Challenge Your Knowledge - Zionist Report

VIDEO: Zionist Report Published It’s FIRST Book Titled – “Challenge Your Knowledge”

If you have not yet read our recently published book, we strongly recommend you do. Even if you think you are already aware of all the historical lies we have been taught for centuries, you are still in for a surprise! Please spread the word, we must give people a chance to learn the truth! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37vBzYGrv3Q

Communist America

COMMENTARY: When New York City Was the Capital of American Communism

This article was not only written by a member of the tribe but published in the NY Times which is completely owned by them. Hasn’t New York City ALWAYS been Capital of American Communism? History proves this. Jacob Schiff was by Rothschild to New York to carry out four specific assignments: 1. And most important, was to acquire control of America’s money-system. 2. Find desirable men, who for a price, would be willing to serve as stooges for the great conspiracy and promote them into high places in our federal government, our Congress, and the U.S. Supreme Court, and all federal agencies. 3. Create minority group strife throughout the nations; particularly between the whites and blacks. 4. Create a movement to destroy religion in the United States, but Christianity to be the chief target. We have seen not only how Schiff and the international Jewish bankers funded the Bolshevik Revolution, ever since then, America has been a puppet directed by Jewish Communist interests. Communist America

“When New York City Was the Capital of American Communism,” Source: nytimes.com

The Brooklyn-born playwright and critic Lionel Abel, who cut his political teeth in left-wing circles in Greenwich Village in the 1930s, remarked in his memoirs that during the Depression years, New York City “went to Russia and spent most of the decade there.” Leaving aside Mr. Abel’s taste for the mordant, he had a point.

For a few decades — from the 1930s until Communism’s demise as an effective political force in the 1950s — New York City was the one place where American communists came close to enjoying the status of a mass movement. Party members could live in a milieu where co-workers, neighbors and the family dentist were fellow Communists; they bought life insurance policies (excellent value for money) from party-controlled fraternal organizations; they could even spend their evenings out in nightclubs run by Communist sympathizers (like the ironically named Café Society on Sheridan Square in Greenwich Village, a showcase for up-and-coming black performers like Billie Holliday).

What became the Communist Party U.S.A. (its name varied in the early years) was founded in Chicago in 1919 and, following a period of underground organization, opened its national headquarters in that city in 1921. But the bulk of the movement’s members were in New York, and in 1927 Communist headquarters were shifted to a party-owned building in Manhattan, at 35 East 12th Street, one block south of Union Square. (The building still stands, although under new ownership, and in what has evolved into a considerably less proletarian neighborhood than in the old days.)

New York would remain the capital city of American Communism from then on. Leading communists, including such figures as William Z. Foster and Earl Browder, had their offices on the top floor of the 12th Street building; accordingly, within the movement, it became the custom to refer to party leadership as the “ninth floor.” (And, for some reason, even in non – and anti-Communist left-wing circles, “the party” was always understood to refer to the Communists, rather than any rival organizations.)

Immigrants, many of them of Eastern European Jewish background, provided the main social base for the party in New York City in the 1920s: As late as 1931, four-fifths of the Communists living in the city were foreign-born.

Of course, immigrant radicalism was nothing new in New York. The socialist leader Morris Hillquit, born in Riga, Latvia, won more than a fifth of the votes cast in the 1917 mayoral election. Socialists initially hailed the news of the Bolshevik Revolution, but many of them — except for those who left to become Communists — came in time to understand and oppose the Soviet regime’s abandonment of the left’s traditional democratic and egalitarian ideals.

Neither of the two main rival left-wing parties, Socialists or Communists, enjoyed much success in the 1920s. But with the onset of the Great Depression, Socialists were poised once again to become the dominant party on the left. In the 1932 presidential election, the Socialist candidate, Norman Thomas, won almost nine times the votes that the Communist candidate, Mr. Foster, received. (Neither of them had a fraction of the support of the actual winner, Franklin D. Roosevelt.)

But the balance of power on the left was about to change, and nowhere would that change make itself felt more dramatically than in New York. With the Depression spiraling out of control in the early 1930s, the Soviet Union began to be viewed in a new and more sympathetic light by millions of people around the world, including many in the United States. The “workers’ state” with its planned economy, viewed at a hazy distance and with a lot of wishful thinking, seemed to offer a desirable alternative to the cruel irrationality of a failed capitalist system, with its mass unemployment and widespread social misery.

Marxism-Leninism, Communists proclaimed, was a science, whose practical application by centralized and disciplined revolutionary parties in Europe, the Americas and elsewhere, held the key to unifying the workers of the world. Within a few years of the Nazi seizure of power in Germany in 1933, Soviet leaders shifted their international strategy from promoting world revolution to seeking anti-fascist alliances with Western democratic powers. In the era of the “popular front,” as American Communists stressed the need for anti-fascist unity, they began to win grudging respect in labor and liberal circles, as useful allies in the struggle for social change.

Party members did their best to appear less threatening and less foreign-inspired even as they still praised all things Soviet, proclaiming that Communism was simply “20th-century Americanism.” Communists also reached out to groups they had previously scorned, like the New Deal Democrats, and to politicians, they had previously denounced, like Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia.

For a while, it worked. In cities around the country, from Detroit to Seattle to Los Angeles, Communists began to play a visible and effective role in politics, both local and national. But nowhere were they as successful as in New York.

By 1938, the party counted 38,000 members in New York State, about half its national membership, and most of those living in New York City. Communists were increasingly native-born (although many were the children of immigrants). Party-organized mass meetings in the old Madison Square Garden were packed with as many as 20,000 participants; the annual May Day parades drew tens of thousands, too.

Some neighborhoods in New York could be likened to the “red belt” surrounding Paris: Communist-organized cooperative parties on Allerton Avenue in the Bronx were a strong base of party support, as were parts of East Harlem, Brooklyn, and the Lower East Side. In Harlem, the party’s strong commitment to fighting racism (still quite rare, even on the liberal left) helped it to attract the support of African-Americans across the social spectrum, including some leading artists like actor and singer Paul Robeson.

Communists were central to spreading the gospel of unionism from the garment trades to a host of previously unorganized industries and workplaces, as organizers and officials in the Transport Workers Union, the National Maritime Union, the Teachers Union and the American Newspaper Guild, among others. Ben Gold, the president of the Fur Workers Union, was one of the few labor leaders in the United States who openly avowed his Communist beliefs. A Communist candidate for the presidency of the city’s board of aldermen received nearly 100,000 votes in 1938; and during World War II, two open Communists, Peter V. Cacchione of Brooklyn and Benjamin Davis of Harlem, held seats on the City Council. At City College, Brooklyn College and Columbia University, there were hundreds of members of the Young Communist League, and thousands of students who joined Communist front groups like the American Youth Congress.

In the end, the decade or so that New York City “spent” in Russia came to nothing. The Communist Party’s ties to the Soviet Union, which forced it into the role of apologist for the worst crimes of the Stalin regime, from the Moscow Trials to the Nazi-Soviet Pact, limited its appeal even at the height of its success. With the onset of the Cold War, and of a second Red Scare more pervasive and longer-lasting than the original, Communists found themselves persecuted and isolated.

In 1956, with a hard core of 20,000 or so surviving members, the party was dealt a fatal blow when the Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, delivered a “secret speech” to the 20th party congress in Moscow, denouncing his predecessor, Stalin, as a bloody mass murderer. The speech leaked. So did the disillusioned membership of the Communist Party U.S.A., reduced to a few thousand members by 1958, and never recovering much beyond that in decades to come. It did, however, survive the collapse of its political inspiration, the Soviet experiment.

On the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, the national headquarters of the Communist Party U.S.A. remains in New York City, on one floor of a party-owned building at 235 West 23rd Street. Party members are apparently divided over whether to keep the building, which generates considerable rent revenue or make a killing on the real estate market by selling it.

A very capitalist question, in the end, to preoccupy the remaining comrades.

Enjoy communism

DOCUMENTARY: Communist Infiltration Of The United States

The Bolshevik Revolution was financed by international Jewry who had already taken over Wall Street. Ever since then, Communism has been slowly infiltrating America and corrupting it from within. Today we can say that America is a country LED by Communism disguised as a democracy. What is important to keep in mind, is that those who are in power, are part of the plan, they have a mission and it is NOT TO SAVE AMERICA. If they truly had the intention to save the country, the tribe would not allow them to be in power. Every move that America makes is being directed from Russia. In the meantime, the brainwashing and the destruction from within continues.

We highly recommend this documentary and ask you to please share it with as many people as you possibly can. Americans have the right to know the truth. 

https://youtu.be/tc8Qg8v-tS0

Germany's Declaration of War

Hitler’s Declaration of War Against The US

This is the war that America should be fighting today, the same war that Hitler had the guts to fight for his love for the human race. This speech among other crucial documentation can be found in our book “Challenge Your Knowledge”. His words clearly reveal, that those who defeated him are the same ones who will take us to WWIII. This speech, is one of Hitler’s most important and should be often read to remind us what America and the world should be really fighting against. How can anyone be of service to their country or to the world for that matter, if they don’t know who is ruling over it and who their enemy really is? What is certain, is that the ignorance of most Americans and the marxist propaganda, has played a key role in the expansion of Communism and continues to do so. Ask yourself, what does America really stand for? And if the answer does not agree with what you see today happening your beloved America, then do something about it! 

All we see is censorship, wars, corruption, lies, racism, riots. Take a look at Europe today! Did you ever ask yourself, what kind of world would we be living in if Hitler had won the war? There is no more time for ignorance and denial, its time to face the truth and fight against the enemies of humanity. 

 

Germany's Declaration of War

“Hitler’s Declaration of War Against the US,” Source: ihr.org

Germany’s Declaration of War Against the United States

Hitler’s Reichstag Speech of December 11, 1941

It has often been said that Hitler’s greatest mistakes were his decisions to go to war against the Soviet Union and the United States . Whatever the truth may be, it’s worth noting his own detailed justifications for these fateful decisions. On Thursday afternoon, December 11, 1941, four days after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hitler spoke to the Reichstag in Berlin. The 88-minute address, which he had written himself, was broadcast to the nation. In it the German leader recounted the reasons for the outbreak of war in September 1939, explained why he decided to strike against the Soviet Union in June 1941, reviewed the dramatic course of the war thus far, and dealt at length with President Franklin Roosevelt’s hostile policies toward Germany. Hitler detailed the increasingly belligerent actions of Roosevelt’s government, and then dramatically announced that Germany was now joining Japan in war against the United States. The day after it was delivered, an inaccurate and misleading translation of portions of the address appeared in The New York Times. Although this historic address should be of particular interest to Americans, a complete text has apparently never before been made available in English.

This translation is my own, as are the brief clarifications given in brackets.

Following the speech text is Germany’s formal note to the U.S. government declaring war, and a short list of items for suggested further reading.

— Mark Weber


Deputies! Men of the German Reichstag!

A year of world-historical events is coming to an end. A year of great decisions is approaching. In this grave period I speak to you, deputies of the Reichstag, as the representatives of the German nation. In addition, the entire German nation should also review what has happened and take note of the decisions required by the present and the future.

After the repeated rejection of my peace proposal in 1940 by the British prime minister [Winston Churchill] and the clique that supports and controls him, it was clear by the fall of that year that this war would have to be fought through to the end, contrary to all logic and necessity. You, my old Party comrades, know that I have always detested half-hearted or weak decisions. If Providence has deemed that the German people are not to be spared this struggle, then I am thankful that She has entrusted me with the leadership in a historic conflict that will be decisive in determining the next five hundred or one thousand years, not only of our German history, but also of the history of Europe and even of the entire world.

The German people and its soldiers work and fight today not only for themselves and their own age, but also for many generations to come. A historical task of unique dimensions has been entrusted to us by the Creator that we are now obliged to carry out.

The western armistice which was possible shortly after the conclusion of the conflict in Norway [in June 1940] compelled the German leadership, first of all, to militarily secure the most important political, strategic and economic areas that had been won. Consequently, the defense capabilities of the lands which were conquered at that time have changed.

From Kirkenes [in northern Norway] to the Spanish frontier stretches the most extensive belt of great defense installations and fortresses. Countless air fields have been built, including some in the far north that were blasted out of granite. The number and strength of the protected submarine shelters that defend naval bases are such that they are practically impregnable from both the sea and the air. They are defended by more than one and a half thousand gun battery emplacements, which had to be surveyed, planned and built. A network of roads and rail lines has been laid out so that the connections [to the installations] between the Spanish frontier and Petsamo [in northern Norway] can be defended independently from the sea. The installations built by the Pioneer and construction battalions of the navy, army and air force in cooperation with the Todt Organization are not at all inferior to those of the Westwall [along the German frontier with France]. The work to further strengthen all this continues without pause. I am determined to make this European front impregnable against any enemy attack.

This defensive work, which continued during the past winter, was complemented by military offensives insofar as seasonal conditions permitted. German naval forces above and below the waves continued their steady war of annihilation against the naval and merchant vessels of Britain and her subservient allies. Through reconnaissance flights and air attacks, the German air force helps to destroy enemy shipping and in countless retaliation air attacks to give the British a better idea of the reality of the so-called  “exciting war,” which is the creation, above all, of the current British prime minister [Churchill].

During the past summer Germany was supported in this struggle above all by her Italian ally. For many months our ally Italy bore on its shoulders the main weight of a large part of British might. Only because of the enormous superiority in heavy tanks were the British able to bring about a temporary crisis in North Africa, but by March 24 of this year a small combined force of German and Italian units under the command of General [Erwin] Rommel began a counterattack. Agedabia fell on April 2. Benghazi was reached on the 4th. Our combined forces entered Derna on the 8th, Tobruk was encircled on the 11th, and Bardia was occupied on April 12. The achievement of the German Afrika Korps is all the more outstanding because this field of battle is completely alien and unfamiliar to the Germans, climatically and otherwise. As once in Spain [1936-1939], so now in North Africa, Germans and Italians stand together against the same enemy.

While these daring actions were again securing the North African front with the blood of German and Italian soldiers, the threatening clouds of terrible danger were gathering over Europe. Compelled by bitter necessity, I decided in the fall of 1939 to at least try to create the prerequisite conditions for a general peace by eliminating the acute tension between Germany and Soviet Russia [with the German-Soviet non-aggression pact of August 23, 1939]. This was psychologically difficult because of the basic attitude toward Bolshevism of the German people and, above all, of the [National Socialist] Party. Objectively, though, this was a simple matter because in all the countries that Britain said were threatened by us and which were offered military alliances, Germany actually had only economic interests.

I may remind you, deputies and men of the German Reichstag, that throughout the spring and summer of 1939 Britain offered military alliances to a number of countries, claiming that Germany intended to invade them and rob them of their freedom. However, the German Reich and its government could assure them with a clear conscience that these insinuations did not correspond to the truth in any way. Moreover, there was the sober military realization that in case of a war which might be forced upon the German nation by British diplomacy, the struggle could be fought on two fronts only with very great sacrifices. And after the Baltic states, Romania, and so forth, were inclined to accept the British offers of military alliance, and thereby made clear that they also believed themselves to be threatened [by Germany], it was not only the right but also the duty of the German Reich government to delineate the [geographical] limits of German interests [between Germany and the USSR]. 

All the same, the countries involved realized very quickly — which was unfortunate for the German Reich as well — that the best and strongest guarantee against the [Soviet] threat from the East was Germany. When those countries, on their own initiative, cut their ties with the German Reich and instead put their trust in promises of aid from a power [Britain] that, in its proverbial egotism, has for centuries never given help but has always demanded it, they were thereby lost. Even so, the fate of these countries aroused the strongest sympathy of the German people. The winter war of the Finns [against the Soviet Union, 1939-1940] aroused in us a feeling of admiration mixed with bitterness: admiration because, as a soldierly nation, we have a sympathetic heart for heroism and sacrifice, and bitterness because our concern for the enemy threat in the West and the danger in the East meant that we were no position to help. When it became clear to us that Soviet Russia concluded that the [German-Soviet] delineation [in August 1939] of political spheres of influence gave it the right to practically exterminate foreign nations, the [German-Soviet] relationship was maintained only for utilitarian reasons, contrary to reason and sentiment.

Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed incapable of defense. 

