minister Lloyd George later admitted that the Versailles Treaty was wrong. So, Hitler was right. As usual.
8 November, 2007 at 10:31 pm
ANZU:
First of all, fuck you and all your kind. You are all retarded.
“Germany was arming all through the 30s, and it wasn’t for “self-defence”. ”
Wasn’t for self-defence? Read Mein Kampf. It talked about the war with the Bolsheviks and Germany’s right to self-defense. If Germany doesn’t arm, your dumb ass is speaking Russian and you and your countrymen bleed profusely and perish under Communism. Kiss Germany’s ass for all of eternity because they saved your fucking dumbasses from that hell called Bolshevism.
“It’s just too bad the screws weren’t tightened on Germany earlier, and then the great fratricidal slaughter of the 20th century could have been averted.”
It’s because you fucking pussies couldn’t do anything about it anyway. What Germany did was not only for Germans but for all of Europe. You are too fucking stupid to realize this.
Go fuck yourself, dummy.
8 November, 2007 at 10:55 pm
No, the Central Powers started WWI when Austria-Hungary invaded Serbia. This isn’t even controversial! How is this “Jewish history”? Invading a country because they wouldn’t hand over a “terrorist” is no different to the justification America gave for invading Afghanistan because the Taliban wouldn’t hand over bin Laden. If it’s a bogus pretext now it’s a bogus pretext then. You can’t start a war that kills 20 million over the assassination of ONE guy. The Treaty of Versailles was too harsh, but Germany was still at fault for WW1.
Regarding Communism, it’s true Communism was a great evil, but you’re trying to tell me Hitler fought a war against us for our own good to protect us from the Commies? Why couldn’t he ally with Britain and the USA against the Bolsheviks? He made this impossible because he wanted to go on a land-grabbing expedition throughout Eastern Europe in the process. Saying that this was “for the benefit of all Europe” is laughable. It was lebensraum for GERMANS, at the cost of the Polish and Ukrainian “untermenschen”. Looks like we managed to defeat both Bolshevism and Nazism in the end, so well played Churchill.
8 November, 2007 at 11:53 pm
ANZU Says: “Why couldn’t he ally with Britain and the USA against the Bolsheviks?”
How could Hitler ally with them? The U.S. took sides with the Soviets early on (in Nov. 1933). By the way, that was long before any “Holocaust” propaganda was being manufactured.
The proper thing for both Britain and America to have done would have been to take sides with Germany, Japan and Italy against Bolshevism. But no. The crippled commie-lover F. D. Roosevelt wouldn’t do that. He cast his lot with the commies early. He and Britain could have signed the Anti-Comintern Pact with the Axis powers. They had the chance. But they refused. Thanks to the “allies,” the Jews now dominate the West. Only The Jew Won World War Two.
9 November, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Ditto, Socrates, and Germany was the talmudic “burnt offering”. The victim of a very real genocidal holocaust.
9 November, 2007 at 9:50 pm
ANZU YOU POS! You and your A. Nut Lords here should be flushed. The fact that O.D. VNN and the very few sites that have heroic White men whose rightous indignation to what the ju’s and useful idiots callaborators have done to US deserve a salute, but I have come to point that toilet filled trolls needs daily flushing.
Germany and England
by: Nesta Webster
by: Nesta Webster
Prefatory comments by Jackie P.
THIS is the little book that opened my eyes about the mass of massive lies we’ve all been told about Germany under National Socialism, and specifically it’s Chancellor, Adolf Hitler.
To my mind the greatest lie was that “Adolf Hitler planned to conquer the world and enslave the inhabitants of all nations”. In reality the ones making those accusations are the ones who plan to conquer the world. The defeat of Germany was a defeat for all the inhabitants of the world, just as Adolf Hitler predicted.
The group promulgating that big lie was successful in its efforts to instill a deep sense of both fear and hatred of the man who wanted only to restore some of the areas of land that had been sliced out of Germany by the Versailles Treaty after WWI, bring the German people back into the fold of their natural country borders, and protect western Europe from the Communist/Bolshevik tyranny threatening to wreak its havoc throughout the continent, and the world.
In another small book titled, The Nameless War, Captain A. H. M. Ramsay gives convincing evidence of the above statement. For some of our readers this will be a turning point (as it was for me). The more lies you uncover, the more truth you desire. Those of you who would rather remain blissfully ignorant will leave now. Those of you who know the truth and hate the truth will be frothing at the mouth that the lies are being exposed.
Captain Ramsay was a veteran of the first World War, a former member of His Majesty’s Guard, and — at the time of his arrest and imprisonment — a member of the British Parliament. He was arrested without formal charges and thrown into Brixton Prison for nearly three years because he discovered and attempted to reveal the culprits who were clamoring for, orchestrating and promulgating what became the Second World War.
