27 July 2014

A look at Germany's Jews as they were in 1919

This post is not entirely finished. If you would like to copy it to your own blog, please wait a few days for all the problems to be shaken out and commentary to be added. When this notice is gone then it will be okay.

A Jewish libel against the Poles from 1919. Note the repetition of the magical "six million" figure.

The "Liberal Judaism" discussed below is what is called Reform Judaism in the USA. This was the affiliation of the majority of Jews in Germany during the first half of the 20th century.



Contemporary Jewish Questions
Alfred Rosenberg
From Auf gut Deutsch, 23 October 1919
Translated by Hadding Scott, 2014

Although the essence of  the Jewish spirit has remained unaltered through the centuries, at the same time various cultural currents among the peoples of Europe have exerted an influence upon the mode and manner of its expressions. Dr. Arthur Ruppin has made an entirely correct
Jew Arthur Ruppin
confession in his work Die Juden der Gegenwart, which lays bare the core of the whole controversy about the Jewish spirit's manner of activity. He says: “Jewish Orthodoxy was from the beginning much less a religion than an organization of struggle for the maintenance of the Jewish people clothed in religious garb.” Every Jewish association is to be considered from this perspective.


If Talmudic Judaism was also an edifice so firm as hardly any other, nonetheless the course of the ages has forced some components from its structure. These separated parts have now founded struggle-organizations of another kind, or rather knew how to convert other collectives into assault-detachments of the World Jewish Power for their goals: the Alliance Israélite Universelle, the Freemasons, the [Communist] International, the Anglo-Jewish Association, Liberal Judaism, and Zionism.

The first associations have been discussed in many sections of  this periodical; a few words now about Liberal Judaism.  It  formed in order to reunite those unfaithful to Talmudic Judaism under a religious banner of another kind. To give greater authority to the endeavors, it was presented as a revival of the ancient prophets' attempts at reform. The initially small community now exists as an organization spread over all Germany. The emphasis of this association however now lies less in the concept Liberal than in the concept Judaism.

One of the present-day spiritual leaders of this movement is the rabbi Dr. Caesar Seligmann from Frankfurt am Main. On the occasion of a planned Panjewish-German congress he wrote in the newspaper Liberales Judentum (No.5 and 6): “As you however assemble at the congress, take care that you not seem to lack the pathos of a great religious faith. With a naked denial of Zionism with the declaration that you are not national Jews but Germans as a nation, one can make no Jewish congress. The commitment to the German nation at a Jewish congress smacks all to much
Jew Caesar Seligmann
of the sentiment of loyalty and is a parcel and relic of the old defensive Judaism. It seems to be a mistake similar to that pseudo-liberalism of past ages which Gabriel Riesser castigates with such bitter words, and which surrendered religious values for the sake of political victory, which reformed not from inner, religious necessities but for the sake of external position in the state. Against such ghetto-Judaism all the contumely and rage of Zionism is justified. It cannot and must not be the task of a Jewish congress to assure Germany of its loyalty. By the way – whoever assures too much seems least of all sure of his business.”*

These words are indeed thoroughly clear. Nothing worse for Dr. Seligmann than to affirm loyalty to Germany. At least it is honest, and therefore more agreeable to read than the pronouncements of the German Citizens of Jewish Faith**.

On the 13th of October the Verein der liberalen Juden of Munich held a closed meeting in order to deliberate about the measures to be taken for the coming “inevitable battle” against anti-Semitism.  Reportedly Dr. Seligmann and State Attorney Stern, the General Secretary of Liberal Judaism, were featured.

Dr. Seligmann gave a very fine speech, compared Judaism with the castle from The Singer's Curse, which  watches so proud and noble over the land as far as the blue sea, and is surrounded by fragrant flowers and gardens. The castle of granite blocks is the house built by the fathers, as we see it before us embodied in the Talmud and Schulchan-Aruch with firm foundations, its “marvelous moral doctrine,” its “humanity, loyalty, and its consciousness of duty,” “sense of duty,” its precept of the “brotherhood of man and reconciliation of peoples.” But the stream at which the castle stood has altered its course and is flowing straight through under the foundations. Therefore the options now were to leave everyone in the old structure, in the worst case to be buried under rubble, to move out, or instead to dismantle and to erect a new house from the present material. The first, Orthodoxy wants; the second is the choice of the too-few-to-be-worth-despising assimilationists, who, according to Seligmann, have “crawled to the cross or to the crescent”; the last, the liberal Jews want, because is the most useful. After that followed some rhetorical flourishes about the revival of the “golden crown and purple mantle of the prophets.” One would like to concede all things good to the speaker, but there was an inevitable snag that made a mockery of the pretty words. For, the rabbi opined, if the Jews should find themselves together again, then the old word would come true, which says that the time would eventually come when the best men of all peoples would cling to the lap of the Jews and beg them: “You lead us!”

Thus the gist of the matter even here was fairly obvious. During the break a gentleman circulated inviting all to join the association for "cheap money." In the declaration that followed the second speaker reported with pride that Liberal Judaism had led many inactive persons back into the fold of Judaism, explicated the idea of Jewish organizations, and finally asserted emphatically that Jewish liberalism was not a worldview among others, but the supreme worldview. What the board of directors had secretly resolved for conducting the battle against Anti-Semitism, however, they unfortunately did not reveal to the public.