The quick conclusion of the campaign in the West [May-June 1940] meant that those in power in Moscow were not able to count on the immediate exhaustion of the German Reich. However, they did not change their plans at all, but only postponed the timing of their attack. The summer of 1941 seemed like the ideal moment to strike. A new Mongol invasion was ready to pour across Europe. Mr. Churchill also promised that there would be a change in the British war against Germany at this same time. In a cowardly way, he now tries to deny that during a secret meeting in the British House of Commons in 1940 he said that an important factor for the successful continuation and conclusion of this war would be the Soviet entry into the war, which would come during 1941 at the latest, and which would also make it possible for Britain to take the offensive. Conscious of our duty, this past spring we observed the military build-up of a world power that seemed to have inexhaustible reserves of human and material resources. Dark clouds began to gather over Europe. 

What is Europe, my deputies? There is no geographical definition of our continent, but only an ethnic-national [volkliche] and cultural one. The frontier of this continent is not the Ural mountains, but rather the line that divides the Western outlook on life from that of the East. 

At one time, Europe was confined to the Greek isles, which had been reached by Nordic tribes, and where the flame first burned that slowly but steadily enlightened humanity. And when these Greeks fought against the invasion of the Persian conquerors, they did not just defend their own small homeland, which was Greece, but [also] that concept that is now Europe. And then [the spirit of] Europe shifted from Hellas to Rome. Roman thought and Roman statecraft combined with Greek spirit and Greek culture. An empire was created, the importance and creative power of which has never been matched, much less surpassed, even to this day. And when the Roman legions defended Italy in three terrible wars against the attack of Carthage from Africa, and finally battled to victory, in this case as well Rome fought not just for herself, but [also] for the Greco-Roman world that then encompassed Europe. 

The next invasion against the home soil of this new culture of humanity came from the wide expanses of the East. A horrific storm of cultureless hordes from the center of Asia poured deep into the heart of the European continent, burning, ravaging and murdering as a true scourge of God. On the Catalaunian fields, Roman and Germanic men fought together for the first time [in 451] in a decisive battle of tremendous importance for a culture that had begun with the Greeks, passed on to the Romans, and then encompassed the Germanic peoples. 

Europe had matured. The Occident arose from Hellas and Rome, and for many centuries its defense was the task not only of the Romans, but above all of the Germanic peoples. What we call Europe is the geographic territory of the Occident, enlightened by Greek culture, inspired by the powerful heritage of the Roman empire, its territory enlarged by Germanic colonization. Whether it was the German emperors fighting back invasions from the East on the Unstrut [river, in 933] or on the Lechfeld [plain, in 955], or others pushing back Africa from Spain over a period of many years, it was always a struggle of a developing Europe against a profoundly alien outside world.

Just as Rome once made her immortal contribution to the building and defense of the continent, so now have the Germanic peoples taken up the defense and protection of a family of nations which, although they may differ and diverge in their political structure and goals, nevertheless together constitute a racially and culturally unified and complementary whole.

And from this Europe there have not only been settlements in other parts of the world, but intellectual-spiritual [geistig] and cultural fertilization as well, a fact that anyone realizes who is willing to acknowledge the truth rather than deny it. Thus, it was not England that cultivated the continent, but rather Anglo-Saxon and Norman branches of the Germanic nation that moved from our continent to the [British] island and made possible her development, which is certainly unique in history. In the same way, it was not America that discovered Europe, but the other way around. And all that which America did not get from Europe may seem worthy of admiration to a Jewified mixed race, but Europe regards that merely as symptomatic of decay in artistic and cultural life, the product of Jewish or Negroid blood mixture. 

My Deputies! Men of the German Reichstag!

I have to make these remarks because this struggle, which became obviously unavoidable in the early months of this year, and which the German Reich, above all, is called upon this time to lead, also greatly transcends the interests of our own people and nation. When the Greeks once stood against the Persians, they defended more than just Greece. When the Romans stood against the Carthaginians, they defended more than just Rome. When the Roman and Germanic peoples stood together against the Huns, they defended more than just the West. When German emperors stood against the Mongols, they defended more than just Germany. And when Spanish heroes stood against Africa, they defended not just Spain, but all of Europe as well. In the same way, Germany does not fight today just for itself, but for our entire continent.

And it is an auspicious sign that this realization is today so deeply rooted in the subconscious of most European nations that they participate in this struggle, either with open expressions of support or with streams of volunteers.

When the German and Italian armies took the offensive against Yugoslavia and Greece on April 6 of this year, that was the prelude to the great struggle in which we now find ourselves. That is because the revolt in Belgrade [on March 26, 1941], which led to the overthrow of the former prince regent and his government, determined the further development of events in that part of Europe. Although Britain played a major role in that coup, Soviet Russia played the main role. What I had refused to Mr. Molotov [the Soviet Foreign Minister] during his visit to Berlin [in November 1940], Stalin believed he could obtain indirectly against our will by revolutionary activity. Without regard for the treaties they had signed, the Bolshevik rulers expanded their ambitions. The [Soviet] treaty of friendship with the new revolutionary regime [in Belgrade ] showed very quickly just how threatening the danger had become.

The achievements of the German armed forces in this campaign were honored in the German Reichstag on May 4, 1941. At that time, though, I was not able to reveal that we were very quickly approaching a confrontation with a state [Soviet Russia] that did not attack at the time of the campaign in the Balkans only because its military build-up was not yet complete, and because it was not able to use its air fields as a result of the mud from melting snow at this time of year, which made it impossible to use the runways.

My Deputies! Men of the Reichstag!

When I became aware of the possibility of a threat to the east of the Reich in 1940 through [secret] reports from the British House of Commons and by observations of Soviet Russian troop movements on our frontiers, I immediately ordered the formation of many new armored, motorized and infantry divisions. The human and material resources for them were abundantly available. [In this regard] I can make only one promise to you, my deputies, and to the entire German nation: while people in democratic countries understandably talk a lot about armaments, in National Socialist Germany all the more will actually be produced. It has been that way in the past, and it is not any different now. Whenever decisive action has to be taken, we will have, with each passing year, more and, above all, better quality weapons.

We realized very clearly that under no circumstances could we allow the enemy the opportunity to strike first into our heart. Nevertheless, in this case the decision [to attack Soviet Russia] was a very difficult one. When the writers for the democratic newspapers now declare that I would have thought twice before attacking if I had known the strength of the Bolshevik adversaries, they show that they do not understand either the situation or me.

I have not sought war. To the contrary, I have done everything to avoid conflict. But I would forget my duty and my conscience if I were to do nothing in spite of the realization that a conflict had become unavoidable. Because I regarded Soviet Russia as the gravest danger not only for the German Reich but for all of Europe, I decided, if possible, to give the order myself to attack a few days before the outbreak of this conflict. 

A truly impressive amount of authentic material is now available which confirms that a Soviet Russian attack was intended. We are also sure about when this attack was to take place. In view of this danger, the extent of which we are perhaps only now truly aware, I can only thank the Lord God that He enlightened me in time, and has given me the strength to do what must be done. Millions of German soldiers may thank Him for their lives, and all of Europe for its existence. 

I may say this today: If this wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion against the Reich, Europe would have been lost.

Several nations have been destined to prevent or parry this blow through the sacrifice of their blood. If Finland [for one] had not immediately decided, for the second time, to take up weapons, then the comfortable bourgeois life of the other Nordic countries would quickly have been extinguished.

If the German Reich, with its soldiers and weapons, had not stood against this opponent, a storm would have burned over Europe that would have eliminated, once and for all time, and in all its intellectual paucity and traditional stupidity, the laughable British idea of the European balance of power.

If the Slovaks, Hungarians and Romanians had not also acted to defend this European world, then the Bolshevik hordes would have poured over the Danube countries as did once the swarms of Attila’s Huns, and [Soviet] Tatars and Mongols would [then], on the open country by the Ionian Sea, force a revision of the Treaty of Montreux [regarding the Dardanelles strait].

If Italy, Spain and Croatia had not sent their divisions, then a European defense front would not have arisen that proclaims the concept of a new Europe and thereby powerfully inspires all other nations as well. Because of this awareness of danger, volunteers have come from northern and western Europe: Norwegians, Danes, Dutch, Flemish, Belgians and even French. They have all given the struggle of the allied forces of the Axis the character of a European crusade, in the truest sense of the word.

This is not yet the right time to speak of the planning and direction of this campaign. However, in a few sentences I would like to say something about what has been achieved [so far] in this greatest conflict in history. Because of the enormous area involved as well as the number and size of the events, individual impressions may be lost and forgotten.

The attack began at dawn on June 22 [1941]. With dauntless daring, the frontier fortifications that were meant to protect the Soviet Russian build-up against us from surprise attack were broken through. Grodno fell by June 23. On June 24, following the capture of Brest-Litovsk, the fortress [there] was taken in combat, and Vilnius and Kaunas [in Lithuania] were also taken. Daugavpils [in Latvia] fell on June 26.

The first two great encirclement battles near Bialystok and Minsk were completed on July 10. We captured 324,000 prisoners of war, 3,332 tanks and 1,809 artillery pieces. By July 13 the Stalin Line had been broken through at almost every decisive point. Smolensk fell on July 16 after heavy fighting, and German and Romanian units were able to force their way across the Dniester [river] on July 19. The Battle of Smolensk ended on August 6 after many encircling operations. As a result, another 310,000 Russians were taken as prisoners. Moreover, 3,205 tanks and 3,120 artillery pieces were counted — either destroyed or captured. Just three days later the fate of another Soviet Russian army group was sealed. On August 9, in the battle of Uman, another 103,000 Soviet Russian prisoners of war were taken, and 317 tanks and 1,100 artillery pieces were either destroyed or captured.

Nikolayev [in the Ukraine] fell on August 13, and Kherson was taken on the 21st. On the same day the battle near Gomel ended, resulting in 84,000 prisoners as well as 144 tanks and 848 artillery pieces either captured or destroyed. The Soviet Russian positions between the Ilmen and Peipus [lakes] were broken through on August 21, while the bridgehead around Dnepropetrovsk fell into our hands on August 26. On the 28th of that month German troops entered Tallinn and Paldiski [Estonia] after heavy fighting, while the Finns took Vyborg on the 20th. With the capture of Petrokrepost on September 8, Leningrad was finally cut off from the south. By September 16 bridgeheads across the Dnieper were formed, and on September 18 Poltava fell into the hands of our soldiers. German units stormed the fortress of Kiev on September 19, and on September 22 the conquest of [the Baltic island of] Saaremaa [Oesel] was crowned by the capture of its capital.

And now came the anticipated results of the greatest undertakings. The battle near Kiev was completed on September 27. Endless columns of 665,000 prisoners of war marched to the west. In the encircled area, 884 tanks and 3,178 artillery pieces were captured. The battle to break through the central area of the Eastern front began on October 2, while the battle of the Azov Sea was successfully completed on October 11. Another 107,000 prisoners, 212 tanks and 672 artillery pieces were counted. After heavy fighting, German and Romanian units were able to enter Odessa on October 16. The battle to break through the center of the Eastern front, which had begun on October 2, ended on October 18 with a success that is unique in world history. The result was 663,000 prisoners, as well as 1,242 tanks and 5,452 artillery pieces either destroyed or captured. The capture of Dagoe [Hiiumaa island] was completed on October 21. The industrial center of Kharkov was taken on October 24. After very heavy fighting, the Crimea was finally reached, and on November 2 the capital of Simferopol was stormed. On November 16 the Crimea was overrun as far as Kerch.

As of December 1, the total number of captured Soviet Russian prisoners was 3,806,865. The number of destroyed or captured tanks was 21,391, of artillery pieces 32,541, and of airplanes 17,322.

During this same period of time, 2,191 British airplanes were shot down. The navy sank 4,170,611 gross registered tons of shipping, and the air force sank 2,346,180 tons. Altogether, 6,516,791 gross registered tons were destroyed.

My Deputies! My German people!

These are sober facts and, perhaps, dry figures. But may they never be forgotten by history or vanish from the memory of our own German nation! For behind these figures are the achievements, sacrifices and sufferings, the heroism and readiness to die of millions of the best men of our own people and of the countries allied with us. Everything had to be fought for at the cost of health and life, and through struggle such as those back in the homeland can hardly imagine. 

They have marched endless distances, tortured by heat and thirst, often bogged down with despair in the mud of bottomless dirt roads, exposed to the hardships of a climate that varies between the White and Black Seas from the intense heat of July and August days to the winter storms of November and December, tormented by insects, suffering from dirt and pests, freezing in snow and ice, they fought — the Germans and the Finns, the Italians, Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians and Croatians, the volunteers from the northern and western European countries — in short, the soldiers of the Eastern front! 

Today I will not single out specific branches of the armed forces or praise specific leaders — they have all done their best. And yet, truth and justice requires that something be mentioned again: As in the past, so also today, of all of our German fighting men in uniform, the greatest burden of battle is born by our ever-present infantry soldiers.

From June 22 to December 1 [1941], the German army has lost in this heroic struggle: 158,773 dead, 563,082 wounded and 31,191 missing. The air force has lost: 3,231 dead, 8,453 wounded and 2,028 missing. The navy: 310 dead, 232 wounded and 115 missing. For the German armed forces altogether: 162,314 dead, 571,767 wounded and 33,334 missing.

That is, the number of dead and wounded is somewhat more than double the number of those lost in the [four month long] battle of the Somme of the [First] World War [in 1916], but somewhat less than half the number of missing in that battle — all the same, fathers and sons of our German people.

And now let me speak about another world, one that is represented by a man [President Franklin Roosevelt] who likes to chat nicely at the fireside while nations and their soldiers fight in snow and ice: above all, the man who is primarily responsible for this war. 

When the nationality problem in the former Polish state was growing ever more intolerable in 1939, I attempted to eliminate the unendurable conditions by means of a just agreement. For a certain time it seemed as if the Polish government was seriously considering giving its approval to a reasonable solution. I may also add here that in all of these German proposals, nothing was demanded that had not previously belonged to Germany. In fact, we were willing to give up much that had belonged to Germany before the [First] World War. 

You will recall the dramatic events of that period — the steadily increasing numbers of victims among the ethnic Germans [in Poland]. You, my deputies, are best qualified to compare this loss of life with that of the present war. The military campaign in the East has so far cost the entire German armed forces about 160,000 deaths, whereas during just a few months of peace [in 1939] more than 62,000 ethnic Germans were killed, including some who were horribly tortured. There is no question that the German Reich had the right to protest against this situation on its border and to press for its elimination, if for no other reason than for its own security, particularly since we live in an age in which [some] other countries [notably, the USA and Britain] regard their security at stake even in foreign continents. In geographical terms, the problems to be resolved were not very important. Essentially they involved Danzig [Gdansk] and a connecting link between the torn-away province of East Prussia and the rest of the Reich. Of much greater concern were the brutal persecutions of the Germans in Poland. In addition, the other minority population groups [notably the Ukrainians] were subject to a fate that was no less severe.

During those days in August [1939], when the Polish attitude steadily hardened, thanks to Britain’s blank check of unlimited backing, the German Reich was moved to make one final proposal. We were prepared to enter into negotiations with Poland on the basis of this proposal, and we verbally informed the British ambassador of the proposal text. Today I would like to recall that proposal and review it with you.

[Text of the German proposal of August 29, 1939:]

Proposal for a settlement of the Danzig-Corridor problem and the German-Polish minority question:

The situation between the German Reich and Poland is now such that any further incident could lead to action by the military forces that have taken position on both sides of the frontier. Any peaceful solution must be such that the basic causes of this situation are eliminated so that they are not simply repeated, which would mean that not only eastern Europe but other areas as well would be subject to the same tension. The causes of this situation are rooted in, first, the intolerable border that was specified by the dictated peace of Versailles [of 1919], and, second, the intolerable treatment of the minority populations in the lost territories.

In making these proposals, the German Reich government is motivated by the desire to achieve a permanent solution that will put an end to the intolerable situation arising from the present border demarcation, secure to both parties vitally important connecting routes, and which will solve the minority problem, insofar as that is possible, and if not, will at least insure a tolerable life for the minority populations with secure guarantees of their rights.

The German Reich government is convinced that it is absolutely necessary to investigate the economic and physical damage inflicted since 1918, with full reparations to be made for that. Of course, it regards this obligation as binding on both sides.

On the basis of these considerations, we make the following concrete proposals: 

1. The Free City of Danzig returns immediately to the German Reich on the basis of its purely German character and the unanimous desire of its population.

2. The territory of the so-called [Polish] Corridor will decide for itself whether it wishes to belong to Germany or to Poland. This territory consists of the area between the Baltic Sea [in the north] to a line marked [in the south] by the towns of Marienwerder, Graudenz, Kuhn and Bromberg — including these towns — and then westwards to Schoenlanke.