Nobody wanted war in England or Germany except Winston Churchill and the War Hawks who controlled him and the press (just like in the U.S. of A. then and today). When Prime Minister Chamberlain returned from a trip to Germany where he had entered into one-on-one conversations with Chancellor Hitler, he announced to the Parliament and the British people that “there will be no war”.
Behind the exuberant celebrations of the people in both Germany and England, the planners went to work. Inside of one week, the controlled press was printing lies about the Prime Minister and began clamoring for his resignation. He was blamed for a military blunder that had actually been committed under Churchill’s orders as Admiral of the Navy. Instead of Churchill standing accused, it was Mr. Chamberlain.
Chamberlain was out; Churchill was in, and on the very evening of the day Churchill became Prime Minister (May 11, 1941), England began indiscriminate bombing of Germany. . . homes, churches, schools, hospitals, slaughtering defenseless men, women and children (just like the U.S. has done in Afghanistan, Iraq, and dozens of other nations).
The situation is the same now as it was then, and the same unseen hand at work today is the same force behind every revolution and war carried out since time immemorial. . . the English Revolution in the 1600’s (which resulted in the entrenchment of the Bank of England); the French Revolution, Russian Revolution (creation of the U.S.S.R), and the foiled (thanks to Mussolini and Hitler) Spanish revolution which Mrs. Webster relates in this book.
Germany and England was presented to me by a friend in her senior years, along with several boxes of books she had been accumulating over the past four decades. As I sat reading this book, in the privacy of my home, I was silently (and sometimes audibly) gasping in shock at the revelations herein.
First, Mrs. Webster’s reference to the ‘Jews’ who controlled the U.S.S.R. and whose minions were over-running western Europe and literally running Germany under the Weimar Republic created a first-impression that she was “anti-Semitic”. Until that time, any information sent or given to me about the Jews, was set aside without a glance, believing that the givers of this information were ‘Jew haters’. I wasn’t. And I’m not today.
However, there is no denying that the plan for World Dominion is a millenia-old plan, and those born into the ‘religion’ of Talmudism (they call themselves Jews) are being used by their Elders to push the plan — along with tens of millions of “Christian-Zionists”. The word ‘religion’ is emphasized, because Judaism is not a religion, according to Moses Mendelsohn, a learned Jew well-known and respected by Jews. Mendelsohn said that:
“Judaism is not a religion, it is a LAW, religionized”.
While researching and writing the book-in-progress titled “Jewish Persecution”, it became clear that Mendelsohn meant what he said, and it is true. There is no such religion as Judaism anyway; the religion is ‘Talmudism’ or ‘Pharisaism’. It IS a LAW which contains the plan for World Dominion, and it is well-hidden ‘neath its cloak of religion.
Second, Mrs. Webster’s comments about and quoted statements by Adolf Hitler presented an absolutely shocking portrait of an individual whose words — and more importantly, his actions — spoke volumes for his love of Germany and her people, as well as his abhorrence for the Jews who had spoiled Germany mentally, emotionally and morally, while totally devastating the economy and well-being of the German population. They controlled the banks (economy), the government, education, the press, and entertainment (just like today in America).
Unfortunately, their ‘lesser brethren’ Jews were always the brunt of the machinations of their Elders, as told by Benjamin Freedman in his speech to a group of people in the late 1960’s. When you read that speech, if you haven’t already, you see parts of it could have been a speech made fairly recently. He mentioned the forces building toward World War III by the orchestrated unrest in the Middle East.
The historical preview given at the beginning of the first chapter was confusing and little understood by me on the first reading. That is because I had NO knowledge or understanding of the history of the meddlesome creatures who call themselves Jews, and who have succeeded in infiltrating every government and nation that has ultimately been destroyed by their machinations.
If the reader takes a look at the names and backgrounds of individuals in very high places in the U.S. (and now state governments) today, it will become obvious that Jews — who purportedly constitute only 3% of the U.S. population — hold disproportionate numbers of positions of great power and influence in administrative, legislative and judicial branches of government, as well as all branches of the military under the Department of Defense. Not only that, they are advisors, speech-writers, and so forth, to non-Jews in high places.
If our reader is in the beginning stages of awakening to the lies, it may be helpful to return to the beginning of chapter one for a re-read after finishing the book. That may be totally unnecessary and maybe I only suggest it because I realized on the second reading that I had not fully understood those first few pages of pre-history review the first time ’round.
We present Germany and England for your reading with deep gratitude to Karen A., who transcribed it for us. . . for you.
The book from which this was transcribed showed no publication date. It was apparently taken from the paper or newsletter Mrs. Nester published, titled “The Patriot” (as referenced below the title). In this writing she alluded to the “England of 1938. . .” as well as a quote by Adolf Hitler in October, 1938, so we are fixing the date of writing in late 1938 or very early 1939.
