Monday, 31 January 2011
Tuesday, 16 March 2010
TRUTH, HISTORY AND INTEGRITY by GILAD ATZMON
March 13, 2010
It also repels integrity or ethics.
It by far prefers total submission, instead of creative and critical thinking.
Jewish history is a phantasmic tale that is there to make the Jews happy and the Goyim behave themselves.
It is there to serve the interests of one tribe and that tribe only.
In practice, from a Jewish perspective, the decision whether there was an Armenian genocide or not is subject to Jewish interests: is it good for the Jews or is it good for Israel.
Back in 2007 the notorious American Jewish right-wing organization, the ADL (Anti-Defamation League)Defamation League) announced that it recognised the events in which an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were massacred as "genocide." The ADL's national director, Abraham Foxman, insisted that he made the decision after discussing the matter with ‘historians’.
For some reason he failed to mention who the historians were, nor did he refer to their credibility or field of scholarship. However, Foxman also consulted with one holocaust survivor who supported the decision. It was Elie Wiesel, not known for being a leading world expert on the Armenian ordeal.
Elie is not known for his accurate memory or honesty and truly fits the above attitude towards history so long as it serves the tribe and lines his pocket and further entrenches his confused version of the Holocaust as the only one acceptable.
The idea of a Zionist organization being genuinely concerned, or even slightly moved, by other people’s suffering could truly be a monumental transforming moment in Jewish history.
Normally the attitude is, we are human, you are animals incapable of feeling pain and emotions. So our suffering matters because we are god's chosen ones.
However, this week we learned that the ADL is once again engaged in the dilemma of Armenian suffering. It is not convinced anymore that the Armenians suffered that much. It is now lobbying the American congress not to recognize the killings of Armenians as ‘genocide. This week saw the ADL “speaking out against Congressional acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, and is, instead, advocating Turkey’s call for a historical commission to study the events.”
How is it that an event that took place a century ago is causing such a furor? One day it is generally classified as ‘genocide’, the next, it is demoted to an ordinary instance of one man killing another. Was it an ‘historical document’ that, out of nowhere, popped out on Abe Foxman’s desk? Are there some new factual revelations that led to such a dramatic historical shift? l don’t think so.
The ADL’s behaviour is a glimpse into the notion of Jewish history and the Jewish understanding of the past. For the nationalist and political Jew, history is a pragmatic tale, it is an elastic account. It is foreign to any scientific or academic method.
Jewish history transcends itself beyond factuality, truthfulness or correspondence rules with any given vision of reality. It also repels integrity or ethics. It by far prefers total submission, instead of creative and critical thinking. Jewish history is a phantasmic tale that is there to make the Jews happy and the Goyim behave themselves.
It is there to serve the interests of one tribe and that tribe only. In practice, from a Jewish perspective, the decision whether there was an Armenian genocide or not is subject to Jewish interests: is it good for the Jews or is it good for Israel.
Interestingly enough, history is not a particularly ‘Jewish thing’. It is an established fact that not a single Jewish historical text has been written between the 1st century (Josephus Flavius) and early 19th century (Isaak Markus Jost). For almost 2 thousand years Jews were not interested in their own or anyone else’s past, at least not enough to chronicle it.
As a matter of convenience, an adequate scrutiny of the past was never a primary concern within the Rabbinical tradition. One of the reasons is probably that there was no need for such a methodical effort. For the Jew who lived during ancient times and the Middle Ages, there was enough in the Bible to answer the most relevant questions to do with day-to-day life, Jewish meaning and fate.
As Israeli historian Shlomo Sand puts it, “a secular chronological time was foreign to the ‘Diaspora time’ that was shaped by the anticipation for the coming of the Messiah.”
However, in the mid 19th century, in the light of secularisation, urbanisation, emancipation and due to the decreasing authority of the Rabbinical leaders, an emerging need of an alternative cause rose amongst the awakening European Jews. All of a sudden, the emancipated Jew had to decide who he was and where he came from. He also started to speculate what his role might be within the rapidly opening Western society.
This is where Jewish history in its modern form was invented. This is also where Judaism was transformed from a world religion into a ‘land registry’ with some clearly devastating racially orientated and expansionist implications. As we know, Shlomo Sand’s account of the ‘Jewish Nation’ as a fictional invention is yet to be challenged academically.
However, the dismissal of factuality or commitment to truthfulness is actually symptomatic of any form of contemporary Jewish collective ideology and identity politics. The ADL’s treatment of the Armenian topic is just one example. The Zionist’s dismissal of a Palestinian past and heritage is just another example. But in fact any Jewish collective vision of the past is inherently Judeo-centric and oblivious to any academic or scientific procedure.
When I was Young
When I was young and naïve I regarded history as a serious academic matter. As I understood it, history had something to do with truth seeking, documents, chronology and facts. I was convinced that history aimed to convey a sensible account of the past based on methodical research. I also believed that it was premised on the assumption that understanding the past may throw some light over our present and even help us to shape a prospect of a better future.
I grew up in the Jewish state and it took me quite a while to understand that the Jewish historical narrative is very different.
In the Jewish intellectual ghetto, one decides what the future ought to be, then one constructs ‘a past’ accordingly. Interestingly enough, this exact method is also prevalent amongst Marxists.
They shape the past so it fits nicely into their vision of the future. As the old Russian joke says, “when the facts do not conform with the Marxist ideology, the Communist social scientists amend the facts (rather than revise the theory)”.
When I was young, I didn’t think that history was a matter of political decisions or agreements between a rabid Zionist lobby and its favorite holocaust survivor. I regarded historians as scholars who engaged in adequate research following some strict procedures. When I was young I even considered becoming an historian.
