|
![]() |
|
|
[11] Posted by neptune3 07-15-2003, 11:18 PM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 03:55:46 GMT, Ernest <deadly0711@hotmail.com>
wrote: > >Hitler gathered together people who would do anything he said >and then gave them instructions to do what he wanted. Hitler >then used them to create the environment that would allow them >to operate freely. Anyone who did not do as they were told Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin, on December 10, 1940: "In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and, as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.' By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of the 'freedom of the press.' In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties. The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected people' actually form a community which operates and controls all these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich Britain.' She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means! In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs, and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves? It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times - only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise, the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them. To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say: 'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'? It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case in other countries. They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is another matter. The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace. On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible for idle drones to inhabit this country. I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our problems. To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We, too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated. When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers, technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though we have no gold, we have capacity for work. The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work. My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work. We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy. Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable. German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic. My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.' Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the blessing which work brings. Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the world's goods. We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime. In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of Germany... One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today a state with a different economic and political orientation from that of the Western democracies. Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel. It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure - the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone. It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact. They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.' And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully, because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have wrought enormous changes. I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good, excellent; my dividends are splendid.' However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we mean. You jeopardize liberty.' Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76, 80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry. Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove victorious, this sort of thing will stop.' They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the National Socialist state will intervene. To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey. They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2 o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled profiteering and even bribery. In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence. They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks. For the first time in German history, we have a state which has absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader! It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing the best among the people for every position. We have Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces. Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we are building up our life for the future. As you know we have countless schools, national political educational establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men, farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest posts.... Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact. On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold. It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and the whole world system will be overthrown.' I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State. These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb. Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But they have made a great mistake. If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the others. I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest wish to rearm. For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the case in England. The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ... www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com |
|
|
| Sponsored Links | ||
|
|
|
[12] Posted by neptune3 07-15-2003, 11:27 PM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 00:39:19 GMT, Ernest <deadly0711@hotmail.com>
wrote: > >They knew he did not like Jews Gypsies etc, but most >thought he would just have them shipped out of the >country not killed etc. Auschwitz was occupied by the Communists on January 27,1945. They made reports about what they claim to have found. These initial reports had not yet been adapted to allied propaganda. The reports were published on February 1 and 2, 1945 in the Soviet propaganda organ Pravda. Here are some things it said: "the Germans in Auschwitz began to remove the traces of their crimes" "They leveled the burial grounds." "They removed and destroyed all traces of the electric conveyer system, where hundreds of people at one time were electrocuted." "The stationary gas chambers in the east side of the camp were remodeled." "This huge death mill was equipped with the latest style of fascist technology..." The Communists did not even claim to have seen any killing machines or rooms. Supposedly it was all destroyed or remodelled. The did not allow the other allies to enter the camp, and they did not supply any pictures or blueprints or any physical evidence. Nevertheless, the United Press correspondent, Henry Shapiro, obediantly echoed the Soviets story. The Soviets said that the Auschwitz complex was entirely a "murder machine". There was not a single word to indicate that the camp was part of the German armament industies, as we now know it clearly was. Even if the Germans had "leveled" the alleged huge grave pits the bodies would still be present. However anyone familiar with the matter knows that in Auschwitz no large grave sites were ever found. The Communists did not allow any inspection of the camps by foreign observers for many months afterwards and their claims conflict with what "holocaust experts" say today. Today the experts all talk of gas chambers is Birkenau, a part of the camp far to the west. This is much different from where the Communists initially claimed that they were. The Communists said the gas chambers were "remodelled", while today the experts say the gas chambers were completely destroyed. The Communists said the gas chambers were made to look like "harmless garages". But they did not supply a single photo of one. The initial Communist reports also do not mention things that are now claimed to have been there. There is no mention of a pile of eyeglasses, or hair, or shoes. There is no mention of underground gas chambers. There is no mention of "farmhouses" remodelled to be gas chambers. There is no mention of the rivers clogged with human ashes. Today the experts are forced to admit that there were no gas chambers in Germany. We are now told that "gassing" and "extermination" camps were located exclusively in what is now Poland, in areas captured by the Soviet Red Army and made off-limits to western investigators. Today tourists can go to Auschwitz and be shown a "gas chamber". This is admitted by the experts not to be genuine. Brian Harmon <harmon@msg.ucsf.edu> wrote in article <080620000051136373%harmon@msg.ucsf.edu>... "You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V. Krema I is a reconstruction, this has never been a secret. Kremas II-V are in their demolished state as they were left." Charles Don Hall <cdhall-nospam@erols.com> wrote in article <8F4CB71B7NukuNuku@news.erols.com>... "Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to deceive. "The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So it would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully admit that it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy." www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com |
