Posts Tagged ‘Soviet Union’

Speaker Express Information #2

Saturday, May 12th, 2012

Many in the population hold the opinion that we can never defeat America because of its great resources of raw materials and its agricultural production. All our military successes in Europe or against the Soviet Union in the East, even the most decisive, cannot deal a mortal blow to the USA and force it to give up the battle.

However, that fact that the United States has ever-growing difficulties because of Axis military successes and is at risk of final defeat was recently confirmed even by North American Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes. Ickes recently published at article in Collier’s Magazine on 15.8.1942 on the USA’s oil supply that attracted great attention. The North American Secretary of the Interior’s article is well-suited to:

  1. Refute the invincibility of our North American opponent, and
  2. Prove the absolute correctness of the Führer’s clearly-stated and consistent strategic plan to defeat our enemies.

Ickes’s article, the most important points of which follow, is to be used in this sense by speakers. After Ickes listed numerous uses of oil that are essential to a nation’s economic life, he continued:

“Most of us do not even yet know the elementary truths of the oil situation.

The truth is that our own reserves are low and getting lower.

On the other hand, the oil reserves outside the United States are vastly greater than those within the United States. Furthermore, these foreign reserves — some of them actually, and the rest of them potentially — are within striking distance of the Axis powers.

The greatest and richest reserve areas on earth are those of Russia and the Near East. And it is precisely there that the Axis is driving with desperate determination. It is not too much to say that the future of the world will be decided in the Near East (of which the Russian Caucasus is a part).

And if Hitler should defeat the mighty Soviets and capture the Russian oil fields, he would be within easy reach of potentially the richest oil areas in the world — the region of the Persian Gulf. The underground reserves in these fields are believed to be so great that they may exceed the total resources known to exist in the United States. Control of the oil fields of the Caucasus and those of the Persian Gulf area would mean that the Axis would dominate the postwar world.

Let us suppose that in this struggle for the mastery of the world, the Axis powers win. The Axis would then control greater treasures in petroleum than are to be found in all the Western Hemisphere. Controlling the world’s oil wells, Hitler would dominate economic life. All that Hitler would have to do to paralyze the United States or to make it subservient to his will would be to deprive it of the markets and cut it off from needed raw materials from other parts of the world. He would not have to fire a shot or set a single soldier upon our soil to force us back to the economic or social status of two or three centuries ago.

The economic future of the world depends on who controls its oil resources. If Hitler and the Japanese get the world’s oil resources, they will have a good chance of winning the war.”

Enhanced by Zemanta

Speaker Express Information

Saturday, May 12th, 2012

The great military successes on all fronts have led part of the population to have an overly optimistic opinion of the situation, one that is ahead of the facts. The [German] people’s desire for peace can lead only too easily to wishful thinking that does not correspond to actual conditions. Thus one not infrequently encounters the following thinking by average citizens:

In the East, the Soviet Union is near its end since the Caucasus has been cut off and the Volga River has been reached. The English can no longer do anything to us in the Mediterranean; if U-Boat successes continue for a few months longer, the opponents will no longer have any shipping capacity. They suffer one defeat after another in East Asia. And British dominion over India is almost ready to collapse. All these factors together mean that the war will end victoriously for us this year.

Such a very optimistic attitude is extraordinarily dangerous. If it is not dealt with or derailed, the danger exists that there will be serious effects on morale that will hinder dealing with the increased difficulties that will come with winter.

In our speeches we must avoid anything that might encourage such overly optimistic wishful thinking by the public.

Any predictions about future developments are absolutely forbidden. The task of propaganda is not to predict what will happen, but rather to explain what did happen and is happening. This also includes raising certain hopes about a future significant improvement in our food situation resulting from harvests in the newly won regions of the Soviet Union.

Even if we succeed in producing agricultural surpluses in these areas in the face of great difficulties such as the lack of agricultural machinery, tractors, fuel, seed, etc., it will not be immediately possible to transport large amounts of these products to the Reich. Any predictions in this subject are absolutely out of order. Even if the food situation improves significantly in the near future, from the propaganda standpoint it is better to announce the success after the fact. Here, too, the maxim applies: â€œNothing is as successful as success, and nothing is more dangerous than disappointed hopes.”

It is always important to even with great successes that each success is only a building block of victory. Our opponents have taken very heavy blows and their losses are terrible, but they are not yet fatally wounded. A boxing match provides a good example:

One boxer has been hit hard and could collapse at any moment. Then the bell rings and the pause enables him to catch his breath again and gather new strength. One round follows another until finally continuing blows break his last strength and he suddenly falls to a blow, often one weaker than those he has already withstood.

All speakers have the absolute duty of following the above guidelines. We want to train our people to hardness, and must therefore avoid strengthening any overly optimistic hopes that are expected to be fulfilled within a short time. We must much more make it clear to our people that there is no doubt of our final victory, but that a major and critical decision will not happen in the immediate future. Instead, we must slowly beat down our opponents step by step.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Time of Ominous Transition

Sunday, May 6th, 2012

Still emerging from seven decades of Soviet rule, Russiansare groping toward a new sense of national identity. Not yet havingcome to grips with its past, this is a land of historical paradox.Thus, Lenin‘s embalmed corpse is still enshrined in a monumentalsarcophagus on Moscow’s Red Square, and not a single former Communistofficial has been brought to trial for Soviet-era crimes.

As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has observed, Russia today is neitheran authentic political democracy nor a genuine free market economy.While an ambitious few amass vast fortunes and great power throughillicit deals, the country’s productive workers, children andelderly suffer. A small oligarchy rules over a population thatlives in near destitution. “Democracy in the true sense ofthe word does not exist in Russia,” writes Solzhenitsyn.He continues:

There exists no legal framework or financial means for thecreation of local self-government. People will have no choicebut to achieve it through social struggle … This system of centralizedpower cannot be called a democracy … The fate of the countryis now decided by a stable oligarchy of 150-200 people, whichincludes the nimbler members of the old Communist system’s topand middle ranks, plus the nouveaux riches … Our present rulingcircles have not shown themselves in the least morally superiorto the Communists who preceded them … Russia is being exhaustedby crime, not a single serious crime has been exposed, nor hasthere been a single public trial … This destructive course ofevents over the last decade has come about because the government,while ineptly imitating foreign models, has completely disregardedthe country’s innate creativity and singular character as wellas Russia’s centuries-old spiritual and social traditions.

For the historically minded observer, the parallels betweenRussia today and Germany during the pre-Hitler Weimar republicyears are striking and portentous. In each case, there has beensevere economic, political and social upheaval, monetary chaos,substantial loss of territory, and humiliating subordination toforeign powers following the abrupt collapse of an seemingly entrenchedpolitical regime. Unscrupulous individuals, many of them membersof an alien ethnic minority, have exploited their foreign connectionsand the prevailing disorder to quickly enrich themselves at theexpense of the common people. Major media and financial institutionsare largely in the hands of people with no national loyalty. Ineach case, the social dislocation has come with a drastic fallin cultural and moral standards.

Much of the talk in the United States about democracy in Russiais as ridiculous today as it has always been. Plus ça change,plus c’est la meme chose. Throughout its history, Russia has beenruled by an elite, entrenched in Moscow and St. Petersburg, oftenof non-Russian origin and fascinated by Western philosophies.