3. For this purpose a plebiscite will be conducted in this territory. All Germans who lived in this territory on January 1, 1918, or were born there on or before that date will be entitled to vote in the plebiscite. Similarly, all Poles, Kashubians, and so forth, who lived in this territory on or before that date, or were born there before that date, will also be entitled to vote. Germans who were expelled from this territory will return to vote in the plebiscite.

To insure an impartial plebiscite and to make sure that all necessary preliminary preparation work is properly carried out, this territory will come under the authority of an international commission, similar to the one organized in the Saar territory [for the 1935 plebiscite there]. This commission is to be organized immediately by the four great powers of Italy, the Soviet Union, France and Britain. This commission will have all sovereign authority in the territory. Accordingly, Polish military forces, Polish police and Polish authorities are to clear out of this territory as soon as possible, by a date to be agreed upon.

4. Not included in this territory is the Polish port of Gdynia, which is regarded as fundamentally sovereign Polish territory, to the extent of [ethnic] Polish settlement, but as a matter of principle is recognized as Polish territory. The specific border of this Polish port city will be negotiated by Germany and Poland and, if necessary, established by an international court of arbitration.

5. In order to insure ample time for the preparations necessary in order to conduct an impartial plebiscite, the plebiscite will not take place until after at least twelve months have elapsed.

6. In order to ensure unhindered traffic between Germany and East Prussia, and between Poland and the [Baltic] Sea, during this period [before the plebiscite], certain roads and rail lines may be designated to enable free transit. In that regard, only such fees may be imposed that are necessary for the maintenance of the transit routes or for transport itself.

7. A simple majority of the votes cast will decide whether the territory will go to Germany or to Poland.

8. After the plebiscite has been conducted, and regardless of the result, free transit will be guaranteed between Germany and its province of Danzig-East Prussia, as well as between Poland and the [Baltic] Sea. If the plebiscite determines that the territory belongs to Poland, Germany will obtain an extraterritorial transit zone, consisting of a motor super-highway [Reichsautobahn] and a four-track rail line, approximately along the line of Buetow-Danzig and Dirschau. The highway and the rail line will be built in such a way that the Polish transit lines are not disturbed, which means that they will pass either above or underneath. This zone will be one kilometer wide and will be sovereign German territory. In case the plebiscite is in Germany’s favor, Poland will have free and unrestricted transit to its port of Gdynia with the same right to an extraterritorial road and rail line that Germany would have had.

9. If the Corridor returns to Germany, the German Reich declares that it is ready to carry out an exchange of population with Poland to the extent that this would be suitable for the [people of the] Corridor.

10. The special rights that may be claimed by Poland in the port of Danzig will be negotiated on the basis of parity for rights to Germany in the port of Gdynia.

11. In order to eliminate all fear of threat from either side, Danzig and Gdynia will be purely commercial centers, that is, with no military installations or military fortifications.

12. The peninsula of Hela, which will go to either Poland or Germany on the basis of the plebiscite, will also be demilitarized in any case.

13. The German Reich government has protested in the strongest terms against the Polish treatment of its minority populations. For its part, the Polish government also believes itself called upon to make protests against Germany. Accordingly, both sides agree to submit these complaints to an international investigation commission, which will be responsible for investigating all complaints of economic and physical damage as well as other acts of terror.

Germany and Poland pledge to compensate for all economic and other damages inflicted on minority populations on both sides since 1918, and/or to revoke all expropriations and provide for complete reparation for the victims of these and other economic measures.

14. In order to eliminate feelings of deprivation of international rights in the part of the Germans who will remain in Poland, as well as of the Poles who will remain in Germany, and above all, to insure that they are not forced to act contrary to their ethnic-national feelings, Germany and Poland agree to guarantee the rights of the minority populations on both sides through comprehensive and binding agreements. These will insure the right of these minority groups to maintain, freely develop and carry on their national-cultural life. In particular, they will be allowed to maintain organizations for these purposes. Both sides agree that members of their minority populations will not be drafted for military service.

15. If agreement is reached on the basis of these proposals, Germany and Poland declare that they will immediately order and carry out the demobilization of their armed forces.

16. Germany and Poland will agree to whatever additional measures may be necessary to implement the above points as quickly as possible.

[End of the text of the German proposal]

The same [measures] would have applied with regard to the proposals to secure [the rights of] the minorities.

This is the treaty proposal – as straight-forward and as generous as has ever been presented by a government – that was made by the National Socialist leadership of the German Reich.

The former Polish government refused to respond to these proposals in any way. In this regard, the question presents itself: How is it possible that such an unimportant state could dare to simply disregard such proposals and, in addition, carry out further cruelties against the Germans, the people who have given this land its entire culture, and even order the general mobilization of its armed forces? 

A look at the documents of the [Polish] Foreign Ministry in Warsaw later provided the surprising explanation. They told of the role of a man [President Roosevelt] who, with diabolical lack of principle, used all of his influence to strengthen Poland’s resistance and to prevent any possibility of understanding. These reports were sent by the former Polish ambassador in Washington, Count [Jerzy] Potocki, to his government in Warsaw. These documents clearly and shockingly reveal the extent to which one man and the powers behind him are responsible for the Second World War. Another question arises: Why had this man [Roosevelt] developed such a fanatic hostility against a country that, in its entire history, had never harmed either America or him? 

With regard to Germany’s relationship with America, the following should be said: 

1. Germany is perhaps the only great power which has never had a colony in either North or South America.Nor has it been otherwise politically active there, apart from the emigration of many millions of Germans with their skills, from which the American continent, and particularly the United States, has only benefited. 

2. In the entire history of the development and existence of the United States, the German Reich has never been hostile or even politically unfriendly towards the United States. To the contrary, many Germans have given their lives to defend the USA. 

3. The German Reich has never participated in wars against the United States, except when the United States went to war against it in 1917. It did so for reasons that have been thoroughly explained by a commission [a special U.S. Senate investigating committee, 1934-1935, chaired by Sen. Gerald Nye], which president Roosevelt himself established [or rather, endorsed]. This commission to investigate the reasons for America’s entry into the [First World] war clearly established that the United States entered the war in 1917 solely for the capitalist interests of a small group, and that Germany itself had no intention to come into conflict with America.

Furthermore, there are no territorial or political conflicts between the American and German nations that could possibly involve the existence or even the [vital] interests of the United States. The forms of government have always been different. But this cannot be a reason for hostility between different nations, as long as one form of government does not try to interfere with another, outside of its naturally ordained sphere. 

America is a republic led by a president with wide-ranging powers of authority. Germany was once ruled by a monarchy with limited authority, and then by a democracy that lacked authority. Today it is a republic of wide-ranging authority. Between these two countries is an ocean. If anything, the differences between capitalist America and Bolshevik Russia, if these terms have any meaning at all, must be more significant than those between an America led by a President and a Germany led by a Führer. 

It is a fact that the two historical conflicts between Germany and the United States were stimulated by two Americans, that is, by Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, although each was inspired by the same forces. History itself has rendered its verdict on Wilson. His name will always be associated with the most base betrayal in history of a pledge [notably, Wilson’s “14 points”]. The result was the ruin of national life, not only in the so-called vanquished countries, but among the victors as well. Because of this broken pledge, which alone made possible the imposed Treaty of Versailles [1919], countries were torn apart, cultures were destroyed and the economic life of all was ruined. Today we know that a group of self-serving financiers stood behind Wilson. They used this paralytic professor to lead America into a war from which they hoped to profit. The German nation once believed this man, and had to pay for this trust with political and economic ruin. 

After such a bitter experience, why is there now another American president who is determined to incite wars and, above all, to stir up hostility against Germany to the point of war? National Socialism came to power in Germany in the same year [1933] that Roosevelt came to power in the United States. At this point it is important to examine the factors behind the current developments.

First of all, the personal side of things: I understand very well that there is a world of difference between my own outlook on life and attitude, and that of President Roosevelt. Roosevelt came from an extremely wealthy family. By birth and origin he belonged to that class of people that is privileged in a democracy and assured of advancement. I myself was only the child of a small and poor family, and I had to struggle through life by work and effort in spite of immense hardships. As a member of the privileged class, Roosevelt experienced the [First] World War in a position under Wilson’s shadow [as assistant secretary of the Navy]. As a result, he only knew the agreeable consequences of a conflict between nations from which some profited while others lost their lives. During this same period, I lived very differently. I was not one of those who made history or profits, but rather one of those who carried out orders. As an ordinary soldier during those four years, I tried to do my duty in the face of the enemy. Of course, I returned from the war just as poor as when I entered in the fall of 1914. I thus shared my fate with millions of others, while Mr. Roosevelt shared his with the so-called upper ten thousand.

After the war, while Mr. Roosevelt tested his skills in financial speculation in order to profit personally from the inflation, that is, from the misfortune of others, I still lay in a military hospital along with many hundreds of thousands of others. Experienced in business, financially secure and enjoying the patronage of his class, Roosevelt then finally chose a career in politics. During this same period, I struggled as a nameless and unknown man for the rebirth of my nation, which was the victim of the greatest injustice in its entire history. 

Two different paths in life! Franklin Roosevelt took power in the United States as the candidate of a thoroughly capitalistic party, which helps those who serve it. When I became the Chancellor of the German Reich, I was the leader of a popular national movement, which I had created myself. The powers that supported Mr. Roosevelt were the same powers I fought against, out of concern for the fate of my people, and out of deepest inner conviction. The “brain trust” that served the new American president was made up of members of the same national group that we fought against in Germany as a parasitical expression of humanity, and which we began to remove from public life. 

And yet, we also had something in common: Franklin Roosevelt took control of a country with an economy that had been ruined as a result of democratic influences, and I assumed the leadership of a Reich that was also on the edge of complete ruin, thanks to democracy. There were 13 million unemployed in the United States, while Germany had seven million unemployed and another seven million part-time workers. In both countries, public finances were in chaos, and it seemed that the spreading economic depression could not be stopped. 

From then on, things developed in the United States and in the German Reich in such a way that future generations will have no difficulty in making a definitive evaluation of the two different socio-political theories. Whereas the German Reich experienced an enormous improvement in social, economic, cultural and artistic life in just a few years under National Socialist leadership, President Roosevelt was not able to bring about even limited improvements in his own country. This task should have been much easier in the United States, with barely 15 people per square kilometer, as compared to 140 in Germany. If economic prosperity is not possible in that country, it must be the result of either a lack of will by the ruling leadership or the complete incompetence of the men in charge. In just five years, the economic problems were solved in Germany and unemployment was eliminated. During this same period, President Roosevelt enormously increased his country’s national debt, devalued the dollar, further disrupted the economy and maintained the same number of unemployed. 

But this is hardly remarkable when one realizes that the intellects appointed by this man, or more accurately, who appointed him, are members of that same group who, as Jews, are interested only in disruption and never in order. While we in National Socialist Germany took measures against financial speculation, it flourished tremendously under Roosevelt. The New Deal legislation of this man was spurious, and consequently the greatest error ever experienced by anyone. If his economic policies had continued indefinitely during peace time, there is no doubt that sooner or later they would have brought down this president, in spite of all his dialectical cleverness. In a European country his career would certainly have ended in front of a national court for recklessly squandering the nation’s wealth. And he would hardly have avoided a prison sentence by a civil court for criminally incompetent business management. 

Many respected Americans also shared this view. A threatening opposition was growing all around this man, which led him to think that he could save himself only by diverting public attention from his domestic policies to foreign affairs. In this regard it is interesting to study the reports of Polish Ambassador Potocki from Washington, which repeatedly point out that Roosevelt was fully aware of the danger that his entire economic house of cards could collapse, and that therefore he absolutely had to divert attention to foreign policy. 

The circle of Jews around Roosevelt encouraged him in this. With Old Testament vindictiveness they regarded the United States as the instrument that they and he could use to prepare a second Purim [slaughter of enemies] against the nations of Europe, which were increasingly anti-Jewish. So it was that the Jews, in all of their satanic baseness, gathered around this man, and he relied on them. 

The American president increasingly used his influence to create conflicts, intensify existing conflicts, and, above all, to keep conflicts from being resolved peacefully. For years this man looked for a dispute anywhere in the world, but preferably in Europe, that he could use to create political entanglements with American economic obligations to one of the contending sides, which would then steadily involve America in the conflict and thus divert attention from his own confused domestic economic policies. 

His actions against the German Reich in this regard have been particularly blunt. Starting in 1937, he began a series of speeches, including a particularly contemptible one on October 5, 1937, in Chicago, with which this man systematically incited the American public against Germany . He threatened to establish a kind of quarantine against the so-called authoritarian countries. As part of this steady and growing campaign of hate and incitement, President Roosevelt made another insulting statement [on Nov. 15, 1938] and then called the American ambassador in Berlin back to Washington for consultations. Since then the two countries have been represented only by charges d’affaires

Starting in November 1938, he began systematically and consciously to sabotage every possibility of a European peace policy. In public he hypocritically claimed to be interested in peace while at the same time he threatened every country that was ready to pursue a policy of peaceful understanding by blocking credits, economic reprisals, calling in loans, and so forth. In this regard, the reports of the Polish ambassadors in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels provide a shocking insight. 

This man increased his campaign of incitement in January 1939. In a message [on Jan. 4, 1939] to the U.S. Congress he threatened to take every measure short of war against the authoritarian countries. 

He repeatedly claimed that other countries were trying to interfere in American affairs, and he talked a lot about upholding the Monroe Doctrine. Starting in March 1939 he began lecturing about internal European affairs that were of no concern of the President of the United States. In the first place, he doesn’t understand these problems, and secondly, even if he did understand them and appreciated the historical circumstances, he has no more right to concern himself with central European affairs than the German head of state has to take positions on or make judgments about conditions in the United States. 

Mr. Roosevelt went even beyond that. Contrary to the rules of international law, he refused to recognize governments he didn’t like, would not accept new ones, refused to dismiss ambassadors of non-existent countries, and even recognized them as legal governments. He went so far as to conclude treaties with these ambassadors, which then gave him the right to simply occupy foreign territories [Greenland and Iceland ]. 

On April 15, 1939, Roosevelt made his famous appeal to me and the Duce [Mussolini], which was a mixture of geographical and political ignorance combined with the arrogance of a member of the millionaire class. We were called upon to make declarations and to conclude non-aggression pacts with a number of countries, many of which were not even independent because they had either been annexed or turned into subordinate protectorates by countries [Britain and France] allied with Mr. Roosevelt. You will recall, my Deputies, that then [on April 28, 1939] I gave a polite but straightforward answer to this obtrusive gentleman, which succeeded in stopping, at least for a few months, the storm of chatter from this unsophisticated warmonger. 

But now the honorable wife [Eleanor Roosevelt] took his place. She and her sons [she said] refused to live in a world such as ours. That is at least understandable, for ours is world of work and not one of deceit and racketeering. After a short rest, though, he was back at it. On November 4, 1939, the Neutrality Act was revised and the arms embargo was repealed in favor of a one-sided supply [of weapons] to Germany’s adversaries. In the same way, he pushed in eastern Asia for economic entanglements with China that would eventually lead to effective common interests. That same month he recognized a small group of Polish emigrants as a so-called government in exile, the only political basis of which was a few million Polish gold pieces they had taken from Warsaw. 

On April 9 [1940] he froze all Norwegian and Danish assets [in the United States] on the lying pretext of wanting to keep them from falling into German hands, even though he knew full well, for example, that Germany has not interfered with, much less taken control of, the Danish government’s administration of its financial affairs. Along with the other governments in exile, Roosevelt now recognized one for Norway. On May 15, 1940, Dutch and Belgian governments in exile were also recognized, and at the same time Dutch and Belgian assets [in the USA ] were frozen. 

This man revealed his true attitude in a telegram of June 15 [1940] to French premier [Paul] Reynaud. Roosevelt told him that the American government would double its aid to France, on the condition that France continue the war against Germany. In order to give special emphasis to his desire that the war continue, he declared that the American government would not recognize acquisitions brought about by conquest, which included, for example, the retaking of territories that had been stolen from Germany. I do not need to emphasize that now and in the future, the German government will not be concerned about whether or not the President of the United States recognizes a border in Europe. I mention this case because it is characteristic of the systematic incitement of this man, who hypocritically talks about peace while at the same time he incites to war. 

And now he feared that if peace were to come about in Europe, the billions he had squandered on military spending would soon be recognized as an obvious case of fraud, because no one would attack America unless America itself provoked the attack. On June 17, 1940, the President of the United States froze French assets [in the USA] in order, so he said, to keep them from being seized by Germany, but in reality to get hold of the gold that was being brought from Casablanca on an American cruiser. 