|
|
|
[13] Posted by neptune3 07-15-2003, 11:32 PM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:51:21 +1000, "Bevan" <Bevan2003@hotmail.com>
wrote: > >A couple of years ago I researched Hitler for a story I was writing. >Here are a few of my findings. > >1. There wasn't anything altogether abnormal about Hitler's upbringing >considering the era. > >2. Hitler was loved by his mother and treated harshly by his father. > >3. His mother, a devout Catholic took Hitler to church regularly. >Hitler later had ideas about joining a Monastery, but instead wanted to >become a famous artist. > >4. Hitler only had one good friend who later said that Hitler used perform >speeches to him. > >5. Hitler was a sickly child and because of his illnesses managed to avoid >conscription. > >6. It seems that Hitler underwent a profound change in his early twenties. >This change would suggest the onset of schizophrenia. > >7.On the onset of WW1 Hitler enlisted in the Army. During the war he managed >to survive as a messenger when the average life of a messenger was only a >day. Subsequently he was awarded two Iron Crosses. > >8. At the end of WW1 a combination of ingredients allowed the proliferation >of a vocal, highly decorated madman. Without one off those ingredients >Hitler probably would have ended up in a Lunatic Asylum. Here are some quotes from a German pamphlet titled "Why the Aryan Law?": "In 1793 the famous philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, author of "Speeches to the German Nation," wrote a pamphlet titled "A Contribution to Correcting Judgments about the French Revolution." It contained the following significant sentence: "In nearly all the nations of Europe, a powerful, hostile government is growing, and is at war with all the others, and sometimes oppresses the people in dreadful ways: It is Jewry!" The French Revolution, with its "ideas for the improvement of humanity" thundered past, and in the noise the people who had believed in world brotherhood entirely missed this serious warning. What Fichte warned the word about then has today become fact in nearly all the nations of the world. The Jewish people, once only tolerated, knew how to raise a hue and cry about discrimination and persecution, winning the sympathy of the world for the "poor Jews." They increasingly infiltrated deep within our national organism, growing to have power over every single area of our national life. The old saga, the "Edda," observes that one blocks a river at its source. The failure to do that was the great mistake of the German people. Thank God, it is not too late. Our Fuehrer Adolf Hitler recognized the importance of the problem for Germany's rebirth, and outlined its solution in his program. Martin Luther wrote this of the Jews in his book "The Jews and their Lies": "They hold we Christians captive in our own land. They have seized our goods by their cursed usury, they mock and insult us because we work. They are our lords, and we and our goods belong to them." If in the coming days the Jewish race is driven out of the non-Jewish world, it will have at least this consolation: It has made clear to them for all time the value of maintaining the purity of race and blood in clear, understandable and unforgettable ways. National Socialist racial legislation has reduced the influence of Jewry in all professions, and above all excluded them from the leading offices of the nation. That is an important step in the relationship between Germans and Jews, but one cannot ignore the fact that we have not yet fully eliminated the influence of the Jewish foreign body in German national life. It is not a question of German-Jewish coexistence, rather of making as great as possible a separation between blood and blood. Three things are involved here: A knowledge of the basic principles of National Socialist racial thinking, An understanding of the growth and expansion of Jewry, The dominant sociological position of Jewry, to show how it dominated the German people economically, intellectually and politically..." "In discussing the Jewish Question, even today one encounters resistance and misunderstandings, especially in intellectual circles. This can only be explained by the intellectual education of the political past. This is especially evident when one discusses the fundamental issues. Whenever a new thought arises in the world and calls people to practical action, the old world resists because it feels its foundations threatened. Its old standpoint has ruled for decades, and it looks uncomprehendingly at a new idea that does not fit into the accustomed patterns of thinking. That is natural. When the new idea and worldview are truly revolutionary, they are on a different level of human thought and feeling, and there can be no compromise. Its realization depends on people who support it, and who are ready to fight to transform the life of the individual and of the nation in every way..." "In the long run, no idea is better suited to guarantee peace between nations than National Socialist racial thinking, which calls for the furtherance and maintenance of one's own race and one's own people, and supports similar efforts on the part of other nations..." "The new Germany that views its own race and ethnicity positively must therefore distinguish within its territory between one race and another, between one people and another. Mixing of blood harms both sides. Race is an issue for every people if they are to live according to their nature. The German people is not so arrogant as to believe that is is the chosen people. The familiar quotation from Geibel, "The world should enjoy German ways," should be understood in the context of the dreams of world betterment of those past days. The National Socialist racial viewpoint has clear consequences for the relationship between Germans and Jews. People have often said that National Socialism's approach to the racial question is purely negative and destructive, and that its essential characteristic is radical anti-Semitism. One must grant that we made the Jewish question clearer than anyone else, and taught an entire generation that had been taught to see all people the same to recognize the importance of the Jewish question not only for our people, but for the entire world. Our treatment of the Jewish problem in the years before we took power must be seen as the political education of the German people, which had lost its racial instincts to a dangerous degree. The question took on its own nature in Germany, Many citizens had their eyes opened, and the simultaneous appeal to all the heroic and manly virtues of the German man resulted in a racial selection of political fighters who today stand at the head of the new state. Formerly, the Jewish question, as seen by the state, was a matter of complete equality and the unhindered immigration of Jews from the East. This is the best proof of how racial feeling and consciousness had been lost. Our tone was not purely negative or the simple rejection of others, rather the emphasis was on the positive values of our own people. This does require noting that Jewry through its Marxist class struggle leadership role and its international financial measures aimed at Germany supported every kind of anti-national action in the cultural and political fields. Jewry should not complain if its anti-German activities, which have no counterpart in any other country, call forth from the people the defensive reaction of anti-Semitism. The starting point of the discussion is the scientific