Tell the Truth & Shame the Devil

by Tell the Truth

  ***

  Full responsibility for the First World War lies squarely on the shoulders of the International Jewish Bankers. They are responsible for millions of dead and dying. (U.S. Congression-Record 67th Congress, 4. Sitting, Senate Document nr. 346, December 1922)

  The result of this one-sided confabulation (Germany was not admitted to the negotiations) was the prestidigitation of entire countries with fanciful names (“Jugo-slavia,” “Czecho-slovakia”) by the alteration of international borders, the aim of which cannot have been other than to cause unrest and thus to incite another war. (“Yugoslavia has seven frontiers, six republics, five nationalities, four languages, three religions, two alphabets and one boss!” A Yugoslav joke from the 1970s). Czechoslovakia’s population, in order of numerical importance, consisted of Czechs, Germans, Slovaks, Hungarians, Ruthenians, Poles and about a quarter of a million persons with other origins. The creation of these ethnically diverse entities contradicted the proclaimed doctrine of “self-determination.”

  Alone the invention of multiethnic “Czechoslovakia” (the Czechs had been one of many ethnicities in just dismembered Austro-Hungary), guaranteed renewed strife. The Czechs had until then, arguably, never ruled their own country, but were merely a tribe that had settled in the 11th century in Bohemia and Moravia—and therefore had never learnt to coexist with other ethnicities. “The worst offence (of the Versailles Treaty) was the subjection of over three million Germans to Czech rule” (H.N. Brailsford, Leading Left-Wing Writer, 1920) -- not to mention another two million Germans subject to Polish rule.

  So much for “multiculturalism,” an expression then unknown, but vigorously promoted today for their own purposes by the usual suspects, intent on destroying the last vestiges of social coherence and supported by the unstable elements of today’s populations, the have-nots and know-nothings and humanoids without a stake in their society. “Stupidity is far more dangerous than evil, for evil takes a break from time to time, stupidity does not.” (Anatole France)

  Memo from today: October 14, 2014: “young people on the search for their own identity” (bluewin.ch, news). As a final riposte to the fairytale that a multicultural world is somehow progressive, children as young as 15 are returning to the countries of their immigrant parents, in this case the 17 year old daughter of a French mother and Algerian father -- to serve the cause of the Syrian “Opposition” and the ISIS “terror-militia,” as dedicated Moslems.

  History divulges successive experiments in multiculturalism, beginning with the subjugation of entire countries and their cultures in “empires”; then of parts of existing countries arbitrarily forced together; today of coerced immigration, intended to disperse culturally cohesive communities in order to create the current empire or bloc, run by the equivalent of satraps-- modern subordinate rulers—all a result of compulsion and therefore heedless of the people affected. (“Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empire. We have the dimension of empire.” President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso, July 10, 2007)

  Wikipedia lists about 165 “empires,” of which a few were probably more significant than others, notably:

  Ancient Egypt (3100-2686BC), Babylon (1900-1600 BC), Achaemenid /Persia (525-332 BC), Roman (27BC-476 AD), Carolingian (800-888AD)/Holy Roman (962-1806), British (1583-1997), Greater German (1933-1945), Soviet (1917-1989).

  We associate certain properties with each of these empires, for instance:

  Ancient Egypt: pyramids

  Babylon: astronomy, architecture

  Persian: craftsmanship, architecture, gardens

  Roman: law, monumental architecture (aqueducts, amphitheatres), sanitation, roads

  Carolingian: architecture, cultural and intellectual advances. Charlemagne has been called the “Father of Europe,” his empire “laid the foundations for modern France and Germany” (Wikipedia)

  British: parliamentary system, English common law, industry, railways, sports

  Greater German: strength through cultural and ethnic identity, national financial independence, innumerable patents, diligence

  Soviet: gulags, mass starvation, show trials

  Future Jewish: ditto, in addition to metaphysics, such as: “Is this a gabardine, or is this a gabardine?”

  All empires with one exception have bequeathed to us a valuable heritage. The Soviet Union was built on a lie and dedicated to the destruction and enslavement of the human spirit. It demonstrates unmistakably the future of humanity under a Jewish Empire, as its origin was identical.

  Memo from today: July, 2012. Sweden.

  The situation in Sweden is far worse than in Denmark. In Sweden NOBODY talks about immigration problems, the death of the multiculti project or the islamisation/arabisation of Europe. If you do, you will immediately be called a racist, an Islamophobe or a Nazi... In this New Sweden we have more reported rapes than any other country in the European Union, according to a study by Professor Liz Kelly from England. More than 5 000 rapes or attempted rapes were reported in 2008 (last year it was more than 6 000). In 2010 another study reported that just one country in the world has more rapes than Sweden, and that is Lesotho in South Africa. For every 100 000 inhabitants Lesotho has 92 reported rapes, Sweden has 53, The United States 29, Norway 20 and Denmark 7...In 1990 the authorities counted to 3 exclusion areas in Sweden, suburbs where mostly immigrants live, where very few have a job to go to, almost all of them live by welfare and the children don’t pass their exams. In 2002 they counted to 128 exclusion areas. In 2006 we had 156 and then they stopped counting. In some cities, like Malmo where I live, a third of all inhabitants live in an exclusion area. (Ingrid Carlqvist, I Want My Country Back, speech)

  Memo from today: January, 2014: Germany.