Thus we see Liberal Judaism opposing Germanism, just as cohesive and organized throughout Germany as the other Jewish struggle-organizations, except in a different form.

Voltaire said that the Jews, filled with inexorable hatred against all nations, were "obsequious in misfortune and shameless in prosperity." This statement, which is applicable to all of Jewish history, is entirely correct even today. "In the long term it cannot satisfy the national self-consciousness of the Jews to be only a minority everywhere," says Cohen (Reuss), the otherwise undeviating internationalist, where it is a matter of German politics (Die politische Bedeutung des Zionismus). David Trietsch sees in the great participation of the Jews in the revolution an "unimpeded spiritual force that would come into manifestation even more strongly by far if the rooted prejudice of the masses did not block the Jew from free political activity." Thus all Judaism so far is still much too little. The same gentleman is very proud about the situation in Russia:  "Even if the evolution of post-czarist Russia is absurd so far, the observer will nonetheless be unable to avoid the recognition that without the Jewish heads that have placed themselves at the disposal of the revolution the chaos would be even worse by far. In Russia the Jewish leaders have taken the helm because of their superior power of thought and owing to their ability to see a path while the best of the others still for the longest time have not overcome the confusion of the collapse" (Palaestina und die Juden).

These few voices are still relatively mild, but they are authoritative insofar as they derive from the "German Committee for the Promotion of the Jewish Settlement of Palestine." The paper Juedische Rundschau however chimes in with its tones, which ought not to be passed over without attention.

First it is asserted that Zionism was born "from the spirit of the idea" and has nothing in common with German nationalism, which sees its ideal in "U-boats, gas-projectiles, etc." The vilification of  the fallen government is recycled in No. 70 as a pamphlet against Germanness [das Deutsche] in general. Germany is said to have guilt for the circumstances of misfortune of the Jews in Poland. "The same German government that during its entry into Poland represented itself to the Jews as a liberator later politically abandoned them completely to the Poles, has done everything to prevent the national unification of the Jews, and through an entirely wicked meddling in their internal relations supported all efforts to disorganize Polish Jewry, and has economically exploited and ruined them in a manner unparalleled in history." "The German officials have through their unscrupulous greed for booty so disrupted all moral concepts there that even the most extensive reparation would not suffice to restore the prestige of the German name among Polish Jews." "In the Rhineland the most German of the Germans in every hour of every day are selling the future of Germany. For the police however it is easier of course to arrest the few Galician and Polish Jews who are so to speak forced, due not least to the Demobilization Bureau's insane directives which are regarded by all social-policy experts as quite incredible, to seek their profit in the black market...." The Jews immigrating from the east, it says, would be applied with great success to agriculture, mining operations, etc. "What even the war, which did not arise from the Jewish spirit, would like to have made out of many from the poor agitated masses, one should thus permit us to say." Thus the article concludes "that today more than ever Germany has cause for not barring its doors against the morality, the godliness, the communion with the eternal, that still live in this eastern Jewry."

Thus the German has robbed the Jew, corrupted his moral sense. The most German is the greatest of all profiteers; the poor Jew is forced into dealing in  contraband, regardless of whether he now does it by choice. From the Jew of the east the German has to await morality and a godly conception of life....

Let us hear more. In No. 72, on the occasion of the immigration-question, a vote is taken for a Pan-Jewish congress; then it says: "The people should be summoned, make a resolution about its migration, and prepare the relevant agencies, on which it bestows its trust.And the questions that determine Jewish emigration should be resolved exclusively according to the interests of the Jewish people.  If the people stands behind the solution, the Jews also have the power and the influence to impose the sound solution...." "If all means are concentrated -- our political possibilities, our financial influence, our intellectual, moral, and economic capacities -- if everything is brought upon one denominator and everything is placed at the service of one goal, then we can not only open the gates to immigration that are today closed but also again close the doors to emigration, which are opened with all too inviting courtesy. It is not enough to seek countries that let in Jews. Care must also be taken that it not become a jeer that Jews are shown the door."

In closing it is emphasized that there can only be a singular Jewish world policy because otherwise "the impact of the Jewish will" would be fragmented.

On the other hand we see cynical scorn come to light unconcealed: the Jews in Germany speak in such a way as if there were no longer a German Reich with which it would still be necessary in any way to reckon. "Exclusively" Jewish interests are to be decisive; should anyone wish to expedite the emigration of the Chosen People, the Jews would take care in advance that this shameless meddling in Jewish affairs cease immediately. For months already a continuous wailing about the pogroms of the Jews in Poland, the Ukraine, Galicia, and Hungary has been going through the Jewish newspapers. Tales of horror are told: innocent Jews are driven from house to courtyard, murdered in frightful martyrdoms; women and little girls were violated, killed, thrown into flush-toilets (!), and so on. The number of victims in the Ukraine is supposed to total 35,000.

The Polish newspapers and politicians now know quite other things to tell. Thus for example there was supposed to have taken place in Krakow a great pogrom of the Jews, on account of which a wailing coursed through all Jew newspapers. At the Polish national assembly however Representative Bruell now has narrated: "Had I not been a witness of the events in Krakow I would have indeed believed that a pogrom had happened there. Now however I must affirm that in Krakow indeed pogroms took place, not however against the Jewish but against the Polish population. All the wounded are Polish soldiers, because the Jewish Bolsheviks did not permit the gangs to be disarmed that instigated the unrest. A certain Goldberg has been arrested  who had Czech and German passports; it was an organized gang that had the mission on the one hand to instigate Bolshevik uprisings in Poland and on the other hand to disgrace the name of Poland in Paris. In Mechow Jews murdered a Pole and defiled his corpse. Yet no one denounces this murder; in Krakow by contrast not a single Jew has perished and already it is cried that a pogrom has happened there."