fact that the Jew is different than the German. This is neither arrogant nor boastful, it simply is the way things are. For us, the Jewish question is a question between two peoples. Its characteristics are determined by the racially determined differences between the two, and through the unusual sociological and numerical development of Jewry in the course of its history, developments that are particularly evident in the last decades through a constantly growing process of foreign infiltration that has reached an intolerable level for the German people. More than once over its history, the German people has absorbed foreign elements, but they were racially identical or similar population groups, as for example was the case with the Huguenots. With the Jews, things are fundamentally different. They are seen everywhere as foreigners, and see themselves that way as well. Walter Rathenau said it most clearly as early as 1897: "How strange! In the middle of German life there is a separate, foreign tribe that stands out in every way with its hot-tempered behavior. An Asiatic horde has settled on the sands of Mark Brandenburg." Einstein said something in 1931: "I have to laugh when I hear the phrase 'German citizen of the Jewish faith.' These citizens first of all want nothing to do with my poor Eastern European brothers, and second do not want to be sons of my (Jewish) people, but only members of the Jewish cultural community. Is that honest? Can a non-Jew respect such people? I am not a German citizen. I am a Jew, and am happy to belong to the Jewish people." The most remarkable thing about Jewry is that it has not disappeared over the millennia, even though it lacks its own territory and language. Even more remarkable is that it lacks the main characteristic of a minority population, its own pockets of settlement to which it could if necessary retreat. Only time will tell if Palestine will someday fill this gap. That question is made more difficult by the fact that the Arabs maintain their claim on Palestine. Whatever the twists of history, the Jew has always remained the same, whether as a grain speculator in ancient Rome or as a bank or stock exchange potentate in the modern era. They were always able to control the wealth of whole nations. Nations and peoples once their contemporaries have vanished, leaving only words and crumbled monuments behind; only the Jew remains. In ancient days we see him carrying on his business in the trading centers of the Mediterranean. In the Middle Ages he provided money for German nobles and free cities. Today he rules the banks and stock exchanges of the whole world, forcing the nations under the yoke of financial capitalism. The power of this people of 15 million rests on these international relations. This is how they seem to fulfill the commandment of Jehovah - the world domination of the chosen people. The secret of the Jewish people, which has enabled them to survive through all of history's twists and turns, is that it has always recognized the laws of blood, even anchoring them in the laws of its religion. The consciousness of blood and family that believing Jews have has been stronger than all the other forces of history, giving us a unique example of a people without its own land and language, which still meets the criteria for being a people, and which has outlasted many other peoples. This historic manifestation of Jewry, which is unique, brings to the fore the question of the relationship between the host and guest peoples. It has been answered in differing ways throughout history, depending on the worldview and thinking then predominant. Since the Jews were dispersed they have been held together by the laws of their religion and their faith that they were the chosen people. Until the middle of the 18th Century, Germans and Jews lived apart from each other. The Jews had no opportunity to become involved in the religious of political-intellectual life of their host people. On the other hand, they could practice their own customs without interference. They had their own religion and their own laws. During the Middle Ages, the Ghetto was the way Jewry could maintain itself in the midst of other peoples and fulfill its Jewish duties, which grew out of its race, origins and laws. The values and ideals of other peoples were not affected. This separation was only possible because the views of the host people were as strong as those of the Jews. According to the writer Grau: "There was no racial defilement or baptism, no attempt to join a nation that one could never be a member of, and no attempt to intellectually silence the host people." In the Ghetto of the Middle Ages, the Jew developed his nature and characteristics, which were later to become significant, while maintaining the community of blood and race. The latter is particularly important, since the strict physical separation between the host and guest peoples maintained the foreign nature that we daily see so clearly, now that the barriers between have long since fallen. Even in the Middle Ages, the most important thing was not the difference between the Christian and Mosaic faiths. Rather, there was on the one hand the natural sense that the Jew was of a foreign race, and on the other hand the strict law of blood which demanded a clear separation if the Jews were to fulfill Jehovah's mission, which had guided them from the beginning. Just this has always been kept in the background by historians, who present the Ghetto as a tolerated asylum for Jewish martyrs persecuted on account of their faith. There is a gap to be filled here. The task of historians writing from our new viewpoint will be to examine the portrait of the Ghetto of the Middle Ages to discover its importance for the development of Jewry and the relationship between the guest and host peoples. Even the Jewish side is demanding that. O. Karbach criticizes historical writing because it "in significant ways conceals the historical fact that the Jews in the centuries before their emancipation possessed a legal standing that was better than the greater part of the rest of the population, namely complete or partial agricultural freedom. (Ordnung in der Judenfrage, edited by E. Czermak, Reinhold, Vienna, 1933). The barriers between Germans and Jews fell as a result of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. The path to Jewish world domination would take a different direction than pious, observant Jews had expected. Emancipation made it possible to build Jewish dominance through secular means. With the disappearance of racial consciousness, only religious differences seemed to remain. It seemed at the time unjust to give someone a preferred position only because of his religious beliefs, which are an entirely personal matter. At the time, this was tied to a belief in human equality and freedom. It was revolutionary. It shattered the church dogmas that had ruled for centuries and was the foundation of liberal thinking during the last two hundred years. The new goal was humanity itself, and nothing stood in the way of racial mixing. Some had the quiet hope that assimilation would mean the absorption of Jewry. Jewry itself, however, was more than willing to use the opportunities of religious assimilation, which opened the path to all important positions, even to political leadership. As H. Heine said, "baptism was the ticket to European culture." Gradually, an intermixing with the German people developed, particularly in its cultural elite. Foreign blood infiltrated to a degree that we realize only today now that the "Law to Reestablish a Professional Bureaucracy" has exposed numerous sources of foreign blood. This process has greatly accelerated during the last fourteen years. Today the age of raceless thinking is being displaced by the ideals of human variability. Values are rooted in origin and territory, and each group has a historic mission based on its own unique and eternal values. Such new racial thinking will of course secure the opposition of those who either through faith or reason still believe in the unity of humanity in culture, social order and organization. The Jews will naturally oppose any discussion of race, since the denial of any significant differences between people is the foundation of his infiltration of Western European society. The Jew finds any mention of the racial question as an attack on his current existence. His leading role in