Thanks, Phil. I was struck by how much there was, and that I'd never heard of any of it. I do think we're being subjected to the same psyops as WWI and WWII but not the way CJ thinks, when he looks at Germans manipulated into atrocities by Hitler and Goebbels. We in the US were manipulated into atrocities by FDR, Hollywood and the media.
Fascinating. I knew all is not as portrayed, e.g. Pearl Harbour set up to manipulate the US public to back war, just like Lusitania false flag prior. Paperclip after is another dot joined on the page.
Yes, Paperclip is definitely another story. One that certainly gives credibility that the Nazis weren't a home-grown movement, at least the eugenics program. At this point I don't know what to believe, I feel like I'm still in the process of undoing what I thought I knew.
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
When I stumbled on to the Unz.com website a few years ago it really was eye opening.
The "good guys" have been the "bad guys" all along at least in my life time.
David Irving books are also good. He speaks German and did original research with Germans after the war. He had to self publish because he could not find a publisher that would print his books.
Larry Romanoff (also available in The Unz Review + independently as Blue Moon of Shanghai) has amazing work - gobsmacking for me - on this and more including aspects of this PC op I'd never before come across.
I'm very grateful to Tereza for bringing Unz and Larry to my attention... I'd absolutely NO idea about this history; and it's fairly clear why it's neither taught in schools or readily available for general consumption.
Having read several of LR's articles has also confirmed my suspicions about certain folk I've really valued/followed and supported. Was/is a game changer.
History is always incredibly pertinent, educational...if only we can access the truth/facts.
Thanks for letting me know about Larry. And yes that history is always pertinent, if it's the real deal! I used to think history was boring in school, then found out it was only the boring stuff they were teaching--dates, names, who won the war. When you know the real history, it's fascinating.
It makes you wonder what the real history of the early 1800’s actually is since there seems to be a giant gap in many people’s lineages. I feel like there was a major world event hidden from us today. To me, it suggests a lot of people were wiped from the Earth.
A lot of them are freemasons I would imagine, since they tend to have knowledge we don't and such well-documented bloodlines (although that is slowly being scrubbed from the internet).
I read recently that the Nazis were in fact a collaboration between the Ziοnist party and the National Socialists. Hence the name. One of their joint aims was the relocation of Jews to Palestine. After the war the German Generals were executed to stop them from telling the truth. My parents always told me the six milliοn was a lie. They went to Germany after the war as part of an effort to help them rebuild after the carpet bombing of German cities by the Allies. However, my mother realised that their efforts were futile in the face of so much destruction and what she saw was so harrowing, they came home after a short while.
What a brave thing for your parents to have done, Claire. Yes I've read too that the National Socialists weren't Nazis at all, that wasn't an abbreviation for them. And that Nazi comes from Ashkenazi Jews. Hitler's genealogy traces back to the Rothschilds. My recent article on Israel/Hamas gives more verification from Max Igan who referenced The Transfer Agreement, a book on Hitler's expatriation of 20,000 Jews in 1933 to Palestine along with, in today's dollars, $100M of farming and other equipment. The same is happening with Zionist Hamas today. And there are many pre-WWII newspaper clippings that talk about 6M Jews being killed. Here's the recent article and another two talking about this:
Oct 13, 2023·edited Oct 13, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Thank you for your reply and the links which I will look at later. I was reading about poor David Irving recently. Unsurprisingly, I had not heard of him until a few years ago.
Incidentally, my father was a pacifist and refused to join the War Effort. He had to go to prison for 3 months for being a conscientious objector - and suffer the indignity of having a prison record for the rest of his life.
It's a key example I give that to be a conscientious objector, you need to say you're against violence for any reason. But to not object, you need to be willing to commit violence for any reason ... that they give you. Or no reason at all. So it's a Catch-22. As I write about with Gaza, the most and perhaps only justified use of violence is to defend yourself, your family, your community. We've turned that into terrorism with human shields, and call mercenary soldiers who kill for a paycheck ethical. It negates whether you're engaging in violence to protect sovereignty or extend empire.
Indeed, self-defence is the only justifiable excuse, but that too has been hijacked! I look forward to reading more of your articles as I have only just found your Substack.
I'm reading the first one now and came across this quote:
"Among other surprising facts, he notes that although Jews were just 1% of the total population, even five years after Hitler had come to power and implemented various anti-Semitic policies, they still apparently owned “something like a third of the real property” in that country, with the great bulk of these vast holdings having been acquired from desperate, starving Germans in the terrible years of the early 1920s. Thus, much of Germany’s 99% German population had recently been dispossessed of the assets they had built up over generations…
"Bryant also candidly notes the enormous Jewish presence in the leadership of the Communist movements that had temporarily seized power after World War I, both in major portions of Germany and in nearby Hungary. This was an ominous parallel to the overwhelmingly Jewish Bolsheviks who had gained control of Russia and then butchered or expelled that country’s traditional Russian and German ruling elites, and therefore a major source of Nazi fears."
It has been a while since I read these but somewhere else I had also read that still after all this time since WWII Germany is STILL paying restitution to Israel to pay for Germany's sins against the Jews in WW2!!! And now in most recent history Jewish neocons without any doubt in my mind destroyed the Nord Stream Pipeline which Germany needed to remain an industrial productive nation. It is sad. The same thing is happening to USA. Literally fire sales everywhere. From weak hands to strong.
I've been putting so many notes from the first Unz article into a new episode that I really might as well be quoting the whole thing! Unz is such a good writer and researcher.
Do you think Jewish neocons set Biden up to give that order? I wouldn't doubt it but there are other players. One, he sees Ukraine as his own playground so it wouldn't take much to convince him. Even his addled brain was already saying, "We have ways" when journalists asked how he'd prevent it from going online.
But I also wonder if China is playing both sides of the chessboard. Chinese oligarchs (who are also Jewish) certainly have Biden in their pocket. The US is running out of weapons, money, oil reserves because of Ukraine. Now Russia is more dependent on sales to China. And the US threat to them is weak indeed.
Even after what the ruling class did to China in the Opium Wars, the China we know today is clearly a project of the globalists. Mayo was a Yali and that is a huge clue.
Some people think the Chinese are smart enough to not let a ZOG happen in their country. George Soros is one Jewish oligarch that does not play well with the Chinese. Even before the Ukraine war began Rick Wiles (Christain preacher newscaster that trys to awaken people to the Zionist threat) had a couple of shows on his Trunews.com saying there was an Israeli billionaire that wanted to create a "New Israel" out of Ukraine. Now that over 450 thousand Slavic men have been killed or wounded and millions of Ukrainians have fled to never return maybe the Israeli billionaire will have his New Israel with the help of Black Rock. Yes it is plain to see that we have been had by the Chinese. They are patient beasts and take their time. All those weapon systems going to Ukraine will be destroyed or sold for profit. Endless resources from USA wasted. Death to America with a thousand cuts.
And Matt Ehret writes a lot about Zi having excised the ZOG threat with the ban on Soros and getting many Chinese agents out of government. But the buying up of agricultural land and residential real estate doesn't bode well, imo. Using Chinese production for the benefit of the Chinese would speak more for sovereign intent.
And may we always remember what Cynthia McKinney (as well as legions of others with similar messages) has said.:
"Billions of dollars have been spent on political propaganda, but not a single important issue has been addressed. The closest the campaign has come to a political issue is which candidate can grovel the lowest at the feet of Israeli prime minister Netanyahu."
Thanks for going back to this article, Geoff! Great McKinney quote but I don't think it will be that way from here on out. Like Fauci, Netanyahu's puppet will be replaced with a new face, some masters.
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
My basic assumption is that what we have been told about WWII is about as accurate as what we are being told about the current war in Ukraine, which is to say it's all lies. I'm no scholar; but my suspicion is that if, as they say, "All wars are bankers wars," then the cause of WWII will be connected with Hitler's treatment of the banks and his management of the German monetary system and economy.
