Let's begin here, In case you did not know:
The Starving of Germany in 1919
I first read about the starvation of Germans at the end of WWI
in a book written by British historian Clive Ponting, he reported that close to 900.000 Germans died of starvation in 1918
The “starvation policy” had begun in 1914. Winston
Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty and one of the framers of the scheme, admitted that it was aimed at “starving
the whole population — men, women, and children, old and young, wounded and sound — into submission.”
Such British policy was in contravention of international law on two major points.
First, in regard
to the character of the blockade, it violated the Declaration of Paris of 1856, which Britain itself had signed, and which,
among other things, permitted “close” but not “distant” blockades. A belligerent was allowed to station
ships near the three-mile limit to stop traffic with an enemy’s ports; it was not allowed simply to declare areas
of the high seas comprising the approaches to the enemy’s coast to be off-limits.
The second point is related to contraband. Briefly, following the lead of the Hague Conference of 1907,
the Declaration of London of 1909 considered food to be “conditional contraband,” that is, subject to interception
and capture only when intended for the use of the enemy’s military forces.
In December 1918, the National Health Office in Berlin calculated that 763,000 persons had already died as a result of
the blockade by that time. In some respects, the armistice saw the intensification of the suffering, since the German Baltic
coast was now effectively blockaded and German fishing rights in the Baltic annulled.
The reason for the food blockade to be kept in
place after the end of the hostilities was aimed at forcing Germany to sign the Versailles Treaty without any change on
the strict conditions they were imposing. Today no one remembers it because it was kept secret and there were no leaks to
the western press while 900,000 German men, women and children died because of the British naval blockade. Even today only
a few non-Germans know the truth and American and British historians, seems to have brushed off this most appalling crime
as a footnote in history.
Even the founder of the Boy Scouts, Robert Baden-Powell, naively expressed his satisfaction that the German race
is being ruined; though the birth rate.
Although the war had ended in November 1918, Germany was still under Allied blockade, which
was ruthlessly enforced. The first state of Germany to benefit from a lifting of the blockade would be communist-controlled
One must search diligently for historical references to the continued,
devastating blockade. Diether Raff confirms the peace-time blockade in his “A History of Germany – From the
Medieval Empire to the Present”:
“The Allied peace terms turned out to be extremely severe, far exceeding the worst fears
of the German government… The peace treaties of Brest-Litovsk and Bucharest were declared invalid and the food blockade
around Germany was to continue… Thus Germany’s capitulation was accomplished and an end set to four years of
“It was the blockade that finally drove the Central Powers to accept defeat,” says Richard Hoveth in
his study of the struggle on the high seas during World War I: “At first mild in its application, the blockade’s
noose gradually tightened until, with the American entry, all restraint was cast aside. Increasingly deprived of the means
to wage war, or even to feed her population, the violent response was insurrection; apathy and demoralization the mute consequence
of dashed hopes and thin potato soup.”
Basil Liddell Hart is quoted
by Hoveth to the effect that, revolution and internal unrest notwithstanding, the blockade was “clearly the decisive
agency in the struggle.”
After confiscating the German merchant navy, the Allies proceeded to confiscate German
private property all over the world, contrary to all precedent from previous wars when private property had been held in
escrow until the ratification of peace treaties, when it would revert to its legitimate owners.
The Allied powers reserved the right to keep or dispose of assets belonging to German citizens, including
companies they control [Article 167 B]. This wholesale expropriation would take place without any compensation to the owners
[Articles 121 and 279 B].
But Germany remained responsible for the liabilities and loans on the assets that were taken from them. Profits,
however, remained in the hands of the Allies. Thus, private German property and assets were confiscated in China (Articles
129 and 132), Thailand (Articles 135-137), Egypt (Article 148), Liberia (Articles 135-140) and in many other countries.
Germany was also precluded from investing capital in any neighboring country and had to forfeit all rights “to whatever
title it may possess in these countries.
The Allies were given free access
to the German marketplace without the slightest tariff while products made in Germany faced high foreign tariff barriers.
Articles 264 to 267 established that Germany “undertakes to give the Allies and their associates the status of most
favored nations for five years.
Germany was already experiencing near famine
conditions but it was at this moment that the Allies decided to confiscate a substantial part of what was left of Germany’s
livestock. The American representative at Versailles, Thomas Lamont, recorded the event with some indignation:
were made to deliver cattle, horses, sheep, goats, etc.,… A strong protest came from Germany when dairy cows were
taken to France and Belgium, thus depriving German children of milk.”
Herbert Hoover, a mining engineer and future president of the United
States – in 1900 defended Tianjin from the assaults of the Boxer – was sent on a mission to help the starving
population but he could do very little because of the fury of the French and the British. Shipments had been delivered
to Allies and to neutrals, but British officials had refused to break their blockade to let cargoes go into Germany. Moreover,
Germany had failed to act on an agreement to turn over merchant ships before receiving food [eventually forced on the Weimar
government and showed no desire to pay for shipments in gold – a possibility that French financiers were thought to
be opposing so that their nation might get what gold there was as indemnity.
There is evidence that Wilson actually thought the European powers
would accept his 14 Points” and feed starving Germans now that the war was over but, of course, that was not the case
as discovered by Wilson’s humanitarian point man, Hoover. England’s Prime Minister, Lloyd George, meanwhile,
thought that the starvation was being ameliorated. He favored – although quietly – feeding his ex-enemy.
In early March
1919, General Herbert Plumer, commander of the British Army of Occupation, informed Prime Minister Lloyd George that his
men were begging to be sent home; they could no longer stand the sight of “hordes of skinny and bloated children pawing
over the offal from the British camps”.
Finally, the Americans and British overpowered French objections and at the end of March, the
first food shipments began arriving in Hamburg. But it was only in July, after the formal German signature to the Treaty
of Versailles, that the Germans were permitted to import raw materials and export manufactured goods.
On May 7 of that year, Count von Brockdorf-Rantzau
had indignantly referred to this fact in addressing the Versailles assembly:”The hundreds of thousands of noncombatants,”
the German chief delegate had stated, “who have perished since November 11, 1918, as a result of the blockade, were
killed with cold deliberation, after our enemies had been assured of their complete victory.”
The food blockade ended on July 12, 1919.
Besides the direct effects of the British blockade, there are the
possible indirect and much more sinister effects to consider. A German child who was ten years old in 1918, and who
survived, was twenty-two in 1930. Vincent raises the question of whether the miseries and suffering from hunger in the early,
formative years help account to some degree for the enthusiasm of German youth for Nazism later on.
last cheque covering reparations for WW1 was issued by Angela Merkel in 2010.
Click on this text to visit the JUSTICE FOR GERMANS WEBSITE...
Hitler's 'Barbarossa' Proclamation
On the morning of June 22, 1941, Reich Minister Joseph Goebbels announced to the world the startling news that German
forces, together with Finnish and Romanian troops, had struck against the vast Soviet Union. On German radio he read Adolf
Hitler's historic proclamation justifying the attack. Among other things, he said that Stalin had massed some 160 divisions
to strike westwards. In reality, more than 300 Soviet divisions were assembled against Germany and Europe. Hitler and his
generals had thereby greatly underestimated the Soviet danger -- a fateful miscalculation that ultimately proved catastrophic,
and not just for Germany. To the Italian leader Benito Mussolini, Hitler wrote that deciding to attack Soviet Russia was
"the most difficult decision of my life." And even though it meant engaging Germany in a two-front war, something
he had specifically warned against in Mein Kampf, this was a decision he never regretted. Hitler's strike against
the Soviet Union, code-named "Barbarossa," has often been called his worst single military blunder because the
immense clash he unleashed ended four years later, in May 1945, with his suicide in his Berlin command post, Soviet forces
hoisting the Red hammer-and-sickle banner above the Reichstag, and Germany's unconditional surrender. Hitler's "Barbarossa"
assault is often, but simplistically, portrayed as a treacherous and unprovoked surprise attack against a peaceable ally,
motivated by greed, dreams of empire, loathing of Russians and other Slavic peoples, and visceral hatred of Communism. Today,
60 years later, German and Russian historians continue to grapple with the origins of this mightiest military clash in history.
Because Hitler's proclamation of June 22, 1941, helps to explain the German leader's motives for turning against Soviet
Russia, it is a document of historic importance. The text is given here in full.
German people! National Socialists!
down with heavy cares, condemned to months-long silence, the hour has now come when at last I can speak frankly.