  The latest evidence of the destruction of the social structure in Germany is taking place in the province of the Saarland, where the teaching of the French language is being enforced in Kindergartens and schools from age three. As this will inevitably mean the wilful substitution of French-speaking for German-speaking teachers, there will be a consequent increase in unemployment among the latter. The Saar is among the poorest states of Germany, having an unemployment rate of 7% and a per person debt of 15,000 Euros. There is no pressing need for such a basic change, nor has there been a suggestion of an equal instruction of German in border regions of France, the mere rumour of which would probably incite a wave of chauvinism.

  Memo from today: October, 2014: Australia.

  In the matter of mass immigration, Australia is still the exception. The Australian government, having recovered partially from the farcical Gillard era and her Labour successor, has started a 16 million Euro campaign against immigration. “No Way, You will not make Australia home,” state placards in 17 languages. However, this is probably just a populist campaign, as Australia is about as independent as that other British Commonwealth member, Canada. Whereas individual peoples in the EU bloc might back a similar campaign, now that their primacy is threatened by ever-greater numbers of refugees, the EU-membership of their governments denies them this freedom of decision.

  Memo from today: November, 2014. The UK.

  In the UK, The Office of Standards in Education was accused of “political correctness” after downgrading a top rural primary school for effectively being too English. The education watchdog faced a backlash from MPs and parents following the decision to penalise Middle Rasen primary in Lincolnshire for not having enough black or Asian pupils. In a report, inspectors said the school was “not yet outstanding” because pupils’ cultural development was limited by a “lack of first-hand experience of the diverse make up of modern British society.” The move followed a shake-up of Ofsted inspections introduced in the wake of the “Trojan Horse” plot in Birmingham to impose hard-line Muslim values in state schools. ... Last month, it was claimed that a small Christian school in the Home Counties had been penalised after failing to invite other faith leaders, such as imams, in to lead assemblies.
... The community primary school, which is based in the picturesque rural town of Market Rasen, has just 104 pupils aged four to 11. (Daily Telegraph, November 19, 2014)

  Aside: It would be redundant and futile to try to explain that the UK will for a predicted 35 years more (Daily Mail, May 5, 2014) be a predominantly white, Anglo-Saxon, English-speaking, Protestant nation. If, indeed, as appears to be the case in Birmingham, public schools have been hijacked by Moslems, it is up to the government to provide an alternative for native British communities. The answer might be to sell these schools to the local Moslem population and to acquire a completely new building elsewhere, in which to teach the traditional British curriculum. Otherwise the authorities could rightly be accused of misusing public funds (once again) and of neglecting their home market.

  However, that solution assumes that the authorities feel any obligation towards their home market. But the authorities are, in any case, not the solution, they are the problem. They promote mass immigration, integration and assimiliation of unsuitable asylum-seekers from countries thousands of miles away. The rescued migrants arriving from North Africa do not necessarily originate there. Those whose lives have allegedly been endangered in their home states and who have trecked to the Mediterranean shore, risk them again to penetrate Western Europe. If a Yemenite’s life is threatened, he might logically flee next door to Oman or Saudi Arabia. If a Nigerian’s life is threatened, he might logically go to Cameroon, Benin or Chad. If a Syrian’s life is threatened, he might logically flee next door to Turkey. If he is prepared to travel over 6,000 kilometres, he is not fleeing for his life but moving for his livelihood. He and his like are all economic refugees; migrants Western Europe does not need and cannot support. Why then are are they being admitted by Western European governments? Because these marionette regimes are pledged to admit them, as part of their assignment to dilute native populations.

  The marionette regimes of Western Europe have been acculturating their indigenous populations to accept this invasion for decades. Take screen entertainment, for instance. For a very long time already, screen entertainment has insidiously, remorselessly introduced mixed casts into its programmes. To be successful a fiction must induce its audience to suspend its disbelief. That requires the fiction to reflect real life accurately. Now, this rule has been abandoned in order to permit mixed casts in all programmes, in roles which do not reflect society as the audience knows it. No matter, partly because these actors have become familiar in their unlikely roles, their equivalents will doubtless shortly assume their parts in real life. When this metamorphosis began, its absurd contentions reduced the credibility of any fiction; now, through massive demographic pressure, they are at least numerically possible.