Others have suggested that WWII's purpose was mainly to complete the work started in WWI: the dismantling of royal imperialism. WWI had achieved the dismantling of all the Continental-European-based empires. Only the British Empire was left. American fascists financed the rise of Hitler to fight a proxy war for them against the British Empire. Hitler was happy to accept American money but in Britain he saw an ally, not an enemy. In May 1941 Hitler betrayed his Wall Street backers by sending Rudolf Hess to England with a peace treaty. Hitler's intention was to replace Churchill and to restore the fascist Duke of Windsor to the throne. A few days later, Hitler invaded Russia, his grand plan being to create a British-German-Russian axis to dominate the globe; but neither Churchill, Stalin nor Roosevelt were willing to be supplanted by Hitler. Roosevelt suddenly did an about face and started preparing to enter the war, which continued for another four years.
Whatever the truth of the matter, I'm sure that - as usual - nothing is what it seems!
Really interesting, Tirion. One thing all these sources glossed over was how Hitler got out of the crippling debt and sanctions when the democratic Weimar leaders couldn't. Buchanan says he did it by bluff but I don't know what that means. We know he kicked out Rothschild and created his own sovereign currency. So I don't know how that fits with accepting American money. He definitely didn't get enough to buy Germany out of debt. If he was creating his own currency, did he need American dollars? At least before Britain declared war?
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
What Hitler would have wanted was not dollars, but gold - probably made available to him through the good offices of his old sidekick Hjalmar Schacht at The Bank of International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland.
Was it Hitler who kicked out the Rothschilds or his Weimar predecessors? We always hear about Hitler being Jewish as a psychoanalysis of his self-hating syndrome but is there any evidence he was actually related to the Rothschilds, as some have claimed? Did the change to a sovereign currency precede him and was it his job to return Germany to the clutches of the BIS?
my grandfather was up for the Czech draft for WW1 & had to report to the consulate while he was traveling in New York so he drank lots & lots of coffee to get an irregular heartbeat & threw his passport in New York harbor to avoid it then travelled to Bolivia to work as a civil engineer at a mining project … WW2 he lost all his assets but escaped the family to Ecuador where he worked as the head civil engineer for the railroads…
What a history for your family, kitten. I did just listen to this and watched intermittently. What General said something to the effect that we've been fighting the wrong side, after the war was over?
Very interesting in terms of Ukraine being the new home of the Khazarians. I wonder if that was before or after? Astonishing piece of history. Thanks for sharing it, I think.
Thanks for posting that link ksa. Watching now ... mostly new information for me, and all disturbing. Feeling darker than black pilled about the future of our species.
It's been a while since I studied this but, IIRC, it was Hitler who kicked the Rothschilds out and reformed the monetary system, leading to a growth miracle in the German economy.
I'm now quite suspicious that the Hitler show was well staged and orchestrated too. Like many other political hotshots, he came out of obscurity, rose like the morning star, worked miracles, then conveniently "committed suicide" after his job was done.
He certainly did not act alone. And that goes for FDR, Stalin, Churchill,and all the rest of the big names too.
Patton said that we killed the wrong pig. I think he may have been onto something.
There is a lot of truth in what you wrote. It's clear to me that WW1 was part of the project to impose the League of Nations on the rest of us. Another part of the puzzle is that the US did not go along with it and so it was punished by financing WW2 as well as the USSR and others and the globalists got their United Nations as well. I think one of the Rockefellers donated land in NYC to build the UN building. Political Communism was a rich boys project and an excuse to impose a worldwide tyranny under "humanitarian" pretexts and the murderous, lying skunks are still getting away with their hideous plans.
Not only , "See how bad the bear is," but "why don't you and it have a fight?" The winners are the finaciers of the fight and they finance their version of history as well. It's similar to the way big pharma finances studies that prove whatever they diesire.
Yes and no. The main "winners" of that and the other wars were a certain group of thuggish international banking parasites. And they have consistently ruled with iron fists in fascist fashion but under cover of misleading titles such as "Communism" and "Democracy" and various other farcical forms of "public and private partnership."
Another very good article; (how do you do it?). Glad to see Rothbard's "Revionsim for Our Time" listed here which I consider a classic. Here's a great quote from that piece.:
“Revisionism as applied to World War II and its origins (as also for previous wars) has the general function of bringing historical truth to an American and a world public that had been drugged by wartime lies and propaganda.
The least of the lessons that revisionism can teach has already been thoroughly learned ( ed: by a select few): that Germany and Japan are not uniquely "aggressor nations," doomed from birth to menace the peace of the world.
Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.
If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler's Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions…”
Thanks for the quotes, links and compliment, Geoff! Intellectual fraud is an excellent term and yes, finding out this was a lie just leads to more searching questions.
I use Fascist in Mussolini's paraphrased meaning of the collaboration of power-concentrating oligarchs and power-distributing government. And yes, bankers are the former.
You truly are a special thinker. Most folks seem to approach the concept of fascism (and Fascism) in a vague way and never define their use of the term. Your defintion of the term is in line with the way I use it and it seems to me that most large governments are in fact, fascist or soon devolve into some form of it. Our own vaunted rulers and government have always been more or less fascist, in fact.
Yes, I think we'd be hard-pressed to come up with an example of a gov't that isn't fascist by this definition. Iceland?
And thanks for the compliment! An ex-boyfriend once told me, "It must be fun living in your head." I don't think he meant it as a compliment but, in fact, it is!
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
What I find ridiculous today is that we have the UN as a result of the second world war in order to keep the peace, not doing so.
They haven't brokered peace to prevent war in Vietnam, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Syria, and now Ukraine.
Why not?
They hide behind the "rules".
The security council is run by a few nations with veto power.
So nothing will happen if any of those nations are looking to have war.
How is this democratic? There should be no single veto privelage at all.
But don't worry, the UN is cool with taking power when it comes to helping big pharma in health propaganda and climate change.
Are the people seeing this scam? Perhaps once the Ukraine war is over, we can start to look into the UN and ask why they couldn't bring peace before so many have been killed and injured.
It's the time where the blatant corruption which hides behind banal rules and regulations designed to avoid the truth in healthcare, bringing peace, and economics are being more and more apparent.
Yes, I remember a truck with signs all over it that the UN was the problem, years ago. I dismissed it until I did the research on the veto power. Completely defeats the purpose of a federation of nations. It's certainly a tool.
"What I find ridiculous today is that we have the UN as a result of the second world war in order to keep the peace, not doing so."
The UN was brought to us by the usual suspects and for the usual reasons. That peace as we proles think of it was always merely a pretext; a selling point.
A Very Brief History of the Origins of the United Nations.
Many of the key originators of the UN were Americans with ties to international banking and international communism.
Harvard Law School student and State Department official, Alger Hiss was an executive secretary of the 1944 Dumbarton Oaks Conference, where representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom formulated proposals for a world organization that became the basis for the United Nations. Hiss was secretary-general of the San Francisco United Nations Conference on International Organization (the United Nations Charter Conference), which began on April 25, 1945. As a U.S. State Department official, he was a key originator of the United Nations, co- authoring the UN Charter with CFR stooges Palvosky, Dalton, Trumbull, and others. Hiss submitted the Charter to the US Senate which signed it without even reading it and he was the first acting UN Secretary-General. He was later convicted and imprisoned as a Soviet spy.
US Secretary of State Cordell Hull and his staff drafted the "Charter of the United Nations" in mid-1943 and later that year Hull served as United States delegate to the Moscow Conference. He had been Secretary of State under FDR who appointed him to lead the American delegation to the London Economic Conference. Hull also chaired the February, 1942 Advisory Committee on Postwar Foreign Policy. In 1945 Hull was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "co-initiating the United Nations” and was referred to by President Roosevelt, Communsit supporter and sympathizer, as the "Father of the United Nations."
Henry Morgenthau Jr. was instrumental in dragging the US into WW1, and as a Secretary of the Treasury under FDR, was a strong supporter of Stalin despite that thug’s long history of hideous crimes, and he played the central role in financing US participation in World War II. In 1944 he headed the US representation to the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, and as chairman, opened it. The Bretton Woods Conference was the keystone of postwar international finance establishing the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) which pegged all international currencies to the dollar. The Bank and the UN have almost the same agendas and membership. In 1943 he wrote, “A United Nations Bank for Reconstruction and Development.” He was also a founding member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) a group that advocates “One World” polices.