— Jackie
July 11th, 2003
P.S. Just before sending this to our webmaster (and he IS a “master” webmaster), Darren Weeks, we received a forward from a BBC item on the death of a Lord Shawcross, who led the British prosecution at the Nuremberg war crimes tribunal. The following statement attributed to Shawcross is relevant and confirms the information Mrs. Webster presents in Germany and England. We have not seen the speech given at Stourbridge. If our reader has access to the entire speech we would appreciate notification. Thank you.
July 28th, 2003
_______________________________________________
Sir Hartley Shawcross, said in a speech at Stourbridge, March 16, 1984
“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 colleagues condemned Nazi Aggression and Terror. I believe now that Hitler and the German People did not want war.
But we [England] 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 ignored Hitler’s pleading, not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realize 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 Empire. I feel ashamed and humiliated to see that the aims we accused Hitler of, are being relentlessly pursued now, only under a different label.”
______________________________________________________
Germany and England
By Nesta H. Webster
Reprinted from THE PATRIOT, OCTOBER and NOVEMBER, 138, and Revised.
_______________________________________________
Foreword
For the benefit of the younger generation or of foreigners who, never having read “Trilby,” may fail to understand the meaning of the frontispiece to the book, it should be explained that the famous novel of this name, written and illustrated by the late George du Maurier, which appeared in 1894, described the history of an artist’s model named Trilby in the Quartier Latin of Paris, who, without any natural voice, was hypnotized to sing by a clever Jewish musician named Svengali, and fell completely under his power.
The point in reproducing it here is to show that the British people are being hypnotized to repeat the phrases put into their mouths at the wave of a conductor’s baton.
Herr Hitler in October, 1938 [said]:
“England would be well advised to stop governessing Europe.”
GERMANY AND ENGLAND
I. THE VOLTE FACE.
To the dispassionate observer who happens to possess a memory, nothing is more extraordinary than the paroxysm of fury and suspicion with regard to Germany’s intentions which broke out last spring in our country where — until five years ago — pro-Germanism was de rigueur in “intellectual” and so-called “advanced” circles.
This kind of pro-Germanism was of long standing. It was seen after the Franco-Prussian War when The Times of 18 November, 1870, gave prominence to Carlyle’s letter deploring the “cheap pity and newspaper lamentation over fallen and afflicted France” and ending with the fervent hope that “noble, patient, deep, pious and solid Germany should be at length wielded into a nation and become Queen of the Continent.”
Before the Great War [WWI] when the hostile intentions of Germany toward the British Empire were clearly evident; when German officers were drinking to “der Tag,” [the Day] whilst German writers openly committed their plans for world power to paper and incident after incident showed that war was inevitable, all those who warned our country were derided or insulted. It was even suggested that Lord Roberts should be deprived of his pension for conducting his campaign for National Service.
The Day — when it at last arrived — was hailed with rapture by the German people. The women threw their hats into the air with joy and the Daily Mail of 3 August 1914, published a photograph of a whole London street filled with young Germans cheering for war.
Meanwhile the same sort of crowds of Socialists and Pacifists who have recently been parading London shouting for war with Germany were then agitating for non-resistance to German aggression.
Even when the grey legions of Germany were marching through Belgium and Flanders on their way to these shores, the Socialists held meetings of protest against national defence, and the reluctance to fight engendered by their propaganda proved a serious check to recruiting. All this when we were at war with an autocracy headed by an Emperor with a ruling caste of Junkers to whom Socialism in any form was abhorrent!
This anti-patriotic campaign was maintained throughout the War and the fifteen years that followed it. Socialists, Communists and Pacifists continued to clamour for greater gentleness to be shown to Germany, declaring that we had “been mad to fight” her and that the Treaty of Versailles should be torn up.
In Liberal, and even in Conservative circles, the same sentiments were frequently expressed –
“the Germans are our natural allies; in the next war we hope we shall be marching with them against France.”
It must be admitted that the incivility sometimes shown to British travelers to France had something to do with these sentiments. Indeed, towards 1930, especially after Mr. Philip Snowden accused France of “bilking her obligations,” feelings between the two countries had become so bitter that those of us who loved France lived in dread of an open rapture with her.
It was but natural that France, having suffered twice within fifty years from invasion by German armies, should fear and distrust Germany’s further intentions more profoundly than England whose soil had never been trodden by a foreign foe since 1066 and that she [France] found some difficulty in believing that Germany had undergone that “change of heart” of which our Socialists and Pacifists spoke with so much assurance.
For, as all well-informed people in this country were aware, the spirit of militarism had not been crushed in Germany. Military associations were openly drilling, secret societies aiming at a war of revenge were formed, stores of ammunition were being secretly piled up.
At the same time close co-operation took place between the “Eastern” school of German militarists and Soviet Russia, Bolshevik propaganda emanated from Berlin as well as from Moscow, the Communist Party of Germany was the largest in the world outside Russia and in all countries Communism aimed particularly at the destruction of France and of the British Empire.