When on September
3, 1939, the German Reich received the British declaration of war there was repeated anew the British attempt to thwart
every beginning of a consolidation of Europe and thereby its rise, by fighting against whatever power on the Continent was
strongest at any given time. That is how, in times past, Britain ruined Spain in many wars. That is how she conducted her
wars against Holland. That is how later she fought France with the aid of all Europe, and that is how, at the turn of the
century, she began the encirclement of the then German Reich and, in 1914, the [First] World War. It was only on account
of its internal lack of unity that Germany was defeated in 1918. The consequences were terrible.
After hypocritical declarations that the fight
was solely against the Kaiser and his regime, and once the German army had laid down its arms, the annihilation of the German
Reich began according to plan.
While the prophecies of a French statesman that there were two million Germans too many -- in other words, that
this number would have to be eliminated by hunger, disease or emigration -- were apparently being fulfilled to the letter,
the National Socialist movement began its work of unifying the German people, and thereby initiating the resurgence of the
Reich. This rise of our people from distress, misery and shameful disregard was in the form of a purely internal renaissance.
In no way did that affect, much less threaten, Britain.
Nevertheless, a new, hate-filled policy of encirclement against Germany began
immediately. Internally and externally there came into being that plot, familiar to all of us, between Jews and democrats,
Bolsheviks and reactionaries, with the sole aim of inhibiting the establishment of the new German people's state, and of
plunging the Reich anew into impotence and misery.
Apart from us, the hatred of this international world conspiracy was directed
against those nations that, like ourselves, were neglected by fortune and were obliged to earn their daily bread in the hardest
struggle for existence.
Above all, the right of Italy and Japan, just as much as that of Germany, to share in the goods of this world was
contested and in fact was formally denied. The alliance of these [three] nations was, therefore, purely an act of self-protection
in the face of the egoistic global combination of wealth and power that threatened them. As early as 1936 [Winston] Churchill,
according to statements by the American General Wood before a committee of the American House of Representatives, declared
that Germany was once again becoming too powerful and must therefore be destroyed.
In the Summer of 1939 the time seemed to have
come for Britain to begin to realize its intended annihilation by repetition of a comprehensive policy of encirclement of
Germany. The plan of the campaign of lies staged for this purpose consisted in declaring that other people were threatened,
in tricking them with British promises of guarantees and assistance, and of getting them to go against Germany, just as
had happened prior to the [First] World War.
From May to August 1939, Britain thus succeeded in broadcasting to the world that Lithuania,
Estonia, Latvia, Finland and Bessarabia. as well as Ukraine, were being directly threatened by Germany. Some of these states
allowed themselves to be misled into accepting the promise of guarantee proffered with these assertions, thus joining the
new encirclement front against Germany. Under these circumstances I considered myself entitled to assume responsibility,
before my own conscience and before the history of the German people, not only of assuring these countries or their governments
of the falseness of these British assertions, but also of setting at rest the strongest power in the east [the Soviet Union],
by especially solemn declarations regarding the limits of our interests.
National Socialists! At that time you probably all felt that this
step was a bitter and difficult one for me. The German people has never harbored hostile feelings against the peoples of
Russia. However, for more than two decades the Jewish Bolshevik rulers in Moscow had been endeavoring to set aflame not
only Germany but all Europe. At no time did Germany ever attempt to carry her National Socialist worldview into Russia,
but on the contrary Jewish Bolshevik rulers in Moscow unswervingly endeavored to foist their domination upon us and other
European nations, not only by ideological means but above all with military force. The consequences of the activity of this
regime were nothing but chaos, misery and starvation in all countries.
I, on the other hand, have been striving for two decades, with a
minimum of intervention and without destroying our production, to arrive at a new socialist order in Germany, one that not
only eliminates unemployment but also permits the productive worker to receive an ever greater share of the fruits of his
labor. The achievements of this policy of national economic and social reconstruction -- which strove for a true national
community by overcoming rank and class divisions -- are unique in today's world.
It was therefore only with extreme difficulty
that I brought myself in August 1939 to send my [Foreign] Minister [von Ribbentrop] to Moscow in an endeavor there to counter
the British encirclement policy against Germany. I did this only out of a sense of responsibility toward the German people,
but above all in the hope of finally, in spite of everything, achieving long-term detente and of being able to reduce sacrifices
that otherwise might have been demanded of us.
While Germany solemnly affirmed in Moscow that the designated territories and countries --
with the exception of Lithuania -- lay outside any German political interests, a special [supplementary] agreement was concluded
in case Britain were to succeed in inciting Poland into actually going to war against Germany. In this case, as well, German
claims were subject to limitations entirely out of proportion to the achievements of the German forces.
National Socialists! The consequences of this
treaty, which I myself desired and which was concluded in the interests of the German nation, were very severe, particularly
for Germans living in the countries concerned. Far more than half a million [ethnically] German men and women, all small
farmers, artisans and workmen, were forced to leave their former homeland practically overnight in order to escape from a
new [Soviet] regime that at first threatened them with boundless misery and sooner or later with complete extermination.
of Germans disappeared. It was impossible ever to determine their fate, let alone their whereabouts. Among them were no
fewer than 160 men of German Reich citizenship. To all this I remained silent because I had to! For, after all, it was my
one desire to bring about a final relief of tension and, if possible, a permanent settlement with this [Soviet] state.
during our advance in Poland, Soviet rulers suddenly, and contrary to the treaty, also claimed Lithuania. The German Reich
never had any intention of occupying Lithuania, and not only failed to present any such demand to the Lithuanian government,
but on the contrary refused the request of the then Lithuanian government to send German troops to Lithuania in that spirit
for that purpose as inconsistent with the aims of German policy.
Despite all this I complied also with this fresh Russian demand.
However, this was only the beginning of continually renewed extortions, which have been repeated ever since.
The victory in
Poland, which was won exclusively by German troops, prompted me to address yet another peace offer to the Western powers
[Britain and France]. It was rejected, due to the efforts of the international and Jewish warmongers. Already at that time
the reason for this rejection lay in the fact that Britain still had hopes of being able to mobilize a European coalition
against Germany, which was to include the Balkans and Soviet Russia. It was therefore decided in London to send Mr. Cripps
as ambassador to Moscow. He received clear instructions under all circumstances to resume relations between Britain and
Soviet Russia, and develop them in a pro-British direction. The British press reported on the progress of this mission, except
insofar as tactical reasons did not impose silence.
In the fall of 1939 and the spring of 1940 the first results actually made
themselves felt. As Russia undertook to subjugate by armed force not only Finland but also the Baltic states, she suddenly
motivated this action by the assertion, as ridiculous as it was false, that she must protect these countries from an outside
threat, or forestall it. This could only be meant to apply to Germany, for no other power could even intervene in the Baltic
area, let alone go to war there. Still I had to be silent. However, those in power in the Kremlin immediately went further.
Whereas in the
spring of 1940 Germany, in accordance with the so-called Friendship Treaty [of Sept. 28, 1939, with Soviet Russia], withdrew
her forces from the eastern frontier and, in fact, for the most part cleared these areas entirely of German troops, a deployment
of Russian forces at that time was already beginning, to an extent that could only be regarded as a deliberate threat to
to a statement that [Soviet Foreign Minister] Molotov personally made at that time, there were 22 Russian divisions in the
Baltic states alone already in the spring of 1940. Given that the Russian government always claimed that it had been called
in by the local population, the purpose of their presence there could only be a demonstration against Germany.
While our soldiers
from May 10, 1940, onward were breaking Franco-British power in the west, Russian military deployment on our eastern frontier
was continuing to an ever more menacing extent. From August 1940 onward I therefore considered it to be in the interest of
the Reich to no longer permit our eastern provinces, which moreover had been laid waste so often before, to remain unprotected
in the face of this tremendous deployment of Bolshevik divisions.
Thus, and just as intended by this British-Soviet Russian cooperation,
there came about the tying up of such strong [German] forces in the east that a radical conclusion of the war in the west,
particularly as regards aircraft, could no longer be vouched for by the German leadership. This, however, was in line with
the goals not only of British but also of Soviet Russian policy, for both Britain and Soviet Russia intended to let this
war go on for as long as possible in order to weaken all Europe and render it ever more impotent.
Russia's threatened attack on Romania was in
the last analysis equally intended to gain possession of or, if possible, to destroy, an important base of the economic
life of not only Germany, but of all of Europe. Since 1933 the German Reich sought with boundless patience to win over states
in southeastern Europe as trading partners. We therefore also had the greatest interest in their internal consolidation and
order. Russia's advance into Romania and Greece's alliance with Britain threatened to quickly turn these regions as well
into a general theater of war.