  Back in 1939, homogenous populations were naturally opposed to war. Yet, the same protagonists, somewhat differently mixed, were at it again. And those that suffered the ultimate sanction were again only those doing their patriotic duty, without which, they were told, their country would be invaded and they enslaved under a foreign system. Even if this threat had been true, would such victimization not have been preferable to an early death? What is worth dying prematurely and painfully for? Isn’t life short enough without letting some dubious cause shorten it further? In the event, the enlisted were not offered the choice. Despite Germany’s repeated peace offers --among them, the Dahlerus Mission, four attempts to prevent war during August 1939 alone-- war, with its inevitable casualties, was evidently considered preferable to peace:

  I hope that you will instruct Mr. Mallet that he is on no account to meet Dr. Weissauer. The future of civilization is at stake. It is a question of we or they now, and either the German Reich or this country has got to go under, and not only under, but right under. I believe it will be the German Reich. This is a very different thing from saying that Germany has got to go under; but the German Reich and the Reich idea have been the curse of the world for 75 years, and if we do not stop it this time, we never shall, and they will stop us. The enemy is the German Reich and not merely Nazism, and those who have not yet learned this lesson have learned nothing whatever, and would let us in for a sixth war even if we survive the fifth. […] All possibility of compromise has now gone by, and it has got to be a fight to a finish, and to a real finish. […]I trust that Mr. Mallet will get the most categorical instructions. We have had much more than enough of Dahlerus, Goerdeler, Weissauer and company. (Vansittart to Halifax, 6th of September 1940)

  ***

  Hitler will have no war, but he will be forced into it, not this year but later... (The Jewish Emil Ludwig, Les Annales, June, 1934)

  ***

  It is not true that I wished for war in 1939, neither I nor anyone else in Germany. War was provoked exclusively by those international statesmen who were of Jewish race or who worked in the interests of international Jewry... (Adolf Hitler, Last Will and Testament, April 29, 1945)

  ***

  The Second World War is being fought for the defence of the fundamentals of Judaism. (Statement by Rabbi Felix Mendlesohn, Chicago Sentinel, October 8, 1942).

  ***

  We shall not flag or fail. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender. (Winston Churchill. House of Commons, June 4, 1940)

  ***

  Victory at all costs - Victory in spite of all terrors - Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival. (Churchill, speech, 13 May, 1940)

  ***

  To achieve this victory he (Churchill) was prepared to sacrifice everything, and the sacrifices he did make then left the British co-victors semi-bankrupt, rationed, financially imprisoned in their island concentration camp, their Empire disintegrating, their own country occupied by American troops, and their national economy dependent upon American charity. And what for? That the Germans might be permanently disarmed? Within three or four years, we were begging the Germans to return as quickly as they liked! (Capt. Grenfell, Unconditional Hatred, German War Guilt and the Future of Europe, 1953, p.108)

  The excerpt below illustrates the agency which guided the Second World War:

  ...This weakness of the President [Roosevelt] frequently results in failure on the part of the White House to report all the facts to the Senate and the Congress; its [The Administration] description of the prevailing situation is not always absolutely correct and in conformity with the truth...When I lived in America, I learned that Jewish personalities -- most of them rich donors for the parties -- had easy access to the President. They used to contact him over the head of the Foreign Secretary and the representative at the United Nations and other officials. They were often in a position to alter the entire political line by a single telephone conversation...Stephen Wise...occupied a unique position, not only within American Jewry, but also generally in America...He was a close friend of Wilson...he was also an intimate friend of Roosevelt and had permanent access to him, a factor which naturally affected his relations to other members of the American Administration...

  Directly after this, the President’s car stopped in front of the veranda, and before we could exchange greetings, Roosevelt remarked: “How interesting! Sam Rosenman, Stephen Wise and Nahum Goldman are sitting there discussing what order they should give the President of the United States. Just imagine what amount of money the Nazis would pay to obtain a photo of this scene.” We began to stammer to the effect that there was an urgent message from Europe to be discussed by us, which Rosenman would submit to him on Monday. Roosevelt dismissed him with the words: “This is quite all right, on Monday I shall hear from Sam what I have to do,” and he drove on. (USA, Europe, Israel, Nahum Goldmann, pp. 53, 66-67, 116).

  Period cartoon depicts puppet President Franking Roosev
elt, in Masonic apron with six-pointed star, being controlled by powerful business—probably Jewish—interests. FDR’s crutches are made of dollar signs. WWW.EUROPEANKNIGHTSPROJECT.COM

  Woodrow Wilson had been an obscure politician before he was picked and paid by Paul Warburg (a front for the Rothschilds) to become president in the fateful year 1913 over the popular President Taft, who otherwise might have been re-elected handily. In 1916, Wilson ran on the slogan “He kept us out of war.” (People forget that warmonger Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize was not the first aberration of this kind: Wilson won it in 1919. Roosevelt did not win a prize for his lie: “I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.”--Boston, October 30, 1940)

  Neither President Woodrow Wilson nor President Barack Obama deserved to receive a Nobel Peace Prize, but they did anyway.

  Both Churchill and Roosevelt, by provenance, were Jewish (Churchill through his mother Jenny Jerome; Roosevelt’s ancestors were Rosenfeld and Delano). “It being true that the Delanos are well-known Jews from the Netherlands, President Roosevelt is, from the standpoint of Jewish Heredity Law, as good a Jew as Bernard M. Baruch.” (Dr. von Leers, Letter of May 14, 1939)