When I was young and naive I was also somehow convinced that what they told us about our ‘collective’ Jewish past really happened. I believed it all, the Kingdom of David, Massada, and then the Holocaust: the soap, the lampshade*, the death march, the six million.
As it happened, it took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative for historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and politicians.
It took me years to grasp that my great-grandmother wasn’t made into a ‘soap’ or a ‘lampshade’*. She probably perished out of exhaustion, typhus or maybe even by mass shooting. This was indeed bad and tragic enough, however not that different from the fate of many millions of Ukrainians who learned what communism meant for real.
“Some of the worst mass murderers in history were Jews” writes Zionist Sever Plocker on the Israeli Ynet disclosing the Holodomor and Jewish involvement in this colossal crime, probably the greatest crime of the 20th century.
The fate of my great-grandmother was not any different from hundreds of thousands of German civilians who died in an orchestrated indiscriminate bombing, because they were Germans.
Similarly, people in Hiroshima died just because they were Japanese.
One million Vietnamese died just because they were Vietnamese.
One point three million Iraqis died because they were Iraqis.
In short the tragic circumstances of my great grandmother wasn’t that special after all.
It Doesn’t make sense
It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on:
If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein ~ free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war?I have been concerned with this simple question for more than a while. I eventually launched into an historical research of the topic and happened to learn from Israeli holocaust historian professor Israel Gutman that Jewish prisoners actually joined the march voluntarily. Here is a testimony taken from Gutman’s book
"One of my friends and relatives in the camp came to me on the night of the evacuation and offered a common hiding place somewhere on the way from the camp to the factory. …The intention was to leave the camp with one of the convoys and to escape near the gate, using the darkness we thought to go a little far from the camp. The temptation was very strong. And yet, after I considered it all I then decided to join (the march) with all the other inmates and to share their fate " (Israel Gutman [editor], People and Ashes: Book Auschwitz ~ Birkenau, Merhavia 1957).
I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?
I think that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start to ask the necessary questions.
We should ask for some conclusive historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws.
We should strip the holocaust of its Judeo-centric exceptional status and treat it as an historical chapter that belongs to a certain time and place
65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz we should reclaim our history and ask why?
Why were the Jews hated?
Why did European people stand up against their next door neighbours?
Why are the Jews hated in the Middle East, surely they had a chance to open a new page in their troubled history?
If they genuinely planned to do so, as the early Zionists claimed, why did they fail?
Why did America tighten its immigration laws amid the growing danger to European Jews?***
We should also ask for what purpose
do the holocaust denial laws serve?
As long as we fail to ask questions, we will be subjected to Zionists and their Neocon agents’ plots.
We will continue killing in the name of Jewish suffering.
We will maintain our complicity in Western imperialist crimes against humanity.
As devastating as it may be, at a certain moment in time, a horrible chapter was given an exceptionally meta-historical status.
Its ‘factuality’ was sealed by draconian laws and its reasoning was secured by social and political settings.
The Holocaust became the new Western religion.
Unfortunately, it is the most sinister religion known to man.
It is a license to kill, to flatten, no nuke, to wipe, to rape, to loot and to ethnically cleanse.
It made vengeance and revenge into a Western value.
However, far more concerning is the fact that it robs humanity of its heritage, it is there to stop us from looking into our past with dignity.
Holocaust religion robs humanity of its humanism.
For the sake of peace and future generations, the holocaust must be stripped of its exceptional status immediately.
It must be subjected to thorough historical scrutiny.
Truth and truth seeking is an elementary human experience.
It must prevail.
*During WWII and after it was widely believed that soaps and lampshades were being mass produced from the bodies of Jewish victims. In recent years the Israeli Holocaust museum admitted that there was no truth in any of those accusations.
Yet despite denunciations regarding the soap hoax years ago, as recently as last autumn (2009) I was reading of an old man using "soap made of his mother" to fill the souls of impressionable 6 year olds with delicious evil. These kids
THE STRUGGLE FOR HISTORY ~ MICHAEL PARENTIS
*** THE ORIGINS OF HOLOCAUST PROPAGANDA ~ This is what was happening in America with Rabbi Weiss who was one of the manipulators of what happened to the Jewish people.
THE ZIONIST/HITLER AGREEMENT ~ THE TRANSFER AGREEMENT ~ This is a must read to find out just how the Zionists and Hitler arranged matters between themselves at the onset of WW2. The Jewish people were just pawns between the two groups and this is recorded history. The facts are here.
Friday, 19 February 2010
UNDERSTANDING ANTISEMITISM
This movie is a thorough historical look at antisemitism from the days of the Pharaohs to the present time. It is definitely educational for everyone. You cannot help but learn something new no matter how much you know on this topic. Yet the evidence is put together and explained in such everyday terms that for someone who knows nothing about the subject will have perhaps a little trouble taking it all in.
Personally, I was pleased to learn more about the Kosher Tax. I had been meaning to investigate it, but it was covered in here. If you have an hour and 13 minutes, this is a good way to spend it.
Saturday, 14 November 2009
THE INTERNATIONAL JEW ~ CH1~ HENRY FORD
Chapter 1.
JEWISH HISTORY IN THE UNITED STATES
The story of the Jews in America begins with Christopher Columbus. On August 2, 1492, more than 300,000 Jews were expelled from Spain and on August 3, the next day, Columbus set sail for the west, taking a group of Jews with him.
They were not, however, refugees, for the prophetic navigator's plans had aroused the sympathy of influential Jews for a long period previously. Columbus himself tells us that he consorted much with Jews. The first letter he wrote detailing his discoveries was to a Jew. Indeed, the eventful voyage itself which added to men's knowledge and wealth "the other half of the earth" was made possible by Jews. The pleasant story that it was Queen Isabella's jewels which financed the voyage has disappeared under cool research.