All this was shown in my Surrender of an Empire (in 1931) against which a boycott was organised in the Press. In those days it was “French militarism” which had become the bogey of our Pacifists just as in France the perfidy of England became the theme of certain French writers.
I remember during that period attending a meeting in London of a certain association which purported to arrange debates and discussions on world politics from a non-party point of view, which, as usual, meant that only “Left” views were given a fair hearing.
On this occasion a German had been invited to speak, and be held forth at great length on the grievances of Germany, observing that, although he himself was not a Nazi, Nazi-ism was but the natural outcome of German resentment at the policy of disarmament imposed on Germany by the Allies.
This was received with sympathy by the audience, a member of which rose at the end of the address and said:
“I am the Bishop of ____ and I am sure that everyone here must feel ashamed of the way in which we are disarming Germany whilst we ourselves are continuing to arm.”
As no one dissented it was evident that this sentiment was shared by all those present. Not one person in that crowded hall rose to observe that we had just scrapped a number of cruisers and were disarming – as is now generally admitted – to the point of danger.
Now, today a leading official of that same association is trumpeting an appeal for an increased national defence against the German menace!
If Germany at the present time considers she has grievances, and that the Treaty of Versailles should be scrapped in favour of a policy more in accord with calm judgment and altered circumstances, how can she be blamed by those who formerly encouraged her to think she had greater grievances than those she now puts forward?
Either they were wrong then or they are wrong now; in either case we should not be guided by their opinion.
Now we — who were never pro-Germans in the sense of seeking peace at any price and of endangering the security of our own country, but who held, on the contrary, that in view of the disturbed state of Europe we must remain fully armed — nevertheless recognised that many errors had been made in the Peace Treaties. It is clear that the policy of forcing Germany with the sword at her throat to admit war guilt, and the absurdity of incorporating the Covenant of the League of Nations in the Treaty of Versailles, could never lead to lasting peace.
[note: the “League of Nations”, formerly the ‘League to Enforce Peace’, is now known as the “United Nations”]
Again and again revisions of the Treaties were demanded by the Germans and their friends in this country but when Hitler, finding that nothing was to be gained by arbitration, decided to take the law into his own hands, the Socialists and Pacifists who from 1914 to 1933 had pleaded the cause of Germany, raised a howl of execration and declared that the Treaties must now be enforced even at the cost of war.
What happened to bring about their change of front? The accession of Hitler to power. Now Hitler had in the past shown himself, at moments, as a fire-brand. But how often have we been told in the case of our own Socialists that office “sobers”?
It certainly seemed to do so in the case of Hitler, who, once in control of his country, abandoned his aggressive attitude toward the Allies. But at the same time he put down Bolshevism and took the control of Germany out of the hands of the Jews.
By these measures it was not only Germany that profited but the two greatest dangers to our country were removed. For the support given to Germany by “International Finance,” which would have enabled her to defray the cost of another war at any moment, was withdrawn and the link between Germany and Soviet Russia was broken.
The floods of Bolshevist propaganda flowing from Berlin into all parts of the British Empire were checked at their source. The resentment of the German people towards the Allies as the cause of all their sufferings gave way to passionate enthusiasm for a leader who set out to restore their country by constructive methods.
The old Pan-German dream of world power was replaced by a Nationalist scheme for the union of all German peoples under one head, leaving the peoples of other countries to work out their own destinies.
Then was the moment for the ending of war hates and of peace between the nation which, throughout thirteen years of endless congresses and assemblies, had been the professed aim of European statesmen, of the talkers at Geneva and countless Pacifist associations.
Then was the moment for the whole civilized world, which for fifteen years had been tossed on the waves of unrest set in motion by Moscow, to see in Hitler, as it should have seen in Mussolini, a saviour from the greatest enemy of the human race – the hideous system of tyranny which threatened to spread itself into every country, well stigmatized by Mr. Winston Churchill at its onset as “the bloody baboonery” of Bolshevism.
Instead of this Hitler was reviled, as Mussolini had been reviled after he had saved Italy from the grip of the Red octopus. Such is the power of the Press, and of mass hypnotism exercised over the minds of the British public that they were now made to regard Hitler as their mortal enemy.
Yet in the place of an autocratic Emperor at the head of a military caste and of a warlike German nation, we were faced by a ruler who, although a dictator, represents the will of 90 per cent of the population, a plain man of the people, an ardent social reformer, too Socialistic for us but clearly sincere, a leader who whilst restoring the confidence and self-respect of the German people has quelled in them the spirit of hatred towards our country.
Instead of young Germans cheering for war in the streets of London we have had the youth of Germany cheering Mr. Chamberlain as the messenger of peace through the streets of Munich.
And this was the moment when we were told that a world war was inevitable in order to crush the “German menace.”