every anti-national area is characteristic of his mimicry, and is necessary for his continued existence. That explains the phrase "German citizen of the Jewish faith." The recognition that the Jew is of a foreign and different race along with the reawakening of German racial consciousness must necessarily lead to a change in the relations between Germans and Jews. There is one point to keep in mind before examining the statistics. Only those people who claimed to be Jews and were members of the Mosaic faith were counted as Jews, not those who for internal or external reasons belonged to another religion, or those who claimed to be dissident Jews and therefore did not belong to the standard groups. This is regrettable for our purposes, since we are interested not in the influence of those who still claimed the Jewish religion, rather those who belonged to the Jewish race! That includes all Jews, whether of the Mosaic faith or baptized Christians. That is just what the supporters of the Talmud and the Old Testament always said. They complained that the state opened all offices to those "without character," to "Christmas Jews," even admitting them to the officer corps! The statistics given here must therefore be increased significantly. The Jews are a race, and baptism does not in any way change the foreign characteristics that are hostile to the German people..." Of course, the intellectual atmosphere that enabled the Jew to infiltrate the German body politic quickly led the Jew himself to see that conditions for his advancement were favorable, and that the way to the top was open. He also realized what the population statistics meant, indeed they were particularly clear to him, since 2/3 of his kind lived in the big cities, the centers of the liberal worldview..." "Nothing shows the differences between our people and the Jews more clearly than their likes and dislikes for certain occupations. In some occupations, particularly those that are most important for the nation as a whole, the foreign influence on German life has reached an intolerable extent not seen elsewhere in Europe. The preference for certain occupations also gives us an interesting insight into the spiritual nature of Jewry. The following figures show how much critical occupations in Germany have been infiltrated. 112,188 Jews, or 58.8%, far more than half, are employed in the area of "commerce and transportation, including restaurants and taverns," but only 17.11% (3,248,145) of the population as a whole. In the area of "industry and craft work, including mining and construction," 19,318 Jews (25.85%) were employed, including 31.82% of foreigners. For the population as a whole, the figure was 40.94% (7,771,799). The figures in the field of "public administration, the judiciary, the army and navy, churches, legal professionals and the independent professions." 11,324 Jews were employed there, or 5.94% , over against 921,048 (4.85%) in the general population..." In 1925, 0.81% of Jews were active as civil servants and the army and navy, as opposed to 2.3% of the general population. In the church, religious occupations, the legal system and the other independent professions, the Jewish percentage is 4.3% as opposed to 2% of the general population. This shows that the Jews are over-represented when compared to the general population, particularly in the independent professions. The percentage of the Jewish population in government positions may seem less than that of the general population, but the difference is not as great as the figures first suggest. The most recent figures, not yet entirely complete, suggest that a not insignificant number of them are baptized Jews or dissidents formerly of the Jewish faith who denied their Jewishness to gain an official position. 4.35% of Jews are employed in the medical and health care system, including welfare, and 2.0% of foreign Jews. The figure for the general population is 1.88%. The Jewish percentage is thus 2 1/2 times as high as that of the general population. In summary, Jewish occupational patterns differ from those of the rest of the population. Jewry seems to have an aversion to agricultural work, industrial labor and crafts. They are greatly over-represented in commerce and transportation, including the entire banking system. They are also over-represented in the independent professions and the health care system. These figures alone demonstrate a clear difference between the native German population and alien Jewry. Very similar conditions prevail in all Western European nations and also in North America, since Jews have spread throughout the world in areas with growing industry and in cities that are centers of economic and financial power. It is not true, as is often claimed, that the Jew was systematically forced into commerce by the laws of the various nations; rather, commerce particularly suits the Jew's nature. This is supported by Dr. Arthur Ruppin, a scholar respected by the Jews. He writes in his book The Jews of the Present (2nd edition, Cologne and Leipzig, 1911, p. 45): "Thanks to their significant commercial gifts (!), the Jews soon enjoyed great success in commerce and industry. For 2000 years they have seemed predestined to work in commerce. It is false to claim, as some do, that Jews became merchants primarily because the Christians denied them other occupations during the Middle Ages. The Jews did not become merchants in Europe, rather they entered the profession in growing numbers ever since the Babylonian Captivity in Syria, Egypt and Babylon [because they dislike labor and prefer to have others work for them! The Editor]. In Palestine until the dispersion they did live primarily by agriculture. In the Diaspora, there was hardly anywhere that the Jews lived by agriculture. The Middle Ages did not make them into merchants. It only affirmed legally that which history had already established. It is after all the rule that economic laws generally do not create new conditions, but only legalize and regulate that which already exists. The law would never have limited the Jews to commerce in Europe if they had not already immigrated primarily as merchants..." Nearly all national economists agree that the Jews owe their role as merchants not to chance, but to their excellent abilities as merchants. As W. Sombart wrote: "The Jewish race is by nature the incarnation of the capitalism-mercantile spirit." (Der moderne Kapitalismus, Vol. 2, p. 349. Leipzig, 1902). Many others agree..." "Similarly differences in the relative proportion of Jews by the self-employed are evident in the medical field, which employs 0.5% of the general population but 2.8% of the Jews, nearly six times as many. Similar statistics are found in the cultural area (theater, film, radio, education, teaching, etc.). The 0.4% of the general population are employed there, 2.6% of the Jews, also about six times as many. In the area of public administration and the judiciary, the percentage of Jews in high positions is 2.0%, over against 1.3% of the general population, nearly twice as high. The significance of these figures becomes clear that when one realizes that the 2.3% of professional Jews in public administration and the judiciary are in a branch where the Jewish percentage of employees is only 0.81%. That means that the Jews are especially represented in the important positions that influence the whole government and leading branches of the economy.." "The statistics may be interesting. The Jewish workers included 11,406 in industry, 2,220 in commerce and transportation, and 726 in agriculture. The following figures show most clearly the different social structure of Jewry in Prussia over against the general population, and reveal clearly Jewry's leading role in public life:.." "On 19 May 1933 Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler gave an interview to Bernard Ridder, an American journalist for the New York State Newspaper. Discussing the Jewish Question in Germany, he said: "Should I allow thousands of German-blooded people to be destroyed so that the Jews can live and work in luxury while millions starve, falling victim to Bolshevism out of desperation?" Can the justice of his words be doubted when one recalls that, according to the Prussian census of 16 June 1925 6.9% of all independent pharmacists, 17.9% of all independent physicians, 4.8% of all independent artists, 27% of all independent attorneys, 4.6% of