There were three Maranos or "secret Jews" who wielded great influence at the Spanish court:
Luis de Santagel, who was an important merchant of Valencia and who was "farmer" of the royal taxes;
his relative, Gabriel Sanchez, who was the royal treasurer;
and their friend, the royal chamberlain, Juan Cabrero.
These worked unceasingly on Queen Isabella's imagination, picturing to her the depletion of the royal treasury and the likelihood of Columbus discovering the fabulous gold of the Indies, until the Queen was ready to offer her jewels in pawn for the funds. But Santagel craved permission to advance the money himself, which he did, 17,000 ducats in all, about 5,000 pounds, perhaps equal to 40,000 pounds today.
Associated with Columbus in the voyage were at least five Jews:
Luis de Torres, interpreter;
Marco, the surgeon;
Bernal, the physician;
Alonzo de la Calle, and
Gabriel Sanchez
Luis de Torres was the first man ashore, the first to discover the use of tobacco; he settled in Cuba and may be said to be the father of Jewish control of the tobacco business as it exists today.
Columbus' old patrons, Luis de Santagel and Gabriel Sanchez, received many privileges for the part they played in the work, but Columbus himself became the victim of a conspiracy fostered by Bernal, the ship's doctor, and suffered injustice and imprisonment as his reward.
From that beginning, Jews looked more and more to America as a fruitful field, and immigration set in strongly toward South America, principally Brazil. But because of military participation in a disagreement between the Brazilians and the Dutch, the Jews of Brazil found it necessary to emigrate, which they did in the direction of the Dutch colony of what is now New York.
Peter Stuyvesant, the Dutch governor, did not entirely approve of their settling among his people and ordered them to leave, but the Jews had evidently taken the precaution to assure their being received if not welcomed, because upon revoking the order of Stuyvesant, the Directors gave as one of the reasons for the Jews being received, "the large amount of capital which they have invested in the shares of the Company."
Nevertheless they were forbidden to enter public service and to open retail shops, which had the effect of driving them into foreign trade in which they were soon exercising all but a monopoly because of their European connections.
This is only one of the thousand illustrations which can be given of the resourcefulness of the Jew. Forbid him in one direction he will excel in another. When he was forbidden to deal in new clothes, he sold old clothes ~ that was the beginning of the organized traffic in secondhand clothing.
1910 Toronto, rag picker in the snow, Bloor Street West
When he was forbidden to deal in merchandise, he dealt in waste ~ the Jew is the originator of the waste product business of the world; he was the originator of the salvage system; he found wealth in the debris of civilization.
He taught people how to use old rags, how to clean old feathers, how to use gall nuts and rabbit skins. He has always had a taste for the furrier trade, which he now controls, and to him is due the multitude of common skins which now pass under various alluring trade names as furs of high origin.
Unwittingly, old Peter Stuyvesant compelled the Jews to make New York the principal port of America, and though a majority of New York Jews had fled to Philadelphia at the time of the American Revolution, most of them returned to New York at the earliest opportunity, instinct seeming to make them aware that, in New York was to be their principal paradise of gain. And so it has proved.
New York is the greatest center of Jewish population in the world. It is the gateway where the bulk of American imports and exports are taxed, and where practical all the business done in America pays tribute to the masters of money. The very land of the city is the holdings of the Jews.
No wonder that Jewish writers, viewing this unprecedented prosperity, this unchecked growth in wealth and power, exclaim enthusiastically that the United States is the Promised Land foretold by the prophets, and New York the New Jerusalem. Some have gone even further and described the peaks of the Rockies as "the mountains of Zion," and with reason, too, if the mining and coastal wealth of the Jews is considered.
In the time of George Washington there were about 4,000 Jews in the country, most of them well-to-do traders. They favored the American side and helped the revolutionary colonies out with loans at critical moments.
In fifty years the traceable increase in the Jewish population of the United States was more than 3,300,000. What it is today no man can estimate with any hope of accuracy.
In 2007, according to Wikipedia, the American Jewish population was estimated to be as high as 6,444,000 (2.2%)
To make a list of the lines of business controlled by the Jews of the United States would be to touch most of the vital industries of the country ~ those which are really vital, and those which cultivated habit have been made to seem vital. The theatrical business is exclusively Jewish: play-producing, booking, theater operation are all in the hands of Jews. This accounts for the fact that in almost every production today can be detected propaganda, sometimes glaringly commercial advertisement, sometimes direct political instruction.
Television and Motion pictures where not invented when this book was written. However, all of these businesses of communication, responsible for the psychological manipulation, are almost 100% Jewish owned.
The American people would be vastly surprised if they could see a line-up of some of the "American business men' who hold up our commercial prestige overseas. They are mostly Jews. This may throw a sidelight on the regard in which "American business methods" are held in some parts of the world.
When many different races of people can carry on business under the name "American," and do it legally, too, it is not surprising that Americans do not recognize some of the descriptions of American methods which appear in the foreign Press. If the reputation of American business has suffered, it is because something other than American methods have been used under the American name.
Instances of Jewish prosperity in the United States are commonplace, but prosperity, the just reward of foresight and application, is not to be confounded with control. It would be impossible for any Gentile coalition under similar circumstances to attain the control which the Jews have won, for the reason that there is lacking in the Gentile a certain quality of working-togetherness, a certain conspiracy of objective, and the adhesiveness of intense raciality, which characterizes the Jew.
It is nothing to a Gentile that another man is a Gentile; it is next to everything to a Jew that the man at his door is another Jew.
