RESPECTED READER, To those of you who know my books (a diminishing band: but aren’t we all?) and to those who know them not, let me recall that in 1936, sitting at a window in Vienna, I wrote a book, Insanity Fair, about the coming Second World War. In 1966, sitting at a window in Salisbury, Rhodesia, I find myself writing this book about the coming of a Third World War. This is where we all came in. The scene has shifted from Europe to Africa, but the new post-war years have seen the same ladder like process calculably leading to war.
In these latter years I did many things, and writing was of the things undone, for my writ, I felt, ran out. There was only the oft-told tale to re-tell and its constant iteration came too near the praising of myself, for every fool can play upon words. If “warnings” were needed, let others warn, and probably in vain, for by a divine instinct men’s minds mistrust ensuing danger. So I sought other paths and spent many years in South Africa.
Man proposes: looking for pastures new, I found myself in the centre of another world conflict in the brewing. Africa was this time the scene of the preparatory steps, and Southern Africa the last rung of the war-ladder. The British Government’s onslaught on Rhodesia, in 1965, returned the world to its plight of 1937, when war was two moves away and could yet have been averted by obvious countermoves.
Let me briefly recall those days to you, senior and junior classmates. From 1933 Hitler’s patent intention to make war was fore-told by all competent observers in Berlin. Even the date (about five years ahead) was accurately estimated, in its dispatches to London, by the Berlin office of The Times (where I was a correspondent).
The London government, however, to the end encouraged Hitler on his warpath by the method called “appeasement” (throwing children to pursuing wolves until only the parents remain, in the fleeing sleigh, for the wolves to devour). German rearmament was let pass, then the seizure of the Rhineland, then the recreation of the German air force (in 1935 Hitler personally told the British Foreign Minister of its massive strength, as I then reported).
IN the early 20th Century the Jews were carrying on a war against all governments and influential individuals they believed to be anti-Jewish.
Among those who were alarmed about the Marxist “workers movement” in Great Britain were a number of retired military officers, including generals and admirals who had fought in World War I and had returned home to see that a great deal of dissent and anti-social activity was being fomented by socialist movements in Britain which were mainly controlled and led by individuals of the Jewish race.
In response to the Jewish run “revolutionary workers” movement in Britain a number of re-tired high ranking military officers who feared a Jewish provoked revolution in Britain aligned themselves with the Britons Publishing Society, which was founded in 1917 by Col. Henry H. Beamish. His father had been a Rear Admiral in the British navy.
Many retired military officers were speakers on the Jewishness of Bolshevism at the Britons Publishing Society headquarters in London.
Mrs. Nesta Webster was a talented writer- who wrote World Revolution and a number of other books exposing the connection between revolutionary Jews and Secret Societies.
Many high ranking military officers could not understand the growing Socialist movements in Britain and Europe.
By chance some of them came across books by Mrs. Nesta.Webster
British Intelligence was alarmed by the leftist “workers” movements in Europe had heard about Mrs. Webster through a supporter of the Britons Publishing Society, Brig. Gen. Prescott Decie.
In 1917 the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, Gen. Sir William Robertson was warned that that af-ter the overthrow of Tsar Nicholas II there was a great deal of pro-Bolshevik activity taking place in Britain. He told Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig “I’m afraid there is no getting away from the fact that there is some unrest in the country now as a result of the Russian Revolution. There have been some bad strikes, and there is still much discontent.” [The Romanov Conspiracies by Michael Occleshaw page 90]
IN 1938, NAZI GERMANY sent an expedition to Antarctica with a mission to investigate sites for a possible base and to make formal claims in the name of the Third Reich. To prepare them for their mission, they invited the great polar explorer Richard E. Byrd to lecture them on what to expect. The following year, a month after hostilities had commenced in Europe, the Germans returned to Neuschwabenland to finish what had been started, with many suggesting that a base was being constructed.
Nine years later, Richard E. Byrd, who by now had become an Admiral in the United States Navy, was sent to Antarctica with the largest task force ever assembled for a polar mission. In Admiral Byrd’s own words, the mission (code-named Highjump ) was “primarily of a military nature”.1 Many claim that the task force was sent to eradicate a secret Nazi base in Queen Maud Land, which the Nazis had renamed Neuschwabenland and which had never been explored as profoundly as the rest of the Antarctic. But, and the big but is, the fact that Admiral Byrd spoke of “flying objects that could fly from pole to pole at incredible speeds”2 and with well-documented German activity before, during and in the immediate aftermath of World War II, one can’t help but wonder whether there is some truth in the Nazi Antarctica myth. Even so, could Operation Highjump and Byrd’s quotes have overshadowed the truth about British excursions in Antarctica by way of misinformation, bringing attention to his mission and, by doing so, making sure that history only remembered one mysterious Antarctic mission?