Thus accusation met with accusation. To clear up all these disputes, Hirsch Morgenthau was placed at the head of the commission of inquiry. The American Jew then traveled the whole country, yet was unable to contradict the witness for the Poles to the extent that the Jews had hoped, and thus his reports turned out fairly neutral. Thereupon came cries of indignation from the whole of Jewry, with the consequence that a harsher man, Mr. Samuel from London, would examine all complaints again.

An old phenomenon recurs again. If the Jewish vampirism on any people becomes too ostentatious and unrest results, then in all the newspapers of the world appear frightful reports about slaughters of Jews that are made up entirely out of thin air. A classic example of that is provided by the situation in Romania in the second half of the 19th century. Unhindered by any restriction on immigration the Jews had literally flooded that country. Through racketeering of the worst kind and through a roaring trade in brandy the unaware and innocent population became totally dependent. All attempts legally and vigorously to dam up Jewish unscrupulousness ran afoul of the objections of the great powers under the influence of the Alliance Israélite. In a letter to Carol of Romania his father calls the affairs of the Jews a noli me tangere; he  complains about the Jewish money-power, but advises to give up, because one can do nothing against it.

As now some Romanian authorities have proceed more energetically against Jewish merchants, as the people have begun to become restless, the Jewish press emitted a cry of pain, and a flood of lying stories came to the uncomplaining paper [aufs geduldige Papier]. So it was said for example in a lamentation of a Jewish banker to the American consul (1876) that in one locale thousands of Jews were robbed of their belongings and had to leave the country. An inquiry determined that some deceitful Jews had been gathered, of whom three had been beaten. Jews from Basliu begged monetary assistance at all consulates because the entire local Jewish population, 740 persons, had been inhumanely chased out of their dwellings in the middle of winter by the Romanians. Another big uproar. The inquiry educed (under supervision of a Jewish representative) that 25 Jews had conducted illegal business and had operated unlicensed schnaps-dens, that their beverages had been confiscated and the 25 Jews expelled from the town. That was all. -- On another occasion the residents of Jassy were very surprised to see in Monde Illustré a large drawing representing a pogrom of the Jews right there. The affair exposed, like many others, a Jewish attempt to stir the public opinion of France in favor of the poor Jews. Made up out of thin air in exactly the same way were the laments of the Neue Freie Presse (May 1877) about nefarious Jewish agitations and a great number of other deceptions. For years at a time there was wailing about persecution of Jews; during which only two Jews were killed, and even these were killed by two Turks as they were expelled from Turkey; religious motives, about which then as now a clamor has been raised, were never causes of any disturbances; in the 20 years (1859-1879) the Jew-badgering consisted in the.seizure of a series of clandestine brandy-dens and in the deportation of their proprietors. (See Verax: La Roumanie et les Juifs, Bucharest 1903, pp. 150-160.)

The Jewish newspapers now summon all "honorable men" to form a front against the "pogrom-agitation" that is supposedly being stoked by anti-Semites also in Germany. How does it stand now? -- All leading anti-Semitic papers have affirmed unambiguously that they abhor every pogrom. They have however just as unambiguously demanded that, in this national hour of destiny of the German people, German men should lead. Instead of that, not a day goes by without a new Jewish personage being appointed to influential posts. All demands to refrain from barging to the front of the queue, to govern their lust for power, have rolled off the Jew like water on a rubber coat; all German distress-calls are on the verge of dying out. It is again as in earlier times. Then the Jews sat as finance-ministers and tax-collectors in the court; all cries for usury-laws on the part of the people and  the estates were crippled by Jewish money.

If one approaches the whole complex of  the historical occurrence affecting the Jews and their relationship to the other peoples without the tired dogma of a tear-soaked sensitivity, one of the following could be confirmed from the outset: if the outcomes in the relations of all peoples to the one Jewish people are the same, this can only, at least in the main, be caused by the character of that one Jewish people. That is because the individualities of the histories affecting the Jews are various, the personality of the Jew on the other hand is the singular and unchanging factor, which is furthermore increased through strict racial breeding.

Many writers of history, carried away from historical impartiality by inhumanities against the Jews that actually occurred, all too easily see a cause in purely human condemnation. This lopsided position, which earns all honor for the man but degrades the historian, one must take into account so as to be able to see past the sentimentalities to history in its deeper relationships.  If one has done this, and one uses portrayals intended in a friendly way toward the Jews and not antisemitic from the outset, so that the eyeglasses of the other side do not become fogged, there comes into view a graph of Jewish life, of Jewish activity, and Jewish suffering that is indeed strikingly similar in all countries of the world: everywhere they are at first received without reservation; everywhere we see the Jews from the outset deliberately segregate themselves both physically and .mentally from the indigenous population; everywhere they are strenuously concerned to win for themselves the favor of the princes, and advancing the money acquired through strenuous commerce and usury to them for undertakings to guarantee their protection and thus to wheedle privileges of every kind for themselves.