The International Jewish plan to move their money market to the United States was what the American people did not want. We have the warning of history as to what this means. It has meant in turn that Spain, Venice, Germany or Great Britain received the blame or suspicion of the world for what the Jewish financiers have done.
This is historically proven. They take their wealth and the area becomes enriched, a city or country of even greater wealth then previously. Through chicanery and power the host country fights their wars at a great loss to both the country and the civilians. But there is the prosperity or war which is not to be sneezed at that ends up in the wallets of the Jews, "chosen people and plucky survivors of the Holocaust". When they have drained the corpse of this host nation, they move on to the next host nation taking all their gold and commerce leaving that nation with a poor reputation and frequently heavy in dept to the Jews.
It is a most important consideration that most of the national animosities that exist today arose out of resentment against what Jewish money power did under the camouflage of national names.
"The British did this," "The Germans did this," when it was the International Jew who did it, the nations being but the marked spaces on his checker board. Today, around the world the blaming word is heard, "The United States did this. If it were not for the United States the world would be in a better shape. The Americans are a sordid, greedy, cruel people."
Why? Because the Jewish money power is centered here and is making money out of both our immunity and Europe's distress, playing one against the other; and because so many so-called "American business men" abroad today are not Americans at all ~ they are Jews.
Friday, 4 September 2009
THE UNKNOWN HOLOCAUST
A damaged angel gazes down and weeps over what was once a vibrant beautiful city. The full extent of the Dresden Holocaust can be more readily grasped if one considers that well over 250,000 ~ possibly as many as half a million ~ persons died within a 14-hour period, whereas estimates of those who died at Hiroshima range from 90,000 to 140,000.The bombings, the horrors perpetrated by the Red Army on women and children was the stuff of nightmares. Much of these things were done as the world watched, helpless and traumatized, much like the actions and lies of of Israel upon the people of Palestine are only watched today.
By Mark Weber
Institute for Historical Review
August 25, 2009
We are ceaselessly reminded of the Third Reich’s wartime concentration camps. But few Americans are aware that such infamous camps as Dachau, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Auschwitz stayed in business after the end of the war, only now packed with German captives, many of whom perished miserably.
The vengeful plan by US Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau to turn defeated Germany into an impoverished “pastoral” country, stripped of modern industry, is recounted by MacDonogh, as well as other genocidal schemes to starve, sterilize or deport the population of what was left of the bombed-out cities.
We hear very little about crimes committed against Germans. Germany’s defeat in May 1945, and the end of World War II in Europe, did not bring an end to death and suffering for the vanquished German people. Instead the victorious Allies ushered in a horrible new era of destruction, looting, starvation, rape, “ethnic cleansing,” and mass killing.
Mountains of the dead in Dresden, 1945
This evening, I’m going to talk about this suppressed chapter ~ Time magazine called it “history’s most terrifying peace.” / 1
Even though this “unknown holocaust” is ignored in our motion pictures and classrooms, and by our political leaders, the facts are well established. Historians are in basic agreement about the scale of this human catastrophe, which has been laid out in a number of detailed books.
For example, American historian and jurist Alfred de Zayas, along with other scholars, has established that in the years 1945 to 1950, more than 14 million Germans were expelled or forced to flee from large regions of eastern and central Europe, of whom more than two million were killed or lost their lives. / 2
In a sobering and courageous new book, After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation, British historian Giles MacDonogh details how the ruined and prostrate Reich (including Austria) was systematically raped and robbed, and how many Germans who survived the war were either killed in cold blood or deliberately left to die of disease, cold, malnutrition or starvation. / 3
After the bombing, in Dresden.
MacDonogh explains how some three million Germans died unnecessarily after the official end of hostilities ~ about two million civilians, mostly women, children and elderly, and about one million prisoners of war.
Some people take the view that, given the wartime misdeeds of the Nazis, some degree of vengeful violence against the defeated Germans was inevitable and perhaps justified. A common response to reports of Allied atrocities is to say that the Germans “deserved what they got.” But however valid that argument might be, the appalling cruelties inflicted on the totally prostrate German people went far beyond any understandable retribution. This was a most vicious genocide pure and simple.
Although I’m focusing today on the treatment of Germans , it’s worth keeping in mind that they were not the only victims of postwar Allied brutality. Across central and eastern Europe, the heavy hand of Bolshevik rule continued to take lives of Poles, Hungarians, Ukrainians, and people of other nationalities.
As Soviet troops advanced into central and eastern Europe during the war’s final months, they imposed a reign of terror, rape, pillage and killing without compare in modern history. The horrors were summarized by George F. Kennan, the acclaimed historian who also served as US ambassador to the Soviet Union. He wrote: / 4
“The disaster that befell this area with the entry of the Soviet forces has no parallel in modern European experience. There were considerable sections of it where, to judge by all MacDonoghexisting evidence, scarcely a man, woman or child of the indigenous population was left alive after the initial passage of Soviet forces; and one cannot believe that they all succeeded in fleeing to the West … The Russians … swept the native population clean in a manner that had no parallel since the days of the Asiatic hordes.”
Another site in Dresden, these are bodies of civilians killed during 14 solid hours of bombing as ordered by Churchill and the American President.
During the last months of the war, the ancient German city of Königsberg in East Prussia held out as a strongly defended urban fortress. After repeated attack and siege by the Red Army, it finally surrendered in early April 1945. Soviet troops then ravished the civilian population.