As a potentially wealthy country with a proud and illustriouspast, it is difficult to imagine that Russians will permit thecurrent miserable and humiliating situation to continue indefinitely.At the same time, it’s hard to see how Russia’s problems can bemastered without very drastic change.

Enhanced by Zemanta

JEWISH-LED SECRET POLICE MURDER MILLIONS

Monday, April 30th, 2012

It was during this time that Bolshevik Commissars (many of them Jews) conducted a horrendous reign of terror against the non-Jewish Russian population. In one operation alone, they deliberately starved to death 8 to 15 million Ukrainian gentile farmers during the 1920′s in one of the most vile campaigns in history orchestrated by Stalin’s brother-in-law and the most powerful Jew in the USSR, Lazar Kaganovich. Of course, Kaganovich certainly wasn’t the only Jew involved: “[I]n (the) Ukraine Jews made up nearly 80 percent of the rank-and-file Cheka agents,” reports W. Bruce Lincoln, an American professor of Russian history. Veteran Chicago Tribune Baltic correspondent, Donald Day, exposed yet another important Jew involved in the Ukrainian crimes: “Artemic Bagratovich Khalatov (Jewish) headed that branch of the Cheka which organized the food supply of the Soviets. He organized the punitive expeditions of the Cheka which confiscated the grain and foodstuffs from the peasants. A policy whose direct result was the great famine of 1920-21.”

The prominence of Jews in Soviet secret police agencies was not isolated to the Unkraine, Benjamin Ginsberg discusses this in his 1994 book “The Fatal Embrace – Jews and the State”: “During the 1920s and 1930s, Jews were a major element in the secret police and other Soviet security forces. Genrikh Yagoda, for instance, served as chief of the secret police during the 1930s. Yagoda had been a pharmacist before the Revolution and specialized in preparing poisons for his agents to use in liquidating Stalin’s opponents.”

Ginsberg continues in the next paragraph by describing how Jews greatly expanded and organized the murderous Soviet Gulag prison system: “Other high-ranking Jewish secret policemen included Matvei Berman and Naftali Frenkel who helped to expand and institutionalize the slave labor system. Slave laborers working under Frenkel’s supervision built the White-Sea Baltic Canal in 1932. As many as 200,000 workers perished while completing this project. Another Jewish security officer, K. V. Pauker, served as chief of operations of the secret police in the 1930s. Lev lnzhir was chief accountant for the Gulag. M. T. Gay headed the special secret police department that conducted the purges of the 1930s. In what came to be called the “Great Terror,” he supervised the mass arrests, trials, and executions of Stalin’s opponents. Two other Jewish secret policemen, A. A. Slutsky and Boris Berman, were in charge of Soviet terror and espionage abroad during the 1930s. Jews were also important in the Red Army. In addition to Trotsky, prominent Jewish generals included Yona Yakir, who was a member of the Communist party central committee; Dmitri Schmidt, a civil war hero and commander of the Kiev area; and Yakob Kreiser, a hero of the defense of Moscow during the Second World War.”

Some modern historians estimate that upwards of 80 million persons were murdered in the 70 years of communist rule in Russia, many of them directly at the hands of Jews at the order of Jewish Communist secret police bosses using execution, starvation, assassination, and the Gulag slave labor prisons.

Enhanced by Zemanta

ANTI-SEMITISM MADE A CAPITAL OFFENSE

Monday, April 30th, 2012

Interestinly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make so-called “anti-Semitism” a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin himself: “National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-Semitism, as an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism…under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the death penalty.” (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).

Enhanced by Zemanta

Hitler Launches World War II

Wednesday, April 18th, 2012

The German army then invaded Poland and began World War II. After crushing the Poles, Hitler subdued Norway, Denmark, Belgium, and The Netherlands. France fell in 1940.

Hitler’s plan to invade Britain was foiled when the German Luftwaffe, or air force, lost the air battle of Britain. When Italy’s invasion of Greece and Africa failed, Hitler seized the Balkans and North Africa.

The Nazis imported “inferior races” from conquered countries to relieve the manpower shortage. Those who resisted were herded into concentration camps. About 12 million persons, including about 6 million Jews, were exterminated.

Hitler next invaded the Soviet Union. He swept on to many victories. After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, he declared war on the United States. Hitler’s defeat at Stalingrad (now Volgograd), in the Soviet Union, marked the turning point of the war. The Allies drove the Nazis out of Africa, Italy, and the Soviet Union. Germany became a battleground as the Allies closed in from east and west. In 1945 Germany surrendered unconditionally. Just before defeat came, Hitler committed suicide.

Allied armies occupied all of Germany. They found it a wasteland. Allied bombers had almost pulverized the large cities. Thousands of civilians had died in air raids. Some 3,250,000 German soldiers had been killed.

The war left Germany shrunken in size. In early 1939, it had been a country of 183,000 square miles (474,000 square kilometers) with a population of about 60,000,000. In 1945 it was reduced to 144,000 square miles (373,000 square kilometers) and was also reduced by several million inhabitants. The Soviets annexed northern East Prussia. Poland administered southern East Prussia, Pomerania, and Silesia, and Germany’s eastern border was pushed back to the Oder and Neisse rivers.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Untangling ‘Ivan the Terrible’

Saturday, March 17th, 2012

John Demjanjuk is dead.  He was 91 years old.

In 2010, the man who came to be known as ‘Ivan the Terrible’ and the subject of the most protracted war crimes case in history went on trial in Germany for mass murder committed before most people alive today were born, and nearly 33 years after he was first identified. Last year, Germany convicted Demjanjuk of having participated in the deaths of nearly 30,000 Jewish men, women and children at a number of concentration camps throughout Poland and Germany.

He was sentenced to five years in prison. Because of his age, he was not sent to prison after the conviction. As such, this mass murderer died a free man.

The year Demjanjuk was identified, the Toronto Blue Jays played their first baseball game ever, Star Wars exploded on the movie screens, Elvis Presley died, a new computer company introduced the Apple II, a young standup comedian named Jay Leno first appeared as a guest on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office asked Eliyahu Rosenberg, an Israeli warehouse manager who escaped from the Treblinka extermination complex in 1943, to look at some old photos.

Rosenberg recognized a man from a 1951 immigration photo and identified him as an S.S. ‘Wachman’ (guard) who prisoners called ‘Ivan Grozny’ (Ivan the Terrible). Two other survivors, Pinchas Epstein and Chaim Rajrodski, also recognized the man in the photo, a Ukrainian immigrant living in Seven Hills, a suburb of Cleveland, Ohio. The survivors made the identification shortly before the Justice Department created the Office of Special Investigation (OSI) specifically to track down Nazi criminals who illegally entered the country. The man in the photo was John Demjanjuk.

Ivan Demjanjuk was born in 1920 in the Ukrainian village of Duboviye Makharynsty, near Vinitsa. Life was little more than survival, even before Stalin starved to death about 7 million Ukrainians in a campaign to end private land ownership. In 1939, Demjanjuk was drafted into the Soviet Army.