Contrary to our principles and customs, and at the urgent request of the then Romanian government,
which was itself responsible for this development, I advised that it acquiesce to the Soviet Russian demands for the sake
of peace, and to cede [the province of] Bessarabia. The Romanian government believed, however, that it could answer for this
before its own people only if Germany and Italy in compensation would at least guarantee the integrity of what still remained
of Romania. I did so with heavy heart, above all because when the German Reich gives a guarantee, that means it also abides
by it. We are neither Englishmen nor Jews.
I still believe at this late hour to have served the cause of peace in that region, albeit
by assuming a serious obligation of our own. In order, however, finally to solve these problems and achieve clarity concerning
the Russian attitude toward Germany, as well as under pressure of continually increasing mobilization on our eastern frontier,
I invited Mr. Molotov to come to Berlin.
The Soviet Foreign Minister [during their November 1940 meeting] then demanded Germany's clarification
of or agreement to the following four questions:
Molotov's first question: Is the German guarantee for Romania also directed
against Soviet Russia in case of attack by Soviet Russia against Romania?
My answer: The German guarantee is a general one and is unconditionally
binding upon us. Russia, however, never declared to us that she had other interests in Romania beyond Bessarabia. The [Soviet]
occupation of Northern Bukovina was already a violation of this assurance. I did not therefore think that Russia could now
suddenly have more far-reaching intentions against Rumania.
Molotov's second question: Russia again feels itself menaced by Finland,
Russia is determined not to tolerate this. Is Germany ready not to give any aid to Finland, and above all immediately to
withdraw German relief troops marching through to Kirkenes?
My answer: As ever, Germany has absolutely no political interests
in Finland. A new war by Russia against the small Finnish nation could not, however, be regarded any longer by the German
government as tolerable, all the more so because we could never believe that Finland could threaten Russia. Under no circumstances
did we want another theater of war to arise in the Baltic.
Molotov's third question: Is Germany prepared to agree that Soviet
Russia give a guarantee to Bulgaria and, in this regard, send Soviet troops to Bulgaria, in connection with which he --
Molotov -- was prepared to state that the Soviets did not intend on that account, for example, to depose the King?
My answer: Bulgaria
is a sovereign state, and I have no knowledge that Bulgaria had ever asked Soviet Russia for any kind of guarantee such
as Romania had requested from Germany. Moreover, I would have to discuss the matter with my allies.
Molotov's fourth question: Soviet Russia absolutely
requires free passage through the Dardanelles, and for her protection also demands occupation of a number of important bases
on the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. Is Germany in agreement with this or not?
My answer: Germany is prepared at any time to
agree to altering the Treaty of Montreux  in favor of the Black Sea states. Germany is not prepared to agree to Russia's
taking possession of bases on the Straits.
National Socialists! Here I adopted the only attitude that I could adopt as the responsible
leader of the German Reich, but also a conscientiously responsible representative of European culture and civilization.
The result was to increase the activity in Soviet Russia directed against the Reich, above all, however, the immediate commencement
of undermining the new Romanian state from within, and an attempt to remove the Bulgarian government by propaganda.
With the help of
confused and immature leaders of the Romanian [Iron Guard] Legion a coup d'etat was staged in Romania whose aim was to overthrow
Chief of State General Antonescu and produce chaos in the country so as to eliminate thee legal authority and thus remove
the precondition for implementing the German guarantee. I nevertheless still believed it best to remain silent.
the failure of this undertaking, there was renewed reinforcement of concentrations of Russian troops on Germany's eastern
frontier. Panzer detachments and parachute troops were transferred in ever increasing numbers to dangerous proximity to
the German frontier. The German armed forces and the German homeland know that until a few weeks ago not a single German
tank or motorized division was stationed on our eastern frontier.
If any final proof was required for the coalition meanwhile formed
between Britain and Soviet Russia, despite all diversion and camouflage, the Yugoslav conflict provided it. While I made
every effort to undertake a final attempt to pacify the Balkans and, in sympathetic cooperation with the Duce [Mussolini],
invited Yugoslavia to join the Tripartite Pact, Britain and Soviet Russia jointly organized that coup d'etat which, in a
single night, removed the government that had been ready to come to agreement.
For today we can inform the German nation that
the Serb putsch against Germany did not take place merely under the British, but primarily under Soviet Russian auspices.
While we remained silent on this matter as well, the Soviet leaders now went one step further. They not only organized the
putsch, but a few days later [April 5, 1941] concluded that well-known friendship treaty with those submissive creatures,
which was meant to strengthen the Serbs in their will to resist pacification of the Balkans, and to incite them against Germany.
And this was no platonic intention: Moscow demanded mobilization of the Serbian army.
Because, even then, I still believed it better
not to speak out, those in power in the Kremlin went still further: The government of the German Reich today possesses documentary
evidence proving that Russia, in order finally to bring Serbia into the war, gave her a promise to supply her, by way of
Salonika, with weapons, aircraft, munitions and other war materials against Germany. And this happened almost at the very
moment that I was advising Japanese Foreign Minister Matsuoka to bring about an easing of tensions with Russia, still hoping
thereby to serve the cause of peace.
Only the rapid advance of our incomparable divisions to Skoplje [Skopje], as well as the capture
of Salonika itself, frustrated the aims of this Soviet Russian-British plot. Officers of the Serbian air force, however,
fled to Russia and were there immediately received as allies.
It was only the victory of the Axis powers in the Balkans that thwarted
the plan to tie down Germany this summer in months of fighting in southeastern Europe while meantime steadily completing
the deployment of Soviet Russian armies and strengthening their readiness for battle in order, finally, together with Britain
and supported by anticipated American supplies, to tie down and then defeat the German Reich and Italy.
Thus Moscow not only broke but miserably betrayed
the stipulations of our friendship treaty. All this was done while the rulers in the Kremlin, exactly as in the case of
Finland and Romania, up to the last moment pretended peace and friendship and issued seemingly harmless denials.
Although I have
been obliged by circumstances again and again to keep silent, the moment has now come when to continue as a mere observer
would not only be a sin of omission but a crime against the German people -- yes, even against the whole of Europe.
like 160 Russian divisions are standing at our frontier. For weeks there have been constant violations of this frontier,
not only affecting us but also in the far north [against Finland], as well as Romania. Russian airmen consider it sport
nonchalantly to overlook these frontiers, presumably to prove to us that they already feel themselves masters of these territories.
During the night of June 17 to 18 Russian patrols again penetrated into Reich territory, and could only be driven back after
prolonged exchange of fire.
This has brought us to the hour when it is necessary for us to counter this plot of Jewish-British warmongers and
equally the Jewish rulers of the Bolshevik center in Moscow.
German people! At this moment a deployment of forces is taking place
that, in its extent and scope, is the greatest the world hitherto has seen. United with their Finnish comrades, the fighters
of the victory of Narvik are standing in the Northern Arctic. German divisions commanded by the conqueror of Norway [General
Dietl], together with the heroes of Finnish freedom under their Marshal [Mannerheim], are protecting Finnish soil. Formations
of the German eastern front extend from East Prussia to the Carpathians. German and Romanian soldiers are united under Chief
of State Antonescu from the banks of the Prut along the lower reaches of the Danube to the shores of the Black Sea.
The task of this
front, therefore, is not merely the protection of individual countries, but the safeguarding of Europe, and thereby the
salvation of all.
I therefore decided today to once again lay the fate and future of the German Reich and our people in the hands of
May the Lord God help us especially in this fight!
From The Journal of Historical Review, Nov.-Dec. 2000 (Vol. 19, No. 6), pages
Excerpts from a presentation by Lady Michele Renouf, speaking in Vancouver, reporting
on a recent “Identitarian” conference in Mexico during which the true events of World War II were discussed in
relation to understanding current affairs in modern day Europe. She spoke of “swindle-speak” and
the historical misappropriation of terms by the media and enemies of truth, providing the term “holocaust” (a
burnt whole offering) as a major example. She cited historical facts concerning the British military policy of targeting
civilians in the WWII air war against Germany, and she concludes that it was the Germans who, by definition, were
the true victims of an actual “holocaust”. She referred to Churchill’s policy, to “baste”
the Germans and burn them alive. Thus, she said, “the German people should rightfully reclaim this term for themselves”.
She then quoted Dennis Richards, Official Historian of the R.A.F. who admitted that the British initiated the air war, targeting
civilians, in order to goad Hitler into bombing England in retaliation.