editors, 11% of theater directors, 7.5% of actors, and 14.8% of all independent dentists were Jews! And these huge figures when the Jews were only 1% of the population! Is that anything other than a Jewdification of our entire cultural system?! And what would these figures look like if one had had the ability to include baptized Jews and dissidents?..." "Berlin is the Jewish metropolis in Germany. The process of Jewdification is considerably further along. That is understandable, since one is in the immediate vicinity of the protective arms of democracy and social democracy, where developments can occur unhindered. Thus in Berlin on 16 June 1925 32.2% of the pharmacists were Jews, as were 49.9% of the physicians, 7.5 of the graphic artists, 50.2% of the attorneys, 8.5% of the editors, 14.2% of the directors and theater heads, 12.3% of the actors and 37.5% of the dentists. These figures cry out for legal limitations on Jewry, and it is surprising that former governments did not take the appropriate action to tell the Jews "this far and no further." The Jewish influence gave the rest of the world an entirely false impression of the nature of the German people. Inside the Reich, they poisoned the soul of the people, and all social and political relationships. Until the national uprising, the leaders of the National Socialist movement were persecuted, defamed and suppressed by a system that was a willing tool in the hands of a foreign and different race. The national revolution freed the German people from this foreign influence, which had also dominated and ruined the German press and public life in significant ways. He who wants to understand the German revolution of 1933 must understand that it had this goal: 'Germany must be governed by Germans for Germans.' The central idea of the National Socialist revolution was the longing of the German people to once more be master in every area of its own life. As a great, confident people, we demand only this of the other peoples: that they permit us, as their equals, to govern ourselves as we wish and find our own way to happiness (Reich Minister of the Interior Dr. Frick)..." "The Jewdification of our colleges and universities over the years has reached almost frightening proportions. We begin with a publication from 1931. Karl Hoppmann, in his volume "On the State of Jewdification in the Academic professions" found the following figures: 1. University of Berlin: Medical faculty . . . . over 50% Philosophical faculty . . . . 25% 2. University of Göttingen, 32% of the professors were Jewish: Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.0% Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.0% Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40.0% Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 23.0% 3. University of Breslau Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30.0% Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0% Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.0% 4. University of Frankfurt (Main) Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.0% Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0% Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 28.0% Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.0% Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.0% Jewry has a dominating role on the stock exchange. The board of the Berlin stock exchange is almost exclusively Jewish. In the various committees, the percentage of the Jewish race is sometimes many times as high as the Aryan. The committees include: That means that 117 or 147 members are Jews, or nearly 80%. The extent of the Jewdification of German theater and film is evident from 1931 figures. Of 234 theater directors, 118 (50.4%) were Jews, 92 (39.3%) were non-Jewish. Berlin led in this area as well, with 23 of 29 theater directors (80%) Jewish. The situation in film is similar. The Viennese Catholic periodical "Schönere Zukunft," which certainly cannot be accused of anti-Semitism, wrote the following in its 3 February 1929 issue: "The percentage of Jewry in today's film industry is so high, at least by us in Germany, that there is only a tiny part left for Christian firms." Jewry has long sought political influence as well. This formerly happened in covert ways, mostly through direct or indirect control of money matters. Nearly every noble once had his financial Jew. Since 1848, the birth of political parties in Germany, Jewry has openly sought to become a political power. The Jew Marx was the founder of Marxist doctrine, the Jew Lassalle was the founder of the Social Democratic Party. The founders of the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany were the Jews Bernstein, Haase, Kautsky, Hilferding, Cohn, Davidsohn, Simon, Rosenfeld, Eisner, Levi, etc. Carl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemberg were the leaders of the Communist Party, and recently the Jews Rosenfeld and Seydewitz founded the Socialist Workers Party. Jews sat in the press offices and the various editorial offices of party newspapers, and above all in the various parliamentary factions..." "We think it necessary to mention that the Communist wave that threatened to destroy Germany politically, economically and intellectually can primarily be traced back to Jewry. Is it any wonder that the Jew is arrogant? The greater the Jewish influence the more secure they feel, and the more ominously and clearly their character and goals becomes clear: Pride, intolerance and superiority on the one hand, a drive for world domination on the other. Several pointed Jewish statements are examples: Hochmut: The familiar "Dorfgeschichte"-Auerbach says: "We Jews are the most intelligent race." "We are the chosen ones," says Dr. Berhard Cohn (Jüdisch-Politische Streitfragen, 20, 22). He continues: "We may carry our head high and demand particular respect. We must not only be treated equally, but better. We deserve the particular respect of other peoples." Rabbi Dr. Rulf wrote a book ("Aruchas bar-Ammni," Israel's Healing, Frankfurt a. M. 1883) in which he says: "The Jewish people is a blessing for all peoples. The blessing has followed on the heels of the Jews. A whole world lives from the Jews, who feed everyone, and everywhere spread wealth and pleasure, comfort and prosperity. Only the commerce of the Jews creates value. Work alone does not do that. Half of the world's population would starve without the Jews." The Jew Dr. Duschak wrote: "The world could not exist without the Jews." The well-known Jew Sacher-Masoch explained the hatred of anti-Semites against the Jews in this way: It is the same hatred a Negro feels against the whites because of their superiority. That the Jews even went so far as to suggest to Bismark that he make the Jewish Day of Atonement a national holiday is certainly no sign of modesty. Intolerance: The Jew Klausner (Society, edited by Conrad, Volume 12) wrote: "Anti-Semitism and criminality are nearly the same thing. There are criminals who were not anti-Semites, but no anti-Semites who were not criminals." The work by Dr. E. Fuchs. "The Future of the Jews," (Berlin, Philo-Verlag, 1924) judges our greatest historians, Hartmann and Treitschke, who see the Jews as our misfortune: "Men blinded by prejudice and hatred. Small, tiny men." World Domination: The Jewish attorney Maurthner in Vienna said back in the 1880's: "It is not just a matter of fighting anti-Semitism. We want to oppose it with Jewish domination!" They made the attempt. If the German people had not recovered their senses at the last moment, and if they had not had a Fuehrer and Chancellor named Adolf Hitler who recognized the danger and woke the German people, we would have fallen into slavery. As we have already noted, the Jew has always known how to rouse sympathy when things were rough for him. Consider this report from the meeting of the PEN Club in Ragusa at the end of May of last year: "Schalom Asch in his keynote address noted that the suffering of the Jews in Germany had aroused the sympathy of the entire world. Only the German government remained untouched. He claimed the Jews has given Germany its deepest thoughts, its most beautiful songs, its greatest poets, artists and philosophers. Today one had crucified them in Germany and covered them with their own blood." Mr. Schalom Asch began crying in the midst of these outrageous lies. He spoke in the hope that his words would be heard for