In July 1940 Roosevelt began to take many new measures toward war, such as permitting the service of American citizens in the British air force and the training of British air force personnel in the United States. In August 1940 a joint military policy for the United States and Canada was established. In order to make the establishment of a joint American-Canadian defense committee plausible to at least the stupidest people, Roosevelt periodically invented crises and acted as if America was threatened by immediate attack. He would suddenly cancel trips and quickly return to Washington and do similar things in order to emphasize the seriousness of the situation to his followers, who really deserve pity. 

He moved still closer to war in September 1940 when he transferred fifty American naval destroyers to the British fleet, and in return took control of military bases on British possessions in North and Central America. Future generations will determine the extent to which, along with all this hatred against socialist Germany, the desire to easily and safely take control of the British empire in its hour of disintegration may have also played a role. 

After Britain was no longer able to pay cash for American deliveries he imposed the Lend-Lease Act on the American people [in March 1941]. As President, he thereby obtained the authority to furnish lend-lease military aid to countries that he, Roosevelt, decided it was in America’s vital interests to defend. After it became clear that Germany would not respond under any circumstances to his continued boorish behavior, this man took another step forward in March 1941. 

As early as December 19, 1939, an American cruiser [the Tuscaloosa] that was inside the security zone maneuvered the [German] passenger liner Columbus into the hands of British warships. As a result, it had to be scuttled. On that same day, US military forces helped in an effort to capture the German merchant ship Arauca. On January 27, 1940, and once again contrary to international law, the US cruiser Trenton reported the movements of the German merchant ships Arauca, La Plata and Wangoni to enemy naval forces. 

On June 27, 1940, he announced a limitation on the free movement of foreign merchant ships in US ports, completely contrary to international law. In November 1940 he permitted US warships to pursue the German merchant ships Phrygia, Idarwald and Rhein until they finally had to scuttle themselves to keep from falling into enemy hands. On April 13, 1941, American ships were permitted to pass freely through the Red Sea in order to supply British armies in the Middle East. 

In the meantime, in March [1941] all German ships were confiscated by the American authorities. In the process, German Reich citizens were treated in the most degrading way, ordered to certain locations in violation of international law, put under travel restrictions, and so forth. Two German officers who had escaped from Canadian captivity [to the United States] were shackled and returned to the Canadian authorities, likewise completely contrary to international law. 

On March 27 [1941] the same president who is [supposedly] against all aggression announced support for [General Dusan] Simovic and his clique of usurpers [in Yugoslavia], who had come to power in Belgrade after the overthrow of the legal government. Several months earlier, President Roosevelt had sent [OSS chief] Colonel Donovan, a very inferior character, to the Balkans with orders to help organize an uprising against Germany and Italy in Sofia [Bulgaria] and Belgrade. In April he [Roosevelt] promised lend-lease aid to Yugoslavia and Greece. At the end of April he recognized Yugoslav and Greek emigrants as governments in exile. And once again, in violation of international law, he froze Yugoslav and Greek assets. 

Starting in mid-April [1941] US naval patrols began expanded operations in the western Atlantic, reporting their observations to the British. On April 26, Roosevelt delivered twenty high speed patrol boats to Britain. At the same time, British naval ships were routinely being repaired in US ports. On May 12, Norwegian ships operating for Britain were armed and repaired [in the USA], contrary to international law. On June 4, American troop transports arrived in Greenland to build air fields. And on June 9 came the first British report that a US war ship, acting on orders of President Roosevelt, had attacked a German submarine near Greenland with depth charges. 

On June 14, German assets in the United States were frozen, again in violation of international law. On June 17, on the basis of a lying pretext, President Roosevelt demanded the recall of the German consuls and the closing of the German consulates. He also demanded the shutting down of the German “Transocean” press agency, the German Library of Information [in New York] and the German Reichsbahn [national railway] office. 

On July 6 and 7 [1941], American armed forces acting on orders from Roosevelt occupied Iceland, which was in the area of German military operations. He hoped that this action would certainly, first, finally force Germany into war [against the USA] and, second, also neutralize the effectiveness of the German submarines, much as in 1915-1916. At the same time, he promised military aid to the Soviet Union. On July 10 Navy Secretary [Frank] Knox suddenly announced that the US Navy was under orders to fire against Axis warships. On September 4 the US destroyer Greer, acting on his orders, operated together with British airplanes against German submarines in the Atlantic. Five days later, a German submarine identified US destroyers as escort vessels with a British convoy. 

In a speech delivered on September 11 [1941], Roosevelt at last personally confirmed that he had given the order to fire against all Axis ships, and he repeated the order. On September 29, US patrols attacked a German submarine east of Greenland with depth charges. On October 17 the US destroyer Kearny, operating as an escort for the British, attacked a German submarine with depth charges, and on November 6 US armed forces seized the German ship Odenwald in violation of international law, took it to an American port, and imprisoned its crew. 

I will overlook as meaningless the insulting attacks and rude statements by this so-called President against me personally. That he calls me a gangster is particularly meaningless, since this term did not originate in Europe, where such characters are uncommon, but in America. And aside from that, I simply cannot feel insulted by Mr. Roosevelt because I regard him, like his predecessor Woodrow Wilson, as mentally unsound [geisteskrank]. 

We know that this man, with his Jewish supporters, has operated against Japan in the same way. I don’t need to go into that here. The same methods were used in that case as well. This man first incites to war, and then he lies about its causes and makes baseless allegations. He repugnantly wraps himself in a cloak of Christian hypocrisy, while at the same time slowly but very steadily leading humanity into war. And finally, as an old Freemason, he calls upon God to witness that his actions are honorable. His shameless misrepresentations of truth and violations of law are unparalleled in history. 

I am sure that all of you have regarded it as an act of deliverance that a country [Japan] has finally acted to protest against all this in the very way that this man had actually hoped for, and which should not surprise him now [the attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941]. After years of negotiating with this deceiver, the Japanese government finally had its fill of being treated in such a humiliating way. All of us, the German people and, I believe, all other decent people around the world as well, regard this with deep appreciation. 

We know the power behind Roosevelt. It is the same eternal Jew that believes that his hour has come to impose the same fate on us that we have all seen and experienced with horror in Soviet Russia. We have gotten to know first hand the Jewish paradise on earth. Millions of German soldiers have personally seen the land where this international Jewry has destroyed and annihilated people and property. Perhaps the President of the United States does not understand this. If so, that only speaks for his intellectual narrow-mindedness. 

And we know that his entire effort is aimed at this goal: Even if we were not allied with Japan, we would still realize that the Jews and their Franklin Roosevelt intend to destroy one state after another. The German Reich of today has nothing in common with the Germany of the past. For our part, we will now do what this provocateur has been trying to achieve for years. And not just because we are allied with Japan, but rather because Germany and Italy with their present leaderships have the insight and strength to realize that in this historic period the existence or non-existence of nations is being determined, perhaps for all time. What this other world has in store for us is clear. They were able to bring the democratic Germany of the past [1918-1933] to starvation, and they seek to destroy the National Socialist Germany of today. 

When Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt declare that they want to one day build a new social order, that’s about the same as a bald-headed barber recommending a tonic guaranteed to make hair grow. Rather than incite war, these gentlemen, who live in the most socially backward countries, should have concerned themselves with their own unemployed people. They have enough misery and poverty in their own countries to keep themselves busy insuring a just distribution of food there. As far as the German nation is concerned, it doesn’t need charity, either from Mr. Churchill, Mr. Roosevelt or [British foreign secretary] Mr. Eden — but it does demand its rights. And it will do what it must to insure its right to life, even if a thousand Churchills and Roosevelts conspire together to prevent it. 

Our nation has a history of nearly two thousand years. Never in this long period has it been so united and determined as it is today, and thanks to the National Socialist movement it will always be that way. At the same time, Germany has perhaps never been as far-sighted, and seldom as conscious of honor. Accordingly, today I had the passports returned to the American charge d’affaires, and he was bluntly informed of the following: 

President Roosevelt’s steadily expanding policy has been aimed at an unlimited world dictatorship. In pursuing this goal, the United States and Britain have used every means to deny the German, Italian and Japanese nations the prerequisites for their vital natural existence. For this reason, the governments of Britain and the United States of America have opposed every effort to create a new and better order in the world, for both the present and the future. 

Since the beginning of the war [in September 1939], the American President Roosevelt has steadily committed ever more serious crimes against international law. Along with illegal attacks against ships and other property of German and Italian citizens, there have been threats and even arbitrary deprivations of personal freedom by internment and such. The increasingly hostile attacks by the American President Roosevelt have reached the point that he has ordered the U.S. navy, in complete violation of international law, to immediately and everywhere attack, fire upon and sink German and Italian ships.  American officials have even boasted about destroying German submarines in this criminal manner. American cruisers have attacked and captured German and Italian merchant ships, and their peaceful crews were taken away to imprisonment In addition, President Roosevelt’s plan to attack Germany and Italy with military forces in Europe by 1943 at the latest was made public in the United States [by the Chicago Tribune and several other newspapers on Dec. 4, 1941], and the American government made no effort to deny it. 

Despite the years of intolerable provocations by President Roosevelt, Germany and Italy sincerely and very patiently tried to prevent the expansion of this war and to maintain relations with the United States. But as a result of his campaign, these efforts have failed.

Faithful to the provisions of the Tripartite Pact of September 27, 1940, German and Italy accordingly now regard themselves as finally forced to join together on the side of Japan in the struggle for the defense and preservation of the freedom and independence of our nations and realms against the United States of America and Britain. 

The three powers have accordingly concluded the following agreement, which was signed today in Berlin:

[Agreement text:]

With an unshakable determination not to lay down arms until the common war against the United States of America and Britain has been fought to a successful conclusion, the German, Italian and Japanese governments have agreed to the following:

Article 1. Germany, Italy and Japan will together conduct the war that has been forced upon them by the United States of America and Britain with all the means at their command to a victorious conclusion.

Article 2. Germany, Italy and Japan pledge not to conclude an armistice or make peace with either the United States of America or Britain unless by complete mutual agreement.

Article 3. Germany, Italy and Japan will also work very closely together after a victorious conclusion of the war for the purpose of bringing about a just new order in accord with the Tripartite Pact concluded by them on September 27, 1940.

Article 4. This agreement is effective immediately upon signing and is valid for the same period as the Tripartite Pact of September 27, 1940. The high contracting parties shall inform each other in due time before the expiration of this term of validity of their plans for cooperation as laid out in Article 3 of this agreement.

[End of Agreement text]

Deputies! Men of the German Reichstag!

Ever since my peace proposal of July 1940 was rejected, we have clearly realized that this struggle must be fought through to the end. We National Socialists are not at all surprised that the Anglo-American, Jewish and capitalist world is united together with Bolshevism. In our country we have always found them in the same community. Alone we successfully fought against them here in Germany, and after 14 years of struggle for power we were finally able to annihilate our enemies. 

When I decided 23 years ago to enter political life in order to lead the nation up from ruin, I was a nameless, unknown soldier. Many of you here know just how difficult those first years of that struggle really were. The way from a small movement of seven men to the taking of power on January 30, 1933, as the responsible government is so miraculous that only the blessing of Providence could have made it possible. Today I stand at the head of the mightiest army in the world, the most powerful air force and a proud navy. Behind and around me is a sacred community — the [National Socialist] Party — with which I have become great and which has become great through me. 

Our adversaries today are the same familiar enemies of more than twenty years. But the path before us cannot be compared with the road we have already taken. Today the German people fully realizes that this is a decisive hour for our existence. Millions of soldiers are faithfully doing their duty under the most difficult conditions. Millions of German farmers and workers, and German women and girls, are in the factories and offices, in the fields and farm lands, working hard to feed our homeland and supply weapons to the front. Allied with us are strong nations that have suffered the same misery and face the same enemies. 

The American President and his plutocratic clique have called us the “have not” nations. That is correct! But the “have nots” also want to live, and they will certainly make sure that what little they have to live on is not stolen from them by the “haves.” You, my Party comrades, know of my relentless determination to carry through to a successful conclusion any struggle that has already commenced. You know of my determination in such a struggle to do everything necessary to break all resistance that must be broken. In my first speech [of this war] on September 1, 1939, I pledged that neither force of arms nor time would defeat Germany. I want to assure my opponents that while neither force of arms nor time will defeat us, in addition no internal uncertainty will weaken us in the fulfillment of our duty. 

When we think of the sacrifice and effort of our soldiers, then every sacrifice of [those here in] the homeland is completely insignificant and unimportant. And when we consider the number of all those in past generations who gave their lives for the survival and greatness of the German nation, then we are really conscious of the magnitude of the duty that is ours. 

But whoever tries to shirk this duty has no right to be regarded as a fellow German. Just as we were pitilessly hard in the struggle for power, so also will we be just as ruthless in the struggle for the survival of our nation. During a time in which thousands of our best men, the fathers and sons of our people, have given their lives, anyone in the homeland who betrays the sacrifice on the front will forfeit his life. Regardless of the pretext with which an attempt is made to disrupt the German front, undermine the will to resist of our people, weaken the authority of the regime, or sabotage the achievements of the homeland, the guilty person will die. But with this difference: The soldier at the front who makes this sacrifice will be held in the greatest honor, whereas the person who debases this sacrifice of honor will die in disgrace.

Our opponents should not deceive themselves. In the two thousand years of recorded German history, our people have never been more determined and united than today. The Lord of the universe has been so generous to us in recent years that we bow in gratitude before a Providence that has permitted us to be members of such a great nation. We thank Him, that along with those in earlier and coming generations of the German nation, our deeds of honor may also be recorded in the eternal book of German history!


Germany’s Formal Declaration of War Against the United States 

About two hours before Hitler began his address to the Reichstag, Germany formally declared war against the United States when Reich Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop delivered a diplomatic note to the American Charge d’Affaires in Berlin, Leland B. Morris.

At almost the same time, the German Charge d’Affaires in Washington, Hans Thomsen, presented a copy of this note to the Chief of the European Division of the Department of State, Ray Atherton. Here is the text of the note:

The government of the United States of America, having violated in the most flagrant manner and in ever increasing measure all rules of neutrality in favor of the adversaries of Germany, and having continually been guilty of the most severe provocations toward Germany ever since the outbreak of the European war, brought on by the British declaration of war against Germany on September 3, 1939, has finally resorted to open military acts of aggression.

On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States of America publicly declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force to shoot on sight any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27, 1941, he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force.

Acting under this order, American naval vessels have systematically attacked German naval forces since early September 1941. Thus, American destroyers, as for instance, the Greer, the Kearny and the Reuben James, have opened fire on German submarines according to plan. The American Secretary of the Navy, Mr. Knox, himself confirmed that the American destroyers attacked German submarines.

Furthermore, the naval forces of the United States of America, under order of their government and contrary to international law, have treated and seized German merchant ships on the high seas as enemy ships.

The German government therefore establishes the following facts:

Although Germany on her part has strictly adhered to the rules of international law in her relations with the United States of America during every period of the present war, the government of the United States of America from initial violations of neutrality has finally proceeded to open acts of war against Germany. It has thereby virtually created a state of war.

The government of the Reich consequently breaks off diplomatic relations with the United States of America and declares that under these circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt, Germany too, as from today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the United States of America.


From: The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1988-89 (Vol. 8, No. 4), pages 389-416.
Revised: October 2007 and August 2012 and July 2013

Source: Der grossdeutsche Freiheitskampf: Reden Adolf Hitlers vom 16. März bis 15. März 1942 (P. Bouhler, ed.) III. Band. Munich: F. Eher, 1942, pages 113-148.


For Further Reading

Patrick J. Buchanan, Churchill, Hitler and ‘The Unnecessary War’. New York: Crown, 2008.

William Henry Chamberlin, “The Bankruptcy of a Policy,” in: Harry Elmer Barnes, ed., Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace (1953), Chapter 8.

William Henry Chamberlin, America‘s Second Crusade. Chicago: Regnery, 1952, 1962.

Benjamin Colby, ‘Twas a Famous Victory. New Rochelle: 1979.

Robert Dallek, Franklin Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1979.

Matthew DeFraga, “March 1939: America’s Guarantee to Britain,” Ex Post Facto: Journal of the History Students at San Francisco State University. 1998, Vol. VII.

Thomas Fleming, “The Big Leak” (“F.D.R.’s War Plans”), American Heritage, Dec. 1987 (http://www.americanheritage.com/content/big-leak?page=show)

Thomas Fleming, The New Dealer’s War: Franklin Roosevelt and the War Within World War II. New York: Basic Books, 2001.