Regarding effective activism in terms of “Identitarianism”, from her own expertise
in the advertising industry, she says that in order to reach the general public with the message, it is important to not
use the adversary’s terminology, to not act and dress as they wish, and of not adopt archaic or nostalgic symbolism
which the enemies of truth have already demonized. She urges civility and creativity in order to appeal to the wider audience
with one’s message and opposes the “Neo-Nazi” look and methods.
I attended this presentation and was involved in the Q&A segment, included in this video. One
should not assume, however, that I necessarily subscribe to the “Identitarian” viewpoint. My issue is and remains
“Justice for Germans” with the caveat, that humanity as whole will also benefit from understanding the truth
about Hitler, National Socialism and World War II. I was, however, much impressed with her presentation. My main reason
for attending was my great respect for her, in light of all of her activism on behalf of the German people and for Our Fallen
over many years, and indeed, for all of humanity against our common enemy or “our predator” as she calls them.Her
contention that the “Holocaust” happened to the German people echoes my own sentiments. This is also evidenced
in the documentary film “Hellstorm“.
It was delightful to re-acquaint myself with her
since our last meeting nearly 4 years ago. We spent several hours chatting privately after the event had concluded, and
I shared with her some of what I have done in that time, including the founding of The Truth and Justice for Germans Society. She read the mandate and constitution, and she endorses it, saying “it is long overdue” and she wondered “why
has it not been done before?” Other TJGS members were also in attendance and greatly appreciated her presentation.
Related Info: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Identitarianism
Lady Michele’s main website: http://tellingfilms.co.uk/
to the claims of the “Court Historians”, the Allied Terror-Bombing Campaign was not intended for the destruction
military targets, as my previous post demonstrate, but rather, to “de-house” and to kill as many German civilians
“Court Historians” are the intellectual bodyguards
of the State. They shape and defend the “official line” or interpretation on the State’s wars, its presidential
regimes, or other key historical events and public policies. As a result they enjoy high esteem and recognition in the mainstream
media and academia. As defenders of the status quo they frequently attack and label their critics as “conspiracy theorists,”
“revisionists,” “isolationists,” “appeasers,” “anti-intellectuals,” or other
boogie men, rather than engage in civil discourse or discussion.
British documents as referred to by David Irving (and many other
Non-Court Historians), and many quotes from the British military leadership confirm that the British and later also the Americans,
deliberately targeted civilians, contrary to International Law. (See Dehousing Paper) Further proof of this, however, is in the routine use of Delay-Action Bombs by the Allies.
Many of the bombs which were dropped upon German cities contained a perfidious mechanism which, rather than exploding
immediately upon contact with the ground or with buildings, were designed to explode hours or days later, thereby causing
harm to survivors when they had emerged from their bomb shelters and cellars. They also caused serious danger to the Fire
Fighters and Rescue personnel, sometimes killing them or making their duties virtually impossible to carry out. Both the
British and Americans had these types of ordinances in their arsenals and also and frequently deployed them. Yes, this is
how the so-called “good guys” and “liberators” waged war.
chemical-mechanical fuse devices contained in them were housed in the rear portion of a standard aerial bomb. However, added
protection using artificial materials (celluloids) were built in to prevent an immediate explosion upon impact. A glass
ampule, located in the rear section, which contained acetone would instead break open upon impact and then slowly begin
to dissolve a series of the protective celluloid plates or barriers, which barricaded the explosive materials, eventually
triggering the firing pin and then finally detonating the bomb at a later point in time. The time of detonation was dependant
upon how long it took for the acetone to dissolve the celluloid barriers. The speed of this chain of could also be varied
according to the number or thickness of the barriers and / or the strength of the acetone contained in the glass ampule.
Thus, they could be designed to detonate in any time frame ranging from several hours to a week. These Delay-Action Bombs
can only be regarded as murderous weapons of terror and mass destruction.
Infos auf Deutsch, siehe: http://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Alliierter_Bombenterror)
Many such bombs, however, did not explode at all and are still being dug up today
on German soil by farmers or in the course of road construction, the building of railways or the digging of tunnels for
underground public transportation lines, etc. These have also frequently been found in rivers and canals. These bombs are,
however, no less deadly than the day they were dropped, over 70 years ago. As a result, and to this day, “bomb alarms”
are still a common occurrence in German cities and towns, resulting in sections of towns to be evacuated, roads to be closed
and rail transportation to be halted for hours while highly trained bomb-disposal experts attempt to diffuse them, move them,
or to detonate them on the spot. They could, however, under the right conditions, still explode spontaneously.
Finding unexploded German ordinance on British soil is, by comparison, a more rare occurrence. Whenever
one is found, it is usually in London. This speaks to the fact that the German side did not use Delay-Action Bombs, as claimed
by Wikipedia (without citation) for example, and also to the fact that England was never bombed to anywhere near the same extent as
Germany. Nonetheless, when a single unexploded World War II German bomb is discovered in England, as was recently
the case in London on March 22, 2015, it is an international “sensation” and news reports of this are carried
world wide, apparently as proof of the barbarism of the “evil Nazis”. See my web search for news reports
By contrast, it is rarely reported in the international media when
unexploded British or American bombs are found on German soil. Why? Perhaps because it is such a common occurrence. Perhaps
because they don’t want the world to know and to understand the full extent of the criminal Allied Terror Bombing
Campaign and the types of bombs that were used. Or perhaps because, “it happened to evil Germans who deserved it,
and so who cares”? One recent exception, however, appeared in the Wall Street Journal:
German City Evacuated After Unexploded World War II Bomb Is Found – Officials cleared 20,000 people from area surrounding Cologne’s Mülheim bridge (WSJ |May 27th,
“Seven decades since the end of World War II, unexploded bombs from are still found regularly throughout Germany, a
legacy of the Allies’ sustained bombing campaign aimed at destroying German industry [a big lie, as
exposed in the my previous posts] and breaking domestic morale. In Cologne alone, 25 bombs on average are discovered
and deactivated each year, so far without causing any incident, city officials say. “
“Most large and midsize German cities were subject to
bombing campaigns in the later phase of the war, leading to casualties estimated between 305,000 and 600,000 people, according
to various historical records. [These are typical, deliberately downsized BRD stats]. In May 1942, Cologne became the first
German urban area to face mass-scale bombing [refers to the Area Bombing Directive of Feb. 14th, 1942 and does not consider earlier bombings of German cities] when British Royal Air Force bombers dropped
more than 1,400 tons of ordnance on the city. Allied forces bombarded the city 262 times during the war,
city spokeswoman Sabine Wotzlaw said.”
Here is an exceptionally good and thorough article:
Nobody Knows How Many Unexploded Bombs Are Hidden Under Berlin – Vice.com – April 14,
2014, By Katie Engelhart
The Reichstag after the Allied bombing of Berlin (Photo via)
In the thick of WWII, Allied pilots dropped some 2 million tons (estimates vary) of bombs on German soil. Most of the bombs exploded, but up to 15 percent were duds and failed to detonate
on impact. Today, these unexploded relics lie waiting. Experts figure that up to 250,000 live bombs remain scattered around Germany, and barely a week goes by without a bomb squad being summoned to one of them—unearthed,
perhaps, by a hapless construction worker or a farmer tending to his fields.
take precautions, but there are still accidents. Bombs go off suddenly and sometimes people die. Though most of the Great
War’s combatants are long dead, WWII’s casualty list keeps growing. Over the last few years, the presence of
unexploded ordnance (UXO) has become a more pressing problem. As WWII bombs grow old, their stabilizing agents begin to
decompose and they become sensitive to the tiniest of tremors. As this happens, the risk of spontaneous explosion increases.
This situation isn’t unique to rural backwaters, either. Berlin, which was bombed to shit
between 1940 and 1945, hosts an estimated 2,000 to 4,000 unexploded bombs (in addition to loads of unexploded grenades, rockets, artillery shells, mortars, mines, etc.) with around
ten to 15 live bombs found in the capital each year…
CONTINUE READING HERE:
Also note that the Inglorious Bastard ALL LIES bear no responsibility even today
for the cost of the bomb disposal operations. Nor do these occupiers, who still have armies on German soil today, send any
of their own teams to disarm and dispose of their World War II bombs which they dropped. Meanwhile, the Germans today pay,
and pay, and pay to apparently anyone who makes a claim against them, absorbs countless refugees from other countries, sends
money and arms to IsraHell, and continually props up other failing EU states, all the while being continually smacked in
the face with World War II Lies and Propaganda. The outright theft of German territory is not even discussed, much less
compensation for our lost lands, or to the millions of Germans who were ethnically cleansed. And to date, no member of the
ALL LIES has ever been tried for a War Crime or Crime Against Humanity, in spite of all of the overwhelming body of evidence.