After the Wehrmacht swallowed up much of Europe, Hitler turned his forces towards Moscow. More than 3 million Nazi soldiers were poised to push eastward, and in July of 1941, the German Army crossed the Dnieper River in the Ukraine. Three months later, Kiev fell under siege, where Demjanjuk was wounded. After his recovery in the early months of 1942, he was sent back to the front. By then, the fighting had eased.

All that changed on May 8, when the Luftwaffe bombarded the ancient Ukrainian city of Kerch.  The Soviet Army was completely overrun. Within a week, the German Army captured nearly 200,000 prisoners.

So many of the 3 million Soviet POW’s were broken and worn down from combat that nearly one in four chose to work for the Nazis in various capacities. Since many hailed from cultures with a history of anti-Semitism, putting them to work in the death camps was not merely efficient, it was mostly effortless. Among these POW’s was 22-year-old Ivan Demjanjuk.

After the war, Demjanjuk came to the United States with his wife Vera, who he met in a displaced persons camp. He legally changed his name to John and settled in Seven Hills. He was hired by the Ford Motor Company as a mechanic, and worked for Ford until his retirement. But the heart of this tangled saga is where Demjanjuk was and what he did from the time of his capture through the end of World War II.

Since 1977, Demjanjuk was denaturalized, ordered deported to the Soviet Ukraine, extradited to Israel to stand trial for crimes against humanity, convicted and sentenced to death, acquitted on appeal, permitted to return to the United States, had his citizenship restored in Federal court, denaturalized again four years later by the same judge who restored his citizenship, was ordered deported again, appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case, faced an extradition request from Germany, spared from deportation by a Federal Judge, again ordered to be extradited to Germany to stand trial for war crimes, spared from extradition because of ill health, found to be faking the seriousness of his illness, and ordered extradited to Germany, where he began being tried for war crimes in 2009.

Today, countless Americans believe Demjanjuk was as he always claimed –  a victim of mistaken identity who never participated in the Holocaust.

After the Treblinka survivors identified him, Demjanjuk insisted he was in a POW camp in Chelm, Poland for the duration of the war. During his denaturalization hearing, Justice Department attorneys showed that a POW camp did not exist in Chelm at the time Demjanjuk claimed to have been there.  Although he changed his alibi a few times, the Chelm story is the one Demjanjuk used most often.  It was the one that he settled on during the closing arguments of his Israeli trial.  To this death, it remained his claim.

The cloud of confusion surrounding Demjanjuk can be attributed to his mistaken identity claim, blunders made by the OSI, the fact that Demjanjuk was not a German but, rather, a Ukrainian who served in the Soviet Army, and a gross misrepresentation by American media of the Israeli trial, the successful appeal, and the scope of Demjanjuk’s place in Holocaust history.

This confusion began immediately after the media began covering the story. As reporters wrote about Demjanjuk, his public image morphed into that of an infamous singular Nazi war criminal known in WWII history as “Ivan the Terrible.” Although reports noted that he was a camp guard, his perceived role in the Holocaust grew, perhaps because the brutality attributed to Demjanjuk was extraordinary, even by Nazi standards.

The OSI did nothing to counter the misperception of Demjanjuk’s role, and in fact, nudged it along by withholding from Demjanjuk’s lawyers the findings of a Polish investigation of the death camps in Poland that there may have been additional Ukrainian guards known to inmates as Ivan the Terrible.

The first step on Demjanjuk’s legal odyssey was his denaturalization in 1981. After Federal Judge Frank Battisti stripped him of his citizenship, Judge Robert Angelelli ordered him deported. Demjanjuk’s destination was to be the Soviet Union, specifically the Ukraine. Secretary of State George Schultz approved the deportation. But before Demjanjuk was deported, Israel requested his extradition to stand trial for crimes against humanity, the only crime for which Israel imposes the death penalty. The only time Israel ever imposed the sentence was in 1962, when Karl Adolf Eichmann, the so-called “architect of the Holocaust” was executed. After all appeals, including one before Judge Robert Bork, were exhausted, the United States granted Israel’s request for extradition.

In February of 1986, Demjanjuk was extradited to Israel.  Because of defense requests for postponement, the trial itself did not commence for nearly a year. On February 16, 1987, John Demjanjuk stood trial in Israel for crimes against humanity. The single count in the indictment was operating the gas chambers at Treblinka.

The trial took place before a three judge tribunal consisting ofJohn_Demjanjuk_3 Jerusalem District Court Judges Zvi Tal and Dahlia Dorner and Israeli Supreme Court Justice Dov Levin. Demjanjuk was represented by John Gill and Mark O’Connor, who also represented him during his denaturalization, deportation and extradition hearings in the United States. They were joined by Israeli attorney Yoram Sheftel.

Prosecutors produced abundant evidence that Demjanjuk had “…perpetrated unspeakable acts of cruelty in conducting victims in theid cardTreblinka concentration camp on the way to their death.” Testimony was graphic and gruesome.

As to the single count in the indictment, the prosecution alleged that the defendant “…operated, with his own hands, the engines which pumped the poisonous exhaust fumes into the gas chambers, thus causing the death of hundreds of thousands of people killed in this manner.”

Sheftel introduced testimony by Ignat Danielchenko, a guard at the Sobibor death camp. (Unlike Auschwitz, which was both a slave labor camp and an extermination factory, Sobibor, Treblinka, Belzec, and Chelmno were created and operated exclusively to exterminate large numbers of people in the shortest possible time.) Danielchenko stated, “I saw Mr. Demjanjuk escorting prisoners in all phases, from the unloading of the trains to the entrance to the gas chamber.”

While such testimony would seem to put Demjanjuk in harm’s way, its purpose was to protect him.  Sheftel’s goal was to place Demjanjuk somewhere other than Treblinka during the period in question, when Demjanjuk was allegedly operating the gas chambers at Treblinka.

A principle of law known as the doctrine of specialty prevented Israel from trying Demjanjuk for any crime other than the one for which he was specifically and exclusively extradited. This principle is spelled out in the extradition treaty between Israel and the United States, which states that “a person extradited under the present convention shall not be detained, tried or punished in the territory of the requesting party for any offence other than that for which the extradition has been granted.” For this reason, Sheftel probably assumed that proving Demjanjuk participated in the murder of civilians at Sobibor during the time in question did not hurt his case. But Sheftel, sensing this strategy might have potential drawbacks, abandoned the Sobibor alibi during his closing arguments. So he reverted to Demjanjuk’s original alibi of having been a POW at Chelm.

On February 18, 1988, he was found guilty of the sole allegation in the indictment. Two months later, Demjanjuk was sentenced to death. The conviction and sentence triggered an automatic appeal, but by this time, stories of another ‘Ivan’ had begun to circulate.

Before the appeal began, Demjanjuk’s defense team was joined by former Israeli judge Dov Eitan. Just days before the scheduled start of the hearing, Eitan fell to his death from the 20th floor of the Jerusalem Tower. Although Eitan left no note, Jerusalem police ruled his death a suicide. Two days later, at Eitan’s funeral, Sheftel was seriously injured when a Holocaust survivor threw acid at his face. He was hospitalized and underwent surgery to save his eyesight.