The people were beaten, robbed, killed and, if female, raped. The rape victims included nuns. Even hospital patients were robbed of their possessions. Bunkers and shelters, packed with terrified people huddling inside, were torched with flame-throwers. About 40,000 of the city’s population were killed, or took their own lives to escape the horrors, and the remaining 73,000 Germans were brutally deported. / 5
In a report that appeared in August 1945 in the Washington DC Times-Herald, / 6 an American journalist wrote of what he described as “the state of terror in which women in Russian-occupied eastern Germany were living. All these women, Germans, Polish, Jewish and even Russian girls `freed’ from Nazi slave camps, were dominated by one desperate desire ~ to escape from the Red zone “
“In the district around our internment camp … Red soldiers during the first weeks of their occupation raped every women and girl between the ages of 12 and 60. That sounds exaggerated, but it is the simple truth. The only exceptions were girls who managed to remain in hiding in the woods or who had the presence of mind to feign illness ~ typhoid, dyptheria or some other infectious disease … Husbands and fathers who attempted to protect their women folk were shot down, and girls offering extreme resistance were murdered.”
In accord with policy set by the “Big Three” Allied leaders of the US, Britain and the Soviet Union ~ Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin ~ millions of Germans were expunged from their ancient homelands in central and eastern Europe.
In October 1945, a New York Daily News report from occupied Berlin told readers: / 7
“In the windswept courtyard of the Stettiner Bahnof [rail station], a cohort of German refugees, part of 12 million to 19 million dispossessed in East Prussia and Silesia, sat in groups under a driving rain and told the story of their miserable pilgrimage, during which more than 25 percent died by the roadside, and the remainder were so starved they scarcely had strength to walk …
“A nurse from Stettin, a young, good-looking blond, told how her father had been stabbed to death by Russian soldiers who, after raping her mother and sister, tried to break into her own room. She escaped and hid in a haystack with four other women for four days …
“On the train to Berlin she was pillaged once by Russian troops and twice by Poles. Women who resisted were shot dead, she said, and on one occasion she saw a guard take an infant by the legs and crush its skull against a post because the child cried while the guard was raping its mother.
German refugees fleeing the Bolshevik advance in East Prussia
“An old peasant from Silesia said ... victims were robbed of everything they had, even their shoes. Infants were robbed of their swaddling clothes so that they froze to death. All the healthy girls and women, even those 65 years of age, were raped in the train and then robbed, the peasant said.”
In November 1945 an item in the Chicago Tribune told readers: / 8
“Nine hundred and nine men, women and children dragged themselves and their luggage from a Russian railway train at Lehrter station [in Berlin] today, after eleven days travelling in boxcars from Poland. Red Army soldiers lifted 91 corpses from the train, while relatives shrieked and sobbed as their bodies were piled in American lend-lease trucks and driven off for internment in a pit near a concentration camp.
“The refugee train was a like a macabre Noah’s ark. Every car was packed with Germans … the families carry all their earthly belongings in sacks, bags and tin trunks ... Nursing infants suffer the most, as their mothers are unable to feed them, and frequently go insane as they watch offspring slowly die before their eyes. Today four screaming, violently insane mothers were bound with rope to prevent them from clawing other passengers “
Although most of the millions of German girls and women who were ravished by Allied soldiers were raped by Red Army troops, Soviet soldiers were not the only perpetrators. During the French occupation of Stuttgart, a large city in southwest Germany, police records show that 1,198 women and eight men were raped, mostly by French troops from Morocco in north Africa, although the prelate of the Lutheran Evangelical church estimated the number at 5,000. / 9
During World War II, the United States, Britain and Germany generally complied with the international regulations on the treatment of prisoners of war, as required by the Geneva accord of 1929. But at the end of the fighting in Europe, the US and British authorities scrapped the Geneva convention. In violation of solemn international obligations and Red Cross rules, the American and British authorities stripped millions of captured German soldiers of their status, and their rights, as prisoners of war by reclassifying them as so-called “Disarmed Enemy Forces” or “Surrendered Enemy Personnel.” / 10
Accordingly, British and American authorities denied access by International Red Cross representatives to camps holding German prisoners of war. Moreover, any attempt by German civilians to feed the prisoners was punishable by death. / 11
Many thousands of German PoWs died in American custody, most infamously in the so-called “Rhine meadow camps,” where prisoners were held under appalling conditions, with no shelter and very little food. / 12
In April 1946, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) protested that the United States, Britain and France, nearly a year after the end of fighting, were violating International Red Cross agreements they had solemnly pledged to uphold. The Red Cross pointed out, for example, that the American transfer of German prisoners of war to French and British authorities for forced labor was contrary to International Red Cross statutes. / 13
Another report by the International Committee of the Red Cross in August 1946 stated that the US government, through its military branch in the US zone of occupation in Germany, was exacting forced labor from 284,000 captives, of whom 140,000 were in the US occupation zone, 100,000 in France, 30,000 in Italy, and 14,000 in Belgium . Holdings of German prisoners or slave laborers by other countries, the Red Cross reported, included 80,000 in Yugoslavia, and 45,000 in Czechoslovakia. / 14
Both during and after the war, the Allies tortured German prisoners. In one British center in England, called “the London Cage,” German prisoners were subjected to systematic ill-treatment, including starvation and beatings. The brutality continued for several years after the end of the war. Treatment of German prisoners by the British was even more harsh in the British occupation zone of Germany. / 15
At the US internment center at Schwäbisch Hall in Southwest Germany, prisoners awaiting trial by American military courts were subjected to severe and systematic torture, including long stretches in solitary confinement, extremes of heat and cold, deprivation of sleep and food, and severe beatings, including kicks to the groin. / 16
Most of the German prisoners of war who died in Allied captivity were held by the Soviets, and a much higher portion of German POWs died in Soviet custody than perished in British and American captivity. For example, of the 90,000 Germans who surrendered at Stalingrad, only 5,000 ever returned to their homeland. Russian poster celebrating the Red Army hero! Apparently the best of the best, and of course, Jewish. Was he a hero while raping and gutting women and catching babies on his bayonet?