So, did the war really end in 1945? Were the Germans in fact “liberated”? And was this really
“the good war”? Or was it just the model for future wars against all nations who defend themselves against the
tyranny of the International Bankster Gangsters and their New World Order agenda?
Excerpts from a presentation by historian David Irving from the late 1980s / early 90s in Germany in which he explains how
it was the British who started the aerial bombing and the targeting of civilians, and how it was Churchill, from the beginning,
who made it British policy, knowing full well that it was a war crime. The intent was to eventually force Hitler to retaliate
in kind. Hitler, himself, had always opposed the targeting of civilian populations, even long before the war. Moreover,
this was a deliberate policy of subverting Hitler’s attempts to make peace by instigating hatred of the Germans in
England. Irving provides some details of Hitler’s peace initiatives and terms. It is well documented that Hitler and
had always sought friendship with England. It was the British war mongers in Parliament, however, who long before 1939 had
been instigating for war. Statistics are also provided here which demonstrate how little damage was actually done to German
industry and military production as compared to the monstrous destruction of German cities and towns, resulting in heavy
Still more to follow on this topic!
It is widely believed to this day that the Germans instigated the aerial bombing campaign against
European and British cities, and thus “got what they deserved” in kind. Often cited are the German bombings of
Warsaw and Rotterdam. These two instances of bombings are not in dispute, however, the context must be considered. The details
are seldom discussed, and hence, little known. The rules of warfare must also be considered. The deliberate targeting of
civilians was indeed a “war crime”. The Hague conventions tolerated the bombing of cities IF they were under
military occupation (ie “defended”), which was the case with both Warsaw or Rotterdam.
The Hague Conventions for Land Warfare (which Germany was a signatory to) stated:
The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which
are not defended, is prohibited.
The Commander of an attacking
force, before commencing a bombardment, except in the case of an assault, should do all he can to warn the authorities.
In sieges and bombardments all necessary
steps should be taken to spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, and charity, hospitals, and
places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not used at the same time for military purposes.
The besieged should indicate these buildings or places by some particular and visible signs, which should
previously be notified to the assailants.
In the cases of both Warsaw and Rotterdam, the bombing was not intentionally
to target civilians. Indeed, Hitler had long campaigned against such actions in warfare and at the commencement of hostilities
with Poland, he gave explicit orders to the Luftwaffe to not target civilians, and they adhered strictly to this order.
In Warsaw, however, the Polish army retreated into the city and turned it into fortress. In essence, they took the city
and the population as a hostage. They were given several ultimatums to surrender, with reasonable time to do so, but they
refused. Flyers were also dropped from the air to warn civilians of the imminent danger. All prudent measures were taken.
While civilians indeed died, they were not intentionally targeted. The aim of the bombing was to force a surrender of the
Polish forces which were holed up there. That was not, according to the international law, a “war crime”.
Here, one may also question why Hitler felt compelled to attack Poland in the first place. I have covered this in numerous
past posts, however, to understand this fully, I recommend reading:
100 Documents on the Origin of the War (German White Book) pdf
The situation in Rotterdam was very similar. A group of Dutch resistance fighters
that fought at the Grebbeberg took refuge in Rotterdam. This eventually resulted in a German ultimatum that if the Grebbeberg
resistance did not cease, Rotterdam would be bombed. The resisters finally complied and the bombing raid was to called off
at the last minute. However, there was a communications problem. Ground flares intended to call off the attack were not
seen or by one of the inbound bomber formations and Rotterdam was thus inadvertently bombed. About 900 people died and 80,000
people became homeless as a result of ensuing fires which were NOT caused by incendiaries, but rather, by hazardous materials
stored on the ground. Mainstream history confirms that:
radioed to postpone the planned attack. When the message reached KG 54’s command post, the Kommodore, Oberst Walter
Lackner, was already approaching Rotterdam and his aircraft had reeled in their long-range aerials. Haze and smoke obscured
the target; to ensure that Dutch defences were hit Lackner brought his formation down to 2,300 ft (700 m). German forces
on the Noordereiland fired flares to prevent friendly fire — after three aircraft of the southern formation had
already unloaded, the remaining 24 from the southern bomber formation under Oberstleutnant Otto Höhne aborted their
attack. The larger formation came from the north-east, out of position to spot red flares launched from the south side of
the city, and proceeded with their attack. Fifty-four He 111s dropped low to release 97 tonnes (213,848 lb) of bombs, mostly
in the heart of the city.
Why the formation had not received the abort order sooner
remains controversial. Oberst Lackner of the largest formation claimed that his crews were unable to spot red flares due
to bad visibility caused by humidity and dense smoke of burning constructions and subsequently needed to decrease altitude
to 2,000 feet. But the red flare, which Lackner failed to see, might have also been used by the Germans to show their
location in the city to avoid friendly fire. An official German form designated red as the colour for that purpose.”
While the details of what actually happened versus what was supposed
to happen (or not happen) remain somewhat sketchy, it was clearly a military vs military attack, and not intended to deliberately
target the civilian population of Rotterdam. This, however, will inevitably beg the question “why did the Germans
invade peaceful, neutral Holland? Surely they had no right to do so!” This question must be answered with another
question. Why did the neutral Dutch permit the RAF to use its airspace to attack the German cities of the Ruhr Valley? Why
did they not defend their stated neutrality? The German White Book Nr.8 – The Sole Responsibility of England
for the Bombing War (1943) indicates numerous instances of British bombers attacking German cities in the Ruhr from the
direction of neutral Belgium and Holland. To my knowledge, this book is not available in an English translation.
Indeed, the British Expeditionary Force planned to attack Germany through these
countries, which were apparently not opposed, while still maintaining their declaration of neutrality. Germany was therefore
not obliged to respect their proclaimed neutrality in defence of its own sovereign territory.
It must also be noted that Germany did not bomb the city of Paris (or other major French cities). Why not? Because
the French declared them to be “free cities”. In other words not occupied by the French military
or “not defended”. Thus they and their cultural artifacts, architecture etc were protected and would not be bombed
by the Luftwaffe. That, however, did not dissuade the British and Americans from bombing Paris and other French cities later,
thereby destroying cultural artifacts and killing many thousands of French civilians in the name of “liberation”.
The British bombing of German cities started well before Churchill even became Prime Minister, on Sept.
5th, 1939 at Wilhelmshaven. Then resumed again with ferocious intensity in the Spring of 1940 and increased with the advent
of the unelected Churchill’s rise to power.
“On 3 September
1939 the French and British empires had declared war on Germany and England’s Royal Air Force began attacking German
warships along the German coast with the North Sea. The attacks by the Royal Air Force (RAF) on German cities began with
the attack on Wilhelmshaven on 5 September 1939. Eight months later, on the 9th of May 1940 began the German offensive in
the West. On the 11th of May the British Cabinet decided to unleash the Bomber Command on the air war against the German
hinterland. The following night British planes aimlessly dropped bombs for the first time on residential areas of Mönchengladbach-Rheydt.
And from then on made such attacks on cities in the Ruhr area night after night. Up to the 13th of May 1940, i.e. two days
later, the German side registered a total of 51 British air attacks on non-military targets plus 14 attacks on military targets
such as bridges, railway tracks, defense and industrial plants.The first carpet bombing of a German city was in the night
of the 15th to 16th of May 1940 in Duisburg. After that the RAF committed repeated air attacks on German cities. The night
of the 24th of August 1940 – bombs meant to be dropped on the Thameshaven oil storage depot and on the Short’s
factory at Rochester, by mistake or simply because they were randomly unloaded in order to escape fighters, fell on the
City of London and nine other districts inside the Greater London area. Incendiaries lit fires in Bethnal Green, and St.Giles’
Church in Cripplegate was damaged. Oxford Street department stores were damaged. Nine people were killed and 58 injured.
On the 25th of August 1940, British bombers attacked Berlin by night, and indeed not even to target important military targets,
because the Royal Airforce (RAF) was not even capable, having not developed any bomb-targeting devices. On the 6th to the
7th of September 1940, a German air raid on London took place – but specifically on military targets such as ports,
railway stations, war factories and power stations. Crews were expressly prohibited to drop their bombs on residential areas,
because thereby, no ‘war deciding’ successes could be expected.”
http://www.scribd.com/doc/87187334/Churchill-the-Warmonger-Started-the-Bombing-on-Cities-First (includes the German text, although I am still looking for the original source. I have contacted the person who posted
this for his assistance and am awaiting a reply. I will update this post if and when I receive the requested info).