Among all peoples  then in response, at first flaring up in some locations, the anti-Jewish movements appear that sometimes grip an entire country, expending themselves in frightening rage. The occasions for these great persecutions of Jews have been of various kinds. But if anywhere historical treatment must pay attention to the social structure so as to reveal not occasions but foundations for incipient shocking events, it is most especially the case with the treatment of the Jewish Question in all lands. Of course political and cultural, but especially religious conditions, have been of importance; at times they came to the fore, as for example at the time of the Inquisition, but they constituted only the noticeable factors; hand in hand went always questions of an economic nature. As the Jewish Question is  indeed in many regards of greater importance today, it nonetheless remains anchored in the social position of the Jews in the present-day world. Without the immense riches that stand at their disposal it would be impossible to steer the politics of the world and to have statesmen of all countries perform as marionettes of the Jewish will; it would be impossible to inject the poison of leveling, of division from their own essence, into the hearts of Europeans and to keep their spirits in a mood favorable for Jewry, if almighty gold, systematically applied, did not hire its accomplices in all countries. But thus, as it is today, where oppressive bank-capital binds all peoples with its interest, so was the situation, if also on a smaller scale, in Spain and in France, in Germany and in many other states. Everywhere the Jew was the interest-lord of the princes, of spirituality, of the people; and the persecutions of Jews, let this be anticipated here, are chiefly an ever-again renewed attempt to break the yoke of usury, all the more as it came from a racially alien, religiously and morally hostile interloper. The work of German anti-Semites should be to create a legal escape from this cruel necessity that absolutely will arrive if Jewish insatiability has reached a no longer surpassable highpoint in the domination of the German people, by demanding that the Jews, following enactment of a law, be removed from all positions in government. In the worst case a popular referendum must decide on it. If however this too is suppressed and prevented, then that must happen which has recurred with inevitable consistency throughout the centuries: a persecution of the Jews. If all warning voices are expended for protection of the Christian and German essence according to the best knowledge and ability, then an uprising against a foreign rule is no longer a hate-filled pogrom but an indication that the soul of a people still is not rotted. "What disturbs your interior, you should not endure," says Goethe; Christ drove the money-changer Jews from the temple with the scourge. The German too will have to defend the best that he has -- what his spirit and his history has passed down to him as a bounty to be husbanded -- if necessary with the scourge. The German Reich must after a long, long time become Germany again, and not a playground of unfettered Jewish lust for power.
_______________________
* "So ihr aber auf dem Kongress euch zusammentut, huetet euch, ohne das Pathos eines grosses Bekenntnisses zu erscheinen. Mit einer blossen Verneinung des Zionismus mit der Erklaerung,dass ihre keine Nationaljuden sondern Deutsche als Nation seid, kann man keinen juedischen Kongress machen. Das Bekenntnis zur deutschen Nation auf einem juedischen Kongress schmeckt allzusehr nach Loyalitaetsgesinnung und ist ein Stueck und Ueberbleibsel des alten Schutzjudentums. Es sieht zum Verwechseln aehnlich jedem Pseudoliberalismus vergangener Zeiten, den Gabriel Riesser mit so bitteren Worten Geisselt, und der um politischen Gewinn religioese Werte hingab, der nicht aus inneren, religioesen Notwendigkeiten, sondern um der aeusseren Stellung im Staate willen reformierte. Gegen solches Ghettojudentum ist jeder Hohn und Ingrimm des Judentums berechtigt. Es kann und darf nicht die Aufgabe eines juedischen Kongresses sein, Deutschland seine Treue zu versichern. Nebenbein -- wer zu viel versichert, scheint seiner Sache am allerwenigsten sicher zu sein." (Rabbi Dr. Caesar Seligmann)

** Centralverein deutscher Staatsbuerger juedischen Glaubens. The position of this organization was that Jews were strictly a religious group (in total contradiction to the declarations of Arthur Ruppin and Caesar Seligmann). After the Nuremberg Laws were passed in 1935 and Jews were no longer German citizens, this organization changed its name to Centralverein der Juden in Deutschland, and its focus shifted to vocational training and assisting emigration. After November 1938 it was subsumed under the Reichsverein der Juden in Deutschland.

26 June 2014

The Ahmed Chalabi of Germany

Highly Rewarded Liar Hermann Rauschning
Hermann Rauschning was a disgruntled former member of the NSDAP who wrote two books about Adolf Hitler that pretended to reveal private conversations in which Hitler had made many shocking statements. These books were highly influential and heavily utilized in Anglo-American war-propaganda. Most of the "quotes" of Adolf Hitler found in the U.S. War Department's Why We Fight series of propaganda-films, for example, are derived from Rauschning.

Among the astounding statements attributed to Hitler by Rauschning are the following:

"Terror is the most effective political instrument."

"I am willing to sign anything. I will do anything to facilitate the success of my policy."
“Providence has ordained that I should be the greatest liberator of humanity.  I am freeing man from the restraints of an intelligence that has taken charge, from the dirty and degrading self-mortification of a false vision called conscience and morality, and from the demands of a freedom and independence which only a very few can bear.”
"Yes, we are barbarians. We want to be barbarians, it is an honored title to us. We shall rejuvenate the world. This world is near its end.”

"The Ten Commandments have lost their validity.  Conscience is a Jewish invention, it is a blemish like circumcision.”

This is just a sample, but you get the idea. The picture of Adolf Hitler that Rauschning presented was of an amoral megalomaniac with whom any attempt to have peaceful dealings would be foolhardy and futile.