Next – Chapter 2: “Governessing England”
Back to HOW WARS ARE MADE | Issues index | CDR Home
9 November, 2007 at 9:52 pm
by: Nesta Webster
Prefatory comments by Jackie P.
THIS is the little book that opened my eyes about the mass of massive lies we’ve all been told about Germany under National Socialism, and specifically it’s Chancellor, Adolf Hitler.
To my mind the greatest lie was that “Adolf Hitler planned to conquer the world and enslave the inhabitants of all nations”. In reality the ones making those accusations are the ones who plan to conquer the world. The defeat of Germany was a defeat for all the inhabitants of the world, just as Adolf Hitler predicted.
The group promulgating that big lie was successful in its efforts to instill a deep sense of both fear and hatred of the man who wanted only to restore some of the areas of land that had been sliced out of Germany by the Versailles Treaty after WWI, bring the German people back into the fold of their natural country borders, and protect western Europe from the Communist/Bolshevik tyranny threatening to wreak its havoc throughout the continent, and the world.
In another small book titled, The Nameless War, Captain A. H. M. Ramsay gives convincing evidence of the above statement. For some of our readers this will be a turning point (as it was for me). The more lies you uncover, the more truth you desire. Those of you who would rather remain blissfully ignorant will leave now. Those of you who know the truth and hate the truth will be frothing at the mouth that the lies are being exposed.
Captain Ramsay was a veteran of the first World War, a former member of His Majesty’s Guard, and — at the time of his arrest and imprisonment — a member of the British Parliament. He was arrested without formal charges and thrown into Brixton Prison for nearly three years because he discovered and attempted to reveal the culprits who were clamoring for, orchestrating and promulgating what became the Second World War.
Nobody wanted war in England or Germany except Winston Churchill and the War Hawks who controlled him and the press (just like in the U.S. of A. then and today). When Prime Minister Chamberlain returned from a trip to Germany where he had entered into one-on-one conversations with Chancellor Hitler, he announced to the Parliament and the British people that “there will be no war”.
Behind the exuberant celebrations of the people in both Germany and England, the planners went to work. Inside of one week, the controlled press was printing lies about the Prime Minister and began clamoring for his resignation. He was blamed for a military blunder that had actually been committed under Churchill’s orders as Admiral of the Navy. Instead of Churchill standing accused, it was Mr. Chamberlain.
Chamberlain was out; Churchill was in, and on the very evening of the day Churchill became Prime Minister (May 11, 1941), England began indiscriminate bombing of Germany. . . homes, churches, schools, hospitals, slaughtering defenseless men, women and children (just like the U.S. has done in Afghanistan, Iraq, and dozens of other nations).
The situation is the same now as it was then, and the same unseen hand at work today is the same force behind every revolution and war carried out since time immemorial. . . the English Revolution in the 1600’s (which resulted in the entrenchment of the Bank of England); the French Revolution, Russian Revolution (creation of the U.S.S.R), and the foiled (thanks to Mussolini and Hitler) Spanish revolution which Mrs. Webster relates in this book.
Germany and England was presented to me by a friend in her senior years, along with several boxes of books she had been accumulating over the past four decades. As I sat reading this book, in the privacy of my home, I was silently (and sometimes audibly) gasping in shock at the revelations herein.
First, Mrs. Webster’s reference to the ‘Jews’ who controlled the U.S.S.R. and whose minions were over-running western Europe and literally running Germany under the Weimar Republic created a first-impression that she was “anti-Semitic”. Until that time, any information sent or given to me about the Jews, was set aside without a glance, believing that the givers of this information were ‘Jew haters’. I wasn’t. And I’m not today.
However, there is no denying that the plan for World Dominion is a millenia-old plan, and those born into the ‘religion’ of Talmudism (they call themselves Jews) are being used by their Elders to push the plan — along with tens of millions of “Christian-Zionists”. The word ‘religion’ is emphasized, because Judaism is not a religion, according to Moses Mendelsohn, a learned Jew well-known and respected by Jews. Mendelsohn said that:
“Judaism is not a religion, it is a LAW, religionized”.
While researching and writing the book-in-progress titled “Jewish Persecution”, it became clear that Mendelsohn meant what he said, and it is true. There is no such religion as Judaism anyway; the religion is ‘Talmudism’ or ‘Pharisaism’. It IS a LAW which contains the plan for World Dominion, and it is well-hidden ‘neath its cloak of religion.
Second, Mrs. Webster’s comments about and quoted statements by Adolf Hitler presented an absolutely shocking portrait of an individual whose words — and more importantly, his actions — spoke volumes for his love of Germany and her people, as well as his abhorrence for the Jews who had spoiled Germany mentally, emotionally and morally, while totally devastating the economy and well-being of the German population. They controlled the banks (economy), the government, education, the press, and entertainment (just like today in America).
