Bleeding Germany dry , 1

Introduction

‘It is a reality that the historian, who follows the dictate of his conscience, is balancing on a knife’s edge, even though he reports no more than what he recognises—basing it on the construct of facts—as the truth. However, since the course of history and its explanations can be interpreted in various ways, so truth becomes a matter of power’.

—Prof. Franz W. Seidler

The following study deals with the crimes committed against Germans, the immeasurable economic and territorial damage inflicted upon Germany since 1945, and the resultant problems of reparations and compensation. Within this framework we shall closely examine the many-layered field of Allied war crimes and violations of human rights. These include the ethnic cleansing of Germans from their native homes and the Allies’ exhaustive plundering throughout Germany, as well as the abduction and exploitation of German civilians and prisoners of war as slave labourers. After having determined the extent of these crimes, we shall present the concept of a financial policy, burdensome with consequences, which up to now has been exclusively one-sided in its reparations and compensation practice, and we have to examine to what extent eventual German claims are justified from a viewpoint of ethics, international law and politics. Further, it needs to be established what should be expected from future sovereign German policies.

More than sixty years after the end of the war there have been accumulated innumerable documents and reports detailing the atrocities connected with ethnic cleansing in Sudetenland, Silesia and other Eastern German regions where Germans had lived for many centuries. On account of their magnitude and brutality, these expulsions rank among the most terrible atrocities of the twentieth century—indeed, of all time; and yet they have never been acknowledged as such by the opinion-making media in the Western democracies. In addition to the crimes connected with ethnic cleansing, the archives attest to countless thousands of other wartime crimes and atrocities, as do many other individual publications. These include abductions, imprisonment under horrific conditions, rape and pillage by Allied occupation troops, and the rampant theft of patents and artworks. The huge amount of documentary literature underscores the Germans’ keen and continuing interest in the history of the post-war period, as well as their determination to continue documenting these crimes in expectation of a future sovereign government that will make use of them. On the part of journalists and publishers, diligence and expectation have lasted for six decades. In view of such massive documentation of international crimes, it is all the more surprising that very few publications have dealt with Germany’s well-founded demands for recompense. There are hundreds of thousands of accounts expounding the crimes committed against Germans during flight, devastation, expulsion and the geopolitical and economic aftermath of the Second World War. Great efforts have been made to document in detail this financial and cultural devastation, although no publicist has yet dared to take the logical next step, as righteous as it is belated, of making demands against the guilty nations. Certainly no politician has ever dared bring up the subject. In Vienna as well as Berlin, it is clearly a taboo subject to raise demands for reparations for Germany and compensation to German people, as opposed to demanding reparations from Germany. It is high time the taboo was given an airing.

Some will ask, why include Vienna/Austria? The answer is, because Austria is an integral part of the German nation, and Austria shared the same horrific post-war experiences as the rest of the German Reich did. At a convention of socialist academics in Graz on 2 April 1964, the Austrian Vice-Chancellor Bruno Pittermann remarked: ‘As to the question of whether we are Germans or Austrians, the majority of us will answer just as we did in 1918, we are German Austrians, just as there are Slovenian, Croatian, Czech and Magyar Austrians, although these are small minorities’.

Pittermann was simply expressing the obvious. Of course the Deutsch-Osterreicher (German Austrians) do belong to the German nation! Their language is German and the Austrian republic is a German state, as many representatives of the Second Republic have acknowledged on numerous occasions. The Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (Freedom Party of Austria) adopted this resolution as early as 1956, even making it a platform for its programme: ‘We support the sovereignty of Austria and we declare that we are members of the German national and cultural community. We advocate a joining together of all free peoples of Europe on the basis of complete equality and self-determination’.

Within the historical framework of more than a thousand years, Austria has fulfilled her function and destiny as a German land of culture. In this connection, one only has to remember the art of poetry and music. Grillparzer, Stifter and Mozart are outstanding representatives of German genius, just as Austrians identify with Schiller and Beethoven. To be German Austrian is by no means an expression of incompatibility such as the classic Goethean conflict of ‘Two souls contending in one breast’. As the Austrian poet Robert Hamerling wrote in the 1860s: ‘Germany is my fatherland! And Austria? Why, my motherland, of course. I love them both so dearly’. May the venerable Red-White-Red banner of Austria long wave as a symbol of this German land of Austria! This is the context in which we shall treat Austria and other German areas in the following study.

It is typical of the periodicals with the highest circulation, as well as conformist writers trapped in the spirit of our times, that they approach the theme of reparations for Germany with a pronounced shaking of the knees. Inevitably the introductions to their works contain cliche-ridden phrases and hackneyed sentences that would ‘relativise’, if not in fact express an excuse, so that, for example, the ‘monstrosity of the war unleashed by Germany’ should not be suppressed under any circumstances, or that, indeed, the subject of the book must on no account be misunderstood. Under no circumstances does one ever want to question the verdicts and decrees of Nuremberg. Furthermore, they affirm, there is never the intention of making a calculation in order to offset the crimes committed by the Germans on people of other nations—naturally, unique in history. Despite all the emphasis on German suffering found in works in the German language, never, ever must this be allowed to become one-sided and biased, etc.

One particularly repulsive kind of a concocted story even suggests that the guilt and blame associated with ethnic cleansing are exaggerated and belongs to the Germans anyway. For example, Hans-Ulrich Wehler shows infinite tolerance for these atrocities, considering them ‘a radical but completely understandable reaction against everything German’. He tells us that the reason they occurred is quite obvious: ‘As everywhere in Europe formerly occupied by the Germans, the actions and behaviour of the resistance movement and Allied troops were nothing more than a reaction to the inhumanity of the National Socialist regime’. In the following study, we are going to demonstrate that this simply does not correspond to the truth.

Attempts at ingratiating and falsifications of history occur all too frequently in our everyday literature. They either indicate the author’s ignorance or opportunism or else bear witness to his ideological and one-sided point of view. Both of these are incompatible with approaching the problem objectively with the intention of honestly answering questions and solving problems.

In view of the sharply curtailed freedom of expression in the Federal Republic of Germany (and increasingly in Austria as well), the debate on, and critical analysis of, an unpleasant subject matter, such as the one in this study undoubtedly is, can only be conducted—if at all—in the scientific field. Critics will of course object that I have not presented ‘the other side’, but honourable critics, from your mouths comes forth hypocrisy! The shelves of libraries and bookstores are filled with depictions of ‘the other side’; schools and universities teach ‘the other side’ exclusively, and radio and TV constantly lull the public to sleep with ‘the other side’. Our newspapers and ‘talk masters’ offer nothing except ‘the other side’ for their discussions, which are again filled exclusively with the arguments of ‘the other side’. Needless to say, the great majority of our politicians serve the interests of ‘the other side’.

Honourable critics, when have you ever given the German side a chance to be heard? Most German readers are completely surrounded and constantly brainwashed by ‘the other side’—socially, culturally, religiously and politically. High time now for German readers to be at last confronted with a truly different point of view. On account of overexposure to the ‘other side’, I have refrained from watering down my presentation with arguments to which the reader is exposed every day. Needless to say, I cannot avoid referring back to ‘the other side’, when it involves unmasking their underlying bias and duplicity.

Much of my sources consist of hitherto unpublished documents. These are primarily personal narratives and reports of factual events furnished by eyewitnesses and persons directly involved in the events. Included are reports from such diverse sources as adolescent girls as well as elderly women; from academics as well as peasants and artisans; from army officers as well as from members of the HJ (Hitler Youth) and their female counterpart, the BDM (League of German Girls); from Democrats as well as National Socialists. Because of varied educational backgrounds and individual points of view, not all the reports could be printed in an unedited form. Wherever grammatical, syntactical or orthographical corrections were necessary, I have carried them out to the best of my knowledge and ability. In order to preserve the authenticity of the sources, I have changed nothing regarding the style of writing or the statements as such. Of course, the eye-witness testimonies and historical documents presented here cannot deal with all aspects and events of the war and post-war period. In part, we are obliged to content ourselves with highlights that serve to illuminate the main points. Here the solution of pars pro toto (a part for the whole) must suffice. The testimonies and reports are in fact comprehensive and detailed enough to depict the matter in its totality, and, as facts, they are strong enough to provide the basis on which to build the argument for demands for reparations for Germany.

It is of course entirely proper to compensate those who actually suffered under the German occupation. This ethical principle, however, has been grossly abused, converted into a gigantic fraudulent business or ‘industry’, as Prof. Norman Finkelstein calls it in his book The Holocaust Industry. Such corruption is made inevitable by the excessive greed of ever-new claimants manifesting themselves, as well as the shameless and cowardly moral stance of politicians in Vienna and Berlin. It makes a mockery of legitimate demands. Claims against Germany, the most detrimentally affected country since 1945, are simply endless; in fact, they still continue to grow. This is why it is necessary for our study to consider the latest German and Austrian payments to third-party states or, rather, interest groups very critically.

The psychiatrist and psychoanalyst William G. Niederland, who emigrated from Germany in 1934, specialised in treating the lifelong traumas of persons who experience overwhelming sorrow. He particularly distinguished himself as a counsellor and for giving spiritual welfare to persons who had suffered persecution during the Third Reich. During the 1980s he became convinced that ‘National Socialism may have ended 40 years ago, but the consequences for survivors have still not been overcome’. It was he who had already introduced the concept of ‘Survivor Syndrome’ as early as 1964. According to Niederland’s findings, the principal symptoms of this syndrome are:

  1. ‘An overpowering depression, characterised by sulky behaviour, the tendency to withdraw, and inexpressible sadness interrupted occasionally by short-lived outbreaks of anger. This behaviour is then accompanied by apathy and lack of initiative, feelings of insecurity, mistrust and helplessness.
  1. A heavy, persistent, usually unconscious guilt complex that arises from inner survival guilt, and consciously or unconsciously centres around the question of: Why did I survive the calamity that killed all my loved ones—parents, children, siblings, friends, spouse?
  1. A state of anxiety and irritation giving rise to sleeplessness, nightmares, inner stress and tension.
  1. The personality changes and psychological disorders, since they persist as permanent disorders, will eventually also lead to physical symptoms in most patients. These occur as stomach, heart, colon, vascular and other illnesses (blood pressure, premature ageing, hardening of the arteries, etc.). Headache, painful joints, trembling of hands, and rheumatic complaints are the rule rather than the exception among these persons.

If these psychological observations are appropriate, they cannot be restricted to just one particular people or national group. The case of their veracity established, they must be universally applicable. Therefore, we find these ‘tormented souls’ also among German people. In addition to the millions of expellees, millions of German slave labourers and prisoners of war suffered incredible abuse. The suffering of the first-mentioned group was increased, because they, in contrast to other Germans, did not only lose their belongings and properties, but also their native homeland (Heimat). In nearly all of the publications of the expellees, it is this loss that is the central theme. The fundamental significance of Heimat is very well described in an article on the destruction and occupation of Danzig: ‘What did they [the outsiders, remark of the author, C.N.] care about Danzig? What did this city mean to them, since it was not their Heimat? For us Danzig was everything, we were bound to it with every fibre of our being. To us it was as if our very lives were being extinguished as we watched it sink away in a smouldering sea of flames, and we were helpless to do anything to rescue it’.

Heimat is much more than just an abstract concept. Let us state more precisely what the loss of Heimat actually means, and what far-reaching consequences arise from it. The journalist Margarethe Dörr has described it in vivid terms: ‘The loss of Heimat’—what a multitude of emotions and experiences are included in these words! They mean separation from our home and the familiar surroundings in which we spent our childhood, youth, early married years; for some, our entire life. It also means the loss of the greatest part, if not all, of what one has possessed—from necessities of life to the personal items dearest to one’s heart. This is true whether it was ‘just’ a toy, a book, musical instruments, or some art objects that one had inherited. Lost were familiar landscape and surroundings, and—even more important—the familiar social environment, the people we trusted and understood and knew intimately. Lost were all those values, material and immaterial, that we can never quite replace and will always look back on with longing and certainly with nostalgia. Those who consider resettlement and population transfers to be nothing more than a means of national Flurbereinigung, i.e. an ethnic cleansing of a territory, and who then regard this to be reasonable on the assumption that, after all, transferred populations will adjust to new surroundings within a generation or so, are denying, for at least a generation, the basic human rights of all these expellees, along with a significant part of their identity. This is true even if the ethnic cleansing is carried out in a relatively “humane” manner’.

How much more did this hold true for the circumstances of the Germans who were not expelled under humane but rather the most inhumane conditions, accompanied by the most savage violations of human rights imaginable! When hundreds of thousands of Germans today still speak of losing their homeland, they are referring to more than just the brutal act of ethnic cleansing. They are referring to the total process of alienation from the lives they had been leading for as far back as they could remember. In the words of expellee and former slave labourer Ida Winter: ‘The material loss of being driven from our homes was very great, but the damage to heart and soul was greater still’.

Quite aside from the right to their homeland, which is still being denied to the expellees, millions of Germans remain without any recompense for the horrors of imprisonment, torture, forced labour; and they have not been compensated for the output of their work, nor the loss of material and intellectual property. In the end, the souls of these people were murdered also: It is not possible to put into words what happens in the souls of a people without any rights, treated worse than any animal—thrashed, flogged, jeered at.

In the Ost-Dokumentation (documentation pertaining to the Eastern part) of the Federal Archives, one of the affected people rightly expressed it thus: ‘One can quote all the facts and figures—but the pain and agony of caged children, of deported and raped women and girls, of the men and boys beaten until crippled, of the torn-apart families, of anxious parents, of dispossessed human beings expelled from the soil of their homeland—this nobody can describe. We can outline the broader perspective, but the individual misery and despair simply cannot be described. Every house, every farm, every family was a tragedy in itself’.

Countless people, particularly among the expellees and the deported Germans used as slave labourers, were unable to withstand the terrible physical and psychological stress. They simply collapsed and died along the roads or in barns and cellars, abandoned and ignored by others. Tens of thousands chose to escape by taking their own lives. German fathers killed all their family and then themselves. German mothers killed their children, then ended their own lives. Thousands of Germans threw themselves into lakes, rivers and wells, drowned their offspring and then themselves, or else hanged themselves from trees or barn rafters, while others slit their veins and slowly bled to death. Such cases were by no means isolated incidents! Veritable epidemics of suicide were reported in many places. Over 2,000 Germans had killed themselves by mid-August 1945 in Karlsbad alone. In towns of 30,000 to 35,000 inhabitants, such as Teplitz-Schonau, no fewer than 6,000 would commit suicide! The floodgates of dams in the Riesengebirge had to be repeatedly opened in order to remove corpses that were clogging the drainage outlets.

In contrast to the subject of ‘foreign labour in the Third Reich’, dishonestly generalised as ‘NS-forced labour’, there have been very few investigations done about German prisoners of war and deported civilians doing forced labour in foreign lands. Those in the corridors of power do not get involved in the subject of forced labour performed by Germans and their exploitation as forced labourers. The official interest is exclusively with foreign workers employed in Germany during the Third Reich, even though most of these had come to Germany voluntarily and were paid substantial wages. Ulrich Herbert, a German historian concerned with contemporary history, displays the fashionable spirit of the times in his typically obligatory self-accusation: ‘The National Socialist use of foreign labour between 1939 and 1945 represents the biggest case in the history of foreign workers being used as forced labour on a massive scale since the end of slavery in the 19th century. In the late summer of 1944 there were, within the territory of the ‘Greater German Reich’, 7.6 million foreign civilian workers and prisoners of war listed officially as employed; most of these had been brought to the Reich to work against their will’. Leaving aside that in the Soviet slave state between 1939 and 1956 the figures for forced labour, inclusive of German prisoners of war and deported civilians, remained consistently in the two-digit millions, the fact alone that Herbert disputes the degree of misery and suffering of the German forced labourers and denies it with his false assertions, underlines more the political than the scientific standpoint of this University Professor of History. Fortunately, we now have adequate documentation to unmask such allegations. The exclusively one-sided campaigns to compensate real or alleged victims have long since reached considerable dimensions. A whole industry now thrives on it; enough reason to examine this area in more detail in a separate chapter.

Already during the war it was alleged, and continues to be alleged to this day in many German and Austrian history books, that science and research were suppressed for political reasons under National Socialism, and that scientists and intellectuals were sacrificed to militarism and the political system. However, the multitude of outstanding scientists and researchers abducted by the victors for intellectual exploitation makes this claim untenable. In view of the Third Reich’s leading position in most areas of science and technology, it is pointless to assert, with monotonous regularity, that it was the intellectual elite that abandoned Germany in 1933. It is of course undeniable that many intellectuals, for example physicists and writers, chose to emigrate when the National Socialists came to power, and it is also true that many of these had distinguished careers abroad. However, the Allies’ plundering rampage of the intellectual sphere of the Third Reich proves that German research of the day was distinguished by a well nigh inexhaustible vitality and productivity, and that the overwhelming majority of the German intelligentsia had remained in the Reich.

In National Socialist Germany, science and research experienced an output of inventions and accomplishments such as the world had never seen before, and the Allies were well aware of this. They engaged in a mad scramble to commandeer this immense intellectual treasure for their own uses. Projects such as Overcast, Paperclip and Ossavakim attest to this. Such massive campaigns of plunder and abduction represent an immeasurable loss—not just for Germany but for all of Europe, as this enabled, most especially the Americans and Soviets, to procure an inconceivable yield and gain.

Despite the ceasefire, the Allies continued to wage unabated war against Germany, albeit no longer with machine-guns and bombs. This war now took the form of an intellectual subversion, as the humanities scholar Herbert Grabert once called it. This cultural and intellectual warfare was also, and especially, carried over into German science, and consequently it represents a major factor of the victors’ post-war crimes.

Up to the end of the war, Germany was the uncontested world leader in many fields of science and technology, as is attested by the dominance of German scientists among recipients of Nobel prizes. Onwards from 1945, a fundamental change took place. At the end of the Second World War, the victors made short work of German science: the leading figures from many research fields would be ‘voluntarily’ abducted, German patents worth many billions of dollars were plundered, and the German system of training and education was brought to a standstill for years and decades by a radical programme of de-Nazification, as well as a Marxist cliche-ridden re-education in the style of the ‘Frankfurt School’ imported from the USA. The decline of German science and research and, consequently, Germany’s increasing social and cultural impoverishment, were not at all an unalterable natural occurrence, but rather a well-aimed and deliberate intervention on the part of the victorious powers.

In popular writings and official pronouncements it is stated repeatedly that—from a German perspective—one must not attempt to ‘balance the books’. This is not the intention of this work in hand; it is, however, intended to attempt some calculation or ‘inventory taking’. Where is it written that Germans are not allowed to compare injustices committed with the put-upon guilt, juxtapose them and then draw one’s own conclusions? Maybe, because one might quickly realize that, on the one hand, Germany has long since paid her debt and that, on the other hand, the crimes perpetrated on the German people are of such magnitude that anything else is beyond the pale of rational enquiry?

Even the publicist Gunnar Heinsohn, who certainly cannot be suspected of wanting revenge, speaks of the driving-out of the Germans from their hereditary homeland as ‘the greatest crime of expulsion in history’. This is undoubtedly true, but it only constitutes one part, when considered in the aggregate of all the crimes committed against the German nation and of the loss suffered by Germany! Abduction, forced labour, organised plundering, misappropriation of reparations monies, etc., are the names for the other aspects of these—as yet—unexpiated crime totals.

The consumerist societies of Austria and Germany, both marked equally with the syndrome of not only fun and diversions, but also with the syndrome of guilt and expiation, are not at all enthusiastic about an eventual German entitlement to reparations. In view of the transient nature of this spirit of the age, this is no longer significant anyway. What is important is Germany’s legitimate claim to existence in the heart of Europe. Of vital importance for real peace—not a phoney peace!—and true friendship—not mere flattery!—is the need for the resolving of unsolved questions, of unpaid accounts and unexpiated guilt. Would one, at this point, kindly not object that the sufferings of the expulsions, the horrors of the abductions—these were also deportations!—the misery and squalor of slave labour and other traumatic experiences would have worn off by now, 40, 50 or 60 years after the ceasefire and that, therefore, any restitution claim had lapsed in the meantime. What has been granted to some victims must not be withheld indefinitely from others. We are not satisfied with the standard response of the Federal Government stating, although being aware, ‘that during and immediately after the Second World War many Germans were made to endure hardships and serious deprivations’ that however, this injustice would have had ‘its roots in the previous National Socialist injustices’, and that this would be the reason for relinquishing ‘all claims for restitution or reparations against the foreign states’.

When in the summer of 2002 Germany was visited by catastrophic flooding, especially in Saxony, many public institutions, political organisations and private individuals called for private donations to relieve the distress of their fellow Germans. Several million Euros were soon collected, and the Federal Government made several million in tax monies available as well. In October, however, the German people, ready to help and willing to make sacrifices, learned that a large portion of the monies collected would not be made available to those in need in Germany! The state of Saxony, the needy recipient of a large amount of donated money, placed the substantial amount of five million Euros at the disposal of the Czech Republic for improvements in its infrastructure. Georg Milbradt, the Minister-President of Saxony, called the gift an ‘act of solidarity’ and, furthermore, Saxony had ‘more money than their Czech neighbour’.

We, of course, have nothing against humanitarian assistance and solidarity with our fellow humans in need, but that was not the situation here! These were totally different circumstances! Not only had a great deal of money once again been given away without the knowledge or consent of the German public. It was given as a gift to a country that to this day upholds its unexpiated murders of hundreds of thousands of Germans and uncompensated expulsion of three million Germans. The Czech Government still believes that it can justify its mass atrocities under the legal authority of the Benes Decrees. Worse still, early in 2002, the Czech Prime Minister Milos Zeman let it be known that the Sudeten Germans should be glad they were ‘just’ driven from their homes and not all killed for ‘treason’. Such shameless and slanderous ridicule of millions of German victims is possible only because of the spinelessness of the Federal Republic of Germany. Furthermore, its pathetic stance has become national German policy to the extent that it is now openly affirmed even by the so-called representatives of the associations of expellees. Even Erika Steinbach, the president of the Federation of Expellees, announced in the summer of 2001: ‘It makes no difference to me whether Upper Silesia belongs to Poland or Germany’. Truly, this present book is more necessary than ever!

In view of the unceasing continuation of a policy of sell-out and grovelling, Bleeding Germany Dry is now more germane and topical than ever. Not only for the reason that historical facts are related herein, but above all for the reason that Federal German representatives of the people do not tire of pursuing a policy that is nothing short of betrayal and treachery against their own nation.

Sooner or later, those at the highest political level will have to deal with Germany’s demands. This day—let us have no hesitation in calling it, quite provocatively, ‘pay-day’—will come, in spite of all denials and all attempts at preventing it. I do, most emphatically, not mean this in a spirit of vengeance or retribution. Rather, I have confidence in the Renaissance of the European cultural heritage, in a restored perceptive understanding of freedom and self-awareness of the German people, of the ultimate realisation of the right to self-determination of all nations, and in the determination of the youth of Germany to no longer tolerate the injustices and discriminations.

The Author

____________

Note of the Ed.: The endnotes of the original book have been omitted.

Love Germania. Hate the US. – III

Editor’s Note: The books that the American Thomas Goodrich wrote about the Second World War represent the most important literature of anything written in this century to understand the catastrophe that spawned the ethno-suicidal zeitgeist of the white man of today.

Below I reproduce chapter 3 of Goodrich’s Summer 1945: Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate. You have to invert the black-and-white colours of how the Americans depicted the Nazi leadership and themselves, a kind of photographic negative of what actually happened: War propaganda that persists to the present year. For example, the Eisenhower camps were the real death camps in 1945, where one million Germans were maliciously starved to death. This time the Bolshevik Jews weren’t the perpetrators of the Holodomor, but the Americans. Goodrich writes below that ten times of German soldiers died compared to those killed on the whole Western Front during the whole six years of war. And let us not speak in this hatnote about the millions of rapes of civilian women and tortures after the Germans surrendered…

The utter quackery of the so-called ‘white nationalist’ movement lies in that they aren’t harping every morning, noon and night, using books like Goodrich’s like a sword, to set the record straight about what happened in WW2. Hence the spawned ethno-suicidal zeitgeist, a ‘monster from the Id’ continues unchallenged to this day.

White nationalism must die so that an authentic movement may emerge, that we could baptise this day as the ‘priesthood of the 14 words’. As I live in the American continent, I dare not use the term ‘National Socialism’, which should be reserved for Germans and Europeans of the Nordic type once they wake up.

All the criticism that white nationalists make of Trump, that he has been false opposition (for which Richard Spencer prefers Biden) I could say of them. As long as American racists refuse to denounce the Hellstorm Holocaust their ancestors perpetrated in Europe their ideology is also false opposition.

Goodrich’s endnotes sourcing every indented quotation as well as the sources of those brief sentences between quotation marks—for example the words of genocidal manic Dwight D. Eisenhower—are omitted in this edited chapter. For a proper reading I urge visitors of this site to order a hard copy of Summer 1945: a book that, fortunately, has not been censored on Amazon Books.
 

______ 卐 ______

 

CHAPTER 3

OF CRIMES AND CRIMINALS

Even as the physical massacre of Germany was in progress, the spiritual massacre of German womanhood continued without pause.

Although violent, brutal and repeated rapes persisted against defenseless females for years, most Soviet, American, British, and French troops quickly discovered that hunger was a powerful incentive to sexual surrender. Usually, a piece of bread, a little candy or a bar of soap made violent rape unnecessary. In their utterly devastated cities, young girls roamed the streets seeking something to eat and a place to sleep. Having only one thing left in the world to sell, they were not slow to sell it.

“Bacon, eggs, sleep at your home?” winked Russian soldiers over and over again, knowing full well the answer would usually be a two-minute tryst among the rubble. “I continually ran about with cooking utensils, and begged for food…,” admitted one girl. “If I heard in my neighborhood the expression ‘pretty woman,’ I reacted accordingly.’’

Despite General Eisenhower’s edict against fraternization with the despised enemy, no amount of words could slow the US soldier’s sex drive. “Neither army regulations nor the propaganda of hatred in the American press,” noted newswoman, Freda Utley, “could prevent American soldiers from liking and associating with German women, who although they were driven by hunger to become prostitutes, preserved a certain innate decency.”

“I felt a bit sick at times about the power I had over that girl,” one troubled British soldier confessed. “If I gave her a three-penny bar of chocolate she nearly went crazy. She was just like my slave. She darned my socks and mended things for me. There was no question of marriage. She knew that was not possible.”

As this young Tommy made clear, desperate German women, many with children to feed, were compelled by hunger to enter a bondage as binding as any in history. With time, some victims, particularly those consorting with officers, not only avoided starvation, but found themselves enjoying luxuries long forgotten.

“By no means could it be said that the major is raping me, revealed one woman. “Am I doing it for bacon, butter, sugar, candles, canned meat? To some extent I’m sure I am. In addition, I like the major and the less he wants from me as a man, the more I like him as a person.”

Unlike the above, relatively few females found such havens. For most, food was used to bait or bribe them into a numbing sexual slavery in which the simple avoidance of starvation was the day-to-day goal. Just as Lali Horstmann was about to sign up for kitchen duty in the Soviet Zone, a job that paid with soup and potatoes, a girl next to her whispered that her sister had volunteered several days before on the same job and had not been seen since. When an old, unattractive woman nearby raised her hand to volunteer, the Red officer in charge ignored her and instead pointed a pistol at a pretty young girl. When the girl refused, several soldiers approached.

“She was in tears as she was brutally shoved forward,” recorded Lali, “followed by others who were protesting helplessly.”

“A Pole discovered me,” acknowledged another girl, “and began to sell me to Russians. He had fixed up a brothel in his cellar for Russian officers. I was fetched by him… I had to go with him, and could not resist. I came into the cellar, in which there were the most depraved carryings on, drinking, smoking and shouting, and I had to participate… I felt like shrieking.”

While many women endured such slavery—if only to eat—others risked their all to escape. Recounted an American journalist:

As our long line of British Army lorries… rolled through the main street of Brahlstorf, the last Russian occupied town, a pretty blond girl darted from the crowd of Germans watching us and made a dash for our truck. Clinging with both hands to the tailboard, she made a desperate effort to climb in. But we were driving too fast and the board was too high. After being dragged several hundred yards she had to let go and fell on the cobblestone street. That scene was a dramatic illustration of the state of terror in which women… were living.

“All these women,” wrote a witness, “Germans, Polish, Jewish and even Russian girls ‘freed’ from Nazi slave camps, were dominated by one desperate desire to escape from the Red zone.”

* * *

By the summer of 1945, Germany had become the world’s greatest slave market where sex was the new medium of exchange. While the wolf of hunger might be kept from the door, grim disease was always waiting in the wings.

“As a way of dying it may be worse than starvation, but it will put off dying for months—or even years,” commented an English journalist.

In addition to all the venereal diseases known in the West, German women were infected by a host of new evils, including an insidious strain of Asiatic syphilis. “It is a virulent form of sickness, unknown in this part of the world,” a doctor’s wife explained. “It would be difficult to cure even if we were lucky enough to have any penicillin.”

Another dreaded concern—not only for those who were selling themselves, but for the millions of rape victims—was unwanted pregnancy. Thousands who were if fact pregnant sought and found abortions. Thousands more lived in dreadful suspense. And for those infants who were carried and delivered, their struggle was usually brief.

“The mortality among the small children and infants was very high,” noted one sad woman. “They simply had to starve to death. There was nothing for them… Generally, they did not live to be more than 3 months old—a consolation for those mothers, who had got the child against their will from a Russian… The mother worked all the time and was very seldom able to give the child the breast.”

As the above implied, simply because a mother sold her body to feed a child did not necessarily save her from back-breaking labor. Indeed, with the end of war, Germans old and young were dragooned by the victors for the monumental clean-up and dismantling of the devastated Reich. Sometimes food was given to the workers —“a piece of bread or maybe a bowl of thin, watery soup”— and sometimes not. “We used to start work at six o’clock in the morning and get home again at six in the evening,” said a Silesian woman.” We had to work on Sundays, too, and we were given neither payment nor food for what we did.”

From the blasted capital, Berlin, another female recorded:

Berlin is being cleaned up… All round the hills of rubble, buckets were being passed from hand to hand; we have returned to the days of the Pyramids—except that instead of building we are carrying away… On the embankment German prisoners were slaving away—gray-heads in miserable clothes, presumably ex-Volkssturm. With grunts and groans, they were loading heavy wheels onto freight-cars. They gazed at us imploringly, tried to keep near us. At first I couldn’t understand why. Others did, though, and secretly passed the men a few crusts of bread. This is strictly forbidden, but the Russian guard stared hard in the opposite direction. The men were unshaven, shrunken, with wretched doglike expressions. To me they didn’t look German at all.

“My mother, 72 years of age, had to work outside the town on refuse heaps,” lamented a daughter in Posen. “There the old people were hunted about, and had to sort out bottles and iron, even when it was raining… The work was dirty, and it was impossible for them to change their clothes.”

Understandably, thousands of overworked, underfed victims soon succumbed under such conditions. No job was too low or degrading for the conquered Germans to perform. Well-bred ladies, who in former times were theater-going members of the upper-class, worked side by side with peasants at washtubs, cleaning socks and underclothes of Russian privates. Children and the aged were put to work scrubbing floors and shining boots in the American, British and French Zones.

Some tasks were especially loathsome, as one woman makes clear: “As a result of the war damage… the toilets were stopped up and filthy. This filth we had to clear away with our hands, without any utensils to do so. The excrement was brought into the yard, shoveled into carts, which we had to bring to refuse pits. The awful part was, that we got dirtied by the excrement which spurted up, but we could not clean ourselves.”

Added another female from the Soviet Zone:

We had to build landing strips, and to break stones… From six in the morning until nine at night, we were working along the roads. Any Russian who felt like it took us aside. In the morning and at night we received cold water and a piece of bread, and at noon soup of crushed, unpeeled potatoes, without salt. At night we slept on the floors of farmhouses or stables, dead tired, huddled together. But we woke up every so often, when a moaning and whimpering in the pitch-black room announced the presence of one of the guards.

As this woman and others acknowledge, although sex could be bought for a bit of food, a cigarette or a toothbrush, some victors preferred to take what they wanted, whenever and wherever they pleased. “If they wanted a girl they just came in the field and got her,” recalled Ilse Breyer who worked at planting potatoes.

“Hunger made German women more ‘available’,’’ an American soldier revealed, “but despite this, rape was prevalent and often accompanied by additional violence. In particular I remember an eighteen-year-old woman who had the side of her face smashed with a rifle butt and was then raped by two Gls. Even the French complained that the rapes, looting and drunken destructiveness on the part of our troops was excessive.”

* * *

“God, I hate the Germans,” wrote Dwight D. Eisenhower to his wife in 1944.

As Mrs. Eisenhower and anyone else close to the general knew, her husband’s loathing of all things German was nothing short of pathological. With the final German capitulation in May, 1945, the Allied commander found himself in control of over five million ragged, weary, but living, enemy soldiers. “It is a pity we could not have killed more,’’ muttered the general, dissatisfied with the body-count from the greatest bloodbath in human history. And so, Eisenhower settled for next best: If he could not kill armed Germans in war, he would kill disarmed Germans in peace. Because the Geneva Convention guaranteed POWs of signer nations the same food, shelter and medical attention as their captors, and because these laws were to be enforced by the International Red Cross, Eisenhower simply circumvented the treaty by creating his own category for prisoners. Under the general’s reclassification, German soldiers were no longer considered POWs, but DEFs—Disarmed Enemy Forces. With this bit of legerdemain, and in direct violation of the Geneva Convention, Eisenhower could now deal in secret with those in his power, free from the prying eyes of the outside world.

Even before war’s end, thousands of German soldiers who somehow escaped being murdered by the Americans when they surrendered and who actually did reach a POW camp, nevertheless soon died in captivity from starvation, neglect and, in many cases, outright murder. At one camp along the Rhine River in April 1945, each group of ten men were expected to survive in the open, on a plot of mud a few yards wide, in cold, wet weather, without shelter or blankets, with virtually no food. When the Americans finally “fed” the prisoners, it was one slice of bread that had to be cut ten ways, a strip for each man. A voice on the camp loud speaker arrogantly announced: “German soldiers, eat slowly. You haven’t had anything to eat in a long time. When you get your rations today from the best fed army in the world, you’ll die if you don’t eat slowly.” This mocking, murderous routine continued for three months. Once healthy prisoners soon became barely-breathing skeletons. Like clockwork, large numbers of dead were hauled away every day.

“The provision of water was a major problem,” revealed another witness, “yet only 200 yards away was the River Rhine running bank full.”

With the war still in progress, when the hard-pressed German leadership heard of these American atrocities they naturally appealed to the International Red Cross.

“If the Germans were reasoning like normal beings, they would realize the whole history of the United States and Great Britain is to be generous towards a defeated enemy,” came Eisenhower’s pompous reply. “We observe all the laws of the Geneva Convention.”

With German surrender and the threat of retaliation against Allied POWs entirely erased, deaths in the American concentration camps soared dramatically. While tens of thousands died of starvation and thirst, hundreds of thousands more perished from overcrowding and disease. As sixteen-year-old, Hugo Stehkamper, graphically described:

I only had a sweater to protect me from the pouring rain and the cold. There just wasn’t any shelter to be had. You stood there, wet through and through, in fields that couldn’t be called fields anymore—they were ruined. You had to make an effort when you walked to even pull your shoes out of the mud… It’s incomprehensible to me how we could stand for many, many days without sitting, without lying down, just standing there, totally soaked. During the day we marched around, huddled together to try to warm each other a bit. At night we stood because we couldn’t walk and tried to keep awake by singing or humming songs. Again and again someone got so tired his knees got weak and he collapsed.

The situation at American death camps near Remagen, Rheinberg and elsewhere, was typical. With no shelter of any sort, the men were forced to dig holes with their bare hands simply to sleep in.

At night, the prisoners would lower into the holes and try to stay warm by clinging to one another. And since it rained virtually every day, those holes that did not collapse always filled with water. Because of rampant diarrhea many of the victims were forced to defecate on the ground. Others were so weakened from sickness and starvation that they could not even lower their pants. Quickly, everyone’s clothes became infected with excrement and very soon, all the men suffered from chronic diarrhea. One camp “was nothing but a giant sewer, where each man just shit where he stood,” recounts a victim. Another enclosure was “literally a sea of urine” where prisoners were compelled to live and sleep. Even though the Rhine River flowed nearby, there was no water in most camps to drink, much less wash clothes in. As the prisoners rapidly weakened, many who fell into the numerous dug holes found it difficult or impossible to get out again without the help of others.

“Amputees slithered like amphibians through the mud, soaking and freezing. Naked to the skies day after day and night after night…,” remembered a witness.

When the camp commandant decided to feed the prisoners, generally every other day, the starved men read on the ration container that the amount was only one-tenth the normal daily diet fed US troops. One prisoner actually complained to a camp commander that the starvation diet was against the Geneva Convention.

“Forget the Convention,” snapped the American officer. “You haven’t any rights.”

As elsewhere, within days of enduring such deadly conditions many of those who had gone healthy into the Remagen camp were being dragged out the front gate by their heals and thrown onto a waiting truck.

“The Americans were really shitty to us,” a survivor at another camp recalled. “All we had to eat was grass.”

At Hans Waltersdorf’s prison, the inmates survived on a daily soup made of birdseed. “Not fit for human consumption,” read the words on the sacks. At another camp, a weeping seventeen-year-old stood day in, day out beside the barbed wire fence. In the distance, the youth could just view his own village. One morning, inmates awoke to find the boy dead, his body strung up by guards and left dangling on the wires. When outraged prisoners cried “Murderers! Murderers!” the camp commander withheld their meager rations for three days.

“For us who were already starving and could hardly move because of weakness… it meant death,” said one of the men.

Not enough that his American jailers were starving them to death; Eisenhower even forbade those on the outside from feeding the prisoners:

Under no circumstances may food supplies be assembled among the local inhabitants in order to deliver them to prisoners of war. Those who violate this command and nevertheless try to circumvent this blockade to allow something to come to the prisoners place themselves in danger of being shot.

Horrified by what they could see at a distance, heart-broken women from towns and villages surrounding the camps did indeed bring their own meager food stocks to share with the starving men. Good to his word, Eisenhower’s guards always chased the women and children away, scooped up the food, poured gasoline over it, then set the piles on fire. As warned, when some anguished women persisted, they were shot. After this murderous decree, anyone who insisted that the goal of the American general was anything less than the massacre of those under his control was simply one of those privy to the plan.

There was no lack of food or shelter among the victorious Allies.

Indeed, American supply depots were bursting at the seams. “More stocks than we can ever use,” one general announced. “They stretch as far as the eye can see.” Instead of allowing even a trickle of this bounty to reach the compounds, the starvation diet was further reduced. “Outside the camp the Americans were burning food which they could not eat themselves,” revealed a starving Werner Laska from his prison.

“When they caught me throwing C-Rations over the fence, they threatened me with imprisonment,” confided an angry American guard, Private Martin Brech. “One Captain told me that he would shoot me if he saw me again tossing food to the Germans… Some of the men were really only boys 13 years of age… or old men drafted by Hitler in his last ditch stand… I understand that average weight of the prisoners… was 90 pounds.”

As Brech noted, many of the prisoners were mere children. Some little boys were still clad in the same grimy pajamas the Americans had arrested them in. Fear that the children might form guerrilla groups was the official reason given.

Horrified by the silent, secret slaughter, the International Red Cross—which had over 100,000 tons of food stored in Switzerland—tried to intercede. When two trains loaded with supplies reached the camps, however, they were turned back by American officers. “These Nazis are getting a dose of their own medicine,” a prison commandant reported proudly to one of Eisenhower’s “political advisers.”

“German soldiers were not common law convicts,” protested a Red Cross official, “they were drafted to fight in a national army on patriotic grounds and could not refuse military service any more than the Americans could.”

Like this individual, many others found no justification whatsoever in the massacre of helpless prisoners, especially since the German government had lived up to the Geneva Convention, as one American official put it, “to a tee.”

“I have come up against few instances where Germans have not treated prisoners according to the rules, and respected the Red Cross,” wrote war correspondent Allan Wood of the London Express.

“The Germans even in their greatest moments of despair obeyed the Convention in most respects,” a US officer added. “True it is that there were front line atrocities—passions run high up there—but they were incidents, not practices; and maladministration of their American prison camps was very uncommon.”

Nevertheless, despite the Red Cross report that ninety-nine percent of American prisoners of war in Germany had survived and were on their way home, Eisenhower’s murderous program continued apace.

One officer who refused to have a hand in the crime and who began releasing large numbers of prisoners soon after they were disarmed was George Patton. Reasoned the general:

I emphasized [to the troops] the necessity for the proper treatment of prisoners of war, both as to their lives and property. My usual statement was… “Kill all the Germans you can but do not put them up against a wall and kill them. Do your killing while they are still fighting. After a man has surrendered, he should be treated exactly in accordance with the Rules of Land Warfare, and just as you would hope to be treated if you were foolish enough to surrender. Americans do not kick people in the teeth after they are down.”

Although other upright generals such as Omar Bradley issued orders to release POWs, Eisenhower quickly overruled them.

Mercifully, for the two million Germans under British control, Bernard Montgomery refused to participate in the massacre. Indeed, soon after war’s end, the field marshal released and sent most of his prisoners home.

After being shuttled from one enclosure to the next, Corporal Helmut Liebich had seen for himself all the horrors the American death camps had to give. At one compound, amused guards formed lines and beat starving prisoners with sticks and clubs as they ran the gauntlet for their paltry rations. At another camp of 5,200 men, Liebich watched as ten to thirty bodies were hauled away daily. At yet another prison, there was “35 days of starvation and 15 days of no food at all,” and what little the wretched inmates did receive was rotten. Finally, in June, 1945, Liebich’s camp at Rheinberg passed to British control. Immediately, survivors were given food and shelter and for those like Liebich—who now weighed 97 pounds and was dying of dysentery—swift medical attention was provided.

“It was wonderful to be under a roof in a real bed,” the corporal reminisced. “We were treated like human beings again. The Tommies treated us like comrades.”

Before the British could take complete control of the camp, however, Liebich noted that American bulldozers leveled one section of the compound where skeletal—but breathing—men still lay in their holes.

* * *

If possible, Germans in French hands suffered even more than those held by Americans. When France requested slaves as part of its war booty, Eisenhower transferred over half a million Germans east.

“Gee! I hope we don’t ever lose a war,’’ thought a GI as he stared at the broken, starving wrecks being selected for slavery. At one American camp of over 30,000 prisoners, a stunned French officer was horrified to see nothing but a vast killing field, “peopled with living skeletons, male and female, huddling under scraps of wet card board.”

Martin Brech happened to be in a truck slowly following one group of Germans that were marching toward France and slavery. “Whenever a German prisoner staggered or dropped back, he was hit on the head with a club and killed,” recalled the shocked US private. “The bodies were rolled to the side of the road to be picked up by another truck. For many, this quick death might have been preferable to slow starvation in our killing fields.”

“When we marched through Namur in a column seven abreast, there was also a Catholic procession going through the street,” remembered one slave as he moved through Belgium. “When the people saw the POWs, the procession dissolved, and they threw rocks and horse shit at us. From Namur, we went by train in open railroad cars. At one point we went under a bridge, and railroad ties were thrown from it into the cars filled with POWs, causing several deaths. Later we went under another overpass, and women lifted their skirts and relieved themselves on us.”

Once in France, the assaults intensified. “We were cursed, spat upon and even physically attacked by the French population, especially the women,” Hans von der Heide wrote. “I bitterly recalled scenes from the spring, when we marched American POWs through the streets of Paris. They were threatened and insulted no differently by the French mob.”

Like the Americans, the French starved their prisoners. Unlike the Americans, the French drained the last ounce of labor from their victims before they dropped dead. “I have seen them beaten with rifle butts and kicked with feet in the streets of the town because they broke down of overwork,” remarked a witness from Langres. “Two or three of them die of exhaustion every week.”

“In another camp,” a horrified viewer added, “prisoners receive only one meal a day but are expected to continue working. Elsewhere so many have died recently that the cemetery space was exhausted and another had to be built.”

Revealed the French journal, Le Figaro:“In certain camps for German prisoners of war… living skeletons may be seen… and deaths from undernourishment are numerous. We learn that prisoners have been savagely and systematically beaten and that some have been employed in removing mines without protection equipment so that they have been condemned to die sooner or later.”

“Twenty-five percent of the men in our camp died in one month,” echoed a slave from Buglose.

The enslavement of German soldiers was not limited to France. Although fed and treated infinitely better, several hundred thousand POWs in Great Britain were transformed into virtual slaves. When prisoners were put to work raising projects for Britain’s grand “Victory in Europe” celebration, one English foreman felt compelled to quip: “I guess the Jerries are preparing to celebrate their own downfall. It does seem as though that is laying it on a bit thick.”

In vain did the International Red Cross protest:

The United States, Britain, and France… are violating International Red Cross agreements they solemnly signed in 1929. Investigation at Geneva headquarters today disclosed that the transfer of German war prisoners captured by the American army to French and British authorities for forced labor is nowhere permitted in the statues of the International Red Cross, which is the highest authority on the subject in the world.

* * *

Meanwhile, those Germans not consigned to bondage continued to perish in American prisons. Soldiers who did not succumb to hunger or disease often died of thirst, even though streams sometimes ran just a few feet from the camps. “The lack of water was the worst thing of all,” remembered George Weiss of his enclosure where the Rhine flowed just beyond the barbed wire. “For three and a half days we had no water at all. We would drink our own urine. It tasted terrible, but what could we do? Some men got down on the ground and licked the ground to get some moisture. I was so weak I was already on my knees.”

At one death camp, after a German officer submitted an official protest over the withholding of water from the prisoners, the American commandant ordered a large fire hose dragged into the densely-packed compound then told his men to turn it on to its utmost. Because of the great pressure, the hose flailed violently, knocking already weakened prisoners to the ground right and left. Still, many men, dying of thirst, tried desperately to capture even a few drops of water. As intended, such a spectacle provided great amusement for the US guards. “They laughed at our predicament as hard as they could,” noted one dying prisoner. When the hose was then quickly turned off only a thin layer of mud remained, which, of course, soon dried in seconds. Such sadistic treatment not only insured men would die but it guaranteed others would be driven insane.

Some prisoners, observed American guard, Martin Brech, “tried to escape in a demented or suicidal fashion, running through open fields in broad daylight towards the Rhine to quench their thirst. They were mowed down.”

As if their plight were not already hideous enough, prisoners occasionally became the targets of drunken and sadistic guards who sprayed the camps with machine-gun fire for sport. “I think,” Private Brech continued, “that soldiers not exposed to combat were trying to prove how tough they were by taking it out on the prisoners and civilians.”

I encountered a captain on a hill above the Rhine shooting down at a group of German civilian women with his -45 caliber pistol. When I asked, “Why?” he mumbled, “Target practice,” and fired until his pistol was empty… This is when I realized I was dealing with cold-blooded killers filled with moralistic hatred.

While continuing to deny the Red Cross and other relief agencies access to the camps, Eisenhower stressed among his lieutenants the need for secrecy. “Ike made the sensational statement that now that hostilities were over, the important thing was to stay in with world public opinion—apparently whether it was right or wrong,” recorded a disgusted George Patton. “After lunch he talked to us very confidentially on the necessity for solidarity in the event that any of us are called before a Congressional Committee.”

To prevent the gruesome details from reaching the outside world—and sidetrack those that did—counter-rumors were circulated stating that, far from mistreating and murdering prisoners, US camp commanders were actually turning back released Germans who tried to slip back in for food and shelter.

Ultimately, at least 800,000 German prisoners died in the American and French death camps. “Quite probably,” one expert later wrote, the figure of one million is closer to the mark. And thus, during the first summer of “peace,” did ten times the number of German soldiers die than were killed on the whole Western Front during the whole six years of war.

“It is hard to escape the conclusion,” admitted a journalist after the war, “that Dwight Eisenhower was a war criminal of epic proportions.”

* * *

Unlike their democratic counterparts, the Soviet Union made little effort to hide from the world the fate of German prisoners in its hands. Toiling and dying by the tens of thousands in the forests, bogs and mines of Siberia, the captives were slaves pure and simple and no attempt was made to disguise the fact. For the enslaved Germans, male and female, the odds of surviving the Soviet gulags were even worse than escaping the American or French prison camps and a trip to Siberia was tantamount to a death sentence. What little food the slaves received was intended merely to maintain their strength so that the last ounce of energy could be drained from them.

And so, with the once mighty Wehrmacht now disarmed and enslaved, and with their leaders either dead or awaiting trial for war crimes, the old men, women and children who remained in the dismembered Reich found themselves utterly at the mercy of the victors. Unfortunately for these survivors, never in the history of the world was mercy in shorter supply.

* * *

While disarmed and helpless German soldiers were dying by the hundreds of thousands in American death camps, helpless German civilians were likewise dying of deliberate starvation in their uncounted thousands. Indeed, in “peace,” all of Germany itself had become the world’s largest death camp, just as Henry Morgenthau had hoped and planned.

Because Germany’s entire infrastructure had been shattered by the war, it was already assured that thousands would starve to death before roads, rails, canals, and bridges could be restored. Even when much of the damage had been repaired, the deliberate withholding of food from Germany guaranteed that hundreds of thousands more were doomed to a slow death. Continuing the policy of their merciless predecessors, Harry Truman and Clement Attlee allowed the spirit of Morgenthau to dictate their course of action regarding post-war Germany.

No measures were to be undertaken, wrote President Truman to General Eisenhower, “looking toward the economic rehabilitation of Germany or designed to maintain or strengthen the German economy.” In other words, the shattered Germany economy would remain just as it was and the people would simply be allowed to starve.

Not only would food from the outside be denied entry, but US troops were forbidden to “give, sell or trade” supplies to the starving. Additionally, Germany’s already absent ability to feed itself would be stymied even further by withholding seed crop, fertilizer, gas, oil, and parts for farm machinery. Because of the enforced famine, it was estimated that thirty million Germans would soon succumb. Well down the road to starvation even before surrender, those Germans who survived war now struggled to survive peace.

“I trudged home on sore feet, limp with hunger…,” a Berlin woman scribbled in her diary. “It struck me that everyone I passed on the way home stared at me out of sunken, starving eyes. Tomorrow I’ll go in search of nettles again. I examine every bit of green with this in mind.”

“The search for food made all former worries irrelevant,” added Lali Horstmann. “It was the present moment alone that counted.”

While city-dwellers ate weeds, those on the land had food taken from them and were forced to dig roots, pick berries and glean fields. “Old men, women and children,” a witness noted, “may be seen picking up one grain at a time from the ground to be carried home in a sack the size of a housewife’s shopping bag.”

The deadly effects of malnutrition soon became evident. Lamented one anguished observer:

They are emaciated to the bone. Their clothes hang loose on their bodies, the lower extremities are like the bones of a skeleton, their hands shake as though with palsy, the muscles of the arms are withered, the skin lies in folds, and is without elasticity, the joints spring out as though broken. The weight of the women of average height and build has fallen way below 110 pounds. Often women of child-bearing age weigh no more than 65 pounds.

“We were really starving now…,” acknowledged Ilse McKee. “Most of the time we were too weak to do anything. Even queuing up for what little food there was to be distributed sometimes proved too much.”

Orders to the contrary, many Allied soldiers secretly slipped chocolate to children or simply turned their backs while elders stole bread. Others were determined to follow orders implacably. “It was a common sight,” recalled one GI, “to see German women up to their elbows in our garbage cans looking for something edible—that is, if they weren’t chased away.” To prevent starving Germans from grubbing American leftovers, army cooks laced their slop with soap. Tossing crumbs or used chewing gum to scrambling children was another pastime some soldiers found amusing.

For many victims, especially the old and young, even begging and stealing proved too taxing and thousands slipped slowly into the final, fatal apathy preceding death.

“Most children under 10 and people over 60 cannot survive the coming winter,” one American admitted.

“The number of still-born children is approaching the number of those born alive, and an increasing proportion of these die in a few days,” offered another witness to the tragedy. “Even if they come into the world of normal weight, they start immediately to lose weight and die shortly. Very often mothers cannot stand the loss of blood in childbirth and perish. Infant mortality has reached the horrifying height of 90 per cent.”

“Millions of these children must die before there is enough food,” echoed an American clergyman traveling in Germany. “In Frankfurt at a children’s hospital there have been set aside 25 out of 100 children. These will be fed and kept alive. It is better to feed 25 enough to keep them alive and let 75 starve than to feed the 100 for a short while and let them all starve.”

From Wiesbaden, a correspondent of the Chicago Daily News sat with a mother and watched as her eight-year-old played with her only toys, a doll and carriage. The reporter saw at a glance that the thin, frail child was starving.

“She doesn’t look well,” I said.

“Six years of war,” the mother replied, in that quiet toneless manner so common here now. “She hasn’t had a chance. None of the children have. Her teeth are not good. She catches illness so easily. She laughs and plays—yes; but soon she is tired. She never has known”—and the mother’s eyes filled with tears “what it is not to be hungry.”

“Was it that bad during the war?” I asked.

“Not this bad,” she replied, “but not good at all. And now I am told the bread ration is to be less. What are we to do; all of us? For six years we suffered. We love our country. My husband was killed—his second war. My oldest son is a prisoner somewhere in France. My other boy lost a leg… And now…”

By this time she was weeping. I gave this little girl a Hershey bar and she wept pure joy—as she held it. By this time I wasn’t feeling too chipper myself.

When a scattering of reports such as the above began filtering out to the American and British public, many were shocked, horrified and outraged at the secret slaughter being committed in their name. Already troubled that the US State Department had tried to keep an official report on conditions in Germany from public scrutiny, Senator James Eastland of Mississippi was outraged.

“There appears to be a conspiracy of silence…,” announced Eastland. “Are we following a policy of vindictive hatred, a policy which would not be endorsed by the American people as a whole if they knew true conditions?”

“Yes,” replied a chamber colleague, Senator Homer Capehart of Indiana, no doubt with Henry Morgenthau on his mind:

The fact can no longer be suppressed, namely, the fact that it has been and continues to be, the deliberate policy… of this government to draw and quarter a nation now reduced to abject misery. In this process this clique, like a pack of hyenas struggling over the bloody entrails of a corpse, and inspired by a sadistic and fanatical hatred, are determined to destroy the German nation and the German people, no matter what the consequences… This administration has been carrying on a deliberate policy of mass starvation.

The murderous program was, wrote an equally outraged William Henry Chamberlain, “a positively sadistic desire to inflict maximum suffering on all Germans, irrespective of their responsibility for Nazi crimes.”

Because of these and other critics, Allied officials were forced to respond. Following a fact-finding tour of Germany, Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of the late president, professed to see no suffering beyond what was considered “tolerable.” And General Eisenhower, pointing out that there were food shortages all throughout Europe, noted that Germany suffered no more nor less than its neighbors. “While I and my subordinates believe that stern justice should be meted out to war criminals… we would never condone inhuman or un-American practices upon the helpless,” assuaged the general as helpless Germans died by the tens of thousands in his death camps each month.

Although some nations were indeed suffering shortages, none save Germany was starving. Many countries were actually experiencing surpluses of food, including Denmark on Germany’s north border, a nation only waiting Eisenhower’s nod to send tons of excess beef south.

“England is not starving…,” argued Robert Conway in the New York News. “France is better off than England, and Italy is better off than France.”

When Senator Albert Hawkes of New Jersey pleaded with President Truman to head off catastrophe and allow private relief packages to enter Germany, the American leader offered various excuses, then cut the senator short:

While we have no desire to be unduly cruel to Germany, I cannot feel any great sympathy for those who caused the death of so many human beings by starvation, disease, and outright murder, in addition to all the destruction and death of war…. I think that… no one should be called upon to pay for Germany’s misfortune except Germany itself… Eventually the enemy countries will be given some attention.

In time, Germany did receive “some attention.” Late in 1945, the British allowed Red Cross shipments to enter their zone, followed by the French in theirs. Months later, even the United States grudgingly permitted supplies to cross into its sector. For millions of Germans, however—the old, the young, the injured, the imprisoned—the “attention,” as originally planned, was far too little, far too late.

Had rapes, slavery and starvation been the only trials Germans were forced to endure, it would have been terrible enough. There were other horrors ahead, however—some so sadistic and evil as to stagger the senses. The nightmarish fate that befell thousands of victims locked deep in Allied prisons was enough, moaned one observer, to cause even the devout to ask “if there really were such a thing as a God.”

* * *

Soon after the Allied victory in Europe, the purge of National Socialist Party members from government, business, industry, science, education, and all other walks of German life commenced. While a surprising number of Nazis were allowed—even compelled—to man their posts temporarily to enable a smooth transition, all party members, high and low, were sooner or later excised from German daily life. In theory, “denazification” was a simple replacement of National Socialist officials with those of democratic or communist underpinnings. In practice, the purge became little more than a cloak for rape, torture and death.

Because their knowledge of the language and culture was superb, many of the intelligence officers accompanying US and British forces into the Reich were Jewish refugees who had fled Germany in the late 1930s. Although their American and English “aides” were hardly better, the fact that many of these “39ers” became interrogators, examiners and screeners, with old scores to settle, insured that Nazis—or any German, for that matter—would be shown no mercy.

One man opposed to the vengeance-minded program was George Patton.

“Evidently the virus started by Morgenthau and Bernard Baruch of a Semitic revenge against all Germans is still working,” wrote the general in private. “I am frankly opposed to this war-criminal stuff. It is not cricket and it is Semitic… I can’t see how Americans can sink so low.”

Soon after occupation, all adult Germans were compelled to register at the nearest Allied headquarters and complete a lengthy questionnaire on their past activities. While many nervous citizens were detained then and there, most returned home, convinced that at long last the terrible ordeal was over. For millions, however, the trial had but begun.

“Then it started,” whispered Anna Fest, a woman who had registered with the Americans six weeks earlier.

Such a feeling of helplessness, when three or four heavily armed military police stand in front of you. You just panic. I cried terribly. My mother was completely beside herself and said, “You can’t do this. She registered just as she was supposed to.” Then she said, “If only you’d gone somewhere else and had hidden.” But I consider that senseless, because I did not feel guilty… That was the way it went with everyone, with no reason given.

Few German adults, Nazi or not, escaped the dreaded knock on the door. Far from being dangerous fascists, Freddy and Lali Horstmann were actually well-known anti-Nazis. Recounts Lali from the Soviet Zone:

“I am sorry to bother you,” he began, “but I am simply carrying out my orders. Until when did you work for the Foreign Office?”

“Till 1933,” my husband answered.

“Then you need fear nothing,” Androff said. “We accuse you of nothing, but we want you to accompany us to the headquarters of the NKVD, the secret police, so that we can take down what you said in a protocol, and ask you a few questions about the working of the Foreign Office…”

We were stunned for a moment; then I started forward, asking if I could come along with them.

“Impossible,” the interpreter smiled.

My heart raced. Would Freddy answer satisfactorily? Could he stand the excitement? What sort of accommodation would they give him?

“Don’t worry, your husband has nothing to fear,” Androlf continued. “He will have a heated room. Give him a blanket for the night, but quickly, we must leave…”

There was a feeling of sharp tension, putting the soldier on his guard, as though he were expecting an attack from one of us. I took first the soldier, then the interpreter, by their hands and begged them to be kind to Freddy, repeating myself in the bustle and scraping of feet that drowned my words. There was a banging of doors. A cold wind blew in. I felt Freddy kiss me. I never saw him again.

“We were wakened by the sound of tires screeching, engines stopping abruptly, orders yelled, general din, and a hammering on the window shutters. Then the intruders broke through the door, and we saw Americans with rifles who stood in front of our bed and shone lights at us. None of them spoke German, but their gestures said: ‘Get dressed, come with us immediately.’ This was my fourth arrest.”

Thus wrote Leni Riefenstahl, a talented young woman who was perhaps the world’s greatest film-maker. Because her epic documentaries—Triumph of the Will and Olympia—seemed paeans to not only Germany, but National Socialism, and because of her close relationship with an admiring Adolf Hitler, Leni was of more than passing interest to the Allies. Though false, rumors also hinted that the attractive, sometimes-actress was also a “mistress of the devil”—that she and Hitler were lovers.

“Neither my husband nor my mother nor any of my three assistants had ever joined the Nazi Party, nor had any of us been politically active,” said the confused young woman. “No charges had ever been filed against us, yet we were at the mercy of the Allies and had no legal protection of any kind.”

Soon after Leni’s fourth arrest, came a fifth.

The jeep raced along the autobahns until, a few hours later… I was brought to the Salzburg Prison; there an elderly prison matron rudely pushed me into the cell, kicking me so hard that I fell to the ground; then the door was locked. There were two other women in the dark, barren room, and one of them, on her knees, slid about the floor, jabbering confusedly; then she began to scream, her limbs writhing hysterically. She seemed to have lost her mind. The other woman crouched on her bunk, weeping to herself.

As Leni and others quickly discovered, the “softening up” process began soon after arrival at an Allied prison. When Ernst von Salomon, his Jewish girlfriend and fellow prisoners reached an American holding pen near Munich, the men were promptly led into a room and brutally beaten by military police. With his teeth knocked out and blood spurting from his mouth, von Salomon moaned to a gum-chewing officer, “You are no gentlemen.” The remark brought only a roar of laughter from the attackers. “No, no, no!” the Gis grinned. “We are Mississippi boys!” In another room, military policemen raped the women at will while leering soldiers watched from windows.

After such savage treatment, the feelings of despair only intensified once the captives were crammed into cells.

“The people had been standing there for three days, waiting to be interrogated,” remembered a German physician ordered to treat prisoners in the Soviet Zone. “At the sight of us a pandemonium broke out which left me helpless… As far as I could gather, the usual senseless questions were being reiterated: Why were they there, and for how long? They had no water and hardly anything to eat. They wanted to be let out more often than once a day… A great many of them have dysentery so badly that they can no longer get up.”

“Young Poles made fun of us,” wept a woman from her cell in the same zone. “They threw bricks through the windows, paper bags with sand, and skins of hares filled with excrement. We did not dare to move or offer resistance, but huddled together in the farthest corner, in order not to be hit, which could not always be avoided… We were never free from torments.”

“For hours on end I rolled about on my bed, trying to forget my surroundings,” recalled Leni Riefenstahl, “but it was impossible.”

The mentally disturbed woman kept screaming—all through the night; but even worse were the yells and shrieks of men from the courtyard, men who were being beaten, screaming like animals. I subsequently found out that a company of SS men was being interrogated.

They came for me the next morning, and I was taken to a padded cell where I had to strip naked, and a woman examined every square inch of my body. Then I had to get dressed and go down to the courtyard, where many men were standing, apparently prisoners, and I was the only woman. We had to line up before an American guard who spoke German. The prisoners stood to attention, so I tried to do the same, and then an American came who spoke fluent German. He pushed a few people together, then halted at the first in our line. “Were you in the Party?”

The prisoner hesitated for a moment, then said: “Yes.”

He was slugged in the face and spat blood.

The American went on to the next in line.

“Were you in the Party?”

The man hesitated.

“Yes or no?”

“Yes.” And he too got punched so hard in the face that the blood ran out of his mouth. However, like the first man, he didn’t dare resist. They didn’t even instinctively raise their hands to protect themselves. They did nothing. They put up with the blows like dogs.

The next man was asked:

“Were you in the Party?”

Silence.

“Well?”

“No,” he yelled, so no punch. From then on nobody admitted that he had been in the Party and I was not even asked.

As the above case illustrated, seldom was there any rhyme or reason to the examinations; all were designed to force from the victim what the inquisitor wanted to hear, whether true or false. Additionally, most such “interrogations” were structured to inflict as much pain and suffering as possible.

“A young commissar, who was a great hater of the Germans, cross examined me,” Gertrude Schulz remembered. “When he put the question: “Frauenwerk [Women’s Labor Service]?” I answered in the negative. Thereupon he became so enraged, that he beat me with a stick, until I was black and blue. I received about is blows… on my left upper arm, on my back and on my thigh. I collapsed and, as in the case of the first cross-examination, I had to sign the questionnaire.”

“Both officers who took our testimony were former German Jews,” reminisced a member of the women’s SS, Anna Fest. While vicious dogs snarled nearby, one of the officers screamed questions and accusations at Anna. If the answers were not those desired, “he kicked me in the back and the other hit me.”

They kept saying we must have been armed, have had pistols or so. But we had no weapons, none of us… I had no pistol. I couldn’t say, just so they’d leave me in peace, yes, we had pistols. The same thing would happen to the next person to testify… The terrible thing was, the German men had to watch. That was a horrible, horrible experience… That must have been terrible for them. When I went outside, several of them stood there with tears running down their cheeks. What could they have done? They could do nothing.

As part of one “interrogation” process, Johann Heilmeyer was forced to watch as Americans tied a woman’s hands to a chair, tore off her clothes, then took turns raping her. Other women were warned that if they failed to sign false confessions they would be turned over to black troops who would do with them as they saw fit.

Not surprisingly, with beatings, rape, torture, and death facing them, few victims failed to “confess” and most glad ly inked their name to any scrap of paper shown them. Some, like Anna, tried to resist. Such recalcitrance was almost always of short duration, however. Generally, after enduring blackened eyes, broken bones, electric shock to breasts—or, in the case of men, smashed testicles—only those who died during torture failed to sign confessions.

American author, Marguerite Higgins, asked and received permission to visit one “Interrogation Center.” What the writer expected to find is unclear, but what she did discover after a GI led her through the main door of the prison the lady was utterly unprepared for.

“Behind the bars of the cell we saw 3 uniformed Germans,” the woman recalled. “Two of them, beaten and covered with blood, were lying unconscious on the floor. A third German was lifted up by the hair on his head, and I shall never forget, he had red hair like a carrot. A GI turned his body over and struck him in the face. When the victim groaned, the GI roared, ‘Shut your mouth, damned Kraut!’“

To her horror, the American author soon learned that for the past fifteen minutes over a score of US soldiers had been beating and kicking the three Germans on the floor as well as three other victims nearby.

“The boy with the red hair was 14 years old,” remembered Marguerite. “The other 5 German boys in the cell blocks were between 14 and 17 years old.”

In the British Zone, a journalist stumbled upon the aftermath of yet another “interrogation.”

‘I’m afraid the prisoners don’t look exactly nice,” laughed the captain in charge.

Crumpled on the floor, laying in pools of blood, the newsman saw several German prisoners moaning. When they were ordered to stand to attention for the guest, slowly, all made the painful attempt. The first man to rise stood on uncertain legs and leaned against the wall for support. Then, his body shaking, the man made a reflexive motion with his arms as if to fend off blows. Others, with difficulty, eventually managed to stand, swaying against the wall. “Come off the wall,” shouted a British sergeant. Unsteadily, the beaten, bleeding men did as told.

In a nearby cell, the “medical officer” had just finished his examination of a German and on the floor lay the victim drenched in his own blood. “Up,” shouted the medical officer to the man when the visitor entered. “Get up.”

Painfully, using the arms of a chair, the victim tried to rise, but could not. Again he was ordered to get up. This time, on weak, shaky legs the man succeeded.

“Why don’t you kill me off?” moaned the victim as he stretched his arms pleading to the men.

“The dirty bastard is jabbering this all morning” the sergeant nearby growled.

Alone, surrounded by sadistic hate, utterly bereft of law, justice or hope, many victims understandably escaped in the only way they could—by taking their own lives. Like rays of sun in a black world of ugliness and evil, however, miracles did occur.

As guards led him back to his prison cell on painfully weakened legs, one Wehrmacht officer reflected on the insults, beatings, and tortures he had endured and contemplated suicide.

I could not see properly in the semi-darkness and missed my open cell door. A kick in the back and I was sprawling on the floor. As I raised myself I said to myself I could not, should not accept this humiliation. I sat on my bunk. I had hidden a razor blade that would serve to open my veins. Then I looked at the New Testament and found these words in the Gospel of St. John: “Without me ye can do nothing.”

With those simple, yet profound words, and despite the terrible pain and agony, the suffering soldier felt something stir within himself, something he had not felt for a very long time. His body beaten, bloody, broken, but his soul… untouched, unharmed, unshakable.

New strength seemed to rise in me. I was pondering over what seemed to me a miracle when the heavy lock turned in the cell door. A very young American soldier came in, put his finger to his lips to warn me not to speak.

“I saw it,” he said. “Here are baked potatoes.”

He pulled the potatoes out of his pocket and gave them to me, and then went out, locking the door behind him.

Love Germania. Hate the US. – II

George Floyd Riots are irrelevant for he who lives under the weirwood. What matters is how the past explains the present in the US. Incidentally, if this site is taken down visit the backup.

 
1918

With Lenin, in 1918 the Bolsheviks initiated a true Holocaust, a massive genocide that would continue until three years after Stalin’s death. Those who haven’t read Alexandr Solzhenitsyn’s book about the genocide of tens of millions of goyim in the archipelago of forced labour and extermination camps of the Gulag (see map below) also ignore that the Jews were involved to the core (see also Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together). It isn’t enough to know the figures: it is imperative to read the testimonies of the 250 survivors that Solzhenitsyn collects in order to feel the pathos of this Russian Holocaust (I recommend the abridged version of The Gulag Archipelago to English speakers).

The honest Jew Ron Unz recently said: ‘In per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close. And yet, by the astonishing alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have somehow been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations will surely be left gasping in awe’.
 
1932

The Ukrainian Holocaust or Holodomor, which would continue until the following year, killed more Ukrainians than the propaganda figure of 6 million holocausted Jews with which the MSM media has deceived the white man. After this true Holocaust of goyim, among the feminised Europeans only the Germans reacted:
 
1933

January 30: President Paul von Hindenburg appoints Adolf Hitler as Chancellor. Hitler was given the Chancellorship right after the Jewish Bolsheviks deliberately starved at least six million Ukrainians to death. (Compare this figure to the figure in the paragraph above. What chutzpah! And the stupid goyim, loyal cattle of the Jews, still swallow it!) Can there be any real doubt that the threat of the Bolshevik terror influenced both the German voters and the decision to give Hitler the Chancellorship? (The Holocaust exposed by Solzhenitsyn has never been consistently dramatised in films or TV documentaries, not even after a century! It would break their little narrative.)

March 5: The National Socialist Party gets 44 percent of the votes in the elections to the German Parliament.

August 12: A spiritual heir to the philo-Semite Cromwell, Winston Churchill, before becoming prime minister begins to sow discord against the German state in a public speech.

December 20: Eugenics begins to be put into practice. The German government announces the sterilisation of 400,000 residents for hereditary defects. (For an introduction to eugenics, and the SS doctrine about Nordicism see: here.)
 
1934

February 6: In Paris, right-wing groups gather in front of the National Assembly in a frustrated coup attempt against the French Third Republic. (Much of the egalitarian ideology that is destroying the white race and the West had come out of the nefarious French Revolution.)
 
1935

February 26: Hitler orders to create the Luftwaffe, ignoring the unfair Treaty of Versailles.

December 12: SS leader Heinrich Himmler creates the Lebensborn Program, aimed at increasing the births of Aryan children: the diametrically opposite of what is happening across the West today (in the London of this century, for example, mass street propaganda encourages white women to have black husbands).
 
1936

November 3: Roosevelt achieves a landslide victory in his re-election in the US, which cannot but reflect that the American people deserve the type of leaders they choose, and deserve to get them good and hard!
 
1937

April 28: The Luftwaffe bombs Guernica in Spain. Pablo Picasso lied, claiming that the bombing inspired the painting of the same name. (Picasso was not in Guernica. Alice Miller suggests that the famous painting had as ferment the experience of a three-year-old Pablo in the arms of his father who was running scared; his eyes recorded the tremendous earthquake of 1884 in Malaga. José María Juarranz, a scholar of Picasso agrees with this interpretation. See Miller’s insightful book The Untouched Key.)

November 5: Hitler explains his Lebensraum plan for Eastern Europe at a secret meeting at the Reich Chancellery. Unlike today’s cucked racialists, those who dreamed of a new Germania knew that the race needed an entire continent to flourish.
 
1938

October 30: The radio broadcast of Orson Wells’ War of the Worlds unleashes panic in the Americans, who believe all the bullshit they hear on MSM as fantastic as it is including propaganda against National Socialist Germany, the noblest nation the West has produced.

November 9: On the Night of Broken Glass, Jewish shops and synagogues are looted—which whites on the other side of the Atlantic should have imitated but, so addicted to their (((Bible))), regarded the Jews as the chosen people.
 
1939

February 27: France and England recognise the Spanish government of Francisco Franco.

March 15: Czechoslovakia ceases to exist as a state after the occupation of the rest of Bohemia and Moravia by German troops.

May 17: Sweden, Norway and Finland rejected German offers of non-aggression pacts. (Apparently, it is not enough to be pure Aryan: You must be noble in spirit like those Germans who dreamed of Germania.)

September 1: Hitler invades Poland and extremely cucked England declares war on Germany. The Second World War begins.

December 15: The romantic film Gone with the Wind is released in the United States. Who would have guessed that the anti-German wind that was already blowing those years would produce a suicidal zeitgeist that would blow away not only the Old South, but the entire American nation in the following decades?
 
1940

January 4: Hermann Göring, head of the Luftwaffe, takes control of the German war industry.

May 10: British Prime Minister resigns, Neville Chamberlain, and is replaced by Winston Churchill, who would intensify the anti-German winds. (After the war, such anti-white winds would also blow away across the UK, including Scotland and Ireland. Remember what I said above about ubiquitous propaganda in Britain to promote mixed couples between monkeys and English roses. Nowadays, the ethnic death-wish of brainwashed Anglo-Saxons seems almost absolute.)

May 14: The Dutch army surrenders after an intense bombardment of Rotterdam.

June 14: German troops occupy Paris (a symbolic place for the West is the city where, by emancipating the Jews, the incredibly imbecile Napoleon Bonaparte opened Pandora’s box).

August 3-6: Stalin annexed Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to the USSR (compared to the handsome Aryan Tsar and his beautiful family that the kike revolution had assassinated, Stalin looks like a fucking mudblood).

October 16: The most treacherous and vile nation in the entire world, the United States of America, recruits 16 million sucker soldiers to prevent Germania from being born if they conquer the lands of Lenin and Stalin’s (((willing executioners))).
 
1941

June 22: Germany invades the Soviet Union.

December 7: The Japanese attack Pearl Harbor.
 
1942

January 20: The Berlin government and the SS launch a plan to expel Jews from Europe. The gringos, who have practiced fellatio on the god of the Jews since 1776—and even before, since the times of John Winthrop—were horrified and continue to be horrified until 2020!

October 3: Pius XII criticises the racial restrictions on marriages dictated by the National Socialists. (Unlike the eugenics that healthy Judaism practices, dysgenics reigns in sick Christianity. In Greco-Roman times Whites had a higher IQ than that of the Jews. It had been precisely Christian dysgenics throughout the centuries that not only matched the IQs after the Middle Ages, but nowadays the Jew surpasses the Aryan in IQ!)
 
1943

April 26: Thousands of Swedish anti-fascists protest against a National Socialist congress in the royal burial mounds at Uppsala. (Apparently, many Swedes had already cucked since then, even before Jewry’s influence over their media became overwhelming.)

April 29: As Christianity and the JQ are two sides of the same coin, Lutheran pastor and theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, leader of the church resistance to National Socialism, is arrested and then hanged in the Flossenburg concentration camp.
 
1944

January 21: The Soviet Union (remember that the USSR had penalized anti-Semites with capital punishment), aided indirectly by the Judaised US, breaks the siege of Leningrad.
 
1945

From Tom Goodrich’s book:

Although forced to the shadows by growing public opprobrium, the “brutal and vicious” Morgenthau Plan for Germany was never actually abandoned by Franklin Roosevelt. Indeed, until his death in April, 1945, the American president had secretly favored the “Carthaginian” approach for the conquered Reich. When Roosevelt’s successor, Harry Truman, met with Soviet strongman, Josef Stalin, and the new British prime minister, Clement Attlee, outside of Berlin at Potsdam in the summer, 1945, most of the teeth in Morgenthau’s murderous scheme remained on the table. With the signature of the “Big Three,” the plan went into effect.

“It is not the intention of the Allies,” argued the joint declaration, “to destroy or enslave the German people.” Virtually word for word, a similar declaration was directed at Japan, then on the verge of total collapse. Despite such solemn pronouncements meant to mollify a watching world, it soon became abundantly clear, first to the Germans, then to the Japanese, that the victors came not as peace­minded “liberators,” as propagandists were wont to declare, but as conquerors fully as ruthless, vengeful and greedy as any who ever won a war.

The plundering of Germany by the Soviet Union first began when the Red Army penetrated East Prussia in late 1944. With war’s end the following year, Stalin’s methodical looting in the Russian Occupation Zone now became prodigious. Steel mills, grain mills, lumber mills, sugar and oil refineries, chemical plants, optical works, shoe factories, and other heavy industries were taken apart down to the last nut and bolt and sent east to the Soviet Union where they were reassembled. Those factories allowed to remain in Germany were to operate solely for the benefit of Moscow.

Electric and steam locomotives, their rolling stock, and even the tracks they ran on were likewise sent east. While the Soviet government pillaged on a massive scale, the common Red soldier was even more meticulous.

“The Russians systematically cleared out everything, that was for them of value, such as all sewing machines, pianos, grand-pianos, baths, water taps, electric plants, beds, mattresses, carpets, etc.,” itemized one woman from eastern Germany. “They destroyed what they could not take away… Not in a single village did one see a cow, a horse or a pig… The Russians had taken everything away to the east, or used it up.”

Like millions of other refugees, Regina Shelton managed her way home at the end of the war. Also like millions of other refugees, the woman was warned of the utter devastation she would find in the wake of the Soviets.

Thus we expect the worst, but our idea of the worst has not prepared us sufficiently for reality. Shocked to the point of collapse, we survey a battlefield-heaps of refuse through which broken pieces of furniture rise like cliffs; stench gags us, almost driving us to retreat. Ragged remnants of clothes, crushed dishes, books, pictures torn from frames, —rubble in every room… Above all, the nauseating stench that emanates from the largest and totally wrecked living room! Spoiled contents oozes from splintered canning jars, garbage of indefinable origin is mixed with unmistakable human excrement, and dried stain of urine discolors crumpled paper and rags.

Americans were not far behind their communist counterparts and what was not wantonly destroyed, was pilfered as “souvenirs.”

“We ‘liberated’ German property,” winked one GI. “The Russians simply stole it.”

Unlike its Soviet ally which had been bled white by nearly thirty years of Marxism, the United States had no need for German plants and factories. The Reich’s hoard of treasure, however, was another matter. Billions of dollars in gold, silver and currency, as well as priceless paintings, sculptures and other art works were plucked from their hiding places in caves, tunnels and salt mines and shipped across the Atlantic. Additionally, and of far greater damage to Germany’s future, was the “mental dismantling” of the Reich. Tons of secret documents revealing Germany’s tremendous organizational talent in business and industry were simply stolen, not only by the Americans, but by the French and British. Hundreds of the greatest scientists in the world were likewise “encouraged” to immigrate by the victors. As one US Government agency quietly admitted, “Operation Paper-Clip” was the first time in history wherein conquerors had attempted to drain dry the creative power of an entire nation.

“The real gain in reparations of this war,” Life magazine openly confessed, was not in factories, treasure or artwork, but “in the German brains and in the German research results.”

While the Soviet Union came up short on German scientists and technicians simply because most had wisely fled and surrendered to the West, Russia suffered no shortage of slave labor. Added to the mil­ lions of native dissidents, repatriated refugees and Wehrmacht prisoners toiling in the gulags, were millions of German civilians snatched from the Reich. As was commonly the case, those who were destined to spend years or their entire lives in slavery were given mere minutes to make ready. In cities, towns and villages, posters suddenly appeared announcing that all able-bodied men and women were to assemble in their local square at a given time or face arrest and execution.

“The screaming, wailing and howling in the square will haunt me the rest of my life,” remembered one horrified female. “Mercilessly the women were herded together in rows of four. Mothers had to leave tiny children behind. I thanked God from the bottom of my heart that my boy had died in Berlin shortly after birth… The wretched victims [were] then set in motion to the crack of Russian whips.”

For those forced east on foot, the trek became little better than a death march. Thousands dropped dead in their tracks from hunger, thirst, disease, and abuse. “It took all of our remaining strength to stay in the middle of the extremely slow-moving herds being driven east,” said Wolfgang Kasak. “We kept hearing the submachine guns when­ ever a straggler was shot… I will never forget… the shooting of a 15-year old boy right before my very eyes. He simply couldn’t walk anymore, so a Russian soldier took potshots at him. The boy was still alive when some officer came over and fired his gun into the boy’s ear.”

“One young girl jumped from a bridge into the water, the guards shot wildly at her, and I saw her sink,” recalled Anna Schwartz. “A young man, who had heart-disease, jumped into the Vistula. He was also shot… Thirst was such a torture, and we were so tired.”

Those who traveled by rail to Siberia fared even worse. With standing room only, small, filthy freight cars were commonly crammed with over one hundred people each. After a suffocating trip of 20 or 30 days, with starvation, thirst, beatings, and rape every mile of the way, fully one third to one half of the passengers were dead when the trains reached their termini. And of those who stepped down, all, thought one viewer, more resembled “walking corpses” than living humans.

“Now the dying really began…,” as Anna Schwartz recollected.

The huts, in which we were quartered, were full of filth and vermin, swarms of bugs overwhelmed us, and we destroyed as much of this vermin as we could. We lay on bare boards so close together, that, if we wanted to turn round, we had to wake our neighbors to the right and left of us, in order that we all turned round at the same time. The sick people lay amongst us, groaning and in delirium… Typhoid and dysentery raged and very many died, but death meant rather release than terror to them. The dead were brought into a cellar, and when this was full up to the top, it was emptied. Meanwhile the rats had eaten from the corpses, and these very quickly decayed… Also the wolves satisfied their hunger.

While Anna’s camp worked on a railroad and was driven day-in, day-out “like a herd of draught animals,” and while others toiled in fields, factories, bogs, and lumber camps, thousands more were relegated to the mines.

“We sometimes had to remain as much as 16 hours down in the pit,” recounted Ilse Lau. “When we had finally finished our work by summoning up our last strength, we were not allowed to go up in the lift, but had to climb up the ladders (450 feet). We were often near to desperation. We were never able to sleep enough, and we were always hungry.”

At one large coal camp, fifteen to twenty-five people died every day. Each night the corpses were carried out and dumped without ceremony into a mass grave.

Despite the never-ending nightmare, Christians still gathered for a few minutes on each Sunday to renew their faith.

“Often a commissar came and shouted out: ‘That won’t help you!’” remembered Gertrude Schulz. But it did.

Just as faith in the Almighty was often the thin divide which separated those who lived from those who died, so too did simple acts of kindness offer strength and rays of hope in an otherwise crushing gloom. As Wolfgang Kasak and his comrades stood dying of thirst one day, a Russian woman appeared with buckets of water.

“The guards drove the woman away,” Kasak said. “But she kept on bringing water, bucket after bucket, to the places where no Russians were standing guard. I know now the Russian soldiers closed one eye and took a long time in following their orders to keep the woman from giving us something to drink.”

Siegfried Losch, a youth who had become a recruit, soldier, veteran, deserter, prisoner, and slave before he had seen his eighteenth year, was hard at work one Sunday morning when an old grandmother approached. Judging by her clothes, she was very poor. Judging by her limp she was crippled. Indeed, thought Losch, the old woman looked like the witch from Hansel and Gretl. But the grandmother’s face was different.

The face emanated… warmth as only a mother who has suffered much can give. Here was the true example of mother Russia: Having suffered under the Soviet regime, the war, having possibly lost one or more of her loved ones… She probably was walking toward her church. When she was near me, she stopped and gave me some small coins… Then she made a cross over me with tears in her eyes and walked on. I gave her a “spasibo” (thank you!) and continued my work. But for the rest of the day I was a different person, because somebody cared, somebody let her soul speak to me.

Precious as such miracles might be, they were but cruel reminders of a world that was no more. “We were eternally hungry,” recalled Erich Gerhardt. “Treatment by the Russian guards was almost always very bad. We were simply walking skeletons… From the first to the last day our life was a ceaseless suffering, a dying and lamentation. The Russian guards mercilessly pushed the very weakest people forward with their rifle-butts, when they could hardly move. When the guards used their rifle-butts, they made use of the words, ‘You lazy rascal.’ I was already so weak, that I wanted to be killed on the spot by the blows.”

“We were always hungry and cold, and covered with vermin,” echoed a fellow slave. “I used to pray to God to let me at least die in my native country.”

Cruelly, had this man’s prayers been answered and had he been allowed to return to Germany, the odds were good indeed that he would have died in his homeland… and sooner than he imagined. Unbeknownst to these wretched slaves dreaming of home, the situation in the former Reich differed little, if any, from that of Siberia. Indeed, in many cases, “life” in the defeated nation was vastly worse.
 
_____________

Pages 47-53. The footnotes have been omitted. Summer 1945 is a book that exposes the atrocities committed by the United States in Japan and Germany (and the Soviet Union’s atrocities on Germans). If the reader is interested in a book by the same author that focuses on the holocaust perpetrated by the Allies solely in Germany, obtain a copy of Hellstorm, The Death of Nazi Germany: 1944-1947.

The loss of WW2 is the reason for the WDH

WDH stands, of course, for the West’s darkest hour. Four years ago I reproduced this 1992 interview of William Pierce. Today I would like to quote only part of it:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Kevin Alfred Strom: You keep referring to the changes which have taken place in the economy since the Second World War. Why is that? What does the war have to do with it?

William Luther Pierce: The Second World War really has everything to do with it. It was, after all, an ideological war, one could almost say a religious war, a war between two fundamentally different world views.

On one side were the believers in quality over quantity, the elitists, the believers that White people, Europeans, are more progressive, are better able to maintain and advance civilization, and should hold onto their position of world mastery.

On the other side were the believers in quantity over quality, the egalitarians, the believers in racial and cultural equality, the people who thought it was wicked for the United States to remain a White country, wicked for White Britain to have a world empire, wicked for White Germany to be allowed to smash communism, wicked to permit nationalism to triumph over internationalism. And the fact is that the egalitarians won the war. After the Second World War White Americans could no more justify keeping hordes of hungry, non-White immigrants out of their country than Englishmen could justify hanging onto the British Empire. They had cut the moral ground right out from under themselves.

KAS: Of course, that’s not the way it was presented to Americans back in the 1940s. We were all taught that we went to war to keep America free, that we were fighting against tyranny, that we were fighting on the side of decency and justice.

WLP: Nonsense. We were fighting on the side of the folks who marched the entire leadership stratum of the Polish nation into the woods and murdered them. And the people who control our news and entertainment media knew that too. When the German Army discovered those huge pits full of murdered Polish officers and intellectuals, they called in the world press to look at the evidence. But the controlled media kept it quiet, so that we would keep fighting on the side of the murderers.

After the war they blamed it on the Germans. And there was nary a squawk from the controlled media when we turned the surviving Poles, and the Hungarians, and the Balts, and all the rest of the Eastern Europeans over to the same gang of cutthroats who had butchered Poland’s leaders in 1940. Of course, it made sense in a sick sort of way. After all, murdering a nation’s elite is an egalitarian act. After you kill off the most intelligent, the most able members of a nation the ones who’re left will be more nearly equal.

KAS: And easier to control.

WLP: Yes. But the point is that, the reasons given to the American people for getting into the war against Germany were all spurious. It was not a war to keep America free. Americans weren’t in the slightest danger of losing their freedom to the Germans. It was, as I said, an ideological war. It was a war about what kind of ideas would govern the world. It was a war about whether we would be proud and White and strong, or whether we would feel guilty about the fact that Mexican peons aren’t as well off as we are. And we lost the war. That was a real turning point in the fortunes of our race and our nation.

The loss of the Second World War is the real reason for the decline of the U.S. economy—and of our social life, our cultural life, and our spiritual life. Before the war we had a White country, a country determined to stay White. After the war we no longer had that determination. Instead we had the vague feeling that it was wrong of us to want to stay White. After the war when the controlled media began pushing for so-called “civil rights” laws and for opening our borders to the Third World, it was just a continuation of their push to get us into the war on the side of the people who had made Poland a more “equal” country by slaughtering her leaders at the killing pits in the Katyn woods.

KAS: Is this spiritual failure entirely the fault of the American people? You’ve repeatedly referred to the controlled media as the principal promoters of the ideology which is at the root of our problems. Aren’t they to blame? Aren’t the people who control the media responsible for what’s happening to America? And, by the way, who are these media controllers?

WLP: Well, I think we all know who wields more control over the news and entertainment media than any other group. It’s the Jews. And, yes, they deserve a great deal of blame. But not all the blame. Perhaps not even most of it. After all, they’re only acting in accord with their nature. They’re doing what they always do when they come into a country.

We shouldn’t have let them do it. We should have stopped them when they were taking over Hollywood 75 years ago. We should have stopped them when they began buying up newspapers back before the Second World War. After the war we shouldn’t have let them get anywhere near a television studio.

But we didn’t stop them, and the blame for that really lies with those who have set themselves up as our political leaders. They sold us out. They sold out America. They sold out their race. When our kids are exposed to the godawful, anti-White rap musicals from MTV, should we blame the Jewish owner of MTV, Mr Redstone, or should we blame the politicians in Washington who let him get away with it? Personally, I’d go after the politicians first.

Zero-budget movies about the Gulag

From minute 40 to 43 Michael Kingsbury explains exactly what we have been saying this month: Whites need a very specific story, and Kingsbury wisely states which story should it be: a tragic story, like the Gulag that killed dozens of millions of whites.

Decades ago I was very naïve. I could not figure out why, in the middle of the Cold War, Kissinger and Nixon did not ask Hollywood to make films about the Gulag in order to win the cultural war that was already taking place in the West. I knew nothing about the Jewish question, let alone that whites were behaving like accomplices of the Jews. (Recall the phone call between Nixon and Billy Graham in which they worried that the media was controlled by Jewry but, from the presidential chair and the pulpit, they did nothing to solve the problem.)

Now I know that both Christians and secular whites are involved not only in the empowerment of Jewry, but in the internalisation of a foundation myth that diabolises the white race. What I did not understand in the past, times when I told people that the media feeds us with ‘a hundred films and documentaries about the Holocaust and zero about the Gulag’, I understand now.

Kingsbury is right in what he says, as I pointed out above, from the 40th to the 43rd minutes. That is why I place so much emphasis on Hellstorm, a true holocaust of Germans that even the so-called white nationalists in North America don’t want to see, apparently because those facts put their dear nation at the level of the USSR of Stalin.

The white man, compassionate by nature, must radically change the story he tells himself. And what better way that, instead of Game of Thrones fantasies, tell stories about real events of the 20th century: events that the System has been hiding for a century (according to Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, the Gulag system started in 1918 and ended a couple of years before the year I was born).

No one wanted to sponsor Kingsbury for his Gulag films. The three films he made were practically zero-budget movies. It reminds me the conditions in which I am also forced to work.

Summer 1945 • 8

by Tom Goodrich

The hour zero

The long gray column stretched east for mile upon muddy mile. Like a wounded animal searching for a quiet place to die, the line moved slowly, painfully, yet steadily. Limping and dragging, staggering and stumbling, the once-mighty German Wehrmacht was now bound for slavery and death. In a stand-up club and claw fight to the finish, a contest between Adolf Hitler and European nationalism versus Josef Stalin and International Communism, the latter, with the power and weight of the United States and the British Empire behind him, had come off victorious. Now, just as the ragged, starving old men and boys in gray were marching east to oblivion, much of the Europe they were leaving was also passing into its own oblivion; for years to come the once bright and beautiful continent would know little else than darkness, degradation, death, and despair.

Above, black as a funeral, the brooding clouds of dejection and defeat. Below, littering the muddy road to Siberia, tattered bits of burnt clothing, broken strips of boot leather, dirty brown bandages, and puddles of blood, fresh, wet and dark. Ahead, years of back-breaking, mind-killing work in mines, bogs and forests and for almost all, the end—a frozen, unmarked grave. Behind, thousands of dead comrades, thousands of dead friends, thousands of dead family members—men, women, children, pets—buried beneath the rubble of a place that no longer resembled anything of this world. Behind, Berlin, the last battle of the war.

“The capital of the Third Reich is a heap of gaunt, burned-out, flame-seared buildings,” reported one of the first Allied correspondents to reach Berlin. “It is a desert of a hundred thousand dunes made up of brick and powdered masonry… It is impossible to exaggerate in describing the destruction… Downtown Berlin looks like nothing man could have contrived… I did not see a single building where you could have set up a business of even selling apples.”

Others who reached Berlin when the bombs stopped falling were likewise stunned by the almost total destruction. Block after block, mile after mile, as far as eyes could see and as far as legs could walk. There was no end to the ruins, ruins that once were one of the most gorgeous and glittering capitals on earth. But even more staggering to those who first viewed Berlin after the war was the total disbelief that anything calling itself “human” could still exist amid such utter ruin.

“Seeing them you almost hope that they are not human,” admitted a visitor.

But, and almost miraculously, there were humans yet living in Berlin. When the guns finally fell silent on May 8, 1945, these tattered and starved survivors crept from their cracks and caves, trying to flee: a nightmare, they knew not where.

“We clamber over bomb craters,” describes one woman trying to escape. “We squeeze through tangled barbed wire and hastily constructed barricades of furniture. It was with sofas that our army tried to block the Russian advance!… One could laugh if it didn’t rather make one feel like crying.”

Tanks riddled with holes block the way. A pitiful sight, pointing their muzzles toward the sky… Burned-out buildings left and right… Behind a projection in a wall sits an old man. A pipe in his right hand, a lighter in his left . He is sitting in the sun, completely motionless. Why is he sitting so still? Why doesn’t he move at all? A fly is crawling across his face. Green, fat, shiny. Now it crawls into his eyes. The eyes… Oh God have mercy! Something slimy is dripping onto his cheeks…

At last the water tower looms up in the distance. We are at the cemetery. The gate to the mortuary is wide open… Bodies, nothing but bodies. Laid out on the floor. Row after row, body after body. Children are among them, adults and some very old people. Brought here from who knows where. That draws the final line under five years of war. Children filling mortuaries and old men decomposing behind walls.

What had taken the German race over two millennia to build, had taken its enemy a mere handful of years to destroy. When the fighting, finally ended, the Great German Reich, which had been one of the most modern industrial giants in the world, lay totally, thoroughly and almost hopelessly, demolished. Germany, mused an American newsman drifting through the rubble, resembled nothing so much as it resembled “the face of the moon.”

At Germany’s second largest city, Hamburg, what Philip Dark found likewise staggered the senses. It was, thought the soldier, “a city devastated beyond all comprehension. It was more than appalling. As far as the eye could see, square mile after square mile of empty shells of buildings with twisted girders scarecrowed in the air…”

And what Leonard Mosley saw when he reached Hanover epitomized the condition of all German cities at war’s end. Hanover, typed the British reporter, “looked like a wound in the earth rather than a city. As we came nearer, I looked for the familiar signs that I used too know, but… I could not recognize [them] anywhere… The city was a gigantic open sore.”

Just as in Berlin, to the shock and surprise of not only Dark and Mosley, but to the survivors as well, life actually existed among and under the seemingly sterile rock piles. Like cave-dwellers from the beginning of time, men, women and children slept, whispered, suffered, starved, cried, and died below the tons of jagged concrete, broken pipes and twisted metal.

Other than being utterly destroyed, another feature shared by Hanover, Hamburg, Berlin, and every other German city was the nauseating stench that hung over them like a pall. “[E]verywhere,” remembered a witness, “came the putrid smell of decaying flesh to remind the living that thousands of bodies still remained beneath the funeral pyres of rubble.”

“I’d often seen it described as ‘a sweetish smell’—but I find the word ‘sweetish’ imprecise and inadequate,” one survivor scribbled in her diary. “It strikes me not so much a smell as something solid, tangible, something too thick to be inhaled. It takes one’s breath away and repels, thrusts one back, as though with fists.”

By their own tally of firebombing casualties, the British estimated that they had killed upwards of half a million German civilians. That some sources from the Dresden raid alone set the toll there at 300,000—400,000 dead would suggest that the British figures were absurdly­ and perhaps deliberately—low. Whatever the accurate figure, the facts are that few German families survived the war intact. Those who did not lose a father, a brother, a sister, a mother—or all the above—were by far the exception to the rule. In many towns and villages the dead quite literally outnumbered the living. For some, the hours and days following the final collapse was simply too much. Unwilling to live any longer in a world of death, misery and alien chaos, countless numbers took the ultimate step.

“Thousands of bodies are hanging in the trees in the woods around Berlin and nobody bothers to cut them down,” a German pastor remarked. “Thousands of corpses are carried into the sea by the Oder and Elbe Rivers—one doesn’t notice it any longer.”

Nor did one notice any longer the thousands of black and bloating bodies laying in the German countryside, on farms, in pastures, along fields, by roads, in ditches, the bodies of gray old men and fresh-faced boys of the Volkssturm, or militia, the pathetic last line of defense; disarmed, beaten, then murdered in cold blood by the same American army that murdered the boys at Dachau, murdered as they desperately tried to surrender, to somehow survive a war that was already over.

For Germany, May 8, 1945 became known as “The Hour Zero”—the end of a nightmare and the beginning of a dark, uncertain future. Most assumed, no doubt, that awful though the coming weeks and months would be, the worst was nevertheless behind them. It seemed to these dazed and damaged people that nothing the future had to offer could match what they had suffered through in the past.

But these people were wrong. The worst yet lay ahead. Though most of the shooting and bombing had indeed stopped, the war against Germany would continue unabated, forever if necessary, until the last German was dead. World War II was by far history’s most terrifying war, but what still lay ahead would prove, as Time magazine later phrased it, “History’s most terrifying peace.”

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s note: The footnotes have been omitted. Summer 1945 is a book that exposes the atrocities committed by the United States in Japan and Germany. If the reader is interested in a book by the same author that focuses on the holocaust perpetrated by the Allies solely in Germany, obtain a copy of Hellstorm, The Death of Nazi Germany: 1944-1947 (sample chapter: here).

Russo-Jewish history

Yesterday, I received from FedEx the treatise of Richard Carrier that endorses the Christ myth theory at the postdoctoral level. White nationalists who continue to believe that there is historical evidence that Jesus of Nazareth existed should obtain a copy of Carrier’s book. As I have said several times, the movement called white nationalism is schizophrenic in that, logically, there can be no such chimera as a Jew-wise movement that submits to the god of the Jews and, at the same time, loves a supposed Jewish dude called Jesus.

Yesterday I could barely tolerate a few seconds of the recent YouTube conversation between Richard Spencer, James Edwards and Kevin MacDonald precisely because of these internal contradictions that did not exist in the upper echelons of Nazi power. And it was precisely the Nazis who wanted to destroy the Soviet Union in which the genocidal Jews played a fundamental role. Precisely because white nationalists are more bourgeois than revolutionary, I fear that in the not too distant future the United States will become an open field of extermination at the mercy of Jews similar to Stalin’s willing executioners.

Solzhenitsyn only wrote two non-fiction books: The Gulag Archipelago and 200 Years Together. No wonder that the second of these books, which deals with Russo-Jewish history, has not been translated by recognised publishers in the Judaized United States. The good news is that Solzhenitsyn’s second non-fictional book has been translated for dissidents like us, who are only allowed to discuss these things on the internet.

I suggest saving the PDF of 200 Years Together on your hard disk. The PDF will become handy when the US becomes like the SU. I want to read it in the coming weeks and months and add some quotes on this site. For the moment, this is the table of contents:
 

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
200 Years Together

 
Volume 1 – The Jews Before the Revolution:

Chapter 1: Before the 19th Century (translated by R. Butler and J. Harris)
Chapter 2: During the Reign of Alexander I
Chapter 3: During the Reign of Nicholas I
Chapter 4: During the Period of Reforms
Chapter 5: After the Murder of Alexander II
Chapter 6: In the Russian Revolutionary Movement
Chapter 7: The Birth of Zionism
Chapter 8: At the Turn of the 20th Century
Chapter 9: During the Revolution of 1905
Chapter 10: During the Period of Duma
Chapter 11: The Jewish and Russian National Consciousness Prior to WWI
Chapter 12: During World War I
 
Volume 2 – The Jews in the Soviet Union:

Chapter 13: The February Revolution
Chapter 14: During 1917
Chapter 15: Among Bolsheviks
Chapter 16: During the Civil War
Chapter 17: Emigration Between the Two World Wars
Chapter 18: In the 1920s
Chapter 19: In the 1930s
Chapter 20: In the Camps of GULAG
Chapter 21: During the Soviet-German War
Chapter 22: From the End of the War to Stalin’s Death
Chapter 23: Before the Six-Day War
Chapter 24: Breaking Away from Bolshevism
Chapter 25: Accusing Russia
Chapter 26: The Beginning of Exodus
Chapter 27: About the Assimilation
Author’s Afterword

Totalitarian Anglosphere

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn published two non-fictional books: The Gulag Archipelago and Two Hundred Years Together: a historical study of Jewry in Russia. Why has his second non-fictional book been de facto censored in English-speaking countries?

Because it would redpill those nations which share common roots in British culture and history.

Judge it by yourself. Not only was the early Soviet Union dominated by Jewish terrorists: it was actually set up and for the most part constituted by Jewry:

The Council of The Commissaries of The People, 22 members, 17 Jews, 77.2% Jewish.

Commissariat of War, 43 members, 33 Jews, 76.7% Jewish

Commissariat of Foreign Affairs, 16 members, 13 Jews, 81.2% Jewish

Commissariat of Finance, 30 members, 24 Jews, 80.0% Jewish

Commissariat of Justice, 21 members, 20 Jews, 95.2% Jewish

Commissariat of Public Instruction, 53 members, 42 Jews, 79.2% Jewish

Commissariat of Social Assistance, 6 members, 6 Jews, 100% Jewish

Commissariat of Work, 8 members, 7 Jews, 87.5% Jewish

Delegates of The Bolshevik Red Cross to Berlin, Vienna, Warsaw, Bucharest and Copenhagen, 8 members, 8 Jews, 100% Jewish

Commissariat of The Provinces, 23 members, 21 Jews, 91.3% Jewish

Commissariat of Journalists, 41 members, 41 Jews, 100% Jewish.

Source: Henry Ford, The International Jew, pages 176-185 of Book 1, Article 19: ‘The All Jewish Mark on Red Russia’, in The Dearborn Independent, September 25th 1920.

Jewish makeup of The Central Committee of the Communist Party of The Soviet Union in 1918-1919:

Trotsky (Bronstein), Jew
Zinoviev, Jew
Larine, Jew
Juritsky, Jew
Volodarsky, Jew
Kamenev, Jew
Smidovitj, Jew
Jankel, Jew
Steklov, Jew
Lenin, married to a Jewess
Krylenko, Jew
Lunacharsky, Russian.

Jewish makeup of The Council of People’s Commissars in 1918-1919:

Lenin, married to a Jewess
Commissar of Foreign Affairs, Chichherin, Russian
Commissar of Nationalities, Stalin, Georgian
Commissar of Agriculture, Protian, Armenian
Commissar of Public Education, Lunacharsky, Russian
Council Financial Adviser, Larine, Jew
Commissar of Food, Schlichter, Jew
Commissar of Army & Navy, Trotsky (Bronstein), Jew
Commissar of State Control, Lander, Jew
Commissar of Public Land, Kauffman, Jew
Commissar of Work, Schmidt, Jew
Commissar of Social Aid, Lelina, Jew
Commissar of Religion, Spitzberg, Jew
Commissar of Interior Affairs, Zinoviev, Jew
Commissar of Hygiene, Anvelt, Jew
Commissar of Finance Goukovsky, Jew
Commissar of Press, Volodrasky, Jew
Commissar of Elections, Uritsky, Jew
Commissar of Justice, Steinberg, Jew
Commissar of Refugees, Fenigstein, Jew
Assistant in The Regugees Commissariate, Savitj, Jew
Assistant in The Regugees Commissariate, Zaslovsky, Jew.

Jewish makeup of the leadership of The Extraordinary Commission (‘The Checka’) in 1918/1919:

Members: 36

Non-Jewish 12, (1 Pole, 2 Russians, 1 German, 1 Armenian, 7 Lithuanian).

Jewish 24.

Source: Behind Communism, Frank Britton, Chapter 18: ‘The London Times Correspondence List of Jews Behind Communism’, page 86; Robert Wilton, distinguished correspondent of The London Times (The Last Days of The Romanovs 1920).

Since the number of people practicing as Jews in the Russian Empire prior to the revolution was 4.15%, had the Jews been proportionately represented in the Cheka’s leadership for 1918/1919 there would have been only 1-2 Jews out of 36, not 24.

Therefore, Bolshevism was Jewish.

America

by Roger Devlin

Like the Soviet Union of yore, contemporary America is in the grip of an ideology, a system of ideas not derived from any empirical study of the world around us, but which provides an account of the world, establishes an aim to be pursued and rules for pursuing it, and (most importantly) legitimates the power of some men over others.

Another essential element of any ideology, as of any religion, is its demonology—an account of the enemy whom adherents must forever struggle against. Unlike personal enmities which arise through concrete social interaction, ideological enmities are established a priori by the ideology itself.

In the ruling ideology of the Soviet Union, e.g., enemies included the bourgeoisie, revisionists, kulaks, and one especially nondescript class referred to simply as “enemies of the people.” In the ideology which prevails in present day America, the ideological enemies are the abstract groups denounced in Trump’s second Charlottesville remarks: racists, supremacists, haters and bigots, Nazis and the KKK. Ritual denunciation of designated enemies is an essential aspect of ideological rule, and leaders of an ideological regime cannot be considered legitimate without periodically making them. In the Soviet Union, communist politicians learned to spit out denunciations of communism’s demons in their sleep. For similar reasons, I do not share Hunter Wallace’s sense of betrayal at Trump’s second speech.

There is no objective or generally agreed-upon way of determining whether an actual person is a member of an ideologically designated category of enemies. Thus, e.g., if you had the misfortune of being designated an “enemy of the people” in the Soviet Union, you had no way to defend yourself. If you were merely accused of murder, the situation was not so desperate: everyone knows that a murderer is someone who has committed premeditated homicide, so a defense against the charge must try to demonstrate that one did not or could not have committed a particular act of homicide, or only did so without premeditation (manslaughter). But what action defines one as an “enemy of the people?”

Essentially the same situation prevails under American anti-racist ideology. There is no agreed-upon definition of racist, supremacist, bigot or Nazi. One’s membership in such supposed groups is not determined by any actions of one’s own, but arbitrarily imputed by ideological zealots, and thus no defense is possible. How could anyone prove he does not harbor “hate” in the privacy of his own mind?…

Perhaps there really are a few people out there seething with fury at others because of “the color of their skin.” But it hardly matters. The important point is the fundamentally mythical nature of the concept, and the real injustice done to those it makes into scapegoats. White activism might even be defined as the overt public rejection of our assigned status as scapegoats for the failures of the fever-dream of “anti-racism.”

We’ll know we have won when we have a president who understands this—and is free to say so.

______________
Read it all: here

Uncle Adolf’s table talk, 3

the-real-hitler

 

Night of 11th-12th July 1941

The natural piety of man—Russian atheists know how to die—No atheistical education.
 

I think the man who contemplates the universe with his eyes wide open is the man with the greatest amount of natural piety: not in the religious sense, but in the sense of an intimate harmony with things.

Man has discovered in nature the wonderful notion of that all-mighty being whose law he worships. Fundamentally in everyone there is the feeling for this all-mighty, which we call God (that is to say, the dominion of natural laws throughout the whole universe). The priests, who have always succeeded in exploiting this feeling, threaten punishments for the man who refuses to accept the creed they impose. When one provokes in a child a fear of the dark, one awakens in him a feeling of atavistic dread. Thus this child will be ruled all his life by this dread, whereas another child, who has been intelligently brought up, will be free of it.

It’s said that every man needs a refuge where he can find consolation and help in unhappiness. I don’t believe it! If humanity follows that path, it’s solely a matter of tradition and habit. That’s a lesson, by the way, that can be drawn from the Bolshevik front. The Russians have no God, and that doesn’t prevent them from being able to face death. We don’t want to educate anyone in atheism.