Regarding England, the fact is, that Germany endured a solid 5 months of bombing of its cities and civilians
before responding in kind. The city of Coventry endured a mere 380 dead. While regrettable, that was absolutely minuscule
in comparison to the bombing of hundreds of German cities and towns, and the casualties which the German side endured by
this unprovoked, criminal British policy of targeting civilians.
For those who
read German, I also recommend reading:
ERICH KERN. Verbrechen am deutschen Volk. Eine Dokumentation
alliierter Grausamkeiten. 1964. VERLAG K. W. SCHÜTZ • GÖTTINGEN
[J4G Exclusive, courtesy of Mike Walsh] During World War Two more bombs by weight were
dropped on the city of Berlin than were released on the whole of Great Britain during the entire war. All German towns and
cities above 50,000 populations were from 50% to 80% destroyed. The great city of Dresden, dubbed the Florence of Northern
Europe, was incinerated. Up to 300,000 civilians lost their lives.
of Europe’s greatest and most beautiful cities, was torched. Genghis Khan would have exulted in the methodical razing
of an entire city and the destruction of its population. The only surviving building was the city’s cathedral. This
ecclesiastical wonder was saved not because of its spiritual symbolism. It survived only because it served the Royal Air
Force (RAF) and United States Air Force (USAF) as a bombing run marker.
By no stretch
of the imagination could such total destruction be written off as legitimate. Entire areas of Hamburg and other European
cities, that offered no war value, were similarly destroyed. Furthermore, such total destruction of infrastructure and innocent
lives cannot be dismissed by the ‘they started it first’ false argument. Nor can it be dismissed as
a tit-for-tat bombing. In this one German city alone, over just a few nights in July 1943, the number of dead exceeded
the entire military and civilian death toll of Britain during the war.
September 1941 conceded that just 2% of (British) real estate had been destroyed by German bombing. The article included
a note that commented on ‘the furious pace at speculators who were buying the bombed sites for a song’. This
situation remained largely unchanged until the end of the war. Germany never engaged in blanket or terror bombing, nor was
it Germany that dropped atomic bombs on two of Japan’s most beautiful cities. Cities that incidentally were the only
two Christian cities in Japan.
Hamburg. Operation Gomorrah. July 1943. Following
the RAF raids the volcanic flames were hurled 5,000 feet into the sky, four times the height of New York’s Empire
State Building. With the consequential gases, they rose as high again, and caused meteorological reaction high as the earth’s
Between 1940 and 1945, sixty-one German cities with a total population
of 25 million souls were destroyed or devastated in a bombing campaign initiated by the English government. Destruction on
this scale had no other purpose than the indiscriminate mass murder of as many German people as possible quite regardless
of their civilian status. One of the campaign’s main aims was to reduce the German population (genocide) and furthermore
reduce its capacity to become a trade rival to Britain. The bombing campaign led to Luftwaffe bombing of Britain in retaliation.
This resulted in 60,000 British civilians’ deaths and 86,000 injured.
MOST UNCIVILIZED FORM OF WARFARE
The eminent British war historian and
strategist, Captain Sir Basil Liddell Hart declared that through this strategy, victory had been achieved “through
practicing the most uncivilized means of warfare that the world had known since the Mongol invasions.” –
The Evolution of Warfare. Baber & Faber, 1946, p.75. “It was absolutely contrary to international law.”
– Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain. “The British Government would never resort to the deliberate attack
on women and children for the purposes of mere terrorism.” – Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain before he
was ousted as Prime Minister.
Winston Churchill’s enthusiasm for the deliberate
destruction of civilian populations could be traced back to his comment: “The air opened paths along which death
and terror could be carried far behind the lines of the actual enemy; to women, children, the aged, the sick, who in earlier
struggles would perforce have been left untouched.” – Winston Churchill, The Great War. Vol. 3 P1602.
The German chancellor, on the other hand, was repelled by the mere thought of targeting civilians. “The
construction of bombing airplanes would soon be abandoned as superfluous and ineffective if bombing as such were branded
as an illegal barbarity. If, through the Red Cross Convention, it definitely turned out possible to prevent the killing
of a defenseless wounded man or prisoner, then it ought to be equally possible, by analogous convention, and finally to
stop the bombing of equally defenseless civil populations.” – German Chancellor Adolf Hitler.
“Hitler only undertook the bombing of British civilian targets reluctantly three months after
the RAF had commenced bombing German civilian targets. Hitler would have been willing at any time to stop the slaughter.
Hitler was genuinely anxious to reach with Britain an agreement confining the action of aircraft to battle zones.”
– J. M Spaight. CB. CBE. Bombing Vindicated, p.47. Principal Secretary to the Air Ministry.
The first breach of international law: “This raid on the night of May 11 1940, although in itself
trivial, was an epoch-marking event since it was the first deliberate breach of the fundamental rule of civilized warfare
that hostilities must only be waged against the enemy combatant forces. Their flight marked the end of an epoch which had
lasted for two and one-half centuries.” – F. J. P Veale, Advance to Barbarism, p.172.
“The first ‘area’ air attack of the war was carried out by 134 British bombers on
the German city of Mannheim on the 16 December 1940. The object of this attack, as Air Chief Marshall Peirse later explained,
was, ‘to concentrate the maximum amount of damage in the center of the town,” – The Strategic Air
Offensive Against Germany. (H. M Stationery Office, London, 1961).
As early as 1953
H. M Stationery Office published the first volume of a work, The Royal Air Force, 1939 – 1945, The Fight at Odds. P.122
described as ‘officially commissioned and based throughout on official documents which had been read and approved
by the Air Ministry Historical Branch. Its author, Dennis Richards, reveals that: “If the Royal Air Force raided
the Ruhr, destroying oil plants with its most accurately placed bombs and urban property with those that went astray, the
outcry for retaliation against Britain might prove too strong for the German generals to resist. Indeed, Hitler himself would
probably lead the clamor. The attack on the Ruhr was therefore an informal invitation to the Luftwaffe to bomb London.”
“We began to bomb objectives on the German mainland before the Germans began to bomb objectives
on the British mainland.” – J. M. Spaight, CB. CBE. Principal Secretary to the Air Ministry.
“Because we were doubtful about the psychological effect of propagandist
distortion of the truth that it was we who started the strategic bombing offensive, we have shrunk from giving our great
decision of May 11 1940, the publicity it deserves.” – Bombing Vindicated. J.M. Spaight, CB. CBE. Principal
Secretary to the Air Ministry.
“Air Marshall Tedder made every effort
to be a worthy pupil of his superior, Prime Minister Winston Churchill. The Marshall told high British officers that Germany
had lost the war because she had not followed the principle of total warfare.” – New York Times, January
“Retaliation was certain if we carried the war into Germany…
there was a reasonable possibility that our capital and industrial centers would not have been attacked if we had continued
to refrain from attacking those of Germany.” – J. M. Spaight, CB. CBE. Principal Secretary to the Air Ministry.
“The primary purpose of these raids was to goad the Germans into undertaking reprisal raids of
a similar character on Britain. Such raids would arouse intense indignation in Britain against Germany and so create a war
psychosis without which it would be impossible to carry on a modern war.” – Dennis Richards, the Royal Air
Force 1939 – 1945. The Fight at Odds. H. M Stationery Office.
gave Coventry and Birmingham, Sheffield and Southampton, the right to look Kiev and Kharkov, Stalingrad and Sevastopol, in
the face. Our Soviet allies would be less critical of our inactivity if they had understood what we had done.”
– J. M. Spaight, CB. CBE. Principal Secretary to the Air Ministry.
TRUTH HIDDEN FROM THE BRITISH PUBLIC
“It is one of the greatest
triumphs of modern emotional engineering that, in spite of the plain facts of the case which could never be disguised or
even materially distorted, the British public, throughout the Blitz Period (1940 – 1941), remained convinced that the
entire responsibility for their sufferings it was undergoing rested on the German leaders.”
“Too high praise cannot, therefore, be lavished on the British emotional engineers for the infinite
skill with which the public mind was conditioned prior to and during a period of unparalleled strain.” –
Advance to Barbarism, P. 168. Mitre Press, London. F. J. P Veale, British Jurist.
bombing of the English city Coventry, a city with a manufacturing base is often claimed to be ‘our Dresden’.