Harry D White was an assistant Secretary of the Treasury and treasury “economist” under Henry Morgenthau, Jr., another Commie sympathizer, “internationalist, and” co-founder and the first head of the International Monetary Fund, He was also a co-founder of the World Bank and he authored the plans for a United Nations Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He was the senior American official at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference, and reportedly dominated the conference and imposed his vision of post-war financial institutions on it. He was also a Soviet secret agent—"the most highly-placed asset the Soviets possessed in the American government." White succeeded in subverting American policy to favor Soviet interests over those of the U.S.
Harry Hopkins, FDR’s Presidential Special Assistant, helped prepare the Atlantic Conference which was a precursor meeting to the United Nations. He helped Roosevelt establish the United Nations and was a major supporter and probably a spy for the Soviet Union.
The UN is essentially a creation of elite commie bankers with the goal, no doubt, for them to rule the world.
Thanks for that snapshot history, Geoff. I have a vague memory that communism was a short-lived experiment in the USSR. Shortly after the royals were deposed, it got taken over by a totalitarian regime--which seems bound to happen if you centralize authority to distribute the products of labor.
Most people who identified as communist or Marxist were, imo, reacting to capitalism as a system that makes the rich richer. They wanted a needs-based economy in the sense of 'To everyone according to their need, from everyone according to their ability.' I don't think that works, personally, but it would still make elite commie bankers a contradiction in terms, I think.
It's another of the false dichotomies we've been given, capitalism vs. communism. Neither one is a system of reciprocity.
I'm sure you know the answer to this but who funded Stalin? I remember he was brought in from the outside but I forget who.
(Banned)Aug 28, 2023·edited Aug 28, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
“Who funded Stalin?”
The usual uber-rich international banking and industrial parasites who supported Marx and the other Commies. Here’s a link to a very nice and super brief summary (10 second read).
Scroll down to Western Support of the Soviet Union which consists of a few brief paragraphs, (sentences, really).
It's been several decades since I've read any of Anthony Sutton but I believe his book, "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: The Remarkable True Story of the American Capitalists Who Financed the Russian Communists" was pretty decent and I'm pretty sure he addressed Stalin's Western support there. Dodd's book, "School of Darkness," exposes the hoi oligoi mucky muck "capitalists" of New York CIty who made Communism fashionable in the first half of the past century.
Even the Commie cartoonist had a clue. Here's the caption to one of his cartoons.:
Cartoon by Robert Minor in St. Louis Post-Dispatch (1911). Karl Marx surrounded by an appreciative audience of Wall Street financiers: John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City Bank, and Morgan partner George W. Perkins. Immediately behind Karl Marx is Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.
How does a starving blockaded Germany, devastated by WW I build enough planes, tanks, munitions, etc to build a military capable of threatening the world? Which is the official narrative of WW II.
Apparently you can build a top notch war machine from scratch in a relatively short time frame.
German economy was devastated by the draconian provisions of the Armistice that they had to sign to end WW I. That was 1918. During the 1920's the German economy was in shambles which laid the ground for Hitler to come to power. He turned the economy around, but even at the beginnings of his land grabs, his military knew they could not back up what he was doing, for example when he directed German military forces to enter the Rhineland, which directly contravened the Treaty of Versailles. It was a bluff, and if France and England had called his bluff the Germans would have had to pull back. Germany spent at least an entire decade (1930') building planes, tanks, munitions, but even then they were not a threat to the world, only to some countries in Europe.
Interesting, so that's what Buchanan meant by a bluff. From these sources, though, it doesn't seem like he was enacting land grabs but (like Putin) returning portions of other countries that had been German, whose inhabitants spoke German and identified as German, and who overwhelmingly wanted to reunite because they were being persecuted by their new 'owner.' And it doesn't seem like that would be the case if Germans were still starving. How did he turn the economy around without contravening the Treaty of Versailles and its debt and sanctions?
Once again, you nailed these key points.:"... (like Putin) returning portions of other countries that had been German, whose inhabitants spoke German and identified as German, and who overwhelmingly wanted to reunite because they were being persecuted by their new 'owner.'"
If only we could clone the way you think and find a way to implant it in the masses...
"How did he turn the economy around without contravening the Treaty of Versailles and its debt and sanctions?"
Very short answer is that he had a little help from his friends. Among them were some powerful and energetic Zionist factions and certain international bankers. (Most of whom no doubt just looked the other way when he and Stalin were allies working together to contravene the "Treaty.")
I believe they had already inflated their way out of the debt. I'd have to read more of the details of German history during that period. Hitler rose to power in early 1930's, so the debt may have already been paid off by then. I don't know how he revved up the economy so quickly though. I recall reading a biography (I believe it was) of the American heading up the US embassy in Berlin in the early 1930's and how impressed they were of what Hitler was doing for the economy and the German people (at that time).
Somewhere around here I have research I did into the Weimar hyperinflation. Oh, it's in that linked article I did on CJ:
Not only were Germans required to pay reparations for losing the war their Emperor forced them to fight, but they also had to pay back the debt that was their slave price. These were denominated in gold, of which Germany had none, and so had to buy foreign gold-backed currency at whatever price speculators were willing to take for the German mark. Then French and Belgian troops invaded to oversee shipments of coal directly as payment, so the workers slowed-down to a crawl.
Finally the financiers issued Rentenmarks (mortgage marks) pegged to the price of gold and the US dollar. Mortgages were reinstated at 25 billion times their value in the old marks, so the advantage of inflation in paying off debt was lost. Government bonds were promised at 2.5 billion of their original value but only after all reparations had been paid. The standard of living index was judged not relevant. They decided that bankruptcies, foreclosures, hunger, strikes, violence and insurrection were preferable to defaulting on foreign debts.
In Web of Debt, Ellen Brown quotes economist Henry C K Liu that:
"The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, at a time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began."
And she quotes Hitler in saying:
"We were not foolish enough to try to make a currency [backed by] gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done or goods produced. . . . we laugh at the time our national financiers held the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank."
What happened between 1938 when Germany had a thriving economy without the British banking system and Hitler was Time magazine’s Man of the Year, and 1939 when Hitler ‘invaded’ Poland? Does it compare, in provocations and proxy wars, to Putin’s ‘invasion’ of Ukraine today? Surely the bankers and foreign debtors didn’t let Germany repudiate its debt and walk away?
To say nothing of the raw materials required to manufacture the new German war machine. It would seem like a whole bunch of rich countries business owners would have had to supply Germany with all sorts of goods and equipment and materials to ramp up a new threat from the ashes of WW I.
I wonder, though. I thought that one of the consequences of the Nord Streams' destruction was that German steel mills would shut down, along with petrofertilizer factories for the byproducts. I may be wrong, though.
Once again, another great summary. I do not pretend to know the details since finance and economics bores me to tears and worse, but from the volumes I've read a long time ago, I'd say you did a fine job there.
Again, Hitler, like Stalin, (and FDR and Churchill) did not do it alone.
The historical context for looking at the ongoing revisionism of reality (is it revisionism when it's being written and rewritten in real time?) is so important to get; yes there is precedence for what we are living through. The sanctified version of WWII, simplified with clear heroes and clear villains, that we were all taught, remains a sacred cow for many (similar the Polio vaccine farce). When big, longstanding linchpin narratives get enough holes in them - even true believers can't get them to stand up.
Thank you Tereza- much of what you've attached is new to me. (always learn from you!) Appreciate it. Best.
I've been finding that term 'revisionist' confusing. It seems to be used by those who are trying to unearth the true history, but should apply to the mainstream versions.
Yes, CJ and Mattais agree on more than they disagree on. They both see Germany as just how it's been presented.
Thanks for that kind compliment, Kathleen. It was new to me also, especially on France.
My take is that the term, "revisionist," was used in a derogatory manner to criticize those who dared question the usual narrative, which of course truly does need to be revised.
It is also meant to be confusing just like "fascist" and "anti-vaxxer."
I suspect they took the term and ran with it., but tha's only conjecture on my part. For example, I now consider myself an "anti-vaxxer" and I wear that label proudly.