J. F. C. Fuller, A Military History of the Western World. New York: 1987. Vol. 3, esp. pp. 372-375, 411-419.

Germany, Auswärtiges Amt [German Foreign Office]. Documents on the Events Preceding the Outbreak of the War. New York: 1940.

Germany, Auswärtiges Amt. Polnische Dokumente zur Vorgeschichte des Krieges. Erste Folge. Berlin: 1940.

Germany, Auswärtiges Amt. Roosevelts Weg in den Krieg: Geheimdokumente zur Kriegspolitik des Präsidenten der Vereinigten Staaten. Berlin: 1943.

Patrick J. Hearden, Roosevelt Confronts Hitler: America’s Entry into World War II. Northern Illinois Univ. Press, 1987.

Robert Higgs, “Truncating the Antecedents: How Americans Have Been Misled about World War II.” March 18, 2008
( http://www.lewrockwell.com/higgs/higgs77.html )

Joachim Hoffmann, Stalins Vernichtungskrieg, 1941-1945: Planung, Ausführung und Dokumentation. München: Herbig, 1999.

David L. Hoggan. The Forced War: When Peaceful Revision Failed. IHR, 1989.

David Irving, Hitler’s War. Focal Point, 2002.

Daniel W. Michaels, “Examining Stalin’s 1941 Plan to Attack Germany,” The Journal of Historical Review, Nov.-Dec. 2000.
(http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n6p40_Michaels.html)

Daniel W. Michaels, “Exposing Stalin’s Plan to Conquer Europe: How the Soviet Union ‘Lost’ the Second World War,” The Journal of Historical Review, July-August 1998.
(http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n4p30_Michaels.html)

Ted Morgan, FDR: A Biography. New York: 1985. Esp. chapters 17, 18 and 20.

Friedrich Stieve. What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers, 1933- 1939.
( http://ihr.org/other/what-the-world-rejected.html )

R. H. S. Stolfi, Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny. Prometheus Books, 2011.

Viktor Suvorov (pseud.), The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2008

Viktor Suvorov (pseud.). Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War?. London: 1990.

Charles C. Tansill, Back Door to War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941. Chicago: 1952.

A.J.P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War. New York: 1983.

John Toland, Adolf Hitler. Doubleday & Co., 1976.

Ernst Topitsch, Stalin’s War: A Radical New Theory of the Origins of the Second World War. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987.

Mark Weber, “President Roosevelt’s Campaign to Incite War in Europe: The Secret Polish Documents,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1983 (Vol. 4, No. 2), pp. 135-172.
(http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html)

Mark Weber, “Roosevelt’s  ‘Secret Map’ Speech,” The Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1985 (Vol. 6, No. 1), pp. 125-127.
(http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p125_Weber.html)

Mark Weber, “The ‘Good War’ Myth of World War Two.” May 2008.
( http://www.ihr.org/news/weber_ww2_may08.html )


Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy

eBOOK: Pearl Harbor – The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy

Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy

“Pearl Harbor – The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy,” by Percy L. Greaves (2010)

The bottom line thesis: that the attack December 7, 1941 was not unexpected or unprovoked. Nor was it the reason that Franklin Roosevelt declared a war that resulted in massive human slaughter. Instead, this book establishes, in exhaustive detail, that Pearl Harbor was permitted as a public relations measure to rally the public – and the blame shifted from the White House, where it belonged, to the men on the ground who were unprepared for the attack.

A president faced an economic depression that wouldn’t go away, and a deeply disgruntled electorate. Not for the first or last time, the option of entering a war seemed politically appealing. How badly did FDR want a war and to what lengths was he willing to go to get one? The questions have vexed historians for many decades.

Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy by Percy Greaves, Jr. (1906-1984), published for the first time in 2010, blows the top off a 70-year cover-up, reporting for the first time on long-suppressed interviews, documents, and corroborated evidence.

The first section (the seeds) provides a detailed history of pre-war U.S.-Japan relations, thoroughly documenting the sources of rising tension. The second section (the fruits) shows that the attack on December 7, 1941 was neither unexpected nor unprovoked. Nor was it the reason that Franklin Roosevelt declared a war that resulted in massive human slaughter. Instead, in exhaustive detail, this book establishes that Pearl Harbor was permitted as a public relations measure to rally the public, shifting the blame from the White House, where it belonged, to the men on the ground who were unprepared for the attack.

For 70 years, Greaves’s documents have been the primary source of revisionist scholarship on Pearl Harbor. These documents were prepared under his leadership as main counsel for the Republican minority on the Joint Congressional Committee that investigated Pearl Harbor from 1945 to 1946.

More than any other person, he was qualified to speak on this subject. He possessed encyclopedic knowledge and had access to research available to no one else. He conducted in-person, detailed, comprehensive interviews with all the main players at Pearl Harbor and many people in the security apparatus. The contents of these interviews are further corroborated by military records.

However, for many reasons, the documents were not published. He continued to work on this book for many years before his death in 1984. At that point, his wife Bettina Bien Greaves took up the project. The result is absolutely astonishing.

Much of Greaves’s research has never appeared in print—effectively suppressed for 70 years. Even the censored minority report did not include it all. But at long last, the fullness of this report is revealed. The result is this monumental book, completed and edited by Bettina Greaves and published by the Mises Institute. Pearl Harbor is a 937-page indictment of the Roosevelt administration, one that finally and devastatingly rips the lid off a case that has been shrouded in mystery for generations.

Because of the astonishing source material and thoroughness of the argument, Robert Stinnett, the leading authority on the topic and the author of Day of Deceit, calls Greaves’s book “explosive!”

Indeed, it is. The author writes in a guarded tone, carefully backing up every statement with massive evidence, provided in a level of depth never before seen. The prevailing consensus is that the fault for Pearl Harbor attack belongs to General Walter Short and Admiral Husband Kimmel, while the major political and military figures in Washington should be completely exonerated.

Greaves turns this conventional wisdom on its head. “It is now apparent also that the president himself, even before the attack, had intended to order the U.S. armed forces to make a pre-emptive strike against the Japanese in the southwest Pacific in order to assist the British in southeast Asia. But the Japanese ‘jumped the gun’ on him by bombing Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.”

Greaves’s conclusion is dramatic: “It must be said also that the evidence revealed in the course of the several investigations leads to the conclusion that the ultimate responsibility for the catastrophe inflicted on the U.S. Fleet at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, must rest on the shoulders of President Roosevelt…. It was thanks to Roosevelt’s decisions and actions that an unwarned, ill-equipped, and poorly prepared Fleet remained stationed far from the shores of the continental United States, at a base recognized by his military advisers as indefensible and vulnerable to attack…. Thus the attack on Pearl Harbor became FDR’s excuse, not his reason, for calling for the United States’s entry into World War II.”

Greaves provides comprehensive coverage here on the history of U.S. and Japanese relations, the actions of the Roosevelt administration, the attack and the response on the ground, the investigations and cover-ups that began almost immediately and continue to this day. Today the “back-door-to-the-war” theory has become mainstream historiography, even if those who admit it say that the lies were necessary for the good of the country. That is a difficult opinion to maintain in the face of the fullness of the evidence against FDR.

It is a remarkable fact that Greaves, who later became a close confidant of Mises himself throughout the 1950s and 1960s, and who is known mainly for his monetary work, has left us an amazing revelation 70 years after the fact and 26 years after his own death. It is proof that the wheels of justice can grind slowly but also very finely.

“Percy Greaves was chief of the minority (Republican) research staff of the (1945-1946) Joint Congressional Committee to Investigate the Pearl Harbor Attack. He attended all its hearings, interviewed many Army, Navy, and Washington principals involved in the attack and in the investigations. He researched diplomatic documents, studied reports and accounts of the event published during the years that followed. This book is not about the attack itself. It is about never before presented pre-attack and post-attack events, from the Washington point of view. Without name-calling, innuendo, or slander, Greaves simply presents the pertinent, significant and relevant facts which led the Japanese to attack and the political administration to want to cover-up its involvement.” – Bettina Bien Greaves

[embeddoc url=”http://zionistreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Pearl-Harbor-The-Seeds-and-Fruits-of-Infamy-1.pdf” download=”all” viewer=”google”]

BOMBSHELL: Zionist Report’s First Book – Challenge Your Knowledge

This is the first book we published. We strongly recommend you read it. You might think you know history, but this book will surprise you without a doubt. It will take you by the hand and clearly show you, true history. This is not just ‘another book’ it is a book that exposes events in an orderly fashion and will make everyone open their eyes! 

 

https://youtu.be/37vBzYGrv3Q

Elizabeth Dilling

COMMENTARY: Elizabeth Dilling Exposes the Jews Behind Communism

Elizabeth ‘Dilling’ Kirkpatrick was a great woman who had the courage to expose the Talmud to the American people. She was born in Chicago in 1894. In 1931 she visited the Soviet Union with her children and later recalled: 

“Our family trip to Red Russia in 1931 started my dedication to anti-Communism. We were taken behind the scenes by friends working for the Soviet Government and saw deplorable conditions, first hand. We were appalled, not only at the forced labor, the squalid crowded living quarters, the breadline ration card workers’ stores the mothers pushing wheelbarrows and the begging children of the State nurseries besieging us.”

“The open virulent anti-Christ campaign, everywhere, was a shock. In public places were the tirades by loud speaker, in Russian (our friends translated). Atheist cartoons representing Christ as a villain, a drunk, the object of a cannibalistic orgy (Holy Communion); as an oppressor of labor; again as trash being dumped from a wheelbarrow by the Soviet Five-Year-Plan – these lurid cartoons filled the big bulletin boards in the churches our Soviet guides took us to visit.”

When she returned to America she began giving lectures about Communism and in 1934 she published a book titled ‘The Red Network’. Dilling clearly exposed Roosevelt and those officials in his administration who were working for the Communist Party. She became associated with Father Charles Coughlin and also joined forces with Robert E. Wood, John T. Flynn, Charles A. Lindbergh, Burton K. Wheeler, Robert R. McCormick, Hugh Johnson, Robert LaFollette Jr., Amos Pinchot, Hamilton Stuyvesan Fish, Harry Elmer Barnes and Gerald Nye. Together they created the America First Committee (AFC) in September 1940. Their four main principals were: 

(1) The United States must build an impregnable defense for America; (2) No foreign power, nor group of powers, can successfully attack a prepared America; (3) American democracy can be preserved only by keeping out of the European War; (4) “Aid short of war” weakens national defense at home and threatens to involve America in war abroad.

Jeremiah Stokes, her second husband also shared her political views and was the co-author with Dilling of The Plot Against Christianity (1964). The book included the following passage:

“Marxism, Socialism, or Communism in practice are nothing but state-capitalism and rule by a privileged minority, exercising despotic and total control over a majority having virtually no property or legal rights. As is discussed elsewhere herein, Talmudic Judaism is the progenitor of modem Communism and Marxist collectivism as it is now applied to a billion or more of the world’s population. Only through thorough understanding of the ideology from which this collectivism originates, and those who dominate and propagate it, can the rest of the world hope to escape the same fate. Communism – Socialism was originated by Jews and has been dominated by them from the beginning.”

Elizabeth Dilling
“Elizabeth Dilling Exposes the Jews Behind Communism,” Source: eurofolkradio.com
 
First, a related audio by Revilo P. Oliver, exposing the saboteurs in America: the Jewish Parasites:

Marxism, Socialism, or Communism in practice are nothing but state-capitalism and rule by a privileged minority, exercising despotic and total control over a majority having virtually no property or legal rights. As is discussed elsewhere herein, Talmudic Judaism is the progenitor of modem Communism and Marxist collectivism as it is now applied to a billion or more of the world’s population .Only through thorough understanding of the ideology from which this collectivism originates, and those who dominate and propagate it, can the rest of the world hope to escape the same fate. Communism — Socialism was originated by Jews and has been dominated by them from the beginning.

There is no moral, philosophical or ethical conflict whatsoever between Judaism and Marxist collectivism as they exist in actual practice. Marxism, to which all branches of Socialism necessarily adhere, was originated by a Jew, Karl Marx, himself of Rabbinical descent. Every Jewish source today boasts of his rabbinical ancestry, and his “keen dialectical ability” (as presumably manifested by his abstruse, hair-splitting, Das Kapital) being due to his Talmudic inheritance.

Marx did not actually originate anything, but merely “streamlined” Talmudism for Gentile consumption. The Socialist” system he conceived merely brings about a practical means for a state dominated and controlled through a Jewish minority to rule by absolute dictatorship over everything and everyone, a concept which has been carried out very successfully in those countries of the World brought thus far under Marxist dictatorship.

Socialism is indeed merely the clover held in front of the cow’s nose to get her into the barn under the milking machine. It is a mechanism whereby a “human” can lead a whole non-human herd into the Jewish controlled barn.

The next time when some Christian dupe tells you: “Socialism is not Jewish!,” for one thing, pull out the pamphlet “Jew and Non-Jew,” put out by the Reform Jewish “Union of American Hebrew Congregations” and their “Central Conference of American Rabbis” and read:

Socialism was originated by Jews; and today Jews play a leading role in its spread and interpretation.” (page 30) (The Commission on Information about Judaism, Merchants Bldg., Cincinnati, Ohio, Exhibit I, page 71)

In a publication of the Jewish Publication Society of America, “Jewish Contributions to Civilization,” it is stated that,

“We find a strong Jewish participation throughout the socialistic movement which, from its inception up to the present day. has been largely dominated by Jewish influence. (See Exhibit I page 71)

Says the 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia:

“Jews have been prominently identified with the Socialist movement from its very inception.” (See Exhibit J, page 72)

The leaders of the 1917 Russian revolution were mostly Jews. (See Exhibit K, page 73)

Moses Hess —Jewish Marxist and Progenitor of Zionism

Like Karl Marx, “Father of modern Socialism,” Moses Hess (1812-1875) was born in Germany of Talmudic rabbinical ancestry, being steeped in Orthodox Judaism by the rabbi grandfather who raised him. He was active with Marx and Engels in promoting Communism which, he held, could best be achieved on a world-wide scale through Jewish Hasidism and Nationalism, or Zionism, based upon Orthodox Judaism. That he remains a pillar of present-day Zionism is illustrated by the fact that the Jewish press has recently announced removal of his body to Israel.

“He collaborated with Marx in writing, ‘Die Deutsche Ideologie’ (1845) … his continued publicizing for practical socialism in Germany earned him a sentence of death after the 1848 revolution.” (Universal Jewish Encyclopedia)

His chief work, authorities agree, was “Rome and Jerusalem” (translated by Meyer Waxman and published in the United States in 1945 by the Block Publishing Co.). He rushed home in 1848, says the translator, from Paris, “taking an active part in the armed resistance of the people.” (page 22) “In 1845, Hess engaged in propagating the Communistic idea and founding societies devoted to its realization, an occupation which led Arnold Ruge to describe him as ‘The Communist Rabbi Moses.”’ (pp. 21-22)

It is stated that,

“The fundamental principle of Hess’ thought … is based on the teaching of Spinoza, of which he was a devoted follower,” but he went further, says the translator, in expounding the “basic unit” of mind and matter, “the basic unity and its various unfoldings.”

Thus, he was considered a better pagan philosopher, even than the Jewish pantheist, Spinoza.

The translator quotes from a later article of Hess (page 30) in which Hess holds that Judaism: “began with the family of the individual and will finally end with a family of nations” (page 30). The Orthodox Jews have, “in his opinion, a much higher and truer conception of Judaism. They have retained … the kernel of Nationalism, and the desire for Jewish restoration … He advocated the colonization of Palestine … he also dreamed of a Jewish Congress, demanding the support of the Powers for the purchase of Palestine …” (page 32) (page 70]

Hess and Christianity

In his preface to “Rome and Jerusalem” Hess referred to Pope Innocent III (1198-1216 AD) and his decrees to compel Jews to wear distinctive badges and be identified as anti-Christians.

“From the time of Innocent III … Papal Rome symbolized to the Jews an inexhaustible well of poison. It is only with the drying up of this source that Christian German Anti-Semitism will die from lack of nourishment. With the disappearance of the hostility of Christianity … to Judaism, with the liberation of the Eternal City on the slopes of Moriah; the renaissance of Italy heralds the rise of Judah … Springtime in the life of nations began with the French Revolution.” The translator’s footnote here (page 34-5) is “At the time when Hess wrote these lines, Italy, under the leadership of Garibaldi, was struggling to wrest Rome from the Papal government and annex it to the new unified Kingdom.”

Hess also stated,

“Judaism has no other dogma but the teaching of the Unity.” (page 44) “… the Rabbis never separated the idea of a future world from the conception of the Messianic reign. Nachmanides insists … upon the identity of … ‘the world to come’ with the Messianic reign.” (page 46)

Sneering at Christianity, holding up the myth of a Jewish race (instead of the actuality, a breed of all races and nations), extolling the Talmud and delegating Moses to the inferior role given him therein (page 91), the whole cry of Hess was for Jewish world rule from Palestine “between Europe and far Asia … the roads that lead to India and China,” and he told Jewry:

“You have contributed enough to the cause of civilization and have helped Europe on the path of progress to make revolutions and carry them out successfully.” He called for Jews to “March forward!” and stated: “The world will again pay homage to the oldest of peoples.” (pp. 139-40) The “Talmud is the corner-stone of modern” Orthodoxy, (page 143). He looked to black magic, the occultism of Chasidism, which along with Zionism, was to achieve Communist dictatorship.” “The great good which will result from the combination of Chasidism with the national movement is almost incalculable,” (page 218), and he added, “Although the Chasidists are without social organization, they live in socialistic fashion.” (same)

The translator called Hess, in the 1918 edition Preface: “The herald of Nationalism and the trumpet of Zionism.”

Jewish Cover-up

The attempts of organized Jewry to cover-up its connections with Marxist collectivism are never-ending.

My book, The Octopus, (published under a pen name, 1940) refuted the lying propaganda of the powerful Jewish organization, B‘nai B‘rith in its brochure, widely copied by Christian dupes, entitled: “Answer Anti-Jewish Propaganda with Statistics.” The more fitting title would have been “Answer Anti-Talmudic Truths with Lies.”

The B‘nai B‘rith “defenses” were more revealing than defending — if one knows the subject matter. For example, in Russia the Mensheviks were but a branch of the Socialist Second International, along with the Bolsheviks, all consisting almost entirely of Marxian Talmudic revolutionaries, with the same objectives. Hence the revealing nature of telling any informed person that Jews were supposedly not Communistic because: “The great part of the Russian Jewish population belonged to the Menshevik party, which was a Democratic party and opposed to the Bolshevik party.” (B‘nai B‘rith Article 5, page 12)

The smear tactic for the gullible was employed by B‘nai B‘rith concerning German Jewish Reds. To whitewash these of Red connotations, the same B‘nai B‘rith article (Article 5, page 11) stated that in Hitler Germany: “Most of the Jews were social Democrats.”

Turning to the authoritative 1920 New York State Committee Investigating Subversive Activities Report (the Committee was headed by Senator Clayton Lusk): “The principles of the Karl Marx Communist Manifesto were adopted as early as 1869 as the basis of the first Social Democratic Party.” And, in 1891, the Party’s “Congress… adopted a thorough and comprehensive Marxian position … which remained the basis of the Party from that time forward.

The Party had over 3,000,000 votes in 1903.” (N.Y. State Lusk Report pp.87-8) In Marx’s lifetime, it was led by his followers Wilhelm Liebknecht and August Bebels. It’s left-wing, under the Jews, Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, staged the bloody Spartacist revolution in attempting to Sovietize Germany, in which they were killed, January 15, 1919.

A short-lived Soviet in Hungary was set up by another Jew, Bela Kun (actual name, Cohen), in 1919. There were 32 days of murdering, torturing Christians, burning nuns alive in ovens and other atrocities, as related to me by eyewitnesses. When this regime fell, Jews and their cohorts who conducted it were killed in large numbers by outraged citizens.

Of this the above New York Lusk report stated under the index: Hungarian and Soviet governments principally Jewish:”

“Of thirty-two principal Commissars, twenty-five were Jews, which was about the same proportion as in Russia.”

Jewish encyclopedias and authoritative histories admit the Jewishness of Bolshevik leaders.

Attempted Cover-up on the Jewish Bund

The same B‘nai B‘rith publication states as to Jewry in Russia:

“As for the part of Jewry which was united politically as Jewish, it grouped itself in the only mass-like Jewish party, the Bund. The Bund as well as the Zionists have been persecuted by Bolshevism from the first days of the October upheaval of 1917 to the present day …” (Article 5, p.30)

The Jews’ own authorities refute these false statements, [page 74] however, and show the active participation of the Bund in the Russian Red Revolutions, and the Red regime which followed.

[NB: Pages 71, 72, and 73 of Dilling’s book consist of Exhibits I, J, and K, respectively. Those exhibits are included on this web page and may be viewed via on the links provided herein. They are also listed in the Table of Exhibits.]

Note, for example, the official New York Jewish Communal Register report concerning the Central Verband of the Bund Organizations of America, and its purpose to aid the “Jewish Socialist Bund in Russia.” The same publication reveals (see Exhibit 242) Bund support of the then completed Bolshevik Red Revolution in Russia, stating:

“Since the Russian Revolution in 1917, the Central Verband of the Bund has been active in collecting funds to assist the Russian Bund in its work against counter-revolution forces and against the agitation by the Black Hundred for massacre of the Jews.”

Pages 1256-61 of the same Kehilla report, not reproduced here, tell how the Russian Bund in this country formed the Jewish Socialist Federation of America and was foremost in organizing the 1915 National Workmen’s Committee of radicals, representing: “a total membership of half a million Jewish workmen … representative of all radical wings.” (page 1448 of same, See Exhibit 239)

Further:

“A net of Bund branches was spread throughout the United States and Canada. For a number of years these branches, whose primary object was to collect funds for the Bund in Russia, were the most active and influential bodies in the Jewish radical world. Their members formed the vanguard of the Workmen’s Circle and swelled the ranks of the Jewish trade unions. The activities of the branches were coordinated and supervised by a Central Verband …” (page 1257 same report, not reproduced here)

The falsity of the alleged “persecution” of the Bund is best described in the 1943 Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (under “Bund”):

“After the revolution of March, 1917, the Bund grew rapidly … It succeeded in electing 300 of its candidates to city councils and 515 to Jewish community boards … The Bolshevik revolution in October of the same year led to sharp conflict of opinion within the Bund. Certain groups immediately joined the Communist Party; others … formed separate Communist Bunds (Kombund) for a time, but soon after joined the Communist Party as well. The members who remained in the party decided at their 11th convention (1919) to favor a Soviet form of government … A year later the majority of the party had adopted the Communist platform and shortly afterwards were ready to liquidate the Bund itself and join the Communist Party. The conflicts reduced the Bund to a fraction of its former size.”

It is further stated that what was left of the Bund ceased to exist in 1920.

Jewish Marxist-Zionist Minority Power

Most non-Jews have no concept of the degree to which Jewry is organized to further its aims. But millions of U.S. Jews are participants and members in Zionist and Marxist organizations, the names of which are virtually unknown to non-Jews, let alone their activities. The most powerful of these organizations have existed for decades.

Much revealing material as to some of the organizations was contained in the Jewish Communal Register for 1917-18, excerpted photostats of which appear herein. This 1597 page book was the report of the Kehilla (Jewish Community) of New York City, 356 Second Avenue, New York City, for 1917-18. Just reading this publication alone dispels any delusion that “Jews,” so-called, are primarily citizens of the USA, or any country in which they live.

The Jewish Community Register concerns itself largely with the political structure of the New York “Kehilla” in which world control of Jewry is centered.

National Workmen’s Committee of 1915

Nationwide Jewish Marxism was sponsored in 1915 by the National Workmen’s Committee.

The National Workmen’s Committee, says the 1917-18 Kehilla Report (Exhibit 233) “was organized in the early part of 1915, by representatives of the four leading radical organizations, viz.: The Workmen’s Circle, the United Hebrew Trades, The Jewish Socialist Federation of America and the Forward Association.”

I have visited one of the fraternal insurance society headquarters and training schools of the Workmen’s Circle, where anarchist meetings are held and Karl Marx’s big picture adorns the walls. Their schools reported teaching some 10,000 children Yiddish and Marxism in recent years.

The United Hebrew Trades has always sent delegates to the Socialist international conferences.

The Forward Association has published the “Forward,” in Yiddish, and which is currently the largest Socialist paper in the world.

The fourth organizer of the 1915 Committee was the red Jewish Socialist Federation.

“Over two hundred organizations were represented” the 18th of April, 1915, says this report. “Similar conferences were held in practically every important Jewish community all over the United States.”

Note (Exhibit 239) that the 1915 convention was held at a time when there were supposedly numerically only a small percentage of the Jews now in this country, but represented “a total membership of half a million Jewish workmen.” That is quite a large number indeed of organized Marxists with but one purpose in mind. They set out to propagandize the American people and the American government — and did.

The American Jewish Committee

The American Jewish Committee is the single most powerful body in world Jewry. Its membership then and now embraces world Jewish capitalists and moving powers.

[page 75] Note the wide range of activities of the Committee to influence national and international actions in favor of Jewry. (See Exhibits 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232234, 235, and 236)

Note in Exhibits 235 and 236, the powerful capitalistic Jews functioning on this all-powerful arbiter of world Jewry, the American Jewish Committee.

Louis Marshall was then, (1917—18) President of the Committee. It was he who served notice upon Henry Ford that he must cease telling the truth about the Talmudic cabal or else. According to the man perhaps closest to Henry Ford, Sr., high in the administration of his affairs, it was an attempt to assassinate Ford by driving his car off the road that caused Mrs. Ford to plead with Henry to cease his exposures of Talmudism through his Dearborn Independent. All the kowtowing now being done by the present-day Ford family to Jewry is but a repetition of what Ford exposed in his paper. One article, discussed later herein, on how President Taft was brought to his knees, refused a second term, then was decorated by B‘nai B‘rith and given a professorship at Yale — then addressed B‘nai B‘rith audiences and wrote internationalist propaganda until his death — is almost a replica of the job being done on the Fords.

Concerning Louis Marshall, the Communal Register states, “a great part of his life [was devoted] to the interests of the Jewish people,” and his part in the “abrogation of the treaty with Russia,” cannot be disputed. He is listed as “president of Temple Emanu-El,” his synagogue, and as Chairman of the Board of Directors and of the Executive Committee of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, among other things.

The Marshalls have worked all sides of the street for Talmudic rule: the capitalistic, the educational, the Red revolutionary, the legal, the United Nations.

James, son of Louis, has (according to Who’s Who in American Jewry, 1938-9) headed the New York City school board and a string of Jewish communal organizations, and as a member of the law firm of Marshall, Bratter and Seligson, listed himself as director and a legal counsel of the Jewish-run Communist Garland Fund, which subsidized the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, run from its foundation in 1913 by the Jewish Spingarns (Joel, the brother Arthur). In Who’s Who In America, 1954-5, Joel boasts of arguing the Texas primary and first Area Zoning cases for the NAACP, going to the Supreme Court. He lists his positions as delegate and commission member for the USA of UNESCO, and as advisor to the US Commissions of UNESCO at Paris and Mexico City. He lists his vice-presidency of the American Jewish Committee in Who’s Who. (1964-5)

Brother Robert, son of Louis, Sr., died, leaving a fortune to be spent for Marxian purposes, in the Robert Marshall Foundation. Its benefits to almost every phase of Communistic activity are chronicled by the Dies Committee reports (Vol. 17, 1944 – Section 1-6, etc.). It is run by another of Louis’s sons, George.

Red George Marshall’s record is so clear and so voluminous that it leaves no doubt about his ideological devotion to the Soviet Union and the revolution upon which that government is based. He has 29 Communistic listings in the index of the Dies Report, all backed by documentary evidence.

A book could be written about other architects for world Talmudic power listed in the 1917-18 Kehillah listing of the American Jewish Committee.

There is Eugene Meyer, Jr., of the Federal Reserve and Washington Post; Herbert Lehman, New York Governor, financier and Senator; Felix M. Warburg, of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., international bankers; Jacob Schiff, who then headed Kuhn, Loeb and Co.

We see that in 1939 Max Warburg, brother of Felix, of the Hamburg, Germany, bankers, appears on the American Jewish Committee’s “Institute on Peace and Post-War Problems,” set up with a ponderous staff and full equipment to go forward, as it did, to write and move the United Nations Charter into being, even before the USA entered World War II. Then we currently see Frederick M. Warburg, son of Felix Warburg, as a member of the American Jewish Committee, while his Hamburg relative, Max Warburg, who came here in 1939, serves on its “Post-war” Committee, as shown in the report of the American Jewish Committee in its American Jewish Year Book (Vol. 43, 1941-2, pp 751, 762).

Also listed in the 1917-18 Kehillah Register was Rabbi Judah L. Magnes of the Communist Garland Fund, protege of Jacob H. Schiff.

There was Cyrus L. Sulzberger, father of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, presently in control of the New York Times.

There was also Jacob Wertheim, father of Maurice, investment banker, industrialist of wide power, and director of the revolutionary Socialist Nation magazine and of that center of Marxian propaganda and Talmudic-Freudian sex-filth, the New School for Social Research, in New York.

Rabbi Wise

A book could be written about the Red activities of Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, before, during and since the Russian Revolution.

He was a founder of the American Jewish Congress and its President from 1924 on. He was a committeeman of the Communist-aiding American Civil Liberties Union, and also the communist American League Against War and Fascism, before, and after its change of name to American League for Peace and Democracy, with Communist Earl Browder as its national vice-chairman, and Communist Party leaders as officials. He “committed” himself for the anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti, for Communist dynamiter Tom Mooney, for the National Religion and Labor Foundation, featuring atheist Soviet cartoons and distributing Toward Soviet America, by Communist William Z. Foster. He ardently backed the Communist burners of Spanish Christian churches. His American Jewish Congress greeted, and he spoke for, the American League for Peace and Democracy. It’s official [page 76] program was the incitement of mutiny and sabotage within the armed forces to turn any war of the USA into a Red Revolution. Notes pledging this treason were read at their Congress in Chicago, which I attended.

Long and effusive memorials to Rabbi Wise appeared in the American Jewish Committee’s 1950 American Jewish Year Book:

“He was founder of the American Jewish Congress … He was the moving spirit and president of the World Jewish Congress from its organization in 1936 to his death … In 1897, as an organizer and secretary of the Federation of American Zionists, Stephen Wise ushered in a career of leadership in Zionism which brought him many high offices in the movement in America and throughout the world … more than any other American he was the outstanding symbol and advocate of Zionism, not only in the eyes of American Jews but also to the entire American people and its leaders, including Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt.”

This is but a small part of the tribute paid to Red Rabbi Wise in 1950 by the “conservative” American Jewish Committee, which also stated: “Toward the end of his life Rabbi Wise was greatly disturbed about the foreign policy of the United States which he felt was leading toward war with the Soviet Union … The last addresses he delivered in the weeks before his death were highlighted by attacks on those forces which he maintained were pushing his country toward war with Russia and which, he claimed, were attempting to suppress him. ‘I will not be silenced!’ were the last words this writer heard Rabbi Wise speak publicly, and they were most typical …” The same tributes close with fervent praises, and chronicle the fact that Wise had amalgamated his Jewish Institute of Religion in New York, which trains Rabbis, with Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio, whose founder and head until his death, Rabbi Isaac M. Wise, edited the first English translation of the Babylonian Talmud, known as the Rodkinson translation. Isaac Wise had introduced so-called “Reform” Judaism into this country from Germany.

American Jewish Congress

Another powerful Marxist-Zionist Jewish organization, with 500,000 or more Jewish members, is the American Jewish Congress.

We see (Exhibit 224), how the 1917-18 Jewish Kehillah report boasted of Pinchas Rutenberg as a founding force in the American Jewish Congress, as well as being the right-hand man to Jewish Premier A.F. Kerensky, at the time of the Russian Revolution.

Out of the Marxian welter of the “National Workmen’s Committee” of Reds in 1915, came the American Jewish Congress, now organized all over the world, with its New York headquarters named after Rabbi Stephen S. Wise. (See Exhibit 240)

We see (same Exhibit 224) Sholem Asch, author of deceitful “Christian” stories, who served on the staff of the socialist Yiddish Forward, then on that of the StalinistFreiheit, also printed in Yiddish. There is also Rabbi Judah L. Magnes, Jacob Schiff’s protege, of the Communist Garland Fund, also, Louis Marshall, and Louis D. Brandeis whose hysterical cry to Jewry was: “Organize, organize, organize!” until every Jew has to “stand up and be counted.” President Wilson put Zionist Brandeis on the Supreme Court. He was the largest single contributor to Communist Commonwealth College. Free love, nude swimming, singing the Soviet International in the training school for red agitators and other extreme activities resulted in Commonwealth College being closed up under the Arkansas anarchy laws.