the sake of justice and humanity throughout the world. The Jew Asch cries! The German people are not moved. They want no torture or persecution, but also no unjustified sympathy, only justice! Remember always the worlds of Field Marshall Moltke: "The Jew is a state within the state." Remember also the works of our great historian Mommsen: "In antiquity too the Jew was the ferment of cosmopolitanism and national decomposition." And remember Goethe: "The Israelites have never done much; they possess few virtues, and most of the deficiencies of other peoples!" The Racial Question has an important role in the laws of other nations, though other peoples and races are affected than in the German Reich. It is in no way new or unusual that the German Reich is active in this area. Contrary to opinions that surface here and there, our laws are in no way directed against the Jewish religion, its practice, or the freedom of the Jewish faith. The German Reich has done nothing but introduce constitutional legislation to provide the kind of civil service necessary to guarantee the secure administration of the Reich. The laws do not render it impossible for a citizen of a foreign state to become a civil servant. Indeed, if he is appointed to such a position, he receives full citizenship in the Reich. German civil servants should however be of Aryan descent. The so-called Aryan Law requires that each civil servant be of German blood. Since the vast majority of non-Aryan civil servants were Jews, the first guidelines to the law paid particular attention to those who were members of the Jewish race. But we did not simply throw out the non-Aryan civil servants, but retired them with honor and a pension. The people's state could hardly proceed in a more legal and mild manner. Germany did not want to attack Jewry wildly, rather only deal with its results, is clear from the fact that the Law of 7 April 1933 left untouched all non-Aryan civil servants who had been appointed before 1 August 1914, and by the fact that the private sphere not affected. Some complain that the law extends to half and quarter Aryans. The answer is that the foreign influence in the civil service had grown to such a dangerous extent that it was almost impossible for young Germans to enter these professions." (Reich Minister of the Interior Dr. Frick..." > >Those ingredients were: >Schizophrenia overcame Hitler just before he enlisted in WW1. Here are some quotes from the German pamphlet "How they Lie" from 1940. The pamphlet has many pictures but the words alone are interesting enough: "For example, what would you say if a colleague of yours, whom you regarded as a rival and who disliked you, were to spread the rumor that your household is in disorder, that you murder small children and rape defenseless women? Rest assured that in our country such a person would soon be behind bars. But the international politicians and journalists who slander entire peoples in a shameless manner not only run around freely, they impudently put on airs as the saviors of human culture. No lie is too crude for them, no slander too vulgar-they understand their craft. Even in World War I they knew how to incite hate with the help of atrocity propaganda. We all recall those daily lies of the "German barbarian" who, "like a wild beast rages over the earth and destroys everything in hate and the fury of annihilation, who tortures children and delights in the tears of mothers," as a foreign paper once wrote. In war, man stands against man. Each serves the Fatherland in his own way, and no soldier will deny the knightly convictions of a noble opponent. Today, however, a cowardly gang of professional agitators daily invents new lies and pictures from the safety of their desks. How was the German soldier once depicted by enemy atrocity propaganda? We all know them, for we had fathers, brothers, sons, and men out there. For instance, on 20 March 1915, the newspaper "Le Rire Rouge" published the following picture of the good German soldier: A bloodthirsty murderer of women and children, a robber and plunderer, who nourishes himself with sausages made from human flesh-that was how it saw the brave and loyal German soldier. Each of us knows what a crude and baseless lie this is. Every decent person in the world should have known this. And yet: "Some of it will always be believed, the stupid and gullible will never see through it all" - so hope the political liars and slanderers. We know what to think about this flood of slander flowing over the German people. We heard the same things between 1914 and 1918. Then as now, they are attempting to drive a wedge between leaders and people. The goal of this propaganda is always the annihilation of Germany. We are also familiar with the old lie about the desecration of churches and shrines, which are once again in fashion with our enemies. This is the undamaged cathedral of Tschenstochau. The picture of the Polish shrine of the Black Madonna, with the German soldiers in the foreground, was taken after its alleged destruction by German bombers. While the lying and yellow press of the entire world and the enemy transmitters were inventing hypocritical stories about the presumed destruction of the holy shrine, the Prior of Tschenstochau wrote the above letter to the German military authorities that clearly testifies that the monastery and holy shrine were untouched. Thus the lie regarding supposed German attack could be immediately exposed. The English Ministry of Advertising has had nothing to say since. In reality, these lies are ancient. Our enemies always babble about violated sanctuaries, persecuted priests, murdered children and tortured women in order to prejudice the world against Germany and to arouse the impression that the world must be defended against "the barbarians who are threatening human culture." The picture above is taken from a leafet dated 19 August 1914. The same lie was used back then. Supposedly the Germans had attacked the monastery at Jasno-Gora. They always lied, they lie today, they lie, they lie. There were countless numbers of these malicious pictures in World War I. Today we see the new versions of this crude charge. Enemy radio reports reports of drugged candy and poison gas-filled children's balloons, with which German troops allegedly killed Polish children. And our enemies decided to spread this vile slander in the exact moment that the world heard from neutral journalists about the unimaginable crimes perpetrated by the Polish on fellow German countrymen. All of these neutral independent reporters saw and corroborated the terrible atrocities against Germans with their own eyes. In light of these proven facts, the shameless enemy presumes to turn the tables and pin these murders on the Germans, declaring that the murdered, whose names and addresses are known, are Poles. They hate the Führer, because he exposes their lies and crimes. They hate him, because he rescued the hard-working German people from exploitation. How happy they would be to see the Führer and the entire German people delivered into the dark machinations of the world Jewry! It shows the impotence of the Jews, since all they can do is drag a straw man through the streets and burn it. What do these subhumans know about the joy of a genuine national community? These warmongers are hard at work rousing the world against Germany. How little they know about the indisoluble bond between Führer and people that is so overwhelmingly clear in this picture: The Führer speaks with German workers. He knows that he can trust them, and they know that our cause is in his good hands. The enemy countries, who are so worried about the fate of the German people, also worry about the S. A. We have often seen them; we know how these men look. They are our comrades, our colleagues in the workplace, our fathers, brothers, sons and men. Do they look like this? Since when are these imagined daggers the true symbol of the S. A.? Once again some professional liar has taken his pen in his hand. They lie, they lie.... German men from all regions and occupations use their free time and energy in regular practice, so they can be ready to serve the community. When in the summer of 1939 the agricultural labor force was too small to bring in the rich harvest, these men freely joined in to help with the harvest, serving the homeland on peaceful fields. Why does the enemy press, which loves to speak of