More than five years after the end of the war, hundreds of thousands of German prisoners were still being held in the Soviet Union. Other German prisoners perished after the end of the war in Yugoslavia, Poland and other countries. In Yugoslavia alone, authorities of the Communist regime killed as many as 80,000 Germans. German prisoners toiled as slave labor in other Allied countries, often for years.
At the Yalta conference in early 1945, the “Big Three” Allied leaders agreed that the Soviets could take Germans as forced laborers, or “slave labor.” It is estimated that 874,000 German civilians were abducted to the Soviet Union. These were in addition to the millions of prisoners of war who were held by the Soviets as forced laborers. Of these so-called reparations deportees, nearly half ~ 45 percent ~ perished. / 17
Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Josef Stalin at Yalta.
For two years after the end of the fighting, Germans were victims of a cruel and vindictive occupation policy, one that meant slow starvation of the defeated population. To sustain life, a normal adult needs a minimum of about 2,000 calories per day. But in March and February 1946, the daily intake per person in the British and American occupation zones of Germany was between one thousand and fifteen hundred calories. / 18
In the winter of 1945-46, the Allies forbid anyone outside the country to send food parcels to the starving Germans. The Allied authorities also rejected requests by the International Red Cross to bring in provisions to alleviate the suffering. / 19Very few persons in Britain or the United States spoke out against the Allied policy. Victor Gollancz, an English-Jewish writer and publisher, toured the British occupation zone of northern Germany for six weeks in late 1946. He publicized the death and malnutrition he found there, which he said was a consequence of Allied policy. He wrote:
“The plain fact is ... we are starving the Germans.
And we are starving them, not deliberately
in the sense that we definitely want them to die,
but willfully, in the sense that we prefer
their death to our own inconvenience.” / 20
In Andernach, about 50,000 prisoners of all ages were held in an open field surrounded by band weeds into a tin can containing a thin soup to ease their hunger pains. They grew emaciated. Dysentery raged,. Soon they were sleeping in their own excrement, too weak and crowded to reach the slit trenches. Many begged for food, sickening and dying before our eyes. We had ample food and supplies, but did nothing to help them, including no medical assistance."
Another person who protested was Bertrand Russell, the noted philosopher and Nobel Prize recipient. In a letter published in a London newspaper in October 1945, he wrote: “In eastern Europe now mass deportations are being carried out by our allies on an unprecedented scale, and an apparently deliberate attempt is being made to exterminate many millions of Germans, not by gas, but by depriving them of their homes and of food, leaving them to die by slow and agonizing starvation. This is not done as an act of war, but as a part of a deliberate policy of `peace’.” / 21
As the war was ending in what is now the Czech Republic, hysterical mobs brutally assaulted ethnic Germans, members of a minority group whose ancestors had lived there for centuries. In Prague, German soldiers were rounded up, disarmed, tied to stakes, doused with gasoline, and set on fire as living torches. / 22
In some cities and towns in what is now the Czech Republic, every German over the age of six was forced to wear on his clothing, sewn on his left breast, a large white circle six inches in diameter with the black letter N, which is the first letter of the Czech word for German. Germans were also banned from all parks, places of public entertainment, and public transportation, and not allowed to leave their homes after eight in the evening. Later all these people were expelled, along with the entire ethnic German population of what is now the Czech Republic. / 23
Identifying German victims before burial at Bromberg.
In the territory of what is now the Czech Republic, a quarter of a million ethnic Germans were killed.
In Poland, the so-called “Office of State Security,” an agency of the country’s new Soviet-controlled government, imposed its own brutal form of “de-Nazification.” Its agents raided German homes, rounding up some 200,000 men, women, children and infants ~ 99 percent of them non-combatant, innocent civilians. They were incarcerated in cellars, prisons, and 1,255 concentration camps where typhus was rampant and torture was commonplace. Between 60,000 and 80,000 Germans perished at the hands of the “Office of State Security.” / 24
We are ceaselessly reminded of the Third Reich’s wartime
concentration camps.
But few Americans are aware that such infamous camps as Dachau, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Auschwitz were kept in operation after the end of the war.
Now they were packed with German captives, many of whom perished miserably.
This makes me wonder just WHO we have been seeing in all those those photos. shown by the Jewish survivors. After all it has been proven some were photo shopped.
In the war’s aftermath, the victors put many German military and political leaders to death or sentenced them to lengthy prison terms after much-publicized trials in which the Allies were both prosecutor and judge. The best-known of these trials was before the so-called “International Military Tribunal” at Nuremberg, where officials of the four Allied powers were both the prosecutors and the judges.
Justice ~ as opposed to vengeance ~ is a standard that is applied impartially. But in the aftermath of World War II, the victorious powers imposed standards of "justice" that applied only to the vanquished. The governments of the United States, the Soviet Union, and other member states of the so-called “United Nations,” held Germans to a standard that they categorically refused to respect themselves.
Robert Jackson, the chief US prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal of 1945-46, privately acknowledged in a letter to President Truman, that the Allies “have done or are doing some of the very things we are prosecuting the Germans for. The French are so violating the Geneva Convention in the treatment of German prisoners of war that our command is taking back prisoners sent to them for forced labor in France. We are prosecuting plunder and our Allies are practicing it. We say aggressive war is a crime and one of our allies asserts sovereignty over the Baltic States based on no title except conquest.” / 26
Germans were executed or imprisoned for policies that the Allies themselves were carrying out, sometimes on a far greater scale. German military and political leaders were put to death on the basis of a hypocritical double standard, which means that these executions were essentially acts of judicial murder dressed up with the trappings and forms of legality.