Also, read Sigmund Freud's nephew's, Edward Bernays, book on "Propaganda". Especially Chapter VI starting at page 92. Here is one important quote, I am sure some of it you will recognize from todays political world. "Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses." https://archive.org/details/bernays-edward-l.-propaganda-1928-1936_202107/page/113/mode/2up?q=democracy
You can quickly get the gist and calibre of his work from interviews with him on YouTube.
While you are there view the 2 interviews with Norman Dodd on YouTube. That will provide a quick and fundamental insight.
You might also delve into Dave Emory's Spitfire List, for his indefatigable interviews with the authors of many books (e.g. the Seagraves, authors of "Gold Warriors"). He has a slight pro-zionist bias, I think, but you can learn a great deal.
It also includes a link to information about Eisenhower's death-camps along the Rhine (Cf. Nazi camps).
Your quest for insight by improving your historical knowledge might also be helped by reading Edward Black on The Transfer Agreement, where Zionists and Nazis worked together before WW2, in helping Jews move from Germany to Israel, including a mechanism for taking their wealth with them! ... and including a boat carrying both a Nazi flag AND an Israeli flag! Contrast that with the fate of German Jews seeking refuge in the US at the same time, a whole liner full of them turned away.
Excellent analysis, Jonathan. Your mother's response is especially interesting. And this topic and particular fact--that Churchill initiated the bombing of civilians that's been 'all's fair' ever since--was going to be the starting point of my next episode. So this will fit nicely.
Very cool that you did a piece on the same discussion. And I'm thinking we're around the same age--I was born in '57.
I also loved the discussion of meter at the end. Poetry was my main course for most of my life and I'm a meter nerd. That little extra syllable at the end of the odd lines really keeps it from being sing-song and gives finality to the even ones.
Okay, now to watch the Feli video while cleaning out the freezer!
Thanks for taking the trouble. This was the first article I wrote, and was therefore before I organised them into 2 groups, serious thinking, and more practical, trivial stuff.
So the version you read is without the comments it originally accrued. If you read the comments here ...
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Yes, I've read that the WW I armistice agreement alone was enough to cause WW II because it destroyed the German economy and laid the ground for a fascist leader to come to power.
Even though the US stayed out of the war initially, when they entered the war, they went whole hog into bombing the sh*t out of Germany, Japan, and Italy, and they've been bombing the sh*t out of countries ever since. The US has no hesitation about killing civilians with bombs as Curis Lemay made very clear. And it was the US that first came up with the idea of "total war", meaning the killing, raping, and burning of civilians and their property. It was General Sherman in the US Civil War who first used the term "total war" and went on to burn a huge swath of Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.
Aug 27, 2023·edited Aug 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
I, too, came across the Unz series this year in a serendipitous way but I can’t remember how. Like you though, I paid attention, which is what pulled me into your post. One of the heartening things to me in this whole Covid debacle for those of us who have woken up, or who are becoming awake, is the realisation - as if walking into an illuminated room - of how brainwashed we are. If you are inveigled into state education then they have got you from the get go. How many then, once they have embarked on their busy lives getting work, raising families etc get to question what they have been taught, even as much of it, I concede, was taught in good faith? In my case the Theory of Evolution was one I had to go back and revisit thirty years after I had left formal education, but then I had the time.
So it makes sense that anyone - like the journalists and scholars you mention - who runs counter to the state (The Powers that Be) narrative - gets ‘disappeared’ or ‘cancelled.’ Back in the post war period such events were pretty easily concealed, but now there’s les and less places for the perpetrators of these lies to hide. That won’t necessarily stop them as the intimidation of anyone who was party to the publication of ‘The Satanic Verses’ in the late. 1980s demonstrates. But there wasn’t the light around even then as there Is now. Many of us who dabble in the metaphysical realms can feel the energy shifting. The absurdities of the Covid era and the official narrative’s ridiculous explanations are just the tip of an iceberg that embraces the lies of hundreds of years, except that it’s so bloody obvious now. But still, like then, most will not speak up because of fear of reprisals and we have not yet reached the tipping point where it feels safe to come over to ‘our side’. Even though the light is becoming dazzling we have to keep on keeping on. This is not the time for complacency but there is room for some encouragement. I am mindful of the phrase I learnt when I first dabbled in Buddhism: ‘If one mind can reach ten minds and those ten minds can reach ten minds each…’ Slowly, slowly catchee monkey or ‘One last push’ as the military parlance has it. Thank you for your contributions in this war.
I have been looking into exactly what you are wondering. And I can tell you, the "good" guys are a lie. The "bad" guys did exist for sure. But when you look at for instance what happened to actually quite a lot of condemned war criminals after the trials, you have to ask what do you call those, that employ the "bad" guys. Obviously those cannot be the "good" guys, right? Just one quick thought: What would this world have looked like, if the survivors of the Operation Overlord, the Normandy landings, had learned in the early 50s that their tax payer dollars went to the salaries of hundred of thousands of former Nazis?
Great points, Ghost, and I'll definitely check out your Substack. Have you read the sequels to this on Churchill's Atrocities and The Trials of David Irving? I'll link them just in case. Yes, this is a deep, deep rabbit hole and it forks in many directions: the eugenics program, medical experimentation, and definitely Bernays the inventor of Psyops!
"What would this world have looked like, if the survivors of the Operation Overlord, the Normandy landings, had learned in the early 50s that their tax payer dollars went to the salaries of hundred of thousands of former Nazis?"
What would people think if they knew that their taxes went to support FDR's government which did everything in its power to support the former "Communist" enemy? What would people think if they knew that the wars were a racket, just as MG Butler wrote? And unnecessary as Pat Buchanan wrote? What would they think if some Zionist factions lwith the National Socialists? What would they think if they learned that most of what they think they know could be classified as bogus?
I bet, unfortunately, that most would think what they've always thunk.
Thank you for this compendium of alternative sources for this crucial period of recent world history
Thanks, Phil. I was struck by how much there was, and that I'd never heard of any of it. I do think we're being subjected to the same psyops as WWI and WWII but not the way CJ thinks, when he looks at Germans manipulated into atrocities by Hitler and Goebbels. We in the US were manipulated into atrocities by FDR, Hollywood and the media.
"I do think we're being subjected to the same psyops as WWI and WWII..."
Without a doubt.
Fascinating. I knew all is not as portrayed, e.g. Pearl Harbour set up to manipulate the US public to back war, just like Lusitania false flag prior. Paperclip after is another dot joined on the page.
Yes, Paperclip is definitely another story. One that certainly gives credibility that the Nazis weren't a home-grown movement, at least the eugenics program. At this point I don't know what to believe, I feel like I'm still in the process of undoing what I thought I knew.
When I stumbled on to the Unz.com website a few years ago it really was eye opening.
The "good guys" have been the "bad guys" all along at least in my life time.
David Irving books are also good. He speaks German and did original research with Germans after the war. He had to self publish because he could not find a publisher that would print his books.
Many of those Paperclip scientists had to have been plants throughout WWII. When they came to America, they weren't treated like the enemy at all!!!
They were extremely helpful assets.
Larry Romanoff (also available in The Unz Review + independently as Blue Moon of Shanghai) has amazing work - gobsmacking for me - on this and more including aspects of this PC op I'd never before come across.
I'm very grateful to Tereza for bringing Unz and Larry to my attention... I'd absolutely NO idea about this history; and it's fairly clear why it's neither taught in schools or readily available for general consumption.
Having read several of LR's articles has also confirmed my suspicions about certain folk I've really valued/followed and supported. Was/is a game changer.
History is always incredibly pertinent, educational...if only we can access the truth/facts.
Thanks for letting me know about Larry. And yes that history is always pertinent, if it's the real deal! I used to think history was boring in school, then found out it was only the boring stuff they were teaching--dates, names, who won the war. When you know the real history, it's fascinating.
It makes you wonder what the real history of the early 1800’s actually is since there seems to be a giant gap in many people’s lineages. I feel like there was a major world event hidden from us today. To me, it suggests a lot of people were wiped from the Earth.
But at who's hands?
A lot of them are freemasons I would imagine, since they tend to have knowledge we don't and such well-documented bloodlines (although that is slowly being scrubbed from the internet).