its objective reporting, never carry such pictures of Germany? The more one examines their endless scribbling and radio news, the clearer one sees that these expert liars have never spoken the truth, not even once. This time a newspaper really outdid itself. Here we see how a German holiday is libeled. Christmas and Nazi Winter Relief We all know this picture. It is the Christmas celebration of a German family that did not have the means by itself to celebrate this holiday of love in the way the Führer wishes, in the way that every German family should experience. The NSV got involved. Helpers, men and women, walked upstairs and downstairs, heard the wishes of the needy, and provided gifts. We all know the results. In any case, the 80 million people of the greater German Reich know that the liar who drew the picture on the previous page of an alleged German Christmas is not only a liar but also an idiot. If the gentlemen wanted to lie, they should have at least started out more intelligently, so that they were not found out immediately. What National Socialist Germany has done and continues to do for working people is unique in the entire world. The foreign plutocratic countries that are dominated by high finance viewed this new and happy life with envy and ill-will. They never ceased in their endeavor to compel this new Germany into war, to keep it in the same miserable state it was in after the Treaty of Versailles. But Germany knows what it has to lose. And because it is stronger than the rest of the world, it will end this struggle victoriously. Mr. Churchill, English warmonger, First Lord of the Admiralty, architect of the encirclement campaign had it easy in the fall of 1939. When he decided to wage war against Germany, he selected four English passenger ships that were sailing to America. Then he sent the above telegram, dated 28 August 1939, to Cunard White Star Lines, compelling them to turn German passengers away from these ships, as they would be uncomfortable eyewitnesses. See the accompanying letter from the shipping company, dated 29 August 1939. Churchill then sent suitable "rescue ships" to be "coincidentally" on the course of these ships, which were now loaded with Americans. The Athenia was torpedoed and sunk. If the affair with the "Athenia" not worked, then one of the other three ships would have been sunk,so that Mr. Churchill would have more stories for the English Ministry of Lies. We know the rest. The yellow press of the world blows Churchill's lying horn obediently: a German submarine allegedly sank the "Athenia." But the evil, criminal escapade failed. Germany got hold of the documents and exposed the criminals. Once again, one of the vilest and most base of the English lies is exposed. The following story is perhaps the best way of showing the reality of moneybags journalism, and how decent foreign journalists are forced to invent lie afer lie. A couple of months ago, a foreign journalist whose name we must hide in order to protect his job, came to Germany. He wanted to see the alleged "Nazi hell" with his own eyes, in order to give an eyewitness account. He saw workers who had jobs. He saw workers taking vacations with the KdF. And he saw workers going to the theater. He saw the NSV's charity for the poor. He saw and was amazed. He had not expected to see that! How could he, knowing the truth, continue to write lies and false atrocity stories about Germany, like the financiers of his newspaper want it?... In German camps, criminals and misfits live in clean and orderly accommodations, receive sufficient nourishment and have enough time for both work and play. The foreign press reporter visited one of these camps. The officials of the German concentration camp were outraged when they later read his article. The article talked about piles of corpses over which the poor reporter had to climb, of moaning people in dark dungeons, of caning orgies and other such imaginary atrocities. The man had seemed so honest. How could he lie like that? What had happened? The journalist wrote a letter to explain. He had written a truthful account of what he had seen at the concentration camp. But the owner of the newspaper switched everything around. Naturally there are decent foreign papers that would never falsify the facts like that, but we are not talking about them here. The newspaperman begged the Germans not to take action against his paper or the publisher who falsified the report, because then he would lose his job. That is how freedom of the press looks like in other countries; that is how the lies and fairy tales come to be. The Führer spoke about the criminal newspaper Jews and the war profiteers, in his speech on 6 October. They order the journalists and radio reporters around like schoolboys. These "servants of public opinion" are not allowed to have convictions or express their true opinions, and only a very few exceptions prove this rule. They must lie and slander and blacken Germany and its Führer to keep the gentlemen behind the plutocratic, moneybag policies in business. But why do these newspaper moneybags lie so crudely, so stupidly, so impudently? Why do they spread their slander all over Germany of all places? They lie because they are weak and Germany is strong. They lie because they want to make money by going to war against Germany, even though the people do not want to go to war and are scared to go to war against a strong Germany... Things are a thousand times better here. Things are more honest and fair here than anywhere in the entire world. Here we recognize the honor of the worker. Here there is a right to work. Here the moneybags are not in control... In conclusion: We will not be confused by the lies of the foreign countries! We know what we are fighting for! >After enlisting and against tremendous odds he survived the war. >He was awarded two Iron Crosses, making him a hero. >He was an excellent public speaker and when he did falter it was put down as >shell shock. >Germany was devastated and conditions were perfect for Hitler, the young, >highly vocal, charismatic hero. >And yes, in the turmoil the fact that Hitler was insane went largely >unnoticed. > Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf: "In my eyes the charge against Judaism became a grave one the moment I discovered the Jewish activities in the Press, in art, in literature and the theatre. All unctuous protests were now more or less futile. One needed only to look at the posters announcing the hideous productions of the cinema and theatre, and study the names of the authors who were highly lauded there in order to become permanently adamant on Jewish questions. Here was a pestilence, a moral pestilence, with which the public was being infected. It was worse that the Black Plague of long ago. And in what mighty doses this poison was manufactured and distributed. Naturally, the lower the moral and intellectual level of such an author of artistic products the more inexhaustible his fecundity. Sometimes it went so far that one of these fellows, acting like a sewage pump, would shoot his filth directly in the face of other members of the human race. In this connection we must remember there is no limit to the number of such people. One ought to realize that for one Goethe, Nature may bring into existance ten thousand such despoilers who act as the worst kind of germ-carriers in poisoning human souls. It was a terrible thought, and yet it could not be avoided, that the greater number of the Jews seemed specially destined by Nature to play this shameful part. "And is it for this reason that they can be called the chosen people? "I began then to investigate carefully the names of all the fabricators of these unclean products in public cultural life. The result of that inquiry was still more disfavourable to the attitude which I had hitherto held in regard to the Jews. Though my feelings might rebel a thousand time, reason now had to draw its own conclusions. "The fact that nine-tenths of all the smutty literature, artistic tripe and theatrical banalities, had to be charged to the account of people who formed scarcely one per cent of the nation- that fact could not be gainsaid. It was there, and had to be admitted. Then I began to examine my favorite 'World Press', with that fact before my mind. "The deeper my soundings went the lesser grew my respect for that Press which I formerly admired. Its style became still more repellant and I was forced to reject its ideas as entirely shallow and superficial. To claim that in the presentation of facts and views its attitide was impartial seemed to me to contain more falsehood than truth. The writers were- Jews. "Thousands of details that I had scarcely noticed before seemed to me now to deserve attention. I began to grasp and understand things which I had formerly looked at in a different light." "Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose minor representatives I had been disputing for months past." www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com |