Unfortunately, their ‘lesser brethren’ Jews were always the brunt of the machinations of their Elders, as told by Benjamin Freedman in his speech to a group of people in the late 1960’s. When you read that speech, if you haven’t already, you see parts of it could have been a speech made fairly recently. He mentioned the forces building toward World War III by the orchestrated unrest in the Middle East.
The historical preview given at the beginning of the first chapter was confusing and little understood by me on the first reading. That is because I had NO knowledge or understanding of the history of the meddlesome creatures who call themselves Jews, and who have succeeded in infiltrating every government and nation that has ultimately been destroyed by their machinations.
If the reader takes a look at the names and backgrounds of individuals in very high places in the U.S. (and now state governments) today, it will become obvious that Jews — who purportedly constitute only 3% of the U.S. population — hold disproportionate numbers of positions of great power and influence in administrative, legislative and judicial branches of government, as well as all branches of the military under the Department of Defense. Not only that, they are advisors, speech-writers, and so forth, to non-Jews in high places.
If our reader is in the beginning stages of awakening to the lies, it may be helpful to return to the beginning of chapter one for a re-read after finishing the book. That may be totally unnecessary and maybe I only suggest it because I realized on the second reading that I had not fully understood those first few pages of pre-history review the first time ’round.
We present Germany and England for your reading with deep gratitude to Karen A., who transcribed it for us. . . for you.
The book from which this was transcribed showed no publication date. It was apparently taken from the paper or newsletter Mrs. Nester published, titled “The Patriot” (as referenced below the title). In this writing she alluded to the “England of 1938. . .” as well as a quote by Adolf Hitler in October, 1938, so we are fixing the date of writing in late 1938 or very early 1939.
— Jackie
July 11th, 2003
P.S. Just before sending this to our webmaster (and he IS a “master” webmaster), Darren Weeks, we received a forward from a BBC item on the death of a Lord Shawcross, who led the British prosecution at the Nuremberg war crimes tribunal. The following statement attributed to Shawcross is relevant and confirms the information Mrs. Webster presents in Germany and England. We have not seen the speech given at Stourbridge. If our reader has access to the entire speech we would appreciate notification. Thank you.
July 28th, 2003
_______________________________________________
Sir Hartley Shawcross, said in a speech at Stourbridge, March 16, 1984
“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 colleagues condemned Nazi Aggression and Terror. I believe now that Hitler and the German People did not want war.
But we [England] 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 ignored Hitler’s pleading, not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realize 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 Empire. I feel ashamed and humiliated to see that the aims we accused Hitler of, are being relentlessly pursued now, only under a different label.”
______________________________________________________
Germany and England
By Nesta H. Webster
Reprinted from THE PATRIOT, OCTOBER and NOVEMBER, 138, and Revised.
_______________________________________________
Foreword
For the benefit of the younger generation or of foreigners who, never having read “Trilby,” may fail to understand the meaning of the frontispiece to the book, it should be explained that the famous novel of this name, written and illustrated by the late George du Maurier, which appeared in 1894, described the history of an artist’s model named Trilby in the Quartier Latin of Paris, who, without any natural voice, was hypnotized to sing by a clever Jewish musician named Svengali, and fell completely under his power.
The point in reproducing it here is to show that the British people are being hypnotized to repeat the phrases put into their mouths at the wave of a conductor’s baton.
Herr Hitler in October, 1938 [said]:
“England would be well advised to stop governessing Europe.”
GERMANY AND ENGLAND
I. THE VOLTE FACE.
To the dispassionate observer who happens to possess a memory, nothing is more extraordinary than the paroxysm of fury and suspicion with regard to Germany’s intentions which broke out last spring in our country where — until five years ago — pro-Germanism was de rigueur in “intellectual” and so-called “advanced” circles.
This kind of pro-Germanism was of long standing. It was seen after the Franco-Prussian War when The Times of 18 November, 1870, gave prominence to Carlyle’s letter deploring the “cheap pity and newspaper lamentation over fallen and afflicted France” and ending with the fervent hope that “noble, patient, deep, pious and solid Germany should be at length wielded into a nation and become Queen of the Continent.”
Before the Great War [WWI] when the hostile intentions of Germany toward the British Empire were clearly evident; when German officers were drinking to “der Tag,” [the Day] whilst German writers openly committed their plans for world power to paper and incident after incident showed that war was inevitable, all those who warned our country were derided or insulted. It was even suggested that Lord Roberts should be deprived of his pension for conducting his campaign for National Service.
The Day — when it at last arrived — was hailed with rapture by the German people. The women threw their hats into the air with joy and the Daily Mail of 3 August 1914, published a photograph of a whole London street filled with young Germans cheering for war.
Meanwhile the same sort of crowds of Socialists and Pacifists who have recently been parading London shouting for war with Germany were then agitating for non-resistance to German aggression.