It is difficult to imagine a more ignorant riposte. “The inhabitants of Coventry, for example, continued to imagine
that their sufferings were due to the innate villainy of Adolf Hitler without a suspicion that a decision, splendid or otherwise,
of the British War Cabinet, was the decisive factor in the case.” – F. J. P Veale. Advance to Barbarism,
“One of the most unhealthy features of the bombing offensive was
that the War Cabinet – and in particular the Secretary for Air, Archibald Sinclair (later Lord Thurso), felt it necessary
to repudiate publicly the orders which they themselves had given to Bomber Command.” – R. H. S Crosman.
Labor Minister of Housing. Sunday Telegraph, October 1 1961.
bombing now part of our policy? Why is it that the people of this country who are supposed to be responsible for what is
going on, are the only people who may not know what is being done in their name?”
“On the other hand, if terror bombing be part of our policy, why was this statement put out at all? I
think we shall live to rue the day we did this, and that it (he bombing of Dresden) will stand for all time as a blot on
our escutcheon.” – Richard Stokes, MP.
This Member of Parliament
was referring to the Associated Press Correspondent of Supreme Allied Headquarters in Paris. This had gloated. “This
unprecedented assault in daylight on the refugee-crowded capital, fleeing from the Soviet Red Army tide in the East. The
report had been widely broadcast in America, and by Paris Radio. It was suppressed in Britain for fear of public revulsion.”
“Thus, in a minute dated 28 February 1943, Sir Archibald Sinclair explained to Sir Charles Portal,
Chief of the Air Staff, that it was necessary to stifle all public discussion on the subject because if the truth had been
disclosed in response to the inquiries being made by influential political and religious leaders, their inevitable condemnation
would impair the morale of the bomber crews and consequently their bombing efficiency.” – F. J. P Veale,
Advance to Barbarism, p.29.
WORKING CLASS TARGETED FOR HIGH KILL RATIOS
“The third and last phase of the British air offensive against Germany began in March 1942 with
the adoption of the Lindemann Plan by the British War Cabinet, and continued with undiminished ferocity until the end of
the war in May, 1945.
The bombing during this period was not, as the Germans
complained, indiscriminate. On the contrary. It was concentrated on working class houses because, as Professor Lindemann
maintained, a higher percentage of bloodshed per ton of explosives dropped could be expected from bombing houses built close
together, rather than by bombing higher class houses surrounded by gardens.” – Advance to Barbarism, F.
J. P Veale, British Author and Jurist.
SLAYING IN THE NAME OF THE LORD
“I am in full agreement (of terror bombing). I am all for the bombing of working class areas
in German cities. I am a Cromwellian – I believe in ‘slaying in the name of the Lord!” – Sir.
Archibald Sinclair, British RAF Secretary for Air.
WOMEN AND CHILDREN TO
BE SLAIN AS A PRIORITY
“They (the British Air Chiefs) argued
that the desired result, of reducing German industrial production, would be more readily achieved if the homes of the workers
in the factories were destroyed; if the workers were kept busy arranging for the burial of their wives and children, output
might reasonably be expected to fall.” – Advance to Barbarism, F. J. P Veale; Distinguished British Jurist.
Mike Walsh, a journalist, author and researcher has studied
and published his books on the political history of the 20th Century for over 40 years. In addition, he has contributed hundreds
of articles to international media. An Irish citizen of considerable revolutionary pedigree, Michael Walsh has an international
reputation also as a poet.
Currently he has published
four titles covering the vexed questions of the Reich and World War Two. These best-selling books are available on Amazon
Books and Kindle. “Heroes of the Reich”, “The All Lies Invasion”, “Heroes Hang When Traitors
Triumph”, and “Thus Sprach der Fuhrer”. Further titles will follow in 2015 and 2016.
The Reich catapulted otherwise quite ordinary people into international acclaim. HEROES OF
THE REICH is neither a military nor political history of the men and woman of many nations who gave their loyalty and in
many cases their lives to the Führer’s Reich. HEROES OF THE REICH reveals the true accounts of political and
military icons, fabulous artistes, great musicians, the ordinary people who withstood to their deaths the overwhelming onslaught
of the combined forces of the British, Soviet and American Empires. HEROES OF THE REICH marks 82 years since the German
leader, Adolf Hitler was elected, 70 years since the end of the Reich. Hitler’s triumph was that he alone laid claim
to be the only true democrat in the War of the Dictators. Soviet leader Joe Stalin, a Georgian, was never elected. Nor was
half-American British Premier Winston Churchill. Whilst U.S. President Roosevelt was narrowly elected, it was afterwards
conceded that it was his empty promise not to involve the American people in another European war that achieved his ‘victory.’
Order at Amazon
WW2: Soviets dressed as Germans killing people & Faked Photos – Stalin’s Order # 0428: the ‘Torch-Men-Order’
is a really excellent article. This guy takes a close look at photos from WW2 and shows you real ones and faked ones. This
collection of real and fake photos is the best I’ve seen from WW2. I hope we can get more such studies to look
It becomes clear that certain photos have been used and modified. One that really stands out for me as nonsensical
is the one of them about to hang the guy from a German tank’s gun. Why would you use an important and expensive piece
of equipment for such a trivial purpose? If you are going to hang someone, just hang from from a nearby tree. Why a tank?
What if you damaged your weapon? It is a precision weapon. The last thing you’d want to mess with is the gun which
is what’s keeping you alive.
The mention of removing the background to hide the location is an important point. I’ve read that
the CIA can take almost any photograph and tell you where it was taken – simply by analysing shadows, etc.
It is important
to see the points of how these guys were faking it as Germans, while using Jewish communist techniques of execution.
A very important point also is this: Since this is 1941, why would the Germans destroy infrastructure that they will
benefit from? It is clear that throughout the time that the Germans advanced, that it was the Soviets who were using scorched
earth tactics. In fact, the Russians used scorched earth tactics against Napoleon. In Wikipedia we read:
Grande Armée was a very large force, numbering 680,000 soldiers (including 300,000 of French departments).
It was the largest army ever assembled in the history of warfare up to that point. Through a series of long marches Napoleon pushed the army rapidly through Western Russia in an attempt to bring the Russian army to battle, winning a number of minor engagements and a major battle at Smolensk in August. Napoleon hoped the battle would win the war for him, but the Russian army slipped away and continued the retreat,
leaving Smolensk to burn. French plans to quarter at Smolensk were abandoned, and Napoleon pressed his army on after the Russians.As the Russian army fell back, the Cossacks applied scorched-earth tactics, burning down villages, towns and crops and forcing the French to rely on a supply system that was incapable of
feeding the large army in the field.
even in Napoleon’s day the Russians were using scorched earth tactics against the invaders. In fact the Russians even
set fire to their capital Moscow! That’s how determined they were.
So switching to WW2, it is totally consistent
that ALL scorched earth tactics used during the time of the German advance had to have come from the Soviets.
NB: Note also the
cremation photo that was faked. That relates to the so-called Jewish holocaust! All nonsense – and we’ll get
to that topic more closely. Jan]
Here’s the excellent article:-
# 0428 – the ‘Torch-Men-Order’
Many ask, “How can [so-called] ‘Holocaust Deniers’ and Revisionists, deny
the photographic evidence of German Soldiers killing civilians?”
The so-called, proof in pictures.
What is Order #0428
– commonly known as?
[now confirmed by todays Russian Government]
Stalins Order #0428,
commanded on the 17th November 1941, declared that Partisans wearing German uniforms, particularly those of the Waffen-SS,
were to destroy all settlements within a swathe of about 40 – 60 km depth from the main battle lines and to ruthlessly
kill the civilian population. With these tactics it was important to leave a few survivors, who would report the supposed
This method of warfare was also confirmed
by German soldiers who captured many Russian Partisans wearing German uniforms.
Almost daily, reports were being issued by the
media, that the German forces advanced with the declared politics and aim of a “scorched earth” approach, which
devastated the vast Russian lands in the most horrific way.
the logical fact that no invader destroys the very infrastructure necessary for his advancement in an occupied territory,
Germany’s Program, called “Ostacker Programm” (Eastern fields program) was designed to restore the devastated
(Archive Series 429, Rolle 461, General’s Headquarters of the Army, Division, foreign Units East II H 3/70
Fr 6439568. Filed: National Archive Washington)
[in progress] “Fackelmänner
Befehl” (torch men-order) confirmed.