|
|
|
[14] Posted by Ferdinand 07-16-2003, 04:53 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
All this mention of Soviets leads me to ask will a "Part 2" be made of the
"Rise of Evil" documenting the evils of Lenin and Stalin (who killed more than Hitler could have dreamed of, including Jews) and of course Mao, one of the greatest mass murderers in history. Hitler was undeniably evil. But he pales into insignificance compared to his communist peers. Ferdinand |
|
|
|
[15] Posted by Bevan 07-16-2003, 07:12 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
Ferdinand wrote in message ... >All this mention of Soviets leads me to ask will a "Part 2" be made of the >"Rise of Evil" documenting the evils of Lenin and Stalin (who killed more >than Hitler could have dreamed of, including Jews) and of course Mao, one of >the greatest mass murderers in history. > >Hitler was undeniably evil. But he pales into insignificance compared to his >communist peers. > >Ferdinand Hitler was mentally sick, that is all. There are millions of people in the world now just like him. The people and circumstances were ideal for a person like him to rule. Instead of just blaming Hitler we need focus on the series of events leading up to the Holocaust. Remember it has happened again after WW2. Scenario: Australia becomes impoverished. Inflation runs at 100%. USA wants to annex Australia for its minerals and position in the pacific. Moslem migrants are doing reasonably in Australia. Along comes a leader. One who was a hero in a past war, a true Aussie. Leader's political party convinces Australians that they only need one party. Heaps of Government jobs are generated. Blame for previous problem attached to Moslems. Subsequently Moslems are transported to camps and shipped to offshore islands---out of sight out of mind. Private security firm is encouraged by party to let a few Moslems die. Then they shoot them. Finally they are given lethal injections Years later leader is found to been suffering a mental illness. Now what about the Party and the ordinary Australians. Yep, they heap the blame on the mentally sick leader. Bevan. |
|
|
|
[16] Posted by Neville Duguid 07-16-2003, 12:14 PM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
netvegetable <netvegetable@fastmail.fm> wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:42:19 +0000, Neville Duguid wrote: > > > Bevan <Bevan2003@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> 6. It seems that Hitler underwent a profound change in his early > >> twenties. This change would suggest the onset of schizophrenia. > > > > I doubt it. Schizophrenia is an incapacitating illness. He would hardly > > have survived four years in the trenches of WW1 if that had been the > > case. He was psychologically robust enough to avoid getting battle > > fatigue which turned lots of soldiers in similar circumstances into > > gibbering wrecks. > > > > He may have been schizoid or semi-autistic, but even that is > > speculation. In Freudian terms, he seems to have transferred or > > 'sublimated' his love of his mother and, some have suggested, the other > > women in his life, on to his adopted country. He aspired to do that via > > his art originally, but was deprived of that outlet at the very time his > > need was greatest (when his mother died), so he needed to find another > > object for his repressed loyalty and devotion. He was prepared to die > > for his country, and expected everyone else to be willing to do the > > same. His total lack of doubt is what empowered him as a speaker. > > On Hitler's personality..... > > There are some historians who maintain that his antisemitism was all just > a front, that he coldly and calculatedly used the Jews as a scapegoat. > Many more however, believe that Hitler was an antisemite by conviction. His devotion to Germany could go a long way to explaining the depth of his resentment of Jews. Many people at that time assumed Jews were behind the ill-advised reparation payments demanded of Germany after WW1. Hitler was one of them. If he had some psychologically driven need to protect his country and he perceived Jews as profiteering from the distress of his country, then that alone is sufficient to explain it. Objectively it could be regarded as no more than a case of scapegoating - focussing miscellaneous grievances against a readily identifable target group. Plenty of that goes on, in germany then, and right here in this newsgroup now. In fact it seems to be a favourite pastime of many who post in this group. The offenders regard it as jolly good fun, and are encouraged to redouble their efforts whenever they spot someone who takes it seriously enough to bite back. As for hatred. There was plenty of hatred between 'reds' and 'brownshirts' which probably originated as a case of mutual contempt between industrial workers and former military personnel. I have seen the same in my own time in the australian defence forces (although 'anger' and 'annoyance' would be more appropriate words than 'hatred' in the Aussie context). People on the front line detest strikers and industrial trouble-makers. They perceive them as 'letting the side down' and 'leaving them in the lurch' when essential supplies fail to show up when most needed. Hitler was a former soldier. In many respects, as you and others have pointed out, he was merely one of a kind - a kind all too common in that particular time and place. > I'm more inclined to agree with the latter, for a number of reasons. We > have the text of Hitler's speeches, in which he automatically seems to > associate the words "Jew" with "filth". We have the accounts of Albert > Speer, who swore that Hitler's antisemitism was the "only thing that drove > him" or words to that effect. There are lots of people who consistently apply such adjectives to other groups right here in this newsgroup. The general received wisdom is to ignore them. In the case of the WW2 Germans, the retrospective verdict is that they should have done anything but ignore them.. > (IIRC, Hitler actually had a hand in producing one of Nazi Germany's many > propaganda films, which did badly at the box office largely because of > it's blatant, over the top attempts to directly associate Jews with > scurrying rats.) Mudslinging, and fictionalising perceived opponents, is very common in aus.politics. The principle (acquired initially by people studying Hitler and Goebbels at Australian universities) has since come to be regarded as a legitimate political tactic right here in Australia. There are many in aus.politics who regard anyone who refuse to fight mudslinging with mudslinging of their own as "piss weak", "got no balls" etc. It has become a permanent part of the mindset of far too many modern Australians, particularly younger ones.. > Sure there were plenty of antisemites around in those days, and still are. > But I think Hitler hated Jews to a point that was beyond rationality. His > passionate hatred bordered on psychosis. How to account for this > psychosis? You can't. It wasn't rational. Paranoia? We have seen similar paranoia against 'communists' in the 1950s, and against ordinary rural Australians in the 1990s during the "Pauline Hanson backlash". Again, it never seems to escalate beyond a certain level in Australia before rational people begin to assert themselves, stopping such attempts to incite mass hysteria before it escalates into a spiral of increasing hatred and violence. > This psychosis could have many causes. Probably related to a very intense > experience at some point in his life. Something related to the fact that > his ailing mother was treated by a Jewish doctor in her last days? Could > it be because Hitler was under the command of a Jewish officer in WWI? All > we can speculate, and at the end of the day say that the man was sick. Undou |