When the Antarctica mystery is mentioned, Britain is never given more than a footnote. That fact is surprising in itself, especially as British forces were active in Antarctica throughout the war and quite possibly took the initiative in dealing with the Antarctic Nazi threat a whole 12 months before Operation Highjump was initiated.
Britain’s activities on Antarctica, though less documented and more clandestine, are just as intriguing as the supposed much-vaunted Operation Highjump. Unfortunately for Britain, though victorious in the War, it was bankrupted and humiliated by the two new superpowers. But Britain was in a position to regain some pride and surreptitiously upset its supposed allies with the final, decisive battle against the surviving Nazis: a battle that would never be recorded in the history books; a battle that would make its claims on the continent more legitimate; but, most importantly, a battle that ended the war that it had been compelled to wage.
TIME and again contradictory information about numbers and battle feats of the British detachment in SS Waffen, which included several Australians, keep turning out in various books and Internet publications. For example till recently one could have come across allegations or speculations that this group of people took part in the defence of Berlin in April-May 1945.
The most comprehensive data based on document declassified in 1980-90-ties was given in the book “Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen (Adrian Weale, 1994). This page is based on that book. It has to be emphasized that this story does not relate to the other group of the British renegades, which took part in Nazi propaganda war targeted against Great Britain.
This detachment commenced formation in the second half of 1943 when the strategic-military situation of Germany had greatly deteriorated. Volunteer POWs from Great Britain and her dominions became the main source of servicemen for the detachment. The first Commander of the Corps was Hauptsturmfurer SS Hans Werner Roepke an English-speaking German.
It has escaped the notice of most people that stories of a “Nazi Holocaust” during World War II are actually impossible as regards the chemistry of poisons. This can be verified by calling or writing the American Cyanamid Co., Box 31, Linden, NJ 07036, telephone (201) 862-6000, or by consulting standard reference works such as the various editions (in particular the 11th) of the Encyclopaedia Britannica under “Hydrocyanic Acid,” “’Prussic Acid,” “Poisons,” Gleason’s Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, or Legal Medicine and Toxicology by Peterson, Haines and Webster (2nd edition).
One might be permitted to ask:
1) whether there is any such thing as an “amethyst-blue crystal of hydrogen cyanide” (Reitlinger, The Final Solution, p. 160; Shirer, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 970);
2) whether hydrogen cyanide can be solidified at room temperature in an ordinary tin can (Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, p. 566, “The hydrogen cyanide, solidified into pellets, immediately passed into the gaseous state.”);
3) whether hydrogen cyanide can be made to crystallize in a vacuum and become gaseous upon exposure to air (“I used Zyklon B, which was a crystallized prussic acid,” Rudolf Hoess at Nuremberg, quoted in Shirer, p. 968);
LENIN’S WELL-KNOWN AXIOM to the effect that in revolutions for every honest-minded man (unfortunately) are to be found hundreds of criminals, can scarcely be applied to Hungarian Bolshevism, for among the notorious exponents of the same even the lamp of Diogenes would hardly have enabled us to detect one honest-minded man. Criminalists of long standing who lived through the horrors of the Red Regime in Hungary, which lasted from March 21 to the end of July, 1919, could testify, even without the decisions of the court of laws, that the leading spirits of the ‘Soviet Republic’ (with the exception of a few fanatics) consisted of common criminals, to the greater part of whom might be applied with perfect aptness the definition of Anatole France, ‘encore bête et déjà un homme.’
Every revolution has its idealistic champions, its enthusiasts who inflame the masses with a fiery passion and are themselves ready to endure all the suffering of Calvary in the service of the creed which they profess. Fanatic apostles of high aims may be sympathetic even in their fatal errors; and there is always something sublimely tragical in their fall. Who would doubt the unselfish enthusiasm of Camille Desmoulins, of Jourde, or of Louise Michel for their ideals, for which they were content to suffer and die?
Note: The Publishers of this volume are greatly indebted to Dr. Oscar Szollosy and to the Editor of The Anglo-Hungarian Review for permission to include this account of some of the chief actors in The Terror.
A hardcover edition of this book was originally printed by a Publisher of Marva, 1211 Genf, Case 254, Switzerland, © Copyright 1974 Kardel ISBN 3 85800 001 9
Translated by the Oficyna Wydawnicza “Fulmen”, Warszawa © Copyright 1996 Fulmen ISBN 83 86445 020 5 and in Poland is already sold out.
This introductory edition was translated by the Publisher, Modjeskis’ Society Dedicated to Preservation of Cