Book Read Free

From Yahweh to Zion

Page 28

by Laurent Guyénot


  “Judea Declares War on Germany”

  History, as written by the victors, is merely the continuation of war propaganda. Writing history is “the last battle,” to quote the title of the book by David Irving on the Nuremberg trials.320 Ironically, the statutes of this International Military Tribunal, which included a prohibition against the defense evoking Tu Quoque (“You also”)—a principle of law allowing the accused to return the accusation to the accuser (in this case, war crimes, crimes against peace and against humanity)—are dated August 8, 1945, precisely between the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This was already making a mockery of justice. On top of that, it is a well-established fact that the confessions of several convicted Nazi officers were obtained under torture. This is the case for Rudolf Höss, commander of Auschwitz from 1940 to 1943. According to the British sergeant Bernard Clarke, who captured him, “It took three days [of beating and sleep deprivation] to get a coherent statement out of him.”321 His deposition, which refers to three million deaths at Auschwitz under his responsibility, is today recognized as grossly exaggerated. There are many other proven cases of confessions extracted under torture and blackmail by the prosecution in Nuremberg: Maurice Bardèche, a survivor of the Nazi camps, assembled a number of them in 1950 in Nuremberg II or Les Faux-Monnayeurs.322 Like the Paris Conference in 1919, the Nuremberg Trials were influenced by a staff composed of a majority of Jews (more than two thirds according to Hungarian journalist Louis Marchalko). Benton Bradberry writes in The Myth of German Villainy that the trials were “permeated throughout with an atmosphere of Jewish vengeance seeking,” and remarks that the tens of Nazi leaders who were condemned to death were hanged on Purim day (October 16, 1946), the Jewish holiday celebrating the hanging of the ten sons of Haman.323 For the new Levitic elite, writing history always means writing the history of Israel. And writing the history of Israel always means reproducing biblical history.

  Authentic historical work consists of revising official history. This presupposes the re-assessment, in the chain of causes and effects, of the story from the side of the vanquished side of the story. The limited scope of this chapter permits us to recall only a few factors that contributed to launching the Germans—and not just some high Nazi officials—into a state of murderous rage against Jews. We have already mentioned the Germans’ perception of the role of the Jews in the Bolshevik Revolution at the gates of Germany on the one hand, and in Germany’s defeat and economic collapse after the First World War on the other. These factors partly explain the rise of Hitler, whose Judeophobia was clearly displayed in Mein Kampf. At the outbreak of war with England in 1939, the Nazis tried to convince the German people that the war had been willed and orchestrated by the Jews. A few hours before his suicide, Hitler wrote again: “It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests.”324

  Some evidence supports this claim. Indeed, on March 24, 1933, less than two months after the appointment of Hitler as Chancellor of the Reich, the British Daily Express published a front page article entitled “Judea Declares War on Germany. Jews of All the World Unite in Action.” The article proclaimed: “The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany. Fourteen million Jews dispersed throughout the world have banded together as one man to declare war on the German persecutors of their co-religionists.”

  This campaign was supported by the majority of Jewish representative bodies and coordinated by influential Zionist lawyer Samuel Untermeyer. In a radio speech reproduced by The New York Times on August 7, 1933, Untermeyer called for “a holy war” against “medieval Hitlerland,” “a war that must be waged unremittingly,” by “the economic boycott against all German goods, shipping and services. […] we will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.” Untermeyer called “traitor to their race” all Jews who refused to join this boycott. He had no doubt that Jews, who had overcome persecution “from time immemorial,” would once again prevail. “For the Jews are the aristocrats of the world.”325 Joining with Samuel Untermeyer in calling for an economic war against Germany, Bernard Baruch promoted preparations for actual war, as he proudly asserted in his autobiography: “I emphasised that the defeat of Germany and Japan and their elimination from world trade would give Britain a tremendous opportunity to swell her foreign commerce in both volume and profit.”326

  Five days after the Daily Express article, Hitler publicly announced a counter-boycott of Jewish businesses in Germany as “merely a defensive measure exclusively directed toward Jewry in Germany,” and warned that international Jewry’s war on Germany would negatively affect German Jews. Goebbels broadcast a speech two days later explicitly warning that the attacks of international Jewry against Germany would rebound against German Jews.327 Jeffrey Herf, who cites these two speeches, fails to point out that they came in response to a declaration of war, accompanied by unfounded accusations, by American Jewish elites. This dishonest presentation is characteristic of mainstream historians of the Holocaust. Herf asserts that the Nazi leaders sincerely believed in the “Jewish conspiracy” they denounced, but fails to specify what their objective reasons for believing it were, so as to present their Judeophobia as a symptom of paranoia.

  Behind the struggle against anti-Semitism was a more fundamental hostility against any form of nationalism, as plainly expressed by Solomon Freehof in Race, Nation or Religion: Three Questions Jews Must Answer (1935): “What stands in our way everywhere in the world is Modern Nationalism. That is our chief enemy. We are on the side of Liberalism against Nationalism. That is our only safety.” The daily Chicago newspaper The Sentinel, reporting a finding of the Central Conference of American Rabbis on September 24, 1936, wrote: “Nationalism is a danger for the Jewish people. Today, as in all epochs of history, it is proved that Jews cannot live in powerful states where a high national culture has developed.”328

  In September 1939, as Great Britain declared war on Germany, the World Jewish Congress declared that international Jewry had already waged an economic war and now stood by Great Britain against Germany. The mobilization of American Jews against Germany intensified. In early 1941 appeared the 96–page booklet by Jewish American businessman Theodore Kaufman, Germany Must Perish. Suggesting as “a final solution” that “Germany be policed forever by an international armed force,” the author concludes: “There is, in fine, no other solution except one: That Germany must perish forever from this earth.” He proposes that “the extinction of the German nation and the total eradication from the earth, of all her people” be achieved by sterilizing all German males under sixty, and females under forty-five, which could be done in less than a month by about twenty thousand surgeons. “Accordingly in the span of two generations, […] the elimination of Germanism and its carriers, will have been an accomplished fact.”329

  Interviewed by the Canadian Jewish Chronicle, Kaufman speaks of the Jews’ “mission” to guide humankind toward “perpetual peace”; thanks to them, “slowly but surely the world will develop into a paradise”; but for the moment, “let us sterilize all Germans and wars of world domination will come to an end!”330 German Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels had a translation of Kaufman’s book massively printed and read on the radio, as a way to show the German people what awaited them if they showed signs of weakness. By further asserting that German Jews were of his opinion, Kaufman provided the Nazis with a pretext for stigmatizing Jews by the Yellow Star (September 1941) and their deportation as enemies of the nation.331

  Jeffrey Herf claims that Kaufman’s book had no impact except in Nazi propaganda. That is not the case. It was reviewed positively in The New York Times and The Washington Post. In 1944, it would be commented upon by Louis Nizer in his very influential book What to Do with Germany? (highly pra
ised by Harry Truman). Nizer rejected Kaufman’s solution as exaggerated, but recommended the death penalty for 150,000 Germans, and “labor battalions” for hundreds of thousands more.332 The same year, celebrated Hollywood screenwriter Ben Hecht wrote in his Guide for the Bedeviled: “A cancer flourishes in the body of the world and in its mind and soul, and […] this cancerous thing is Germany, Germanism, and Germans.”333

  Louis Marschalko cites a few more well-published Jewish authors advocating a “final solution” for the “German question”: Leon Dodd, who in How Many World Wars (New York, 1942), proclaims that no Germany and no German race must be left after the war; Charles Heartman, who in There Must Be No Germany After This War (New York, 1942), also demands the physical extermination of the German people; Einzig Palil, who in Can We Win the Peace? (London, 1942), demanded the dismembering of Germany and the total demolition of German industry; Ivor Duncan, who in the March, 1942, issue of Zentral Europa Observer, demanded the sterilization of forty million Germans, estimating the total cost at five million pounds sterling.334

  While in 1942 and 1943 the chances of a German victory diminished, various events fed the Nazi propaganda mill and convinced the Germans that surrender was not an option. In the spring of 1943 German soldiers discovered the bodies of more than 4,500 Polish officers shot in the head by the Soviet NKVD in the spring of 1940 in the forest of Katyn (in Poland near the Belarusian border). Later other mass graves were discovered, raising the number of members of the Polish elite so executed by the Soviets in 1940 to more than 25,000. The Nazis denounced this “Judeo-Bolshevik” massacre, but the Soviets denied their responsibility and claimed that the massacre was perpetrated by the Nazis during their advance in 1941. The Germans then called on an international commission and the Red Cross, both of which confirmed Soviet guilt. But these conclusions were ignored by the Allies and the Western press. Jewish neurologist Richard Brickner exploited the lie of German guilt in a book published in 1943 under the title Is Germany Incurable? He intended to show that “the national group we call Germany behaves and has long behaved startlingly like an individual involved in a dangerous mental trend,” which he characterized as “the real murder-psychosis,” involving megalomania and “the paranoid’s conviction of his own a priori world-shaking importance, of the supreme value and significance of his every act and thought.”335 Despite evidence against the Soviets, the Nuremberg Tribunal declared the Nazis guilty of the Katyn massacre, just as it ignored Soviet responsibility for the deaths of more than 440,000 Poles (according to recent estimates) between September 1939 and June 1941, murdered with the aim of eliminating “social classes that were hostile to communism.”

  Shortly after the Normandy landings, Roosevelt and Churchill discussed the future of Germany at the Second Quebec Conference of September 11, 1944, and signed a project developed under the leadership of Jewish-Americans Henry Morgenthau Jr., the Secretary of the Treasury, and his assistant Harry Dexter White. This “Morgenthau Plan,” entitled Suggested Post-Surrender Program for Germany, or Program to Prevent Germany from Starting a World War III, “is looking forward to converting Germany into a country primarily agricultural and pastoral in its character,” by dismantling and transporting to Allied nations “all industrial plants and equipment not destroyed by military action,” while calling for “forced German labor outside Germany.” The revelation of this insane plan by The Wall Street Journal (September 23, 1944) helped push the Nazis into a desperate fight-to-the-death mentality, and suggested to Henry Stimson, US Secretary of War, this commentary: “It is Semitism gone wild for vengeance and, if it is ultimately carried out (I can’t believe that it will be), it as sure as fate will lay the seeds for another war in the next generation.”336 The plan was abandoned in 1946 because of the Soviet threat. Germany needed to become a bulwark against communism, and would therefore be entitled to the Marshall Plan. But until then, the Germans experienced a “peace” more infernal than all wars: destruction and plunder, organized famine, mass rapes, and the deportation of millions of slaves to the Soviet Union, most of whom would never return. According to James Bacque, more than nine million Germans died as a result of Allied starvation and expulsion policies in the first five years after the war.337 According to Jewish author John Sack, Jews played a major part in the massive cruelty perpetrated on the 200,000 German civilians parked in over a thousand concentration camps in Poland, “many of them starved, beaten and tortured.” On the basis of many documented cases, he claims that “more than 60,000 died at the hands of a largely Jewish-run security organization,” and lays the blame primarily on Zionist Jews.338

  It is well known that Roosevelt’s conduct of the war, beginning with his decision to involve the United States, was influenced by his being greatly weakened physically and largely captive to his advisers. He was much influenced by his wife Eleanor Roosevelt, who had communist sympathies and a very favorable opinion of Stalin.339 At the Yalta Conference he was constantly assisted by a State Department official by the name of Alger Hiss, a former protégé of Felix Frankfurter, whom he would later appoint as the first Secretary-General of the United Nations. In 1948, thanks to the efforts of Richard Nixon (then a member of the House Un-American Activities Committee), Hiss was convicted of espionage for the Soviets. The Soviet archives made public in the 1990s confirmed his guilt.

  Among the gray eminences behind Roosevelt were many Jewish personalities. In addition to Henry Morgenthau Jr. at the Treasury, we must mention the banker Bernard Baruch, already very influential under Wilson, and Felix Frankfurter, successor of Louis Brandeis to the Supreme Court. According to Curtis Dall, son-in-law of Roosevelt: “Mr. Baruch, as top man, raised most of the campaign and expense money; Mr. Frankfurter approved, directly or obliquely, most of the important governmental appointments. They were, without doubt, the ‘Gold Dust Twins.’”340

  Curtis Dall has also revealed a secret diplomatic channel demonstrating that the White House harbored a strong desire to prolong the war: on the one hand to deprive Germany of any possibility of escaping her programmed destruction; and on the other, to give the USSR time to invade Central Europe. Soon after Roosevelt and Churchill agreed in Casablanca in January 1943 to demand “unconditional surrender” from Germany, George Earle, the American ambassador to Bulgaria who served as special emissary to the Balkans from his base in Istanbul in neutral Turkey, was contacted by Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of the German intelligence service. Canaris explained that if President Roosevelt made it clear that he would accept an “honorable surrender,” the German generals, many of whom were hostile to Hitler’s suicidal policy, would deliver Hitler to international justice and put the German army at the disposal of US forces to ally against the USSR, the true enemy of Western civilization, and protect Central Europe from Soviet assault. Earle then met the German ambassador Fritz von Papen, a fervent Catholic and anti-Hitlerian, then Baron Kurt von Lersner, another German dignitary. Convinced of both the sincerity of the Germans and of Stalin’s determination to conquer Europe, Earle thrice sent an urgent message to Roosevelt by diplomatic and military channels inviting him to seize this unexpected opportunity. The only response Earle finally received from Roosevelt was an order to defer to the commander-in-chief in Europe, General Eisenhower. This killed the initiative of the German anti-Nazi dignitaries, who were executed by Hitler after their vain attempts to assassinate him on July 20, 1944.341

  Eisenhower, as it turned out, was instructed to leave Central Europe—where most of the population only wanted to surrender to American troops—undefended against Stalin’s invasion. He could have used General Alexander’s allied forces in Italy to occupy Eastern Europe and the Balkans before they passed from Hitler’s yoke to that of the Red Army. The allied armies would then have freed Berlin entirely and would have reached Vienna, Budapest, and Prague, while the Soviet state would have been kept within the natural frontiers of Russia. Instead, Italian troops were used for a landing on the French Mediterranean coast,
complementary to the main landing in Normandy, which brought no decisive military advantage. General Mark Clark, who in 1943 commanded the American forces in Italy, saw in this strategy “one of the outstanding political mistakes of the war.”342 Moreover, Eisenhower restrained General Patton’s enthusiasm, forcing him to stop a hundred kilometers before Berlin, and on March 28, 1945, he sent a “personal message for Marshal Stalin” to inform him of it. Patton nevertheless took Vienna against Eisenhower’s orders.

  Thus the Second World War was completed with the determined aim of laying the foundations of a new conflict in Europe. The Atlantic Charter of August 14, 1941, had declared that the United States and Great Britain “wish to see sovereign rights and self government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them,” and “hope to see established a peace which will afford to all nations the means of dwelling in safety within their own boundaries.” This referred first of all to Poland, whose joint invasion by the Nazis and the Soviets had justified the Allies’ entry into the war. Yet the result of the Second World War was not to liberate Poland and the other Eastern European peoples, but to hand them over to the Soviet dictatorship. This situation did not result from any failure by the United States, but on the contrary from the secret will of the powers that controlled the White House.

 

‹ Prev