As for Rauschning himself, he achieved fame and fortune, selling many books and writing a syndicated weekly newspaper-column in the United States during the war. He was even called as an expert witness in the Mass-Sedition Trial of 1944.

In early 1939, before war had broken out, Rauschning was declaring that Hitler was bent on war and would launch a surprise attack on Britain and France. This is not what happened, but the fact that Rauschning was saying such things -- and being widely quoted in news-media -- tended to increase paranoia and make war more likely.

In effect, Hermann Rauschning was to Adolf Hitler and Germany what Ahmed Chalabi was to Saddam Hussein and Iraq -- a disgruntled defector willing to profit from lying. (The CIA considers defectors to be untrustworthy as sources of information, but they certainly have been effective as propagandists.)

The worst part is that many mainstream historians, apparently reluctant to let go of the old notions that were originally instilled as war-propaganda, still use Rauschning as a source.

A Swiss researcher named Wolfgang Haenel -- in no way a friend to Adolf Hitler -- determined in 1983 that Rauschning's supposed conversations with Hitler were not authentic for the following reasons, summarized by Hanns Neuerbourg:


Haenel says his research established that:

-- Rauschning, who headed the government of the Free City of Danzing (now Gdansk, Poland) after the Nazi party won local elections there in 1933, never belonged to the "innermost circle" of Hitler confidants.

-- Records show that Rauschning, an honorary colonel in the SS elite guard, had only a very few meetings with Hitler, and none in private.

-- Rauschning admitted he kept only "scanty jottings" of his meetings with Hitler. His "confidential" quotes include excerpts from later speeches by the Fuehrer and paraphrased comments from Hitler's Mein Kampf

-- Numerous distortions and fabrications in the book were designed to strengthen Allied resolve and to encourage the United States and other nations to join the war-effort.

-- A chapter on "Hitler Himself" in which Rauschning tells of the Fuehrer hearing voices, waking at night with convulsive shrieks, and uttering unintelligible phrases, was inspired by a novel by French writer Guy de Maupassant. [Hanns Neuerbourg, AP, 2 November 1985]

If we had paid attention to Haenel in the 1980s, instead of remaining naive about lying defectors and their demonization-propaganda, perhaps we would have recognized in 2003 that Ahmed Chalabi was really the Hermann Rauschning of Iraq.

15 June 2014

White Males are Never held Accountable?

That's what feminist writer Elizabeth Plank said in a roundtable discussion about the Elliot Rodger spree-shooting on MSNBC. The maker of the video below points out that Elliot Rodger was in fact of mixed race (East-Asian and Jew) and if he had been the victim of the crime, would likely have been sympathetically  identified as mixed, rather than invidiously  misidentified as White.



The claim that White men are not held accountable for crimes when they commit them is absurd: White men are blamed even for crimes that they did not commit. George Zimmerman was clearly not White, but was falsely labeled as White in early reporting on the Trayvon Martin shooting-incident because it fit into a preconceived narrative about violent White male conspiracies. There was violence against White people as a result of this false reporting. The feminist writer who claims that White men are never held accountable is doing the same, blaming White men based on an incident where the perpetrator was not White.


Mixed-Race Miscreant Elliot Rodger
In fact, Elliot Rodger's being of mixed race was very likely a factor in his mental illness, and in his frustration with trying to date White women. A study at UC Davis has shown that people of mixed East-Asian and "Caucasian" ancestry have twice the incidence of mental illness found in people of unmixed race:

A new study of Chinese-Caucasian, Filipino-Caucasian, Japanese-Caucasian and Vietnamese-Caucasian individuals concludes that biracial Asian Americans are twice as likely as monoracial Asian Americans to be diagnosed with a psychological disorder. [...] [Professor of psychology Nolan] Zane and his co-investigator, UC Davis psychology graduate student Lauren Berger, found that 34 percent of biracial individuals in a national survey had been diagnosed with a psychological disorder, such as anxiety, depression or substance abuse, versus 17 percent of monoracial individuals. The higher rate held up even after the researchers controlled for differences between the groups in age, gender and life stress, among other factors.[UC Davis News and Information, 18 August 2008]

The delicately feminine appearance and unimpressive physique created by Mongoloid admixture likely contributed (on top of his being a mentally ill creep) to Elliot Rodger's inability, despite having plenty of money and an expensive car, to persuade White women to date him. Rodger specifically complained about being rejected by blondes. White Women generally do not prefer a man with a round, girlish face and bee-stung lips. That does not meet the expectation of masculine appearance in the White race.

06 June 2014

A National-Socialist View of European Unity

While Alfred Rosenberg distrusts the motives of those advocating a "United States of Europe" in the 1920s (among whom Jews figured prominently), he sees it as desirable that European states at least stop fighting among themselves in foreign policy and present a united front against the rising non-White world. Rosenberg mentions that there were those who fantasized that European unity would empower the Catholic Church, but considers that an unlikely prospect. The main question ultimately was whether and how some semblance of unity could be established in Europe without facilitating plutocratic subjugation of Europe. 

The answer to that question, as it has turned out in 1940 and again in the 21st century, seems to be that if there is to be a united Europe, Germany's dominance of that union is the viable alternative to Jewish dominance, since the Germans were and are the strongest nation in Europe.



 


United States of Europe? 
Alfred Rosenberg
Völkischer Beobachter, 13/14 December 1925

Translated 2014 by Hadding Scott

In recent months, concurrent with the propaganda for the “League of Nations,” the activity of the so-called “Pan-European Association” is also increasing, At the same time various press-agencies conducted polls among politicians and writers on how they regard this so-called “United States of Europe.” Thus the Neue Wiener Journal has just conducted such an inquiry, and asked a series of famous personalities of all states their opinion on the following questions: 
1. Do you consider the creation of the United States of Europe necessary? 
2. Do you consider the ratification of the United States of Europe possible?


To these inquiries the French finance-minister Caillaux answered that the patriotism of the 20th century would amalgamate with Europeanism. The “Easter of the European Union” would come; it would come, just as inevitably as there are physical laws. Ignatz Seipel, the former federal chancellor of Austria, hopes the same and wishes a general “revision of the concept of the state”! A similar view was expressed by Anton Svelah, the minister-president of Czechoslovakia.

Jacob Lippowitz, the Jewish editor of the Neue Wiener Journal, declares: the boundary-markers of the European states have proven to be torture-stakes for every citizen of a European state. Similar statements came from Maximilian Harden, Albert Einstein, Alfred Kerr, and of course Dr. Gerhart Hauptmann, Heinrich Mann, and Dr. Thomas Mann!1

As one sees, a whole list of personages finds this buzzword, the United States of Europe, agreeable. Yet it is naturally clear that most of them understand something entirely different by it. Herr Lippowitz and his consorts are certainly thinking of a single Jewish private syndicate, as Walther Rathenau also also had visualized. All nation-states would then have to fit into this. Ignatz Seipel however surely dreams of the Mediaeval lordship of the church, and the others meanwhile pursue their highest real-world foreign-policy goals.

But whatever the motives of the individual may be, the fact of a strong movement somehow to bring about a European federation is there, and we therefore have to concern ourselves with this problem and to declare our position on it.

Without doubt an awakening is manifesting in the entire world. The awakening of the Near and Far East, and indeed upon a racial backdrop, is plain to see, and even the Negro portion of the Earth has begun to announce its demands in a similar manner. Only a fool can believe that this pressure from outside of Europe does not also require a common European stance. This awakening of the Near and Far East is the response to the robber-economy and the corrupting influences that mercantile Europe has brought with its political conquests to India and China. But this unbridled robber-economy and robber-politics has not only fostered all bad instincts in the colonies or quasi-colonial lands, but unleashed them also in Europe itself, where they are deliberately stoked further by clever politicians.
Coudenhove-Kalergi
The present-day propaganda for the “United States of Europe,” which originates from the circles of the stock-exchange and the Jewish press, means nothing more than a logical continuation of this same robber-economy, sanctioned by a politically strengthened federation. It is thus self-evident that we stand in the sharpest opposition to this new fraud. Fact is on the other hand that there is a growing awareness in foreign policy that mutual warring of the European nations also means the end of every single national culture. This awakening sense of a European solidarity in foreign policy is exploited and bastardized today by the same politicians that all European peoples can thank for their present-day misery.


The “United States of Europe” would have to be rejected by us already just on the grounds that such a character as the half-Asian Count Coudenhove-Kalergi is its leading exponent. This man preaches, instead of adherence to what is organic, to race and national tradition, absolute racial mishmash, and is thus to be treated as a new herald of European decline.

Nevertheless the recognition of the necessity for Europe to be unified in foreign policy stands apart from the question of whether it must bring a whole series of grievous problems in its wake. But one ought to consider that if we face an either/or – destruction of the Eveningland or Europe's security in the world – ways would have to be found to accomplish this goal. At the top stands a demand without the fulfillment of which all is in vain: the exclusion [Ausscheidung] of the Jews from all states of Europe. This in turn can only be the consequence of an awakening of racial feeling, of a new state-idea, and of a reconceptualization of economic life.
_________________________________________

1. In this list of six supporters of European unification, the first three names belong to ethnic Jews. Einstein, the promulgator of a theory of relativity and admirer of Joseph Stalin, everybody knows as a Jew, because Jews want everybody to know it. The Jew Maximilian Harden was named Felix Witkowski at birth but changed his name and converted to Protestantism, becoming a sometime newspaper-columnist and publisher of a magazine called Die Zukunft from 1892 until 1923. Politically Harden/Witkowski seems to have been an opportunist, a warmonger in 1914 but a supporter of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. The Jew Alfred Kerr was born with the surname Kempner, calling himself Kerr from the age of 20 and becoming a theater-critic. Of the non-Jews listed, Heinrich Mann's political views were such that he was planning to settle in the Communist "German Democratic Republic" at the time of his death in 1950, and was honored by that government with a postage-stamp. Younger brother Thomas Mann was so wicked that he actually made broadcasts against his homeland during the Second World War and became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 1944, at a time when aerial bombardment by the United States was incinerating tens of thousands of German civilians in thousand-plane raids. Gerhart Hauptmann was a Social-Democrat who had been considered subversive by the Hohenzollerns prior to the First World War, and was noted immediately after the war as a pacifist.  In 1933 however Hauptmann applied for membership in the NSDAP (but was rejected).

05 April 2014

More Abuse of DNA-Evidence by Anti-White Media

There is no evidence that Eva Braun had any Jewish ancestry, regardless of what BBC-4 may say.

BBC Television's Channel 4 has a new series called Dead Famous DNA, hosted by  Mark Evans, a veterinary scientist who previously hosted a show called Bigfoot Files. The new show depicts in trivial detail Evans' efforts to acquire samples of DNA from famous dead people, and then to have them tested, either just to find out whatever can be learned or to resolve some specific question, like whether a diesel-mechanic in Michigan is the son of Elvis Presley. The show's content is padded with scenes of the histrionic Dr. Evans belaboring some point or acting as if he were haunted by something. The show's intro, read by Evans himself, hardly conveys scientific objectivity:

"Could the DNA reveal what made Marilyn Monroe so attractive, Albert Einstein so intelligent, or Adolf Hitler so evil?"

British news-outlets report that the show recently featured a discussion of the DNA of hair found in a brush that is believed to have been used by Eva Braun, the beloved of Adolf Hitler who became Mrs. Hitler shortly before both of them ended their lives in 1945.

The brush had been looted, reputedly, from Hitler's Bavarian retreat, the Berghof, by an American soldier, Captain Paul Baer, who sold it to somebody named John Reznikoff, who then sold eight strands of the hair for $2000 to Mark Evans. (In the second episode of Dead Famous DNA this same Reznikoff was said to have three samples of Napoleon's hair that did not resemble each other: the implication was that much of what Reznikoff sells is not authentic.)1

Evans' statement at the end of the show about Eva Braun's DNA and its supposed Jewishness is emphatic and unambiguous. "But ethnically, if that's her hair, on her hairbrush, Eva was Jewish." He says that this finding is "the final nail in the coffin of Nazi ideology."



In the first place, Evans is using a definition of Jewishness that is far stricter than that promulgated in the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, whereby a person without at least one Jewish grandparent was not considered a Jew or even a Mischling. Consequently, even if Evans' scientific finding were correct, it would have no bearing on National-Socialist ideology or practice. The notion of "Nazi ideology" that Evans attacks is a straw-man. But there is a much more serious indictment of Evans' work than its vulgar reliance on bad history.

There is also a scientific problem with what Evans says that makes him appear deliberately dishonest. 

Evans' conclusion about Eva Braun, as he states it in the show, is short on details. He does not say which sequence found in Eva Braun's mitochondrial DNA is "only shared by Ashkenazi Jews." That is a key detail, on which the whole argument hinges.

News-reports about the show revealed that detail.  It is reported that the piece of DNA attributed to Eva Braun that supposedly belongs only to Ashkenazi Jews is a sequence called N1b1. (The Independent, 5 April 2014)

The premise that N1b1 belongs only to Ashkenazi Jews is not even close to being accurate. The following relevant information is drawn from a fairly recent (2012) article in The American Journal of Human Genetics:


N1b ... dates to 19-25 ka ago and is primarily found in Southwest Asia.... N1b itself has three basal branches: N1b1, N1b2, and a third, which we labeled N1b3, represented by a single sample from Anatolia. N1b2 is found mainly in Ashkenazi Jews, and its estimated age of ~2ka indicates a recent founder effect among Ashkenazi ancestors. The main subclade, N1b1, dates to ~13-14 ka ago and includes several branches from the Near East, Europe (rarely, mainly in central and eastern Mediterranean Europe), Arabia, and northern Africa (Figure 2C).2
Frequency Map for Haplogroup  N1b, from the American Journal of Human Genetics, 10 February 2012


N1b1 could hardly be Jewish, since it is at least 13 thousand years old, and neither Ashkenazi Jews nor Jews in general have  existed anywhere near that long. The geographic distribution of N1b (which is mostly N1b1) also shows that it is not specifically Jewish but regional, with its strongest European showing in Albania (not known for having a large Jewish population). Eva Braun could easily have inherited her mitochondrial DNA from the population that brought agriculture into Europe from southwest Asia during the Neolithic period.

It is the N1b2 DNA-sequence, which originated only about 2000 years ago, that is strongly associated with Ashkenazi Jews and is believed to have developed within a Jewish population in Europe. It appears that Dr. Mark Evans made a mistake.

That is, if we assume that this was not deliberate misrepresentation. The tendency to misconstrue DNA-evidence in specious justification of absurd conclusions is something that we have been seeing recently, in the cases of Adolf Hitler's Y-chromosome and Craig Cobb's ostensible DNA-test-result on the Trisha show. The reverence for any finding that is called scientific, and the general public's ignorance about DNA, are being exploited in a very reckless way for anti-White propaganda. This kind of innuendo, of Jewish or Negro ancestry, was a favorite form of propaganda against prominent National-Socialists long before DNA-testing became possible. The way DNA-results have been abused recently amounts to dressing up rumor-mongering in a white lab-coat. Perhaps Mark Evans deliberately omitted from his show the detail about which DNA-sequence was supposed to belong only to Ashkenazi Jews, because he knew that giving that detail would make his conclusion easy to debunk.

On the other hand it seems that some people connected with the production are simply incompetent. A spokesman for Channel 4 (repeating what Evans had said in the show) is quoted thus: 

“In the nineteenth century, many Ashkenazi Jews in Germany converted to Catholicism, so Eva Braun is highly unlikely to have known her ancestry and - despite research he instigated into Braun’s race - neither would Hitler.”[The Independent, 5 April 2014]

That is a very ignorant statement.The Catholic and Lutheran churches in Germany keep birth-records extending back hundreds of years. If Eva Braun had a Jewess as a matrilineal ancestor anytime after the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648 (and possibly earlier) it would be a matter of record. 
______________________________
1. The looter of the brush from the Berghof, Captain Paul Baer, is described as a "German-Born Jew" (The Telegraph, 5 April 2014). Reznikoff, who bought the brush from Baer and sold it to Mark Evans, claims in the show that his family are "Holocaust-survivors."

2. V. Fernandez, F. Alshamali, M. Alves, M. Costa, J. Pereira, N. Silva, L. Cherni, N, Harich, V. Cerny, P. Soares, M. Richards, L. Pereira, "The Arabian Cradle: Mitochondrial Relicts of the First Steps along the Southern Route out of Africa", The American Journal of Human Genetics, 10 February 2012.

Upload MP3 and download MP3 using free MP3 hosting from Tindeck.

29 March 2014

The Appalling Ignorance of Abby Martin

"See, this bombshell leak describes something known as a false-flag operation. A false-flag is a covert military operation designed to appear as if it were carried out by other parties, and is usually used as a pretext for military intervention, with the citizens of the country unaware of their government's premeditated actions. See Gulf of Tonkin used to invade Vietnam, and the Reichstag Fire in Hitler's Germany as a pretext to invade Poland." (Abby Martin, 29 March 2014)

This statement from Abby Martin's Breaking the Set show on Russia Today reveals an appalling carelessness about historical accuracy, and also a certain lamentable bias.

Most strikingly, the claim that the Reichstag Fire was used as a pretext to invade Poland shows that Miss Martin is totally ignorant of the events of the 1930s to which she refers. The Reichstag Fire occurred in 1933 and the invasion of Poland occurred in 1939. The man convicted of setting the fire was from the Netherlands, not Poland. If anybody before Miss Martin ever claimed that the Reichstag Fire was used as a pretext for invading Poland, it is very much a fringe view. Most likely it is a product of Miss Martin's own muddled incomprehension of the history of that period.

Furthermore, the Reichstag Fire is well known not to have been a false-flag operation. The rumor that it was a false-flag operation was circulated by Communists at the time, but it was never really credible since Marinus Van Der Lubbe, a very active Marxist organizer, had been caught inside the Reichstag and confessed his involvement. German authorities did not believe that he had acted alone however, and charged several prominent German Communists as co-conspirators, but ended up acquitting them for lack of evidence. Yes: apparently they got fair trials. The verdict of mainstream historiography has long been that the Reichstag Fire was not a false-flag operation.

The bias that Miss Martin displays is kosher. 

By referring to the Reichstag Fire as a supposed false-flag operation she ultimately reinforces Zionist war-propaganda, which consistently relies on such invidious comparisons to Hitler. The leader of the targeted government is always "another Hitler." The same demonization-propaganda has the very convenient feature for Jews that it represents them as the ultimate unjustly persecuted victims. By endorsing and repeating the old propagandist characterization of Adolf Hitler, Miss Martin is, advertently or inadvertently, helping Zionist Jews to continue their warmongering.
 
If she had wanted to invoke a genuine example from history, Miss Martin could have referred to one of the generally recognized false-flag operations staged by the State of Israel, like the Lavon Affair, instead of using the same kind of comparison that the Zionist warmongers always use.

I note that Miss Martin also uses the kosher-leftist expression "corporate media," as if all the United States' Middle-East wars were motivated by corporate interests, when in fact it is easy to establish that Jews dominate American mass-media and that it was Zionist Jews who spent fifteen years (1988-2003) agitating for invasion of Iraq.

I say that Miss Martin's bias is kosher, but it seems more a matter of reckless ignorance* than premeditation on her part. The claim that the Reichstag Fire (1933) was used as a pretext for invading Poland (1939)  is so patently ridiculous that it seems unlikely that anyone would say it as a deliberate lie.
_________________________
* The suggestion that Miss Martin speaks out of ignorance also arose recently after she bit the hand of her Russian employer by declaring in her live show on 3 March 2014 that Russia's intervention in the Crimea (securing Russian interests against the effects of what seems to be a Zionist-instigated coup in the Ukraine) was "wrong." When Russia Today subsequently invited Abby Martin to visit the Crimea to get some knowledge of the situation, she declined the offer, claiming that military intervention was always wrong, thus obviating the need to base her opinion on any real understanding of the situation. (Belfast Telegraph 5 March 2014)




Upload MP3 and download MP3 using free MP3 hosting from Tindeck.

26 March 2014

Anti-Assad Propaganda: BBC's Falsification Exposed


The BBC cultivates a reputation for impartial accuracy most of the time so that when they lie they will be believed. 

In the period following 11 September 2001, the BBC was broadcasting the absurd lie that the Taliban were responsible for production of opium, even though it was already well known that the Taliban had outlawed poppy-farming in the 90% of Afghanistan that they controlled. 

This clip from RT's The Truthseeker calls attention to a similarly demonstrable misrepresentation, the alteration of a video-clip that the BBC had already aired, for the purpose of portraying Syria's president Dr. Assad as a monster who "gassed his own people."

Truthseeker's host, Daniel Bushell, asks: "Why do we get almost identical claims before each war, which then prove [to be] lies?" That kind of skepticism should lead one to question the anti-Hitler propaganda of the Second World War, which seems to have provided the foundation for most subsequent American and British war-propaganda.