As for the millionaire American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress: “The two organizations differed on the question of method rather than that of principle.” (See Exhibit 240)

The American Jewish Congress is active in some 65 countries of the world. The Congress has followed the Red line with enthusiasm — whether going to court for the “Miracle,” a play which portrays Christ as a bastard son of a soldier, in accordance with the Talmud, opposing “loyalty oaths,” or what have you.

Majority of Jews in Zionist-Marxist Organizations

The magazine, Jewish Life (April, 1938, published by the New York State Jewish Bureau, Communist Party) stated:

“Three federated Jewish bodies encompass between them the majority of Jews; the American Jewish Congress, controlled by the Zionists and representing the majority of Zionists, the Jewish Labor Committee and the Jewish People’s Committee, both of which have had national conventions in the past months, at which their respective positions were very clearly stated.”

Thus, the majority of Jews are in three Marxist national networks: all Marxist Socialist and one of them outright Communist in affiliation.

The Jewish Labor Committee

The organization of the Jewish Labor Committee in 1934 is cited in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (1943), in a sketch by its executive secretary. It represented a membership of half a million in 1942 and included David Dubinsky’s International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union, Sidney Hillman’s Amalgamated Clothing Worker’s Union, “and 765 other labor organizations.” The donation of a day or half-day’s pay to underground activities abroad was mentioned. Adolph Held, Joseph Baskin, David Dubinsky and the writer Jacob Pat, are given as officers.

Comparing the 1915 convention with a 1934 convention of the Jewish Labor Committee, B‘nai B‘rith Magazine (National Jewish Monthly, April, 1934) felicitated the Jewish Labor Committee on its “racial solidarity” and stated: [page 77]

“With the leading Jewish Socialist organizations represented by over one thousand delegates, this recent conference equalled in size and resembled in character that one that was held at the outbreak of the war. It was estimated that the delegates acted and spoke for more than half a million organized Jewish toilers, and spoke for them in behalf of specific Jewish interests.

“To show the world that we have great armies of labor is a very good thing but to have the same world note that these hosts are largely of radical frame of mind is something about which we have in the past been somewhat squeamish.”

The elected officers of the original and subsequent Jewish Labor Committee such as Chairman, B. Charney Vladeck (deceased), Secretary J. Baskin, Treasurer David Dubinsky, Joseph Schlossberg and Max Zaritsky, Vice-Presidents, were all Russian-born Red Socialist Jews, and former Red revolutionists in Russia.

Dubinsky, for example, was arrested repeatedly in Russia, serving 18 months in one prison, and was exiled to Siberia, escaping after five months and coming to the USA (American Labor Who’s Who, 1925).

Israel Weinberg, another official of the Jewish Labor Committee was “acquitted on one charge of murder in San Francisco Preparedness Day Parade bomb explosion, July 22, 1916, eight other indictments still pending.” (same source) The San Francisco Preparedness Day bombing was the work of the Anarchist-Communist Tom Mooney and his cohorts. Mooney had been expelled from the Socialist branch of the party for the dynamiting. But world Communism made him a hero until his death.

Adolph Held, Polish-born Jewish Socialist, who has been President of Sidney Hillman’s Amalgamated (Clothing Workers’) Bank, and President of the Daily Forward Association, was Chairman in 1955, of the Jewish Labor Committee. As previously mentioned, Daily Forward is the largest Socialist paper in the world — and is printed in New York in Yiddish.

B‘nai B‘rith Gloats Again

In the May, 1938 issue of its magazine, B‘nai B‘rith again gloated over a current convention of the Jewish Labor Committee “attended by 1,200 delegates, and said to represent more than 500,000 organized Jewish workers,” and rejoicingly commented that:

“The achievements of the Jewish people in the Soviet Union have been made possible by the assistance of the Soviet government.”

The American Jewish Committee, B‘nai B‘rith, and the Jewish Labor Committee formed a joint council with the Zionist radical American Jewish Congress (Associated Press, June 17, 1938), and have since been known as the “Big Four.”

Jewish People’s Committee

The Jewish People’s Committee of the Communist Party is comprised of hundreds of thousands of Communist Jews.

The January, 1938 issue of its publication, Jewish Life, reported a convention of the Jewish People’s Committee, stating:

“Close to 1,000 delegates representing half-a-million American Jews participated in the National Conference and anti-Polish Pogrom march on Washington under the auspices of the Jewish People’s Committee … A spokesman for Jewish reaction, Dr. S. Margoshes, tried to pooh-pooh the whole conference by saying: ‘About a thousand delegates, representing mostly Left and Communist-controlled Jewish organizations, assembled in Washington over the weekend.’”

But the article goes on to say: “Half a million Jews constitute a significant cross-section of American Jewry.”

Poale Zion

In the Jewish Communal Register for 1917-18, note, concerning “Zionism-Socialism,” the tribute paid to a socialist leader, B. Borouchov, who proclaimed Zionism as a Socialist “theory which was necessarily very popular among the Jewish masses who were at the same time Socialistic through and through.” And they still are “Socialistic through and through.”

“Zionism thus received a Marxist basis, and appealed strongly to the masses.” We see the organizations of the “Social Democratic Zionist Party Poale-Zion,” by Socialist Borochov and Ben-Zwi; a great Russian general strike (always part of Zionist strategy) and the organization of revolutionary red journals.

“At the same time that the party was organized in Russia, sister societies were organized in America, in England, and finally, in Palestine.” (See Exhibits 218, 219)

“Poale-Zionism” [i.e. workers of Zionism] we read “is a party not for Palestine alone, but also for the Golus [all Jews everywhere in so-called dispersion] and its interests.” “For this reason, Poale-Zionism is the center of the East Side [of New York] from which come forth almost all Jewish American movements, or without which no movement can prosper.”

And, continuing: “The Poale-Zion created the [Jewish] Congress movement … And the participation by the Jewish Kehillah of New York is cited:

“The Poale-Zion have made their best record in the Congress movement, where they forced the whole Jewish laboring class on the one hand, and the Zionists on the other hand, as well as the better-to-do elements, to participate.” (See Exhibits 222 and 223)

Even in 1917-18, there were stated to be “more than one hundred societies in the National Workers’ Alliance, which cooperates with Poale Zion. ”All this constitutes a strong [page 78] National-Socialist movement in America under the spiritual leadership of Poale Zion.” (See Exhibit 225) And:

“Purpose … the establishment of a socialistic commonwealth … the education of the Jewish masses in America (See Exhibit 226)

“Poale Zion” formed a world organization and affiliated with “Zeire Zion,” and became the strongest element in the Palestine “Histadruth” (giant cooperatives of unions, properties, industries, bus lines, banks, etc., on USSR lines) “controlling 70% of its votes” (Universal Jewish legion that fought on the side of the Allied army in Egypt and Palestine … a Yiddish weekly, Yiddisher Kampfer, and a monthly, The Jewish Frontier [supporter of Histadruth] and its prominent place in the Zionist World Organization. Poale Zion’s string of Marxist schools have done their work and are continuing to do it.

A Poale Zion Palestine party mentioned in the above 1943 report was called Aduth Haabodah, also spelled in the Zionist Palestine Year Book (1946), Ahdut Avoda and (in a 1955 Jewish Examiner report) Achdut Avodah.

“Ahdut Avoda is affiliated with the World Zionist Movement. It stands for the establishing of a Socialist Jewish State in Palestine, but is more radical in internal affairs.” (Palestine Year Book. 1946, page 355).

Marxist Parties in Israel

Where there is changing and realigning, the Marxist political composition of Israel does not change. “Left Poale Zion” and Ahdut Avoda form in part the Mapai party: “It’s socialistic outlook is similar to that of the Third International [i.e. of Moscow] but was not permitted to affiliate with it.” These Marxist parties comprise 92% of the Histadruth vote. (Palestine Year Book, 1946, page 355). As an illustration of “Poale-Zion”).

Poale Zion, like the rest of the Palestine Socialist parties, is part of the World Zionist Organization, in turn maneuvering through the world for Zionist aims.

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (1943) reported under “Poale Zion,” its formation in 1897; it’s founding of the Israel political orientation, the 1955 vote for Knesset (parliament) members in Israel was reported as follows (Jewish Voice, August 12, 1955):

“Mapai 40; Mapai-affiliated Arab parties, 4; Herut 16; General Zionists, 14; Religious Front (Mizrachi, Hapoel Hamizrachi) 12; Agudah, 6; Achduth Avodah, 10; Mapam, 8; Progressives, 5; and Communists, 5.”

And what are these parties, in brief? Says the Palestine Yearbook, 1946, page 354:

“Mapai is a Zionist Socialist party From its inception Mapai has been affiliated with the Second (Brussels) International.” Lenin and other Reds belonged to the Second International, until Moscow formed its own, called the Third International, a combine of Marxist parties formed in 1919.

Herut, which is now reputedly the second most powerful Palestine party, was formed by the Sternist terrorists who dynamited British police in sadistic fashion. After Israel was declared a state by the UN, these Sternists were admitted to the Palestine parliament, the Knesset, calling their party Herut.

Mapai tried to join the Moscow International, but was not permitted to because of minor stipulations. It “generally has a line of policy similar to Irgun and the Fighters for Freedom. It stands for close cooperation with the Soviets … A little-publicized fact is that Soviet arms have now been issued to all Israel troops … Recent Hebrew victories have been won with Soviet guns.” (From Jerusalem Calling, organ of the Sternist, now Herut, Fighters for Freedom, September 3, 1948, 149 Second Avenue, New York)

Ahdut, or Acduth, or Leachduth, Avodah, as before stated, is a Socialist Party, a party dedicated in other words to subjugating all classes to one collective rule.

The Religious Front — Mizrachi and Hapoel Hamizrachi, and the even more fanatical Agudah parties are Talmudic parties, fanatically dedicated to the achievement of the anti-Christian, immoral, anti-human world power aims of their Pharisee religion. The difference between Communist tactics and Talmudic tactics is that one is political and deceptive, the other inspires and is the dynamic of these tactics. One practices what the other teaches. Communism is Talmudism in action.

The Communist Party is merely an arm attached to the Moscow branch of Jewish imperialism.

The General Zionists are different only in their stress upon certain policies best calculated to achieve Talmudic world aims. As for any imagined “conservatism,” the leaders of the General Zionists, (according to the Palestine Year Book, 1946, issued by the Zionist Organization of America) the ruling heads of the World Zionist Organization were: red Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver, Louis Lipsky, Nahum Goldmann. (page 357)

Wise, Silver, Goldmann, Lipsky, were all included in the 120 top Jews of the world chosen by the world Kehillas in 1937, along with Commissar Litvinov (Finklestein) of Russia, Rabbi Louis Finkelstein (see his “Pharisees” herein), and others.

The four have been leaders in the World Zionist Congress, and its American branch, the American Jewish Congress.

 

DOCUMENTARY: People Who Control America?

This documentary will help you learn the reasons behind all wars. Who sunk ‘The Maine’ in 1898 and why? Why was the British ocean liner, Lusitania, torpedoed in 1915? Why did Pearl Harbor occur? And, why do we continue accepting lies after lies. Until humanity decides TO LEARN what the truth is behind all the lies we have been fed with,  it will never see neither justice nor peace. Their main objective is World Government which is Communism, Jewish Communism. An elite who’s objective is the power over the world. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzrYMEvAEyw

Boycott of German goods

COMMENTARY: MUST READ! – The Economic Boycott Of 1933

This is an excellent article that exposes not only the real causes and Jewish provocation for a war with Germany, but also how Hitler actually favored Zionism, something that not too many Jews will ever admit. The sentiment towards Jews in Europe has never been good, their immorality, usury and bad habits were not well received in any European countries, they were expelled from 109 European cities since 250 AD.

They brought the world into WW2 just like they did during WW1, with lies and fals propaganda, that is what they are good at. They already owned the media and counted with Freemasons in leading positions, so they backstabbed Hitler who was trying to eradicate communism from Europe and the world. Like General Patton quoted: “We defeated the wrong enemy”. Indeed they did, today we see the results. 

Boycott of German goods

“The Economic Boycott of 1933. M. Raphael Johnson, Ph.D.,” Source:  wintersonnenwende.com

The Jewish Declaration of War
on Nazi Germany
The Economic Boycott of 1933Article from The Barnes Review, Jan./Feb. 2001, pp. 41-45.
The Barnes Review, 645 Pennsylvania Ave SE, Suite 100, Washington D.C. 20003, USA.
By M. Raphael Johnson, Ph.D., assistant editor of TBR;
published here with kind permission from TBR.
This digitized version © 2002 by The Scriptorium.

Long before the Hitler government began restricting the rights of the German Jews, the leaders of the worldwide Jewish community formally declared war on the “New Germany” at a time when the U.S. government and even the Jewish leaders in Germany were urging caution in dealing with the new Hitler regime.

The war by the international Jewish leadership on Germany not only sparked definite reprisals by the German government but also set the stage for a little-known economic and political alliance between the Hitler government and the leaders of the Zionist movement who hoped that the tension between the Germans and the Jews would lead to massive emigration to Palestine. In short, the result was a tactical alliance between the Nazis and the founders of the modern-day state of Israel – a fact that many today would prefer be forgotten.

To this day, it is generally (although incorrectly) believed that when Adolf Hitler was appointed German chancellor in January of 1933, the German government began policies to suppress the Jews of Germany, including rounding up of Jews and putting them in concentration camps and launching campaigns of terror and violence against the domestic Jewish population.

While there were sporadic eruptions of violence against Jews in Germany after Hitler came to power, this was not officially sanctioned or encouraged. And the truth is that anti-Jewish sentiments in Germany (or elsewhere in Europe) were actually nothing new. As all Jewish historians attest with much fervor, anti-Semitic uprisings of various degrees had been ever-present in European history.

In any case, in early 1933, Hitler was not the undisputed leader of Germany, nor did he have full command of the armed forces. Hitler was a major figure in a coalition government, but he was far from being the government himself. That was the result of a process of consolidation which evolved later.

Even Germany’s Jewish Central Association, known as the Verein, contested the suggestion (made by some Jewish leaders outside Germany) that the new government was deliberately provoking anti-Jewish uprisings.

The Verein issued a statement that “the responsible government authorities [i.e. the Hitler regime] are unaware of the threatening situation,” saying, “we do not believe our German fellow citizens will let themselves be carried away into committing excesses against the Jews.”

Despite this, Jewish leaders in the United States and Britain determined on their own that it was necessary to launch a war against the Hitler government.

On March 12, 1933 the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens for March 27. At that time the commander in chief of the Jewish War Veterans called for an American boycott of German goods. In the meantime, on March 23, 20,000 Jews protested at New York’s City Hall as rallies were staged outside the North German Lloyd and Hamburg-American shipping lines and boycotts were mounted against German goods throughout shops and businesses in New York City.

According to The Daily Express of London of March 24, 1933, the Jews had already launched their boycott against Germany and her elected government. The headline read “Judea Declares War on Germany – Jews of All the World Unite – Boycott of German Goods – Mass Demonstrations.” The article described a forthcoming “holy war” and went on to implore Jews everywhere to boycott German goods and engage in mass demonstrations against German economic interests. According to the Express:

The whole of Israel throughout the world is uniting to declare an economic and financial war on Germany. The appearance of the Swastika as the symbol of the new Germany has revived the old war symbol of Judas to new life. Fourteen million Jews scattered over the entire world are tight to each other as if one man, in order to declare war against the German persecutors of their fellow believers.

The Jewish wholesaler will quit his house, the banker his stock exchange, the merchant his business, and the beggar his humble hut, in order to join the holy war against Hitler’s people.

The Express said that Germany was “now confronted with an international boycott of its trade, its finances, and its industry…. In London, New York, Paris and Warsaw, Jewish businessmen are united to go on an economic crusade.”

The article said “worldwide preparations are being made to organize protest demonstrations,” and reported that “the old and reunited nation of Israel gets in formation with new and modern weapons to fight out its age old battle against its persecutors.”

This truly could be described as “the first shot fired in the Second World War.”

In a similar vein, the Jewish newspaper Natscha Retsch wrote:

The war against Germany will be waged by all Jewish communities, conferences, congresses… by every individual Jew. Thereby the war against Germany will ideologically enliven and promote our interests, which require that Germany be wholly destroyed.

The danger for us Jews lies in the whole German people, in Germany as a whole as well as individually. It must be rendered harmless for all time…. In this war we Jews have to participate, and this with all the strength and might we have at our disposal.

However, note well that the Zionist Association of Germany put out a telegram on the 26th of March rejecting many of the allegations made against the National Socialists as “propaganda,” “mendacious” and “sensational.”