If the standards of the Nuremberg Tribunal had been applied impartially, many American, Soviet and other Allied military and political leaders would have been hanged.
An awareness of how the defeated Germans were treated by the victors helps in understanding why Germans continued to fight during the final months of the war with a determination, tenacity and willingness to sacrifice that has few parallels in history, even as their cities were being smashed into ruins under relentless bombing, and even as defeat against numerically superior enemy forces seemed inevitable.
Two years after the end of the war, American and British policy toward the defeated Germans changed. The US and British governments began to treat the Germans as potential allies, rather than as vanquished subjects, and to appeal for their support. This shift in policy was not prompted by an awakening of humanitarian spirit. Instead, it was motivated by American and British fear of Soviet Russian expansion, and by the realization that the economic recovery of Europe as a whole required a prosperous and productive Germany.
How a people learns history
is its form of political education.
In every society, including our own,
how people learn and understand history
is determined by those who control
political and cultural life,
including the educational system
and the mass media.
How people understand the past
~ and how they view the world
and themselves as members of society ~
is set by the agenda of those who hold power.
~ Oswald Spenger, German historian and philosopherThat’s why, in our society, death and suffering during and after World War II of non-Jews ~ Poles, Russians and others, and especially Germans ~ is all but ignored, and why, instead, more than six decades after the end of the war, Jewish death and suffering ~above all, what is known as “the Holocaust” ~ is given such prominent attention, year after year, in our classrooms and motion pictures, and by our political leaders.
What I’m calling here this evening the “unknown holocaust” of non-Jews is essentially ignored not because the facts are disputed or unknown, but rather because
this reality does not fit well
with the Judeo-centric view of history
that is all but obligatory in our society.
Massacred bodies of German children, women & men ready for incineration ~ Dresden 1945. OTHER people than the Jews, other races, suffered terribly. But that is not a fact they wish us to know. They prefer to be the victimized chosen ones and do not wish to share that title. Or any clam to it.It is a view of the past that reflects the Jewish-Zionist hold on our cultural and educational life. This means that it is not enough simply to “establish the facts.”
It is important to understand,
identify,
and counter
the power that controls
what we see, hear and read!
This must take place in our classrooms, our periodicals, and in our motion pictures ~ and which determines how we view history, our world and ourselves ~ not just the history of what is called “the Holocaust,” but the history and background of World War II, the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Middle East turmoil, and much, much more.
History, as the old saying goes,
is written by the winners.
In our society, the “winners,”
that is, the most important single group
that sets our perspective on the past
through its grip on the media,
and on our cultural life,
is the organized Jewish community .
This reality is hardly a secret. Michael Medved, a well-known Jewish author and film critic, has acknowledged: “It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture … Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names.” / 27
One person who has carefully studied this subject is Jonathan J. Goldberg, editor of the influential Jewish community weekly Forward. In his 1996 book, Jewish Power, Goldberg wrote: / 28
“In a few key sectors of the media, notably among Hollywood studio executives, Jews are so numerically dominant that calling these businesses Jewish-controlled is little more than a statistical observation …
“Hollywood at the end of the twentieth century is still an industry with a pronounced ethnic tinge. Virtually all the senior executives at the major studios are Jews. Writers, producers, and to a lesser degree directors are disproportionately Jewish ~ one recent study showed the figure as high as 59 percent among top-grossing films.
“The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America’s most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. They are a major source of money for Democratic candidates.”
A writer for the Los Angeles Times, Joel Stein, boldly declared seven months ago, in a column in December 2008 for the influential daily paper:
“As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood … I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” / 29
The Katyn Forrest Massacre of 15 000 Poles by the Jewish NKVD Secret Police in 1940
Thirty seven years ago, two of the most powerful men in our country, indeed, in the world, frankly discussed this matter in a private conversation that should be much better known.
It was in 1972, in the oval office of the White House. President Richard Nixon and the Rev. Billy Graham ~ the nation’s best-known and most influential Christian evangelist ~ were alone.
These were not just prominent and influential men. They were shrewd and astute individuals who had accomplished much in their lives, and who had thought a lot about what they had observed and experienced over the years.
We know about this one-on-one conversation, and exactly what the two men said to each other, because Nixon had arranged for all conversations in his office to be secretly recorded. He regarded these recordings as his personal property, but he was later forced by court order to give them up. It wasn’t until thirty years later ~ in 2002 ~ that this conversation was finally made public. / 30
Here’s how their talk went. Graham said:
“This stranglehold has got to be broken
or the country’s going down the drain.”
The President responded by saying:
“You believe that?,”
“Yes, sir,” said Graham.
“Oh, boy,” Nixon replied, “So do I.
I can’t ever say that, but I believe it.”
Now consider for a moment what this means, for America and the world, and for us today. Here’s the most powerful political personality in the United States, indeed the most powerful man in the world, and the most influential religious figure in the US, in agreement about the Jewish hold on our media. They didn’t talk about the Jewish role in the media, or even Jewish domination of the media. They spoke about a Jewish “stranglehold” on our media.
For everyone who cares about our nation and the world, it’s worth asking and answering two questions.
First, were Nixon and Graham right?
Were they correct in what they said
that day about what they called
the Jewish “stranglehold” on the media?
Second, if they were right,
what does that say about America and our society?