I read recently that the Nazis were in fact a collaboration between the Ziοnist party and the National Socialists. Hence the name. One of their joint aims was the relocation of Jews to Palestine. After the war the German Generals were executed to stop them from telling the truth. My parents always told me the six milliοn was a lie. They went to Germany after the war as part of an effort to help them rebuild after the carpet bombing of German cities by the Allies. However, my mother realised that their efforts were futile in the face of so much destruction and what she saw was so harrowing, they came home after a short while.
What a brave thing for your parents to have done, Claire. Yes I've read too that the National Socialists weren't Nazis at all, that wasn't an abbreviation for them. And that Nazi comes from Ashkenazi Jews. Hitler's genealogy traces back to the Rothschilds. My recent article on Israel/Hamas gives more verification from Max Igan who referenced The Transfer Agreement, a book on Hitler's expatriation of 20,000 Jews in 1933 to Palestine along with, in today's dollars, $100M of farming and other equipment. The same is happening with Zionist Hamas today. And there are many pre-WWII newspaper clippings that talk about 6M Jews being killed. Here's the recent article and another two talking about this:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/gaza-jailbreak-or-trap
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-trials-of-david-irving
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/churchills-atrocities
Thank you for reading!
Thank you for your reply and the links which I will look at later. I was reading about poor David Irving recently. Unsurprisingly, I had not heard of him until a few years ago.
Incidentally, my father was a pacifist and refused to join the War Effort. He had to go to prison for 3 months for being a conscientious objector - and suffer the indignity of having a prison record for the rest of his life.
It's a key example I give that to be a conscientious objector, you need to say you're against violence for any reason. But to not object, you need to be willing to commit violence for any reason ... that they give you. Or no reason at all. So it's a Catch-22. As I write about with Gaza, the most and perhaps only justified use of violence is to defend yourself, your family, your community. We've turned that into terrorism with human shields, and call mercenary soldiers who kill for a paycheck ethical. It negates whether you're engaging in violence to protect sovereignty or extend empire.
Indeed, self-defence is the only justifiable excuse, but that too has been hijacked! I look forward to reading more of your articles as I have only just found your Substack.
Tereza you sure have done a deep dive here! Good for you.
A couple more reads and listens from Unz:
https://www.unz.com/runz/hitler-churchill-the-holocaust-and-the-war-in-ukraine/
https://www.unz.com/runz/why-everything-you-know-about-world-war-ii-is-wrong/
https://www.unz.com/runz/the-remarkable-historiography-of-david-irving/
Great sources, tanzenkran, thanks for sending!
I'm reading the first one now and came across this quote:
"Among other surprising facts, he notes that although Jews were just 1% of the total population, even five years after Hitler had come to power and implemented various anti-Semitic policies, they still apparently owned “something like a third of the real property” in that country, with the great bulk of these vast holdings having been acquired from desperate, starving Germans in the terrible years of the early 1920s. Thus, much of Germany’s 99% German population had recently been dispossessed of the assets they had built up over generations…
"Bryant also candidly notes the enormous Jewish presence in the leadership of the Communist movements that had temporarily seized power after World War I, both in major portions of Germany and in nearby Hungary. This was an ominous parallel to the overwhelmingly Jewish Bolsheviks who had gained control of Russia and then butchered or expelled that country’s traditional Russian and German ruling elites, and therefore a major source of Nazi fears."
It has been a while since I read these but somewhere else I had also read that still after all this time since WWII Germany is STILL paying restitution to Israel to pay for Germany's sins against the Jews in WW2!!! And now in most recent history Jewish neocons without any doubt in my mind destroyed the Nord Stream Pipeline which Germany needed to remain an industrial productive nation. It is sad. The same thing is happening to USA. Literally fire sales everywhere. From weak hands to strong.
I've been putting so many notes from the first Unz article into a new episode that I really might as well be quoting the whole thing! Unz is such a good writer and researcher.
Do you think Jewish neocons set Biden up to give that order? I wouldn't doubt it but there are other players. One, he sees Ukraine as his own playground so it wouldn't take much to convince him. Even his addled brain was already saying, "We have ways" when journalists asked how he'd prevent it from going online.
But I also wonder if China is playing both sides of the chessboard. Chinese oligarchs (who are also Jewish) certainly have Biden in their pocket. The US is running out of weapons, money, oil reserves because of Ukraine. Now Russia is more dependent on sales to China. And the US threat to them is weak indeed.
Even after what the ruling class did to China in the Opium Wars, the China we know today is clearly a project of the globalists. Mayo was a Yali and that is a huge clue.
Some people think the Chinese are smart enough to not let a ZOG happen in their country. George Soros is one Jewish oligarch that does not play well with the Chinese. Even before the Ukraine war began Rick Wiles (Christain preacher newscaster that trys to awaken people to the Zionist threat) had a couple of shows on his Trunews.com saying there was an Israeli billionaire that wanted to create a "New Israel" out of Ukraine. Now that over 450 thousand Slavic men have been killed or wounded and millions of Ukrainians have fled to never return maybe the Israeli billionaire will have his New Israel with the help of Black Rock. Yes it is plain to see that we have been had by the Chinese. They are patient beasts and take their time. All those weapon systems going to Ukraine will be destroyed or sold for profit. Endless resources from USA wasted. Death to America with a thousand cuts.
And Matt Ehret writes a lot about Zi having excised the ZOG threat with the ban on Soros and getting many Chinese agents out of government. But the buying up of agricultural land and residential real estate doesn't bode well, imo. Using Chinese production for the benefit of the Chinese would speak more for sovereign intent.
"The same thing is happening to USA. Literally fire sales everywhere. "
It is gratifying that people seem to be noticing these sorts of things.
Thank you.
T(Z)C...If you liked that quote, you simply must read Reed's "Controversy of ZIon."
Pat Buchanan has some good articles on the subject as is his "Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War."
https://archive.org/details/ChurchillHitlerAndTheUnnecessaryWar"
And may we always remember what Cynthia McKinney (as well as legions of others with similar messages) has said.:
"Billions of dollars have been spent on political propaganda, but not a single important issue has been addressed. The closest the campaign has come to a political issue is which candidate can grovel the lowest at the feet of Israeli prime minister Netanyahu."
Cynthia McKinney On Leadership
October 2, 2012
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/10/02/cynthia-mckinney-on-leadership/
Thanks for going back to this article, Geoff! Great McKinney quote but I don't think it will be that way from here on out. Like Fauci, Netanyahu's puppet will be replaced with a new face, some masters.
Terrifically organized comprehensive piece. There's sure a lot to chew on.
My basic assumption is that what we have been told about WWII is about as accurate as what we are being told about the current war in Ukraine, which is to say it's all lies. I'm no scholar; but my suspicion is that if, as they say, "All wars are bankers wars," then the cause of WWII will be connected with Hitler's treatment of the banks and his management of the German monetary system and economy.
Others have suggested that WWII's purpose was mainly to complete the work started in WWI: the dismantling of royal imperialism. WWI had achieved the dismantling of all the Continental-European-based empires. Only the British Empire was left. American fascists financed the rise of Hitler to fight a proxy war for them against the British Empire. Hitler was happy to accept American money but in Britain he saw an ally, not an enemy. In May 1941 Hitler betrayed his Wall Street backers by sending Rudolf Hess to England with a peace treaty. Hitler's intention was to replace Churchill and to restore the fascist Duke of Windsor to the throne. A few days later, Hitler invaded Russia, his grand plan being to create a British-German-Russian axis to dominate the globe; but neither Churchill, Stalin nor Roosevelt were willing to be supplanted by Hitler. Roosevelt suddenly did an about face and started preparing to enter the war, which continued for another four years.
Whatever the truth of the matter, I'm sure that - as usual - nothing is what it seems!
Really interesting, Tirion. One thing all these sources glossed over was how Hitler got out of the crippling debt and sanctions when the democratic Weimar leaders couldn't. Buchanan says he did it by bluff but I don't know what that means. We know he kicked out Rothschild and created his own sovereign currency. So I don't know how that fits with accepting American money. He definitely didn't get enough to buy Germany out of debt. If he was creating his own currency, did he need American dollars? At least before Britain declared war?
I agree completely--nothing is as it seems!
What Hitler would have wanted was not dollars, but gold - probably made available to him through the good offices of his old sidekick Hjalmar Schacht at The Bank of International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland.
"Follow the money"!
Was it Hitler who kicked out the Rothschilds or his Weimar predecessors? We always hear about Hitler being Jewish as a psychoanalysis of his self-hating syndrome but is there any evidence he was actually related to the Rothschilds, as some have claimed? Did the change to a sovereign currency precede him and was it his job to return Germany to the clutches of the BIS?
have you seen the white rabbit stuff… started to watch it but it got too depressing fast…
https://whiterabbit.substack.com/p/the-real-holocaust-caused-by-jewish?publication_id=355867&isFreemail=true
my grandfather was up for the Czech draft for WW1 & had to report to the consulate while he was traveling in New York so he drank lots & lots of coffee to get an irregular heartbeat & threw his passport in New York harbor to avoid it then travelled to Bolivia to work as a civil engineer at a mining project … WW2 he lost all his assets but escaped the family to Ecuador where he worked as the head civil engineer for the railroads…
I haven't seen that. I did watch the Europa video they link. I'll check it out and see if I can stand it :-(
What a history for your family, kitten. I did just listen to this and watched intermittently. What General said something to the effect that we've been fighting the wrong side, after the war was over?
Very interesting in terms of Ukraine being the new home of the Khazarians. I wonder if that was before or after? Astonishing piece of history. Thanks for sharing it, I think.
Thanks for posting that link ksa. Watching now ... mostly new information for me, and all disturbing. Feeling darker than black pilled about the future of our species.
When it gets dark, please return to comedy! Freedom toons - A Brief History of Socialism (3 mins)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZz2HF5KtrY
Communism and fascism are both Khazarian/Sabbatean divide-and-conquer psyops?
It's been a while since I studied this but, IIRC, it was Hitler who kicked the Rothschilds out and reformed the monetary system, leading to a growth miracle in the German economy.
I don't know about Hitler's genetics, sorry!
I'm now quite suspicious that the Hitler show was well staged and orchestrated too. Like many other political hotshots, he came out of obscurity, rose like the morning star, worked miracles, then conveniently "committed suicide" after his job was done.
He certainly did not act alone. And that goes for FDR, Stalin, Churchill,and all the rest of the big names too.
Patton said that we killed the wrong pig. I think he may have been onto something.
There is a lot of truth in what you wrote. It's clear to me that WW1 was part of the project to impose the League of Nations on the rest of us. Another part of the puzzle is that the US did not go along with it and so it was punished by financing WW2 as well as the USSR and others and the globalists got their United Nations as well. I think one of the Rockefellers donated land in NYC to build the UN building. Political Communism was a rich boys project and an excuse to impose a worldwide tyranny under "humanitarian" pretexts and the murderous, lying skunks are still getting away with their hideous plans.
Revisionist history always written by the winners...
Poking the bear repeatedly until the bear rises, then screaming "see how bad the bear is?"
Nothing surprises me anymore in propagandized America.
Not only , "See how bad the bear is," but "why don't you and it have a fight?" The winners are the finaciers of the fight and they finance their version of history as well. It's similar to the way big pharma finances studies that prove whatever they diesire.
"And Did Fascists Win WWII?"
Yes and no. The main "winners" of that and the other wars were a certain group of thuggish international banking parasites. And they have consistently ruled with iron fists in fascist fashion but under cover of misleading titles such as "Communism" and "Democracy" and various other farcical forms of "public and private partnership."
Another very good article; (how do you do it?). Glad to see Rothbard's "Revionsim for Our Time" listed here which I consider a classic. Here's a great quote from that piece.:
“Revisionism as applied to World War II and its origins (as also for previous wars) has the general function of bringing historical truth to an American and a world public that had been drugged by wartime lies and propaganda.
The least of the lessons that revisionism can teach has already been thoroughly learned ( ed: by a select few): that Germany and Japan are not uniquely "aggressor nations," doomed from birth to menace the peace of the world.
Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.
If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler's Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions…”
http://mises.org/daily/2592
“History at the cartoon level isolates only the unpleasant features and events and then exaggerates them to gain its effect.”
John T. Flynn, As We Go Marching, 1944, pg 150
http://mises.org/books/aswegomarching.pdf
Thanks for the quotes, links and compliment, Geoff! Intellectual fraud is an excellent term and yes, finding out this was a lie just leads to more searching questions.
I use Fascist in Mussolini's paraphrased meaning of the collaboration of power-concentrating oligarchs and power-distributing government. And yes, bankers are the former.
You truly are a special thinker. Most folks seem to approach the concept of fascism (and Fascism) in a vague way and never define their use of the term. Your defintion of the term is in line with the way I use it and it seems to me that most large governments are in fact, fascist or soon devolve into some form of it. Our own vaunted rulers and government have always been more or less fascist, in fact.
Yes, I think we'd be hard-pressed to come up with an example of a gov't that isn't fascist by this definition. Iceland?
And thanks for the compliment! An ex-boyfriend once told me, "It must be fun living in your head." I don't think he meant it as a compliment but, in fact, it is!
I'd have taken it as a compliment!
What I find ridiculous today is that we have the UN as a result of the second world war in order to keep the peace, not doing so.
They haven't brokered peace to prevent war in Vietnam, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Syria, and now Ukraine.
Why not?
They hide behind the "rules".
The security council is run by a few nations with veto power.
So nothing will happen if any of those nations are looking to have war.
How is this democratic? There should be no single veto privelage at all.
But don't worry, the UN is cool with taking power when it comes to helping big pharma in health propaganda and climate change.
Are the people seeing this scam? Perhaps once the Ukraine war is over, we can start to look into the UN and ask why they couldn't bring peace before so many have been killed and injured.
It's the time where the blatant corruption which hides behind banal rules and regulations designed to avoid the truth in healthcare, bringing peace, and economics are being more and more apparent.
The who- won't get fooled again
https://youtu.be/UDfAdHBtK_Q
Yes, I remember a truck with signs all over it that the UN was the problem, years ago. I dismissed it until I did the research on the veto power. Completely defeats the purpose of a federation of nations. It's certainly a tool.
Yes, they have produced peace in the same way as the Federal Reserve stopped inflation! ;-)
"What I find ridiculous today is that we have the UN as a result of the second world war in order to keep the peace, not doing so."
The UN was brought to us by the usual suspects and for the usual reasons. That peace as we proles think of it was always merely a pretext; a selling point.
A Very Brief History of the Origins of the United Nations.
Many of the key originators of the UN were Americans with ties to international banking and international communism.
Harvard Law School student and State Department official, Alger Hiss was an executive secretary of the 1944 Dumbarton Oaks Conference, where representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom formulated proposals for a world organization that became the basis for the United Nations. Hiss was secretary-general of the San Francisco United Nations Conference on International Organization (the United Nations Charter Conference), which began on April 25, 1945. As a U.S. State Department official, he was a key originator of the United Nations, co- authoring the UN Charter with CFR stooges Palvosky, Dalton, Trumbull, and others. Hiss submitted the Charter to the US Senate which signed it without even reading it and he was the first acting UN Secretary-General. He was later convicted and imprisoned as a Soviet spy.
US Secretary of State Cordell Hull and his staff drafted the "Charter of the United Nations" in mid-1943 and later that year Hull served as United States delegate to the Moscow Conference. He had been Secretary of State under FDR who appointed him to lead the American delegation to the London Economic Conference. Hull also chaired the February, 1942 Advisory Committee on Postwar Foreign Policy. In 1945 Hull was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "co-initiating the United Nations” and was referred to by President Roosevelt, Communsit supporter and sympathizer, as the "Father of the United Nations."
Henry Morgenthau Jr. was instrumental in dragging the US into WW1, and as a Secretary of the Treasury under FDR, was a strong supporter of Stalin despite that thug’s long history of hideous crimes, and he played the central role in financing US participation in World War II. In 1944 he headed the US representation to the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, and as chairman, opened it. The Bretton Woods Conference was the keystone of postwar international finance establishing the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) which pegged all international currencies to the dollar. The Bank and the UN have almost the same agendas and membership. In 1943 he wrote, “A United Nations Bank for Reconstruction and Development.” He was also a founding member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) a group that advocates “One World” polices.
Harry D White was an assistant Secretary of the Treasury and treasury “economist” under Henry Morgenthau, Jr., another Commie sympathizer, “internationalist, and” co-founder and the first head of the International Monetary Fund, He was also a co-founder of the World Bank and he authored the plans for a United Nations Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He was the senior American official at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference, and reportedly dominated the conference and imposed his vision of post-war financial institutions on it. He was also a Soviet secret agent—"the most highly-placed asset the Soviets possessed in the American government." White succeeded in subverting American policy to favor Soviet interests over those of the U.S.
Harry Hopkins, FDR’s Presidential Special Assistant, helped prepare the Atlantic Conference which was a precursor meeting to the United Nations. He helped Roosevelt establish the United Nations and was a major supporter and probably a spy for the Soviet Union.
The UN is essentially a creation of elite commie bankers with the goal, no doubt, for them to rule the world.
Thanks for that snapshot history, Geoff. I have a vague memory that communism was a short-lived experiment in the USSR. Shortly after the royals were deposed, it got taken over by a totalitarian regime--which seems bound to happen if you centralize authority to distribute the products of labor.
Most people who identified as communist or Marxist were, imo, reacting to capitalism as a system that makes the rich richer. They wanted a needs-based economy in the sense of 'To everyone according to their need, from everyone according to their ability.' I don't think that works, personally, but it would still make elite commie bankers a contradiction in terms, I think.
It's another of the false dichotomies we've been given, capitalism vs. communism. Neither one is a system of reciprocity.
I'm sure you know the answer to this but who funded Stalin? I remember he was brought in from the outside but I forget who.
“Who funded Stalin?”
The usual uber-rich international banking and industrial parasites who supported Marx and the other Commies. Here’s a link to a very nice and super brief summary (10 second read).
https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=FinalWarning&C=7.4#:~:text=Financed%20by%20Kuhn%2C%20Loeb%20and%20Co.%2C%20Stalin%20implemented,industrialization%2C%20known%20as%20the%20%22First%20Five%20Year%20Plan.%22
Scroll down to Western Support of the Soviet Union which consists of a few brief paragraphs, (sentences, really).
It's been several decades since I've read any of Anthony Sutton but I believe his book, "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: The Remarkable True Story of the American Capitalists Who Financed the Russian Communists" was pretty decent and I'm pretty sure he addressed Stalin's Western support there. Dodd's book, "School of Darkness," exposes the hoi oligoi mucky muck "capitalists" of New York CIty who made Communism fashionable in the first half of the past century.
Even the Commie cartoonist had a clue. Here's the caption to one of his cartoons.:
Cartoon by Robert Minor in St. Louis Post-Dispatch (1911). Karl Marx surrounded by an appreciative audience of Wall Street financiers: John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City Bank, and Morgan partner George W. Perkins. Immediately behind Karl Marx is Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Robert-Minor-Dee-Lighted-1911.png
'hoi oligoi' my new favorite term!
Will check out the links.
How does a starving blockaded Germany, devastated by WW I build enough planes, tanks, munitions, etc to build a military capable of threatening the world? Which is the official narrative of WW II.
Apparently you can build a top notch war machine from scratch in a relatively short time frame.
German economy was devastated by the draconian provisions of the Armistice that they had to sign to end WW I. That was 1918. During the 1920's the German economy was in shambles which laid the ground for Hitler to come to power. He turned the economy around, but even at the beginnings of his land grabs, his military knew they could not back up what he was doing, for example when he directed German military forces to enter the Rhineland, which directly contravened the Treaty of Versailles. It was a bluff, and if France and England had called his bluff the Germans would have had to pull back. Germany spent at least an entire decade (1930') building planes, tanks, munitions, but even then they were not a threat to the world, only to some countries in Europe.
Interesting, so that's what Buchanan meant by a bluff. From these sources, though, it doesn't seem like he was enacting land grabs but (like Putin) returning portions of other countries that had been German, whose inhabitants spoke German and identified as German, and who overwhelmingly wanted to reunite because they were being persecuted by their new 'owner.' And it doesn't seem like that would be the case if Germans were still starving. How did he turn the economy around without contravening the Treaty of Versailles and its debt and sanctions?
Once again, you nailed these key points.:"... (like Putin) returning portions of other countries that had been German, whose inhabitants spoke German and identified as German, and who overwhelmingly wanted to reunite because they were being persecuted by their new 'owner.'"
If only we could clone the way you think and find a way to implant it in the masses...
"How did he turn the economy around without contravening the Treaty of Versailles and its debt and sanctions?"
Very short answer is that he had a little help from his friends. Among them were some powerful and energetic Zionist factions and certain international bankers. (Most of whom no doubt just looked the other way when he and Stalin were allies working together to contravene the "Treaty.")
I believe they had already inflated their way out of the debt. I'd have to read more of the details of German history during that period. Hitler rose to power in early 1930's, so the debt may have already been paid off by then. I don't know how he revved up the economy so quickly though. I recall reading a biography (I believe it was) of the American heading up the US embassy in Berlin in the early 1930's and how impressed they were of what Hitler was doing for the economy and the German people (at that time).
Somewhere around here I have research I did into the Weimar hyperinflation. Oh, it's in that linked article I did on CJ:
Not only were Germans required to pay reparations for losing the war their Emperor forced them to fight, but they also had to pay back the debt that was their slave price. These were denominated in gold, of which Germany had none, and so had to buy foreign gold-backed currency at whatever price speculators were willing to take for the German mark. Then French and Belgian troops invaded to oversee shipments of coal directly as payment, so the workers slowed-down to a crawl.
Finally the financiers issued Rentenmarks (mortgage marks) pegged to the price of gold and the US dollar. Mortgages were reinstated at 25 billion times their value in the old marks, so the advantage of inflation in paying off debt was lost. Government bonds were promised at 2.5 billion of their original value but only after all reparations had been paid. The standard of living index was judged not relevant. They decided that bankruptcies, foreclosures, hunger, strikes, violence and insurrection were preferable to defaulting on foreign debts.
In Web of Debt, Ellen Brown quotes economist Henry C K Liu that:
"The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, at a time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began."
And she quotes Hitler in saying:
"We were not foolish enough to try to make a currency [backed by] gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done or goods produced. . . . we laugh at the time our national financiers held the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank."
What happened between 1938 when Germany had a thriving economy without the British banking system and Hitler was Time magazine’s Man of the Year, and 1939 when Hitler ‘invaded’ Poland? Does it compare, in provocations and proxy wars, to Putin’s ‘invasion’ of Ukraine today? Surely the bankers and foreign debtors didn’t let Germany repudiate its debt and walk away?
To say nothing of the raw materials required to manufacture the new German war machine. It would seem like a whole bunch of rich countries business owners would have had to supply Germany with all sorts of goods and equipment and materials to ramp up a new threat from the ashes of WW I.
I wonder, though. I thought that one of the consequences of the Nord Streams' destruction was that German steel mills would shut down, along with petrofertilizer factories for the byproducts. I may be wrong, though.
Once again, another great summary. I do not pretend to know the details since finance and economics bores me to tears and worse, but from the volumes I've read a long time ago, I'd say you did a fine job there.
Again, Hitler, like Stalin, (and FDR and Churchill) did not do it alone.
The historical context for looking at the ongoing revisionism of reality (is it revisionism when it's being written and rewritten in real time?) is so important to get; yes there is precedence for what we are living through. The sanctified version of WWII, simplified with clear heroes and clear villains, that we were all taught, remains a sacred cow for many (similar the Polio vaccine farce). When big, longstanding linchpin narratives get enough holes in them - even true believers can't get them to stand up.
Thank you Tereza- much of what you've attached is new to me. (always learn from you!) Appreciate it. Best.
I've been finding that term 'revisionist' confusing. It seems to be used by those who are trying to unearth the true history, but should apply to the mainstream versions.
Yes, CJ and Mattais agree on more than they disagree on. They both see Germany as just how it's been presented.
Thanks for that kind compliment, Kathleen. It was new to me also, especially on France.
"Yes, CJ and Mattais agree on more than they disagree on. They both see Germany as just how it's been presented."
Yeah, I think it's hard to drop big narratives, especially if we've woven them into so many other stories and explanations. Pull on one thread...
My take is that the term, "revisionist," was used in a derogatory manner to criticize those who dared question the usual narrative, which of course truly does need to be revised.
It is also meant to be confusing just like "fascist" and "anti-vaxxer."
Right but that's why I don't know why they'd use it for themselves. As far as I know, the only alternative history is self-categorized as revisionist.
I suspect they took the term and ran with it., but tha's only conjecture on my part. For example, I now consider myself an "anti-vaxxer" and I wear that label proudly.
not so sure I would trust the Swiss…
Fauci Swiss side of family coat of arms is a snake eating what looks like a person…
&https://ia804608.us.archive.org/12/items/genealogico-fauci/genealogico-fauci.pdf
Very creepy!
Also, read Sigmund Freud's nephew's, Edward Bernays, book on "Propaganda". Especially Chapter VI starting at page 92. Here is one important quote, I am sure some of it you will recognize from todays political world. "Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses." https://archive.org/details/bernays-edward-l.-propaganda-1928-1936_202107/page/113/mode/2up?q=democracy
Read "Wall St. and the Rise of Hitler" ...
https://archive.org/details/pdfy-lwUqPAGSzT-3bnd3
... and anything else by Anthony Sutton!
You can quickly get the gist and calibre of his work from interviews with him on YouTube.
While you are there view the 2 interviews with Norman Dodd on YouTube. That will provide a quick and fundamental insight.
You might also delve into Dave Emory's Spitfire List, for his indefatigable interviews with the authors of many books (e.g. the Seagraves, authors of "Gold Warriors"). He has a slight pro-zionist bias, I think, but you can learn a great deal.
Thanks for all those references, Jonathan!
I think you might like to try an article of mine, called "What's Wrong With The Greater Good".
https://whatdoino.substack.com/p/copy-whats-wrong-with-the-greater
I just posted a comment on it, thanks for linking!
I somehow forgot that I had also written a reaction to Corbett's discussion of Buchanan's book(!) which includes a personal anecdote relating to WW2.
https://whatdoino.substack.com/p/copy-a-funny-thing-happened-in-2012
It also includes a link to information about Eisenhower's death-camps along the Rhine (Cf. Nazi camps).
Your quest for insight by improving your historical knowledge might also be helped by reading Edward Black on The Transfer Agreement, where Zionists and Nazis worked together before WW2, in helping Jews move from Germany to Israel, including a mechanism for taking their wealth with them! ... and including a boat carrying both a Nazi flag AND an Israeli flag! Contrast that with the fate of German Jews seeking refuge in the US at the same time, a whole liner full of them turned away.
Excellent analysis, Jonathan. Your mother's response is especially interesting. And this topic and particular fact--that Churchill initiated the bombing of civilians that's been 'all's fair' ever since--was going to be the starting point of my next episode. So this will fit nicely.
Very cool that you did a piece on the same discussion. And I'm thinking we're around the same age--I was born in '57.
I also loved the discussion of meter at the end. Poetry was my main course for most of my life and I'm a meter nerd. That little extra syllable at the end of the odd lines really keeps it from being sing-song and gives finality to the even ones.
Okay, now to watch the Feli video while cleaning out the freezer!
Aw thanks: that's really great. 😊
The freezer eh? Wow - I wish I was as productive as you!
(Yup, born 1957).
Really interesting, Jonathan. I heard that Hitler wanted to export the German Jews to Israel, but Israel refused. Any background on that?
I'll check out your link.
I'm pretty sure you mean Palestine. I do not think Israel existed as a state at the time.
And getting Jews to Palestine was a project of some Zionist faction(s). Hitler supported the idea but was not the instigator of it.
Rings a bell. I suspect that was later, right by the start of the war.
Thanks for taking the trouble. This was the first article I wrote, and was therefore before I organised them into 2 groups, serious thinking, and more practical, trivial stuff.
So the version you read is without the comments it originally accrued. If you read the comments here ...
https://whatdoino.substack.com/p/whats-wrong-with-the-greater-good/comments
... you will find some quotations on US bombing, amongst other things, that are quite revealing.
Yes, I've read that the WW I armistice agreement alone was enough to cause WW II because it destroyed the German economy and laid the ground for a fascist leader to come to power.
Even though the US stayed out of the war initially, when they entered the war, they went whole hog into bombing the sh*t out of Germany, Japan, and Italy, and they've been bombing the sh*t out of countries ever since. The US has no hesitation about killing civilians with bombs as Curis Lemay made very clear. And it was the US that first came up with the idea of "total war", meaning the killing, raping, and burning of civilians and their property. It was General Sherman in the US Civil War who first used the term "total war" and went on to burn a huge swath of Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.
I, too, came across the Unz series this year in a serendipitous way but I can’t remember how. Like you though, I paid attention, which is what pulled me into your post. One of the heartening things to me in this whole Covid debacle for those of us who have woken up, or who are becoming awake, is the realisation - as if walking into an illuminated room - of how brainwashed we are. If you are inveigled into state education then they have got you from the get go. How many then, once they have embarked on their busy lives getting work, raising families etc get to question what they have been taught, even as much of it, I concede, was taught in good faith? In my case the Theory of Evolution was one I had to go back and revisit thirty years after I had left formal education, but then I had the time.
So it makes sense that anyone - like the journalists and scholars you mention - who runs counter to the state (The Powers that Be) narrative - gets ‘disappeared’ or ‘cancelled.’ Back in the post war period such events were pretty easily concealed, but now there’s les and less places for the perpetrators of these lies to hide. That won’t necessarily stop them as the intimidation of anyone who was party to the publication of ‘The Satanic Verses’ in the late. 1980s demonstrates. But there wasn’t the light around even then as there Is now. Many of us who dabble in the metaphysical realms can feel the energy shifting. The absurdities of the Covid era and the official narrative’s ridiculous explanations are just the tip of an iceberg that embraces the lies of hundreds of years, except that it’s so bloody obvious now. But still, like then, most will not speak up because of fear of reprisals and we have not yet reached the tipping point where it feels safe to come over to ‘our side’. Even though the light is becoming dazzling we have to keep on keeping on. This is not the time for complacency but there is room for some encouragement. I am mindful of the phrase I learnt when I first dabbled in Buddhism: ‘If one mind can reach ten minds and those ten minds can reach ten minds each…’ Slowly, slowly catchee monkey or ‘One last push’ as the military parlance has it. Thank you for your contributions in this war.
"I had wondered, at the time, if we knew the truth about WWII and whether the good guys had really won over the bad guys, as we’ve been told." No. We do not know the truth about what happened after WWII. https://ghostfromthefuture.substack.com/p/now-that-your-eyes-are-open
I have been looking into exactly what you are wondering. And I can tell you, the "good" guys are a lie. The "bad" guys did exist for sure. But when you look at for instance what happened to actually quite a lot of condemned war criminals after the trials, you have to ask what do you call those, that employ the "bad" guys. Obviously those cannot be the "good" guys, right? Just one quick thought: What would this world have looked like, if the survivors of the Operation Overlord, the Normandy landings, had learned in the early 50s that their tax payer dollars went to the salaries of hundred of thousands of former Nazis?
Oh here are the links: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/churchills-atrocities and https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-trials-of-david-irving.
Great points, Ghost, and I'll definitely check out your Substack. Have you read the sequels to this on Churchill's Atrocities and The Trials of David Irving? I'll link them just in case. Yes, this is a deep, deep rabbit hole and it forks in many directions: the eugenics program, medical experimentation, and definitely Bernays the inventor of Psyops!
"What would this world have looked like, if the survivors of the Operation Overlord, the Normandy landings, had learned in the early 50s that their tax payer dollars went to the salaries of hundred of thousands of former Nazis?"
What would people think if they knew that their taxes went to support FDR's government which did everything in its power to support the former "Communist" enemy? What would people think if they knew that the wars were a racket, just as MG Butler wrote? And unnecessary as Pat Buchanan wrote? What would they think if some Zionist factions lwith the National Socialists? What would they think if they learned that most of what they think they know could be classified as bogus?
I bet, unfortunately, that most would think what they've always thunk.