In fact, the Zionist faction had every reason to ensure the permanence of National Socialist ideology in Germany. Klaus Polkehn, writing in the Journal of Palestine Studies (“The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941”; JPS v. 3/4, spring/summer 1976), claims that the moderate attitude of the Zionists was due to their vested interest in seeing the financial victory of National Socialism to force immigration to Palestine. This little-known factor would ultimately come to play a pivotal part in the relationship between Nazi Germany and the Jews.

In the meantime, though, German Foreign Minister Konstantin von Neurath complained of the “vilification campaign” and said:

As concerns Jews, I can only say that their propagandists abroad are rendering their co-religionists in Germany no service by giving the German public, through their distorted and untruthful news about persecution and torture of Jews, the impression that they actually halt at nothing, not even at lies and calumny, to fight the present German government.

The fledgling Hitler government itself was clearly trying to contain the growing tension – both within Germany and without. In the United States, even U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull wired Rabbi Stephen Wise of the American Jewish Congress and urged caution:

Whereas there was for a short time considerable physical mistreatment of Jews, this phase may be considered virtually terminated…. A stabilization appears to have been reached in the field of personal mistreatment…. I feel hopeful that the situation which has caused such widespread concern throughout this country will soon revert to normal.

The New York Daily News front page headline

This New York Daily News front page headline hailed the massive anti-German protest rally held in Madison Square Garden on March 27, 1933. Despite efforts by the German government to alleviate tensions and prevent the escalation of name-calling and threats by the international Jewish leadership, the rally was held as scheduled. Similar rallies and protest marches were also being held in other cities during the same time frame. The intensity of the Jewish campaign against Germany was such that the Hitler government vowed that if the campaign did not stop, there would be a one-day boycott in Germany of Jewish-owned stores. Despite this, the hate campaign continued, forcing Germany to take defensive measures that created a situation wherein the Jews of Germany became increasingly marginalized. The truth about the Jewish war on Germany has been suppressed by most histories of the period.

Despite all this, the leaders of the Jewish community refused to relent. On March 27 there were simultaneous protest rallies at Madison Square Garden, in Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Cleveland and 70 other locations. The New York rally was broadcast worldwide. The bottom line is that “the New Germany” was declared to be an enemy of Jewish interests and thus needed to be economically strangled. This was before Hitler decided to boycott Jewish goods.It was in direct response to this that the German government announced a one-day boycott of Jewish businesses in Germany on April 1. German Propaganda Minister Dr. Joseph Goebbels announced that if, after the one-day boycott, there were no further attacks on Germany, the boycott would be stopped. Hitler himself responded to the Jewish boycott and the threats in a speech on March 28 – four days after the original Jewish declaration of war – saying:

Now that the domestic enemies of the nation have been eliminated by the Volk itself, what we have long been waiting for will not come to pass.

The Communist and Marxist criminals and their Jewish-intellectual instigators, who, having made off with their capital stocks across the border in the nick of time, are now unfolding an unscrupulous, treasonous campaign of agitation against the German Volk as a whole from there….

Lies and slander of positively hair-raising perversity are being launched about Germany. Horror stories of dismembered Jewish corpses, gouged out eyes and hacked off hands are circulating for the purpose of defaming the German Volk in the world for the second time, just as they had succeeded in doing once before in 1914.

Thus, the fact – one conveniently left out of nearly all history on the subject – is that Hitler’s March 28, 1933 boycott order was in direct response to the declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership just four days earlier. Today, Hitler’s boycott order is described as a naked act of aggression, yet the full circumstances leading up to his order are seldom described in even the most ponderous and detailed histories of “the Holocaust”.

Not even Saul Friedlander in his otherwise comprehensive overview of German policy, Nazi Germany and the Jews, mentions the fact that the Jewish declaration of war and boycott preceded Hitler’s speech of March 28, 1933. Discerning readers would be wise to ask why Friedlander felt this item of history so irrelevant.

The simple fact is that it was organized Jewry as a political entity – and not even the German Jewish community per se – that actually initiated the first shot in the war with Germany.

Deutsche! Wehrt Euch! Kauft nicht bei Juden!

Placard text:
“Germans! Defend yourselves!
Don’t shop at Jewish stores!”

Photo not part of original TBR article –
added by The Scriptorium.

Germany’s response was a defensive – not an offensive – measure. Were that fact widely known today, it would cast new light on the subsequent events that ultimately led to the world-wide conflagration that followed.To understand Hitler’s reaction to the Jewish declaration of war, it is vital to understand the critical state of the German economy at the time. In 1933, the German economy was in a shambles. Some 3 million Germans were on public assistance with a total of 6 million unemployed. Hyper-inflation had destroyed the economic vitality of the German nation. Furthermore, the anti-German propaganda pouring out of the global press strengthened the resolve of Germany’s enemies, especially the Poles and their hawkish military high command.

The Jewish leaders were not bluffing. The boycott was an act of war not solely in metaphor: it was a means, well crafted, to destroy Germany as a political, social and economic entity. The long-term purpose of the Jewish boycott against Germany was to bankrupt her with respect to the reparation payments imposed on Germany after World War I and to keep Germany demilitarized and vulnerable.

The boycott, in fact, was quite crippling to Germany. Jewish scholars such as Edwin Black have reported that, in response to the boycott, German exports were cut by 10 percent, and that many were demanding seizing German assets in foreign countries (Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement – The Untold Story of the Secret Pact between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine, New York, 1984).

The attacks on Germany did not cease. The worldwide Jewish leadership became ever the more belligerent and worked itself into a frenzy. An International Jewish Boycott Conference was held in Amsterdam to coordinate the ongoing boycott campaign. It was held under the auspices of the self-styled World Jewish Economic Federation, of which famous New York City attorney and longtime political power broker, Samuel Untermyer, was elected president.

Upon returning to the United States in the wake of the conference, Untermyer delivered a speech over WABC Radio (New York), a transcript of which was printed in The New York Times on August 7, 1933.

Untermyer’s inflammatory oratory called for a “sacred war” against Germany, making the flat-out allegation that Germany was engaged in a plan to “exterminate the Jews.” He said (in part):

…Germany [has] been converted from a nation of culture into a veritable hell of cruel and savage beasts.

We owe it not only to our persecuted brethren but to the entire world to now strike in self-defense a blow that will free humanity from a repetition of this incredible outrage….

Now or never must all the nations of the earth make common cause against the… slaughter, starvation and annihilation… fiendish torture, cruelty and persecution that are being inflicted day by day upon these men, women and children….

When the tale is told… the world will confront a picture so fearful in its barbarous cruelty that the hell of war and the alleged Belgian atrocities pale into insignificance as compared to this devilishly, deliberately, cold-bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people…

The Jews are the aristocrats of the world. From time immemorial they have been persecuted and have seen their persecutors come and go. They alone have survived. And so will history repeat itself, but that furnishes no reason why we should permit this reversion of a once great nation to the Dark Ages or fail to rescue these 600,000 human souls from the tortures of hell….

…What we are proposing and have already gone far toward doing, is to prosecute a purely defensive economic boycott that will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.

…We propose to and are organizing world opinion to express itself in the only way Germany can be made to understand….

Untermyer then proceeded to provide his listeners with a wholly fraudulent history of the circumstances of the German boycott and how it originated. He also proclaimed that the Germans were bent on a plan to “exterminate the Jews”:

The Hitler regime originated and are fiendishly prosecuting their boycott to exterminate the Jews by placarding Jewish shops, warning Germans against dealing with them, by imprisoning Jewish shopkeepers and parading them through the streets by the hundreds under guard of Nazi troops for the sole crime of being Jews, by ejecting them from the learned professions in which many of them had attained eminence, by excluding their children from the schools, their men from the labor unions, closing against them every avenue of livelihood, locking them in vile concentration camps and starving and torturing them without cause and resorting to every other conceivable form of torture, inhuman beyond conception, until suicide has become their only means of escape, and all solely because they are or their remote ancestors were Jews, and all with the avowed object of exterminating them.

Untermyer concluded his largely fantastic and hysterical address by declaring that with the support of “Christian friends… we will drive the last nail in the coffin of bigotry and fanaticism….”

The Biggest Secret of WWII?
Why Germany Began Rounding Up Jews
and Deporting Them to the East

Chaim Weizmann Why did the Germans begin rounding up the Jews and interning them in the concentration camps to begin with? Contrary to popular myth, the Jews remained “free” inside Germany – albeit subject to laws which did restrict certain of their privileges – prior to the outbreak of World War II.
Yet, the other little-known fact is that just before the war began, the leadership of the world Jewish community formally declared war on Germany – above and beyond the ongoing six-year-long economic boycott launched by the worldwide Jewish community when the Nazi Party came to power in 1933.
As a consequence of the formal declaration of war, the German authorities thus deemed Jews to be potential enemy agents.
Here’s the story behind the story: Chaim Weizmann (above), president of both the international “Jewish Agency” and of the World Zionist Organization (and later Israel’s first president), told British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in a letter published in The London Times on September 6, 1939 that:
      I wish to confirm, in the most explicit manner, the declarations which I and my colleagues have made during the last month, and especially in the last week, that the Jews stand by Great Britain and will fight on the side of the democracies. Our urgent desire is to give effect to these declarations [against Germany].
We wish to do so in a way entirely consonant with the general scheme of British action, and therefore would place ourselves, in matters big and small, under the coordinating direction of His Majesty’s Government. The Jewish Agency is ready to enter into immediate arrangements for utilizing Jewish manpower, technical ability, resources, etc.

[Emphasis in red added by The Scriptorium.]

That his allegations against Germany were made long before even Jewish historians today claim there were any gas chambers or even a plan to “exterminate” the Jews, displays the nature of the propaganda campaign confronting Germany. However, during this same period there were some unusual developments at work: The spring of 1933 also witnessed the beginning of a period of private cooperation between the German government and the Zionist movement in Germany and Palestine (and actually worldwide) to increase the flow of German-Jewish immigrants and capital to Palestine.

The modern-day supporters of Zionist Israel and many historians have succeeded in keeping this Nazi-Zionist pact a secret to the general public for decades and while most Americans have no concept of the possibility that there could have been outright collaboration between the Nazi leadership and the founders of what became the state of Israel, the truth has begun to emerge.

Dissident Jewish writer Lenni Brennar’s Zionism In the Age of the Dictators, published by a small press and not given the publicity it deserves by the so-called “mainstream” media (which is otherwise obsessed with the Holocaust era), was perhaps the first major endeavor in this realm.

In response to Brennar and others, the Zionist reaction has usually consisted of declarations that their collaboration with Nazi Germany was undertaken solely to save the lives of Jews. But the collaboration was all the more remarkable because it took place at a time when many Jews and Jewish organizations demanded a boycott of Germany.

To the Zionist leaders, Hitler’s assumption of power held out the possibility of a flow of immigrants to Palestine. Previously, the majority of German Jews, who identified themselves as Germans, had little sympathy with the Zionist cause of promoting the ingathering of world Jewry to Palestine. But the Zionists saw that only the anti-Semitic Hitler was likely to push the anti-Zionist German Jews into the arms of Zionism.

For all the modern-day wailing by worldwide supporters of Israel (not to mention the Israelis themselves) about “the Holocaust”, they neglect to mention that making the situation in Germany as uncomfortable for the Jews as possible – in cooperation with German National Socialism – was part of the plan.

Note to readers of this article who can also read German: a booklet discussing the emigration of Jews from Third Reich Germany, and the Transfer Agreement that facilitated their emigration, may be found here!

This was the genesis of the so-called Transfer Agreement, the agreement between Zionist Jews and the National Socialist government to transfer German Jewry to Palestine.According to Jewish historian Walter Laqueur and many others, German Jews were far from convinced that immigration to Palestine was the answer. Furthermore, although the majority of German Jews refused to consider the Zionists as their political leaders, it is clear that Hitler protected and cooperated with the Zionists for the purposes of implementing the final solution: the mass transfer of Jews to the Middle East.

Edwin Black, in his massive tome The Transfer Agreement (Macmillan, 1984), stated that although most Jews did not want to flee to Palestine at all, due to the Zionist movement’s influence within Nazi Germany a Jew’s best chance of getting out of Germany was by emigrating to Palestine. In other words, the Transfer Agreement itself mandated that Jewish capital could only to go Palestine.

Thus, according to the Zionists, a Jew could leave Germany only if he went to the Levant.

The primary difficulty with the Transfer Agreement (or even the idea of such an agreement) was that the English [!!!; Scriptorium] were demanding, as a condition of immigration, that each immigrant pay 1,000 pounds sterling upon arrival in Haifa or elsewhere. The difficulty was that such hard currency was nearly impossible to come by in a cash-strapped and radically inflationary Germany. This was the main idea behind the final Transfer Agreement. Laqueur writes:

A large German bank would freeze funds paid in by immigrants in blocked accounts for German exporters, while a bank in Palestine would control the sale of German goods to Palestine, thereby providing the immigrants with the necessary foreign currency on the spot. Sam Cohen, co-owner of Hanoaiah Ltd. and initiator of the transfer endeavors, was however subjected to long-lasting objections from his own people and finally had to concede that such a transfer agreement could only be concluded on a much higher level with a bank of its own rather than that of a private company. The renowned Anglo-Palestine Bank in London would be included in this transfer deal and create a trust company for [this] purpose.

Of course, this is of major historical importance in dealing with the relationship between Zionism and National Socialism in Germany in the 1930s. The relationship was not one merely of mutual interest and political favoritism on the part of Hitler, but a close financial relationship with German banking families and financial institutions as well. Black writes:

It was one thing for the Zionists to subvert the anti-Nazi boycott. Zionism needed to transfer out the capital of German Jews, and merchandise was the only available medium. But soon Zionist leaders understood that the success of the future Jewish Palestinian economy would be inextricably bound up with the survival of the Nazi economy. So the Zionist leadership was compelled to go further. The German economy would have to be safeguarded, stabilized, and if necessary reinforced. Hence, the Nazi party and the Zionist organizers shared a common stake in the recovery of Germany. 

Thus one sees a radical fissure in world Jewry around 1933 and beyond. There were, first, the non-Zionist Jews (specifically the World Jewish Congress founded in 1933), who, on the one hand, demanded the boycott and eventual destruction of Germany. Black notes that many of these people were not just in New York and Amsterdam, but a major source for this also came from Palestine proper.

On the other hand, one can see the judicious use of such feelings by the Zionists for the sake of eventual resettlement in Palestine. In other words, it can be said (and Black does hint at this) that Zionism believed that, since Jews would be moving to the Levant, capital flight would be necessary for any new economy to function.

The result was the understanding that Zionism would have to ally itself with National Socialism so that the German government would not impede the flow of Jewish capital out of the country.

It served the Zionist interests at the time that Jews be loud in their denunciations of German practices against the Jews to scare them into the Levant, but, on the other hand, Laqueur states that “The Zionists became motivated not to jeopardize the German economy or currency.” In other words, the Zionist leadership of the Jewish Diaspora was one of subterfuge and underhandedness, with only the advent of German hostility towards Jewry convincing the world’s Jews that immigration was the only escape.

The fact is that the ultimate establishment of the state of Israel was based on fraud. The Zionists did not represent anything more than a small minority of German Jews in 1933.

On the one hand, the Zionist fathers of Israel wanted loud denunciations of Germany’s “cruelties” to the world’s Jews while at the same time demanding moderation so that the National Socialist government would remain stable, financially and politically. Thus Zionism boycotted the boycott.

For all intents and purposes, the National Socialist government was the best thing to happen to Zionism in its history, for it “proved” to many Jews that Europeans were irredeemably anti-Jewish and that Palestine was the only answer: Zionism came to represent the overwhelming majority of Jews solely by trickery and cooperation with Adolf Hitler.

For the Zionists, both the denunciations of German policies towards Jews (to keep Jews frightened), plus the reinvigoration of the German economy (for the sake of final resettlement) was imperative for the Zionist movement. Ironically, today the Zionist leaders of Israel complain bitterly about the horrific and inhuman regime of the National Socialists. So the fraud continues.

The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany
The Economic Boycott of 1933
dennis wise

DOCUMENTARY: Communism By The Backdoor

This is a MUST WATCH Documentary! We suggest you watch it all!! Anyone who really wants to know what is happening to the world must watch this and share it. You will learn many events in history that have been hidden from us. We highly recommend you take the time to watch it completely, and then conduct your own research. 

https://youtu.be/gpfBiwub-LQ?list=PLoLytQk_WG5IjRnx6ikufsX9unhiNaVMc