Two of the most influential men in our country were so afraid of the intimidating power of the organized Jewish community that they felt unable even to mention publicly this “stranglehold” ~ that’s the term Graham used ~ on our media, a “stranglehold” that they regarded as so harmful that unless it is broken, America, again, their words, is “going down the drain.”
What a telling commentary on the corruption and perversion of our national life! If Nixon and Graham were right, is it not important, indeed, imperative, to clearly and forthrightly address the reality of this hold on our media?
What has brought us together here this evening is, first and foremost, our interest in real history ~ our passion for a clearer understanding of the past free of “politically correct” orthodoxy and stricture.
But an awareness of “real history” is not enough. It is important to understand the how and why of the systematic distortion of history in our society, and the power behind that distortion. Understanding and countering that power is a critically important task, not merely for the sake of historical truth in the abstract, but for the sake of our nation and humankind.
The Passing of Kurt Vonnegut ~ An Eyewitness to the Holocaust of Dresden
NOTES:
- Time magazine issue of Oct. 15, 1945.
- Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, The German Expellees: Victims in War and Peace (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993). See also: Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, A Terrible Revenge: The Ethnic Cleansing of the Eastern European Germans, 1944-1950 (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994); Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, Nemesis at Potsdam: The Expulsion of the Germans From the East (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska, 1989. 3rd rev. ed.)
- Giles MacDonogh, After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation (New York: Basic Books, 2007). See also the review of this book by Mark Weber, “New Book Details Mass Killings and Brutal Mistreatment of Germans at the End of World War Two.” (IHR: 2007).
- On this subject, see also: Douglas Botting, From the Ruins of the Reich: Germany 1945-1949 (New York: Crown, 1985); Richard Bessel, Germany 1945: From War to Peace (New York: Harper, 2009); Freda Utley, The High Cost of Vengeance (Chicago: H. Regnery, 1949); James Bacque, Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation 1944-1950 (Little, Brown: 1997).
- George F. Kennan, Memoirs 1925-1950 (Boston: 1967), p. 265. Also quoted in: A.-M. de Zayas, The German Expellees (1993), p. 62.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 47-50.
- Ralph Franklin Keeling, Gruesome Harvest: The Allies’ Postwar War Against the German People (IHR, 1992), pp. 59-60. (In the original edition, published in Chicago in 1947, pp. 55-56.). Also mentioned, in part, in: Max Hastings, Armageddon: The Battle for Germany 1944-1945 (New York: Alfred Knopf, 2004), p. 479.
- R. Keeling, Gruesome Harvest (1992), pp.15-16.
- R. Keeling, Gruesome Harvest (1992), p. 15.
- R. Keeling, Gruesome Harvest (1992), p. 61. See also: R. Bessel, Germany 1945 (2009), pp. 116-117; Max Hastings, Armageddon (2004), pp. 428-431; G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 78-79.
- Günter Bischoff and Stephen Ambrose, Eisenhower and the German POWs (Louisiana State University Press, 1992), pp. 9-10 (incl. n. 24), 58-64, 147 (n. 33), 178.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 392-395. See also: James Bacque, Crimes and Mercies (1997), pp. 41-45.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 396-399; G. Bischoff and S. Ambrose, Eisenhower and the German POWs (1992), pp. 165, 169, 170
- R. Keeling, Gruesome Harvest (1992), pp. 27-28 (or pp. 26-27 of the 1947 edition)
- R. Keeling, Gruesome Harvest (1992), p. 26.
- “Secrets of the London Cage,” The Guardian (London), Nov. 12, 2005
- (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/nov/12/secondworldwar.world); G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 412- 413. F. Utley, The High Cost of Vengeance (1949), pp. 185-201.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 400, 406.
- A.-M. de Zayas, The German Expellees (1993), p. 113.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 362-363; G. Bischoff and S. Ambrose, Eisenhower and the German POWs (1992), pp. 12, 106, 109.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), p. 362.
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 362-365.
- A.-M. de Zayas, The German Expellees (1993), p. 108.
- A.-M. de Zayas, The German Expellees (1993), p. 85.
- A.-M. de Zayas, The German Expellees (1993), pp. 86-92.
- John Sack, An Eye For An Eye (2000. Fourth, revised and updated edition);
- See also: “Behind An Eye for an Eye, an IHR Conference address by John Sack, May 2000. ( http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n1p-9_Sack.html )
- G. MacDonogh, After the Reich (2007), pp. 38, 382, 386 , 389.
- Jackson letter to Truman, Oct. 12, 1945. State Department files. Quoted in: R. Conot, Justice at Nuremberg (1983), p. 68. Also quoted in: M. Weber, “The Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust,” The Journal of Historical Review (Vol. 12, No. 2), Summer 1992. ( http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p167_Webera.html )
- M. Medved, “Is Hollywood Too Jewish?,” Moment, Vol. 21, No. 4 (1996), p. 37. Also quoted in: M. Weber, “A Straight Look at the Jewish Lobby”
- ( http://www.ihr.org/leaflets/jewishlobby.shtml )
- Jonathan Jeremy Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment (Addison-Wesley, 1996), pp. 280, 287-288. See also pp. 39-40, 290-291.
- J. Stein, “How Jewish Is Hollywood?,” Los Angeles Times, Dec. 19, 2008.
- (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein19-2008dec19,0,4676183.column )
- “Nixon, Billy Graham Make Derogatory Comments About Jews on Tapes,” Chicago Tribune, March 1, 2002 (or Feb. 28, 2002)
- (http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/02/Graham_Nixon.html ); “Billy Graham Apologizes for ’72 Remarks,” Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, March 2, 2002. “Graham Regrets Jewish Slur,” BBC News, March 2, 2002. ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1850077.stm ). The conversation apparently took place on Feb. 1, 1972.