Even when the grey legions of Germany were marching through Belgium and Flanders on their way to these shores, the Socialists held meetings of protest against national defence, and the reluctance to fight engendered by their propaganda proved a serious check to recruiting. All this when we were at war with an autocracy headed by an Emperor with a ruling caste of Junkers to whom Socialism in any form was abhorrent!
This anti-patriotic campaign was maintained throughout the War and the fifteen years that followed it. Socialists, Communists and Pacifists continued to clamour for greater gentleness to be shown to Germany, declaring that we had “been mad to fight” her and that the Treaty of Versailles should be torn up.
In Liberal, and even in Conservative circles, the same sentiments were frequently expressed –
“the Germans are our natural allies; in the next war we hope we shall be marching with them against France.”
It must be admitted that the incivility sometimes shown to British travelers to France had something to do with these sentiments. Indeed, towards 1930, especially after Mr. Philip Snowden accused France of “bilking her obligations,” feelings between the two countries had become so bitter that those of us who loved France lived in dread of an open rapture with her.
It was but natural that France, having suffered twice within fifty years from invasion by German armies, should fear and distrust Germany’s further intentions more profoundly than England whose soil had never been trodden by a foreign foe since 1066 and that she [France] found some difficulty in believing that Germany had undergone that “change of heart” of which our Socialists and Pacifists spoke with so much assurance.
For, as all well-informed people in this country were aware, the spirit of militarism had not been crushed in Germany. Military associations were openly drilling, secret societies aiming at a war of revenge were formed, stores of ammunition were being secretly piled up.
At the same time close co-operation took place between the “Eastern” school of German militarists and Soviet Russia, Bolshevik propaganda emanated from Berlin as well as from Moscow, the Communist Party of Germany was the largest in the world outside Russia and in all countries Communism aimed particularly at the destruction of France and of the British Empire.
All this was shown in my Surrender of an Empire (in 1931) against which a boycott was organised in the Press. In those days it was “French militarism” which had become the bogey of our Pacifists just as in France the perfidy of England became the theme of certain French writers.
I remember during that period attending a meeting in London of a certain association which purported to arrange debates and discussions on world politics from a non-party point of view, which, as usual, meant that only “Left” views were given a fair hearing.
On this occasion a German had been invited to speak, and be held forth at great length on the grievances of Germany, observing that, although he himself was not a Nazi, Nazi-ism was but the natural outcome of German resentment at the policy of disarmament imposed on Germany by the Allies.
This was received with sympathy by the audience, a member of which rose at the end of the address and said:
“I am the Bishop of ____ and I am sure that everyone here must feel ashamed of the way in which we are disarming Germany whilst we ourselves are continuing to arm.”
As no one dissented it was evident that this sentiment was shared by all those present. Not one person in that crowded hall rose to observe that we had just scrapped a number of cruisers and were disarming – as is now generally admitted – to the point of danger.
Now, today a leading official of that same association is trumpeting an appeal for an increased national defence against the German menace!
If Germany at the present time considers she has grievances, and that the Treaty of Versailles should be scrapped in favour of a policy more in accord with calm judgment and altered circumstances, how can she be blamed by those who formerly encouraged her to think she had greater grievances than those she now puts forward?
Either they were wrong then or they are wrong now; in either case we should not be guided by their opinion.
Now we — who were never pro-Germans in the sense of seeking peace at any price and of endangering the security of our own country, but who held, on the contrary, that in view of the disturbed state of Europe we must remain fully armed — nevertheless recognised that many errors had been made in the Peace Treaties. It is clear that the policy of forcing Germany with the sword at her throat to admit war guilt, and the absurdity of incorporating the Covenant of the League of Nations in the Treaty of Versailles, could never lead to lasting peace.
[note: the “League of Nations”, formerly the ‘League to Enforce Peace’, is now known as the “United Nations”]
Again and again revisions of the Treaties were demanded by the Germans and their friends in this country but when Hitler, finding that nothing was to be gained by arbitration, decided to take the law into his own hands, the Socialists and Pacifists who from 1914 to 1933 had pleaded the cause of Germany, raised a howl of execration and declared that the Treaties must now be enforced even at the cost of war.
What happened to bring about their change of front? The accession of Hitler to power. Now Hitler had in the past shown himself, at moments, as a fire-brand. But how often have we been told in the case of our own Socialists that office “sobers”?
It certainly seemed to do so in the case of Hitler, who, once in control of his country, abandoned his aggressive attitude toward the Allies. But at the same time he put down Bolshevism and took the control of Germany out of the hands of the Jews.
By these measures it was not only Germany that profited but the two greatest dangers to our country were removed. For the support given to Germany by “International Finance,” which would have enabled her to defray the cost of another war at any moment, was withdrawn and the link between Germany and Soviet Russia was broken.
The floods of Bolshevist propaganda flowing from Berlin into all parts of the British Empire were checked at their source. The resentment of the German people towards the Allies as the cause of all their sufferings gave way to passionate enthusiasm for a leader who set out to restore their country by constructive methods.