Russian Security Service FSB published Stalin’s order No. 0428, as
‘Deutsche Greueltaten’ – translation – ‘German Atrocities’
“All settlements, in which German troops are found,
up to a depth of 40 – 60km from the main lines of battle, are to be destroyed and set on fire, also 20-30km from the
roads. For the destruction of the settled areas in the required radius, the air force will be made available, also artillery
and rocket-launchers will be used extensively, as well as intelligence units, skiers and Partisan divisions, who are equipped
with bottles with flammable liquid. These hunting expeditions in their activities of destruction are to be dressed to the
greatest extent in German soldier’s uniforms and uniforms of the Waffen-SS looted from the German army.
ignite hatred toward all fascist occupiers and make the conscription of partisans from the outlaying areas of fascist territories
easier. It is important to have survivors who will tell about “German atrocities”. For this purpose every regiment
is to form hunter-units of about 20- 30 men strong with the task to detonate and incinerate the villages. We have to select
brave fighters for this action of destruction of settled areas. These men will be especially recommended to receive bravery
awards when working in German uniforms behind enemy lines and destroying those settlement outposts. Among the population
we have to spread the rumor that the Germans are burning the villages in order to punish the Partisans.”
If the Jewish Bolsheviks
were purposely sacrificing people in these ways, to create anti-German propaganda, there is no doubt they would have photographed
these horrors, to drive the message home.
No doubt, from this time originate
the “famous” atrocity Photos of mass-executions which are the favourites in the press.
Furthermore, this does not align with the Official ‘Holocaust’ narrative, of the Germans going
to great extent to conceal their crimes by burning records and millions of bodies, which is one of the excuses as to why
the Allies could not find any evidence to the purported mass gassings of internees. The ‘Official’ narrative
would have us believe that the Germans (in the middle of war) hunted through millions of documents to dispose of records
by burning them, but leave hundreds of incriminating photographs accessible for the world to see?
Additionally, the single shot to the back of
the neck/head, was the method and training of the Cheka and NKVD, for singular executions.
fear and hate hysteria created from imagery, was not just limited to performing in front of the camera… simply manipulating
the imagery by superimposing over innocent photo’s for the desired effect, was also utilised… here is just
a small example of many.
The deliberate sinking of this refugee ship filled with innocent german women and children remains not
only the worst nautical disaster in world history but one of the most heartless and sadistic war crimes ever committed.
For millions of Germans cut off on the Baltic coast by the rapid Red Army advance, only one avenue of escape
remained open - the sea. Even here, however, Soviet aircraft controlled the skies above and submarines prowled
unseen below. In the various ports along the coast, thousands upon thousands of ragged, frozen refugees pressed to the water’s
edge in hopes of landing a spot on one of the few vessels available.
The numbers were so great and the fear so consuming that efforts to
board when ships did dock often resembled riots.
“The crush to get on board was just terrible,” a witness wrote from
Pillau. “I saw a pram being squeezed out of all recognition by the pushing masses. One old man fell into the water
and there was nothing one could do in the crush—also it was so cold he would have died on hitting the water.”
Because armed guards had orders to evacuate as many women and children as possible, babies were used like tickets,
with half-crazed mothers tossing infants down to relatives on the pier. Some
children landed safely; some did not.
If anything, the situation at Gotenhafen was even more horrific. As the Wilhelm Gustloff
made ready to take on passengers in late January 1945, the ship’s crew was stunned by what they saw. “There must
have been 60,000 people on the docks . . . ,” remembered second engineer, Walter Knust. “[A]s soon as we let
down the gangways people raced forward and pushed their way in. In the confusion a lot of children got separated from their
parents. Either the kids got on board leaving their parents on the harbor or the children were left behind as their parents
got pushed forward by the throng.”
A former cruise liner designed to accommodate two thousand passengers and crew, by the time
the Gustloff cast ropes on January 30, the beautiful white ship had taken on as many as eight thousand refugees. Even so,
as she backed away from port, her path was blocked by smaller craft jammed with people.
“Take us with you,” the refugees
cried. “Save the children!”
“We put down nets and everybody on the small ships scrambled up as best they could,”
said the Gustloff ’s radio operator, Rudi Lange. “As we got under way I think I remember being told by one of
the ship’s officers to send a signal that another 2,000 people had come aboard.”
That black, stormy night, as she struggled through
high winds and heavy, ice-filled waves, the Gustloff ’s ventilation and plumbing systems failed utterly. Strained
far beyond its limits, the tightly-sealed ship filled with a hot, nauseating stench of urine, excrement, and vomit. The
groans and screams of severely wounded soldiers and the wails of separated families added to the ghastly horror. But the
worst was yet to come. At approximately 9 p.m., three heavy jolts rocked the passengers on the Gustloff.
what it sounded like,” recalled a young boy upon hearing the torpedoes.
“I heard [the] explosions,” wrote engineer Knust, “and
I knew what had happened at once, because the engines stopped and then I saw a rush of water through the engine room. First
the ship lurched to starboard under the force of the blast. Then she rose and began listing to port. I put on my shoes and
jacket and hurried out into the corridor.”
Panic-stricken, thousands below deck stampeded through the narrow passageways
crushing and clawing others in an attempt to reach the life boats. “People were rushing about and screaming. Alarm
bells shrilled,” remembered one terrorized passenger.
“We struggled through the crowd to one of the boats,”
said Paula Knust, wife of the ship’s officer. “It was so cold as the wind hit us. I was wearing only slacks
and a blouse and blazer. Already the ship had a heavy list. The waves seemed very high, and you cannot imagine how terrible
Most lifeboats were frozen solid and even those that could be freed were mishandled in the panic and spilled their
screaming occupants into the black sea. Walter and Paula Knust grappled with one boat that did manage to get away. “As
we hit the water,” the husband recalled, “I could see people leaping from the side of the ship into the sea.
I thought those who escaped drowning would freeze to death. It was so cold.” Indeed, the water was so frigid that
those who leaped overboard might just as well have jumped into boiling oil or acid for their chances of survival were almost
as slim. In seconds, minutes at most, the struggling swimmers were dead.
While loud speakers blared words of comfort—“The ship
will not sink. Rescue ships are on the way”—thousands of freezing people pressed along the decks. Convinced
that the sealed bulkheads had held and that indeed, the ship would not sink, many passengers fled indoors once more to escape
the razor sharp winds and –20 degree temperature. The respite proved brief, however.
At ten o’clock a heavy tremor ripped the
Gustloff as the bulkheads broke and the sea rushed in. Within seconds, the big ship began to roll on its side. Sixteen-year-old
Eva Luck was in the ballroom with her mother and little sister:
[S]uddenly the whole music room tilted and a great cry went up from
all the people there. They literally slid in a heap along the angled deck. A grand piano at one end went berserk and rolled
across the crowded room crushing women and children in its path and scattering others before it. Finally it smashed into
the port bulkhead with a discordant roar as though a giant fist had hit all the keys at once.
Elsewhere, other victims went flying through
glass enclosed decks into the sea. Amid the screams, sirens and roar of rushing water, gunshots sounded throughout the doomed
ship as those trapped below committed suicide.
Miraculously escaping the ball room with the help of a sailor, Eva Luck’s
family frantically tried to escape:
My mother had forgotten to put her shoes on, and I moved clumsily on high heels towards the
iron rungs of the ladder going up the ship’s inside. People around us were falling about as the ship moved but I was
able to grasp the rungs and haul up my little sister. . . . My mother followed us to the upper deck. When we got there it
was terrible. I saw with horror that the funnel was lying almost parallel with the sea. People were jumping in. I could
hear the ship’s siren and felt the ice-cold water round my legs. I reached out to try and grab my sister. I felt nothing
but the water as it swept me out and over the side.
Fortunately for Eva and a few others, the force of the flooding water freed
a number of life rafts. As survivors scrambled aboard, the Gustloff began her swift descent. “Suddenly,” remembered
a woman in a lifeboat, “it seemed that every light in the ship had come on. The whole ship was blazing with lights,
and her sirens sounded out over the sea.”
Paula Knust also watched the drama:
I cannot forget the loud clear sound of the siren
as the Gustloff with all her lights on made the final plunge. I could clearly see the people still on board the Gustloff
clinging to the rails. Even as she went under they were still hanging on and screaming. All around us were people swimming,
or just floating in the sea. I can still see their hands grasping at the sides of our boat. It was too full to take on any
rescue ships later reached the scene, they pulled from the icy waters a mere nine hundred survivors. All else—an estimated
8,000-9,000 men, women and children—were lost.
Even then, however, the nightmare did not end. When rescue vessels touched
land, scores of victims were disembarked at Gotenhafen. Thus, in less than twenty-four hours, after a harrowing night of
incredible terror, some refugees found themselves on the very docks they had hoped to leave, once again searching desperately
for a way to escape to approaching Red Army.