The appeal was heard by a five judge panel presided over by Israeli Supreme Court President Meir Shamgar. Unlike appeals courts in the United States, this tribunal not only accepted new evidence unavailable during the trial, but welcomed it. This distinction permitted Demjanjuk’s attorneys to introduce evidence that became available because of the collapse of the Soviet Union, which occurred during his trial.

This new evidence consisted of depositions taken in the U.S.S.R. from repatriated Ukrainians who were being interrogated about having worked for the Nazis after their capture, some of whom the Soviet Union sentenced to death for their service to the enemy after being captured.

The testimony related to Treblinka, where many served. Some of them mentioned a Ukrainian named Ivan Marchenko, who ran the gas chambers in that camp. They testified that inmates referred to Marchenko as “Ivan Grozny,” Russian for Ivan the Terrible. Although the prosecution served up abundant evidence that Demjanjuk had killed Jewish men, women and children, sometimes in the most gruesome ways imaginable at Treblinka and other camps, he was indicted exclusively for having operated the gas chambers at Treblinka, the activity that in Israeli law elevated his action to a crime against humanity. While the prosecution showed that Demjanjuk murdered countless Jews while serving at Nazi concentration camps including Trawniki, Flossenberg, Regensburg and at *Operation Reinhard facilities such as Solibor and Treblinka, none of these acts were in the original indictment.

The two questions now before the appeals tribunal were if these depositions were acceptable evidence, since those who gave them could not be cross-examined, and if murders and acts of torture not specified in the original indictment could legally uphold his conviction. The Court concluded that the depositions created a reasonable doubt as to the charge in the indictment, and that other actions could not be a factor.

Nevertheless, under a provision in Israeli law, Demjanjuk could have been found guilty of multiple murders the trial showed him to have committed. However, this created its own legal problem because of the doctrine of specialty. As such, the five judge panel concluded that bringing new charges against Demjanjuk would not be legal without first petitioning the United States for another writ of extradition.

Because the evidence indicated that a different ‘Ivan the Terrible’ committed the single act in the original indictment, and in spite of testimony and other evidence that Demjanjuk tortured and murdered prisoners at several camps, including Treblinka, the judges reluctantly acquitted Demjanjuk.

Demjanjuk’s life was spared not only by the Israeli Supreme Court, but by the extradition itself. Since the U.S.S.R. took a dim view of their soldiers working for the Nazis, the Soviet Union would probably have executed Demjanjuk upon his return to the Ukraine, just as it did many of the repatriated Ukrainians whose testimonies indicated a different Ivan worked the Treblinka gassing facility.

He was now free. But he was also a man without a country.

One month before Israel acquitted Demjanjuk, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals appointed U.S. District Judge Thomas Wiseman to investigate charges of misconduct by the OSI. Wiseman ruled the OSI had played games with the evidence, but did not intentionally or unintentionally frame Demjanjuk. Wiseman also noted that because of Demjanjuk’s Nazi SS service at Sobibor and his unbelievable alibis, concocted to hide all of his Nazi service, Demjanjuk’s behavior contributed to his extradition. Wiseman wrote, “Mr. Demjanjuk’s alibi was so incredible as to legitimately raise the suspicions of his prosecutors that he lied about everything.”

After Israel reversed the conviction, 6th Circuit Judge Gilbert Merritt then ordered Demjanjuk temporarily readmitted to the United States. The court declared that his presence was necessary to assist his attorneys in preparing for an appeal to be allowed to return to the United States permanently.

Merritt’s ruling, and the subsequent ruling by a three-judge panel which included Merritt, that Demjanjuk may remain in the United States indefinitely, cost the judge dearly.

At the time, Merritt was on a short list of Supreme Court nominees,Gilbert Merritt but outrage in the Jewish community was intense. The Anti-Defamation League, World Jewish Congress and the Simon Wiesenthal Center lodged protests. In the end, President Clinton removed Merritt from consideration.

Although the 405-page acquittal reiterated Demjanjuk’s numerous acts of murder and torture unrelated to the original indictment, American media usually framed the ruling as a validation of his claim of innocence. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported the acquittal “…prove[d] Demjanjuk was not Ivan the Terrible.”

On Demjanjuk’s return to Seven Hills after the acquittal, the family gave Mike Conway, then a reporter for WJW-TV in Cleveland, the exclusive right to broadcast images of Demjanjuk back in the bosom of his loving family. The video, shot in Demjanjuk’s living room, showed a smiling John Demjanjuk playing with a grandchild born during the trial in Israel. Conway began the report over a musical intro of “Tie a Yellow Ribbon ‘Round the Old Oak Tree.”

Because of such coverage, most Americans embraced the Israeli Court’s ruling as an affirmation of his claim that he was an innocent victim of mistaken identity. Demjanjuk’s image as an innocent victim was further solidified with skillful public relations by his principle spokesperson, son-in-law Ed Nishnic.

Nishnic was tireless and unrelenting in his father-in-law’s defense. He rarely stumbled in his role as sculptor of Demjanjuk’s public image. His damage control skills withstood the test even when Demjanjuk received public support from the Ku Klux Klan and the Institute for Historical Review, the anti-Semitic organization created to disseminate the claim that the Holocaust never happened. Nishnic distanced his father-in-law from their support while denouncing Holocaust denial. Nishnic’s campaign to keep Demjanjuk’s image from being associated with Holocaust revisionists nearly met with disaster when Demjanjuk’s principal financial backer began to emerge from the background.

Jerome Brentar was a wealthy Cleveland travel agent who transferred an estimated three million dollars to Demjanjuk. Much of this money, to cover legal fees and travel expenses, came out of Brentar’s own pockets. Brentar never doubted Demjanjuk’s innocence,Brentar but Brentar’s reason for believing in Demjanjuk was different than Nishnic’s.  Jerome Brentar was a Holocaust denier. Brentar addressed conferences of the Institute for Historical Review. In his talks before the I.H.R., Brentar insisted that Demjanjuk was innocent, because the crimes he was charged with are a fabrication created by the Jews.

Brentar was born in Croatia and raised in Cleveland  In the early post-war years, Brentar, who could speak fluent German, returned to Europe. There he screened thousands of refugees as an employee of the International Refugee Organization. Between 1948 and 1950, Brentar and the late Dr. Edward O’Connor, an official with the Catholic Relief Services, worked together to secretly smuggle Nazis into the United States. In an interview published in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Brentar admitted helping hundreds of Nazis defraud their way into the United States. “Whether he was in the Waffen SS or the Wehrmacht… I would permit them to be considered…”  Edward O’Connor’s son Mark would later become one of Demjanjuk’s defense attorneys.

Nishnic quickly responded to news reports about Brentar. He told the Cleveland Free Times, “It’s obviously an attempt to discredit Mr. Demjanjuk by attacking those around him. I don’t think any serious person accepts that Jerry Brentar is a Nazi sympathizer. In all the years I’ve known him, he has never tried to push Holocaust denial on me…. I find it sadly humorous that people are making Mr. Brentar seem like a Nazi-smuggler.”

For years after the acquittal, news stories about Demjanjuk continued to omit any mention of his work in the camps and, as such, buttressed Demjanjuk’s posture as a victim. During this time, his most famous American advocates were Pat Buchanan and James Traficant, the Ohio congressman who was later convicted and sent to prison for taking bribes, filing false tax returns, racketeering, and forcing staff members to perform chores at his farm in Ohio and on his houseboat in Washington. Buchanan continues to author articles sympathetic to Demjanjuk. Traficant has been released from prison, and now hosts a weekly radio talk show in Cleveland.

After Demjanjuk was convicted in Israel, Traficant assisted his attorneys in obtaining previously un-released Justice Department documents, including findings of the Polish investigation that several Ukrainian guards were also known to the inmates as Ivan the Terrible. While these documents were of no use to the appeal in Israel, they did prove crucial to Demjanjuk’s effort to return to the United States. Traficant even proposed a bill in the House calling for the federal government to provide financial compensation for Demjanjuk’s “… pain and suffering.” The motion was not seconded.

Demjanjuk was now home, but was rarely seen in public. He did not venture from his house, except to attend church. The Seven Hills Police Department posted several ‘no trespassing’ signs in his front yard. The blinds on the front windows were drawn closed day and night.

Still, a few Holocaust survivors and their supporters demonstrated in front of Demjanjuk’s home whenever the Demjanjuk case made news. They carried signs reading, “We Know the Truth,” and, “6,000,000 Witnesses Call for Justice!” They chanted “Nazis out of America,” or “Nazis back to the Ukraine.” The chants were not loud. They mostly marched in silence.

On one such occasion Demjanjuk’s next-door neighbor had a brief exchange with a middle-aged demonstrator. The neighbor watched the marchers while sweeping his garage. As they went past his house, he waved his fist at them, shouting that Jews deserve whatever they get because of what they did to Jesus. The demonstrator erupted. “Because you think some Jews killed your God, it’s okay to murder thousands of Jewish children twenty centuries later? So that’s why Jews should die?” A Holocaust survivor quieted his fellow demonstrator, and told him not to have any exchanges with the neighbor, “…no matter what that mamzer [Yiddish for ‘bastard’] shouts at you.”

When a reporter asked the middle-aged demonstrator why Jews demonstrate in a neighborhood where the perception of Demjanjuk as an innocent man seems unshakable and nearly unanimous, he explained that he had “six million reasons” for being there. When asked about the questionable behavior by the OSI and the acquittal in Israel, he replied, “Do you think we don’t know what we’re doing? Or do you believe we’re knowingly hounding an innocent man? The Cleveland Plain Dealer, your newspaper, published a commentary titled ‘It’s Time to Close the Book on the Demjanjuk Case.’ Can you imagine a newspaper telling its readers to stop seeking the truth? We’re out here to demand the book on Demjanjuk be kept open, that the public see Demjanjuk’s past for what it is. We aren’t here for revenge. We aren’t calling for the executioner. We don’t want his head on a platter. We want him to know that we know what he did. We want everyone else to see the truth about Mr. John Demjanjuk. Then we want him deported. He has no right to enjoy the privilege of living in America. He never did.”

Not only was Demjanjuk’s petition to remain in the United States successful, in February of 1998, federal judge Paul Matia restored Demjanjuk’s citizenship. Attorney General Janet Reno formally objected to Matia’s decision, to no avail. However, Matia’s ruling rendered it possible for the Justice Department to bring new charges against Demjanjuk.

The Justice Department did just that, and four years later, Judge Matia, who had restored Demjanjuk’s citizenship, determined that Demjanjuk concealed his role in the Holocaust on his original citizenship application, reversed his decision and revoked Demjanjuk’s citizenship.

In the summer of 2006, Jerome Brentar sued the Demjanjuk family to recover some of the millions he spent trying to help Demjanjuk. During the civil trial, Cleveland businessman Martin Lax agreed to testify on behalf of Demjanjuk or, more accurately, against Brentar. Lax is a Holocaust survivor. Although Lax was certain Demjanjuk was a brutal death camp guard, he found himself in the unenviable position of taking Demjanjuk’s side against a neo-Nazi and Holocaust denier.  When Lax was asked why he would put himself in such a position, he explained that Demjanjuk’s crimes, while indefensible, were 60 years in the past. But Brentar’s Holocaust denial and neo-Nazi involvement, was ongoing.

The judge found in favor of Brentar, but reduced his award to $90,000. Members of Demjanjuk’s family helped pay the judgment. Brentar died the following December.

In 2007, Immigration Judge Michael J. Creppy ordered Demjanjuk deported again. His destination this time was to be Poland, Germany or the Ukraine. In May of 2008, the Supreme Court denied Demjanjuk’s petition for review.

One month later, Kurt Schrimm, head prosecutor at the German agency that brings Nazi war criminals to justice, reported that after interviewing numerous witnesses and obtaining documents indicating Demjanjuk’s participation in mass murder at several camps, Germany would seek Demjanjuk’s extradition. In March 2009, a German judge issued an arrest warrant for Demjanjuk.

On May 11, 2009, after filing numerous unsuccessful motions in the United States and Germany, Demjanjuk was finally deported to Germany. Upon arrival in Munich, he was arrested and sent to prison. Two months later, Demjanjuk was formally charged with nearly 28,000 counts of accessory to murder. On November 30, 2009, thirty two years after he was first identified, 89-year-old John Demjanjuk went on trial in Germany.

The sign at the entrance to the infamous Auschwitz concentration camp reads “Arbeit Macht Frei.” Work makes you free. For more than one million Jews exterminated at the camp, the slogan’s sardonic irony transformed it into an icon of the Holocaust. While there is no record of Demjanjuk at Auschwitz, he embraced “Arbeit Macht Frei,” when, like countless Soviet POW’s, he chose work for the Nazis as a death camp guard over confinement in a stalag.

Some observers who acknowledge Demjanjuk’s participation in the Holocaust have suggested that perhaps he had no choice, since conditions in German POW camps might have been sufficiently harsh to justify such a decision.

However, in an observation from his classic book, Man’s Search for Meaning, psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl provided a contrary perspective on the moral nature of such a decision:

“We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms, to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”

 

*Operation Reinhard was the name for the construction and operation of Nazi facilities built exclusively for extermination.

During the Holocaust, the Nazis established approximately 15,000 concentration camps in their occupied territories. Although these camps exterminated Jews and others deemed undesirable, those that were part of Operation Reinhard were built for efficiency. The purpose of these highly industrialized factories was to put to death the greatest number of Jewish men, women and children in the shortest period of time.

These facilities included Belzec, Kulmhof – Chelmno, Maidanek, Sobibor, and Treblinka.

Demjanjuk’s ID card was issued at Trawniki, a forced labor camp that also served as a training facility for non-German nationals who would later be assigned to the Reinhard facilities.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The War and the Jews by Joseph Goebbels

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

The naivete, not to mention ignorance, with which certain European circles see the Jewish Question in the fourth year of this gigantic struggle is astonishing. They cannot or will not see that this war is a war of the Jewish race and its subject people against Western culture and civilization. Everything that we Germans and Europeans, defenders of the principle of a moral world order, hold dear is at risk. The above-mentioned circles are too inclined to see the Jewish Question as a humanitarian issue. They make their judgments on the feelings of the moment rather than on the knowledge and insight resulting from clear and calm reason. It is clear that if during this war we show the least weakening of our determination to resolve the Jewish Question, the result will be the gravest danger to our people and Reich and all of Europe.

Jewry wanted this war. Whether one looks to the plutocratic or the bolshevist side of the enemy camp, one sees Jews standing in the foreground as instigators, rabble-rousers and slave drivers. They organize the enemy’s war economy and encourage plans to exterminate and destroy the Axis powers. England and the USA recruit from among them bloodthirsty and vengeful agitators and political lunatics, and they are the source of the terror commissars of the GPU. They are the mortar that holds the enemy coalition together. In the National Socialist Reich, they see a power that resists their drive for world domination both militarily and intellectually. That explains their rage and deep hatred. Do not think that the Old Testament tirades of their newspapers and radio are merely political propaganda. They would carry it all out to the letter, should they have the opportunity.

Our state’s security requires that we take whatever measures seem necessary to protect the German community from their threat. That leads to some difficult decisions, but they are unavoidable if we are to deal with the threat. This war is a racial war. The Jews started it and they direct it. Their goal to destroy and exterminate our people. We are the only force standing between Jewry and world domination. If the Axis powers lose the war in Europe, no power on earth could save Europe from the Jewish-Bolshevist flood. It may seem surprising that such a small minority possesses such great power and is such a deadly danger. But it is so. International Jewry uses certain criminal methods to gain world domination that are not evident to uneducated nations. The same is true in private life. The Jews do not enjoy economic success because they are more intelligent than non-Jews, but rather because they follow a different moral code. They attempt to conceal their methods for as long as possible, until it is too late for the affected nation to defend itself. Then it takes a revolution to dislodge them. We know how difficult and tiresome that is.

We constantly hear news that anti-Semitism is increasing in enemy nations. The charges being made against the Jews are the same ones that were made here. Anti-Semitism in enemy nations is not the result of anti-Semitic propaganda, since Jewry fights that strongly. In the Soviet Union, it receives the death penalty. Jewry does all it can to oppose anti-Semitism. The word Jew itself, for example, is hardly to be found in the otherwise so talkative English and USA newspapers, not to mention the Bolshevist press. Still, anti-Jewish attitudes are growing among the enemy public. This is an entirely natural reaction to the Jewish danger on the part of the affected peoples. In the long run, it does the Jews no good to plead in parliament and the newspapers for tougher laws against anti-Semitism, or to haul out the highest secular and spiritual dignitaries, among them naturally the Archbishop of Canterbury, to say a good word for the poor innocent persecuted Jews. They did that in Germany before 1933 too, but the National Socialist revolution took place nonetheless.

None of the Führer’s prophetic words has come so inevitably true as his prediction that if Jewry succeeded in provoking a second world war, the result would be not the destruction of the Aryan race, but rather the wiping out of the Jewish race. This process is of vast importance, and will have unforeseeable consequences that will require time. But it can no longer be halted. It must only be guided in the right direction. One must also be sure to strike the weapon of public deception from Jewry’s hands, which it is desperately using to save its skin. One can already see that in the face of approaching catastrophe the Jews are shrinking into the background. They send their pet Goy to the fore. It will not be long before they will not want to do it any longer, and wash their hands in innocence.

As one has to grant, we have some experience in these matters, and are taking action to be sure they do not succeed. The Jews will have to answer for their countless crimes against the happiness and peace of mankind, and one day the whole world will give them the penalty that they are suffering today in Germany. We speak without resentment. The time is too grave to spin naive plans of revenge. This is a world problem of the first order that can be solved by the present generation, and must be solved by them. Sentimental considerations have no part here. We see Jewry as the embodiment of a general world decline. Either we will break this danger, or the peoples of the world will break under it.

No one should say that winners are boastful. At present, we are the victors only in our own nation. Our victory at home, however, drew upon us the diabolic hatred of World Jewry, whose advance members the Jews still with us see themselves as. They want to see the Axis powers defeated, for that is the only way for them to regain their old privileges. It makes sense for us to secure our rear so that we can continue the battle before us with full energy and enthusiasm. When dealing with the Jews there are only two choices: to surrender to them or to fight them. We have chosen the latter. As our enemy attacks without mercy, so do we. The future will prove who is right. Developments to far, however, seem to be more in our favor than the enemy’s. Opposition to the Jews, not friendship with them, is growing around the world. We are convinced that at the end of the war, Jewry will face a humanity that fully understands the Jewish Question.

Recently a leading London newspaper, which is wholly under Jewish control, printed an article that wondered at the alarming increase in anti-Semitism. It received many letters in response, and had to admit that only a tiny percentage took the Jewish side. The pro-Semitic letters, though the newspaper did not say this, probably were written by the Jews themselves. The others made the strongest attacks on Jewry, and the readership forced the paper to print some of them. They included all the insults one could hope for. This anti-Semitism is not racially grounded, and its roots are not at all clear, but one may still establish with some satisfaction that healthy popular instincts are beginning to manifest themselves even in enemy nations, Things are not much different in the United States. One of the letters encouraged the newspaper to send reporters to streetcars and trains. There they would hear numerous opinions about the Jews that deserved more than ironic dismissal.

That is the way it normally begins. The Jews in England are reacting in the usual ways. First they look injured and unjustly persecuted. In the synagogues, the rabbis encourage people to be more careful in public, and to avoid provocative behavior. Then they rent a few respected, but buyable leaders from society, business or religious life to make their case. Their well-paid job is to condemn anti-Semitism as a cultural disgrace that is the result of enemy propaganda. They call for stronger laws against it. The poor Jews whine in public about everything they have done for the country, what wonderful and patriotic citizens they have always been and will continue to be, the important offices they hold, etc. The innocent citizen is persuaded by a flood of words that he must have been mistaken in always seeing Jews behind all major political or economic crimes. Soon they find some high church leader who is ready to condemn anti-Semitism as anti-Christian. By the end, not the Jews, but their enemies are responsible for every national misfortune. Then the game starts all over again.

One has to grant that extraordinarily clever tactics are being used, and that it takes some intelligence or sound instincts to see behind the Jewish facade. But here, too, the jug carries water until it breaks. International Jewry’s attack on the culture and moral order of the world is cleverly concealed, but not cleverly enough so that it cannot be seen through. One must keep at their heels, and give them no rest when they begin to tire. They are virtuosos at the art of transformation. They can appear in a thousand forms, yet are always the same. If one has caught them, they claim injured innocence and send their guard of pity on ahead to beg for mercy. But if one extends them even a finger of pity, they chop the whole hand off. They must therefore be kept in the fear of the Lord.

We know that they hate us from the depths of their souls. We take pleasure in their hatred. There is nothing that they would not do to us if they had the power. We cannot therefore give them even the slightest bit of power. More than that, it is our duty to tell the world of their nature and their depravity. We must again and again prove their sick role in beginning and carry on this war. We must attack them incessantly, accuse them without pity of the crimes of which they are guilty, until the nations begin to wake up. That may take a long time, but it is worth it. We are dealing with the most dangerous enemy that ever threatened the life, freedom, and dignity of humanity. There can be no mercy. We have pity only for the countless millions of our own people and those of other European nations who will be given over to the hate and destructive will of this devilish race if we become weak and give up the battle. Those Philistines who today are so eager to protect the Jews would be their first victims.

We must all keep alert. We must be on guard against the insidious cleverness of the international world enemy. In the depths of his soul, he realizes that this war that he so frivolously began, expecting it to be the last step to world domination, has instead become a war for his racial existence. He desperately seeks to stop the inevitable march of events. It will do him no good. We will keep at him. In the end, the Führer’s prophecy about World Jewry in 1939, which they laughed at then, will come true.

The Jews laughed in Germany too when they first saw us. They are not laughing any longer. They chose to wage war against us. But that war is turning against them. When they planned a war to totally destroy the German nation, they signed their own death warrant.

Here, too, world history will be the world court.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The So-Called Russian Soul by Joseph Goebbels

Tuesday, March 13th, 2012

The hard and pitiless battle for Sevastapol, as well as the recent broad offensive operations of the German army, have reopened a lively debate, above all in the neutral press. Similar to that of the past winter, it is on the issue of the so-called Russian soul. The spiritual as well as the territorial boundaries between Asia and Europe have always interested Western Europeans. It is not to be denied that the ethnic mixture that we called Russia before 1917 and the Soviet Union thereafter has been a riddle to our part of the world. That had nothing to do with tsarism then or Bolshevism today. It simply has to do with the fact that the various peoples joined together in this monster of a nation are not a people [Volk] in our sense of the word.

The many sides of the Russian soul which appears so complex and contradictory to us are in reality nothing but the reflection of the various peoples who are a part of it. It would be a mistake to evaluate it by the standards of Western Europe. What we call Russia has always been a collective mass. Only a small portion of it has made history. Earlier it was the tsarist upper class, today the Bolshevist-Jewish ruling clique. The broad masses of peasants and workers were only tools, having themselves no part in historical events.

The peoples of the Soviet Union live at a level of brutish primitiveness that we can hardly imagine. An exhibition called “The Soviet Paradise” has recently visited Berlin and other large cities, trying to show the nature of life in the Soviet Union through original materials. Normal and naive people can hardly believe it. One often saw groups of civilians discussing the matter heatedly, who then had to be told by a few wounded veterans of the Eastern Front that reality in the so-called workers’ and peasants’ paradise was even worse than what was presented. It is significant that the campaign against the Soviet Union has not brought back any fond memories of communism. None of our soldiers has seen any evidence of an agreement between the theory and practice of Bolshevism. None has returned from the East as a communist. The veil has been removed. Bolshevism is not a danger for us any longer.

It still seems astonishing that the Soviet army has put up resistance against our troops that they have not encountered in previous campaigns. They fight with a stolid, almost bestial determination, and sometimes show a contempt of death that is more than remarkable. Participants in the Battle of Sevastopol relate stories of the resistance of the Soviet troops that need explanation if they are not to unsettle a large part of the public.

The Russians throughout their history have always shown a particularly stubborn and tough manner of defense, while never being particularly gifted at offense. Their national character has a defensive nature. They are stolid and animalistic. They are accustomed to a hard and impoverished existence, and therefore do not hold on to life all that strongly. The average person has less worth than a bicycle. A rapid birthrate quickly replaces any losses. They have a type of primitive toughness that one cannot call bravery. It is entirely different. Bravery is a kind of spiritual courage. The toughness with which the Bolshevists defended their bunkers in Sevastapol was more a bestial drive, and nothing could be more mistaken than to assume that it was the result of Bolshevist views or education. The Russians were always like that, and will likely always remain so. It is also easier to throw a life away when there is no promise to it than when, even at the moment of danger, a distant paradise still seems to beckon.

One does not need to speak of the enormous danger that the armed uprising of such stolid millions is for Germany and all of Europe. For attacking soldiers, the motive of the defenders is not particularly relevant. The methods the Bolshevist commissars use to drive their troops to the last measure of resistance are not really all that important for the course of battle. It is however important to know it to prevent false impressions. Bolshevism is a master at exploiting the Slavic national soul. Only in Russia was this dreadful experiment possible. It required the primitive and bestial dullness of the peoples forming the Soviet Union, as well as their limited social and economic expectations. Its methods were then implemented with a consistency that amazed the observer.

Our first images of Bolshevism were not exaggerated, but understated. They were cast into the shadows by reality. We will not even mention the so-called social achievements of the Soviet system, which in comparison with ours can provoke only laughter or shock. It has hardly a matter of taste, however, to be astonished by the fact that Bolshevist propaganda largely succeeded in sealing the masses of Russian workers and peasants off from the world and persuading them by stupid repetition that they were living in a paradise on earth. Independent judgment requires the opportunity to compare. That is ruled out for them. The workers and peasants of the Soviet Union are like the man imprisoned in a dark dungeon for 25 years, who may easily be persuaded that a kerosene lantern is the sun.

The political commissar has a function in such a system that is absolutely incomprehensible for us. He wields the whip, both among the masses and in the army. He has full power over life and death, and his own head is on the line as well. The stolid masses are at his disposal. They are forced to choose between accepting it all or facing jail at the least or bestial death at the worst. There is nothing like an intelligentsia remaining to put up any resistance. The system has the resources to eliminate it at the earliest stages. The whole country is covered by a spy system that misuses children to spy on their parents. What choice do the stolid and hopeless masses have but to obey with the fatalism that lies within their racial soul, to give themselves up to their fate? What choice does a soldier in a bunker have when the commissar is standing there with a drawn pistol, and systematic Jewish propaganda has persuaded him that becoming a prisoner means not only death, but gruesome torture?

That really has nothing to do with bravery as we understand it. Even this system, when it faces the final test, will bend before the superior force of manly combativeness. The Bolshevists had a great advantage in their defensive positions, yet they capitulated after 25 days. In the end, their system lacks the free personal will that springs from the individual fighting spirit. It overcomes difficulty and danger not through terror and threats, but through individual bravery. Certainly international Jewry with its organized stolid and malleable human material is a dangerous enemy. Once it is used up, there will be no threat left for us to face. We would have to doubt the quality of our race, the goodness of our soldiers, and the fighting power of our worldview and principles if we even for a moment doubted that we can break this danger.

It is a part of the fate of the German race that at critical points it must defend itself against the threat from the East. It is especially dangerous today, bound as it is to the ruthless infernal goals of Jewish intellectualism. Without doubt it was a near fatal threat not only to Germany, but to all of occidental culture, when Jewry transformed the physical capacities of the East into a monstrous and armed Soviet military, aimed at Germany and all of Europe. The red commissar is defending his world tby holding together his attack on us. We must destroy his system if we want to live free from danger in the future.

This explanation goes beyond the realm of Philistine discussions of the so-called Russian soul. The old measures are inadequate to things of such an enormous spiritual and philosophical scale. The gigantic battle on the Eastern Front is shaking a world that must fall if we are to have any kind of a national future. The bestial brutality with which the enemy is waging war is proof of the enormity of the danger facing us. Everything is truly at stake. One cannot imagine the consequences if that system were to be implemented here. It would introduce Europe’s total domination by international Jewry. Our people would be subjected to the stolid brutality of a primitive race and would lose its most valuable aspects. London could only welcome such a thing. They have an opponent they are unable to defeat by their own strength, as the development of the war shows.

One therefore understands why we Germans have limited patience for intellectual discussions of a so-called Russian national soul, which must be thoroughly investigated in order to uncover its presumed secrets. There are no mysteries here, only facts. We are battling a world power that threatens our national life. The war is hard reality for us, not a philosophical question. We see its ghastly origins, and our soldiers are fighting for our holiest possessions. We do not underestimate our opponent. Still, we are as always persuaded that here too the higher race will triumph over the lower one, regardless of what infernal means it uses to escape its deserved fate.

We know well that Europe would be lost if the Axis powers did not defend it. We have given our part of the world renewed youth. The attack from the East against its life and culture will fail, because we will meet its stolid power with an offensive resistance that draws its strength from the intelligence of the leadership and the vitality of Europe’s young races.

As so often before, this time, too, the surging nomads of the East will be driven back to their steppes. That is the purpose of our battle against the Soviet Union.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Churchill’s Trick by Joseph Goebbels

Sunday, March 11th, 2012

The neutral press has been asking recently how it is that Mr. Churchill has such influence on the English public and British public opinion. Despite the worst reversals and the most demoralizing defeats, regardless of initial suspicion, in the end they are captivated by this clever wordsmith and accept his foolish policies and military leadership. The question is both easy and hard to answer. The answer to the riddle is probably that although Mr. Churchill lacks all strategic sense in both politics and military leadership, he is an extraordinarily capable tactician. He is a virtuoso at democratic party and press leadership, and therefore is the best of the current English politicians, who as it is known are not gifted with any great intelligence. His methods are as primitive as one can imagine. His ideas are hardly original, and one can usually predict exactly what he will say or do. It is always the same thing with him.

When he began as British prime minister, he proclaimed the slogan that he has held to regardless of political or military events, through setbacks and defeats. It protects him against all criticism: “Blood, sweat and tears.” One can fight a war to its bitter end under that slogan without running the danger of being proven wrong. The people will hardly recall the slogan in the midst of victory, and in defeat he can pretend to be a prophet. Mr. Churchill is like a doctor who stands by the bed of a seriously ill patient and says: “He will die.” If the patient worsens, or even dies, he is proved right. He will not hesitate to remind people of his excellent prognosis. And if the patient gets better or even recovers, will one reproach the doctor that the patient got better despite his bad condition?

One cannot call such a practice particularly intelligent or original, but it does have its public. Up to the present moment, Mr. Churchill has carried it off. One does not need to be a prophet, one needs only to see through his trick to predict that, after the British Empire’s grave defeats in the past four weeks, he will say that he had expected and predicted nothing else. His farsightedness will be admired.

We can predict what Mr. Churchill will say in about two months, and thus predict what he will have to say today. One of his methods is to paint the past in the blackest possible terms, then to discover a silver lining in the present. No one will be able to find a speech of his from, say, last August in which he sees gray. One can only see how serious he thought the situation was then by seeing what he says about it today. His practice is to make the past look worse that it was in order to make the present seem better than it is. He confesses things are going poorly, but claims they were even worse before! That is not true, but he depends on the public’s forgetfulness. They will not take the trouble to see what he actually said last August, and then compare it to what he says today.

He claims that time is a traditional ally of his side. No one will claim that time has been a reliable ally of the English over the last two and a half years. England’s situation is far more precarious in 1942 than it was in 1939 or 1940. One also cannot imagine time working more in England’s favor in the future than it did in the past. Every month, indeed nearly every week, England loses one of its important holdings, and one must be remarkably foolish to think that England will have the strength during or after the war to regain its lost possessions.

In 1939 Mr. Churchill looked forward to 1940. In 1940 he looked forward to 1942. In 1942 he was thinking of 1945 as the year things would finally go England’s way. One can see the constantly changing dates, and see that the British prime minister clearly knows that Britain’s hands are tied. It can no longer be saved by its power, only through a miracle.

It was characteristic that in his last radio speech, Mr. Churchill was unable to find even a single argument that referred to the British Empire. He referred to the United Sates, the Soviet Union, and Chaing Kaishek. He hardly mentioned Great Britain. The empire is apparently no longer able to contribute to its own defense, despite the fact that it is a war for its very existence, and that its prime minister provoked it without any reason and without making the necessary preparations. This is clear from the contributions London has made to the war, both in terms of blood and labor. There is general displeasure among England’s allies at its wholly inadequate contributions. Mr. Churchill had to respond, for example, to public criticism in Australia by inventing some statistics. No one believes him. One has to be amazed at the thoughtlessness, not to mention cynicism, that began and carries out the war.

That is fine with us. Our polemics are not intended to improve anything, only to make clear to the public that the riddle of Churchill is really not a riddle at all, but only a primitive conjurer’s trick. We realize that this unfortunate man is England’s last hope in its present situation. Despite all the concealed and open opposition in the House of Commons, he cannot be deposed because there is no one to take his place. He is the embodiment of the curse of the evil deed, which has to keep doing evil. If he falls, a good part of the British will to resist falls too. The man on the street in England probably senses dimly that this war is Churchill’s war, that he began it and is the one who has to carry it on to a bitter end for the Empire. That explains his appeal to national unity. He has a parliamentary vote of no confidence as his last resort, to be called upon when he is in deep trouble.

He has a remarkably clever way of dealing with public unhappiness with himself, his policies or his war leadership. He allows a kind of pseudo-criticism. When the empire staggers under some blow, he retreats for a time to the background and lets people complain. He opens the release valve, one might say, to let the people’s rage dissipate.

One should not think that happens against his will. He knows how to play the game. He figures the loudest voices will shout themselves hoarse. When a so-called Churchill crisis is at its peak, he pulls out a deus ex machina. He smooths the waves, adds water to the wine, minimizes the defeats and explains that he had predicted it all. Even more, he had expected even worse, which thank God has not come to pass. One should rejoice that it only rained, not hailed. Singapore may have fallen, but he was expecting to lose India. He sees it as to England’s advantage that German ships sailed through the English Channel. He lies so well that the gullible might almost believe London’s claims that 600 Royal Air Force planes chased our ships back to German harbors, losing only 49 of them in the process! And if things look bad in East Asia, which no one doubts, they look good in the East. 1942 will be a difficult year, as he predicted — though of course he actually had predicted the opposite! — better days may come in 1943, or maybe in 1945. National unity must be preserved, and he of course is its guarantee. Anyone who attacks him proves that he is not English.

Such behavior would be unthinkable in any other country. A prime minister with so many failures, so many false predictions and windy promises, of which none came true, would be thrown out anywhere else. The English people like Churchill. He is its curse, its evil spirit, a man who has all the abilities to be Great Britain’s gravedigger.

We could not wish for anyone better. If there is no way for the Axis powers to win other than through the collapse of the British Empire, Mr. Churchill is fine with us. The war’s first round did not end with a sudden knock out punch; there will be further rounds. We have to slowly but surely pound the enemy until he becomes groggy. Now and again the enemy will hope to be saved by the bell, but a new round will follow. The decisive moment will come when he is knocked down by a lightning blow. We do not know when that will happen, we only know that it will happen. A prime minister who leads an empire into such danger is a considerable advantage for the other side.

We are happy Mr. Churchill is there. We certainly do not want to be rid of him. We want to keep him around, since he is the pathfinder for our total and radical victory.

Enhanced by Zemanta