The old Pan-German dream of world power was replaced by a Nationalist scheme for the union of all German peoples under one head, leaving the peoples of other countries to work out their own destinies.
Then was the moment for the ending of war hates and of peace between the nation which, throughout thirteen years of endless congresses and assemblies, had been the professed aim of European statesmen, of the talkers at Geneva and countless Pacifist associations.
Then was the moment for the whole civilized world, which for fifteen years had been tossed on the waves of unrest set in motion by Moscow, to see in Hitler, as it should have seen in Mussolini, a saviour from the greatest enemy of the human race – the hideous system of tyranny which threatened to spread itself into every country, well stigmatized by Mr. Winston Churchill at its onset as “the bloody baboonery” of Bolshevism.
Instead of this Hitler was reviled, as Mussolini had been reviled after he had saved Italy from the grip of the Red octopus. Such is the power of the Press, and of mass hypnotism exercised over the minds of the British public that they were now made to regard Hitler as their mortal enemy.
Yet in the place of an autocratic Emperor at the head of a military caste and of a warlike German nation, we were faced by a ruler who, although a dictator, represents the will of 90 per cent of the population, a plain man of the people, an ardent social reformer, too Socialistic for us but clearly sincere, a leader who whilst restoring the confidence and self-respect of the German people has quelled in them the spirit of hatred towards our country.
Instead of young Germans cheering for war in the streets of London we have had the youth of Germany cheering Mr. Chamberlain as the messenger of peace through the streets of Munich.
And this was the moment when we were told that a world war was inevitable in order to crush the “German menace.”
Next – Chapter 2: “Governessing England”
ANZU congoid POS!
Back to HOW WARS ARE MADE | Issues index | CDR Home
10 November, 2007 at 10:46 am
ANZU
Get back to Free Repuklic.com
12 November, 2007 at 6:29 am
America First,
I don’t really see where you’re coming from, since that article of yours is an own goal and supports my earlier points, confirming that
1. Germany wanted war in WWI (and got it), and Germans cheered in the streets in 1914. Germany was the aggressor.
2. England was disarming herself during the 1930s.
The perfidy and treason of the left in Britain in the 1930s (and present day) is well known, and is not something I would debate. I don’t contend that Hitler wanted to “take over the whole world” either. Hitler’s fault was in trying to take back the territory of which Germany had justly been deprived at Versailles. Germany WAS the aggressor in the First World War, as your article supports, so why should she go unpunished for that act of aggression? Britain had canceled Germany’s war debt, and Germans were not “suffering under Versailles” in the late 30s, so why should Germany be entitled to effectively get of scot free with a status quo ante for starting the first major European fratricidal bloodshed of the 20th century – and over some petty Balkanoid bullshit at that? Der Fuhrer asks too much.
Read an account of the pointless slaughter of hundreds of thousands of White men at the Somme and tell me that Germany’s territorial losses were unjustified. Hitler knew that England would declare war if Germany invaded Poland – territory that was not rightfully Germany’s following WWI, and Hitler did it anyway. The treatment of Poles and other Slavs by occupying Germans only compounded the crime.
I’m as much against the multicultural bullshit that has been carried out in the West in the name of “anti-Nazism” since WWII as the next guy, but that doesn’t make Hitler the “good guy”, and it CERTAINLY doesn’t make Germans the “good guys” in WWI.
16 November, 2007 at 12:48 am
Then was the moment for the whole civilized world, which for fifteen years had been tossed on the waves of unrest set in motion by Moscow, to see in Hitler, as it should have seen in Mussolini, a saviour from the greatest enemy of the human race – the hideous system of tyranny which threatened to spread itself into every country, well stigmatized by Mr. Winston Churchill at its onset as “the bloody baboonery” of Bolshevism.
Instead of this Hitler was reviled, as Mussolini had been reviled after he had saved Italy from the grip of the Red octopus. Such is the power of the Press, and of mass hypnotism exercised over the minds of the British public that they were now made to regard Hitler as their mortal enemy.
Yet in the place of an autocratic Emperor at the head of a military caste and of a warlike German nation, we were faced by a ruler who, although a dictator, represents the will of 90 per cent of the population, a plain man of the people, an ardent social reformer, too Socialistic for us but clearly sincere, a leader who whilst restoring the confidence and self-respect of the German people has quelled in them the spirit of hatred towards our country.
Instead of young Germans cheering for war in the streets of London we have had the youth of Germany cheering Mr. Chamberlain as the messenger of peace through the streets of Munich.
And this was the moment when we were told that a world war was inevitable in order to crush the “German menace.”
16 November, 2007 at 10:44 pm
http://www.kennewick-man.com/
Enemy Alien Bastards!
ju’s Will post lies and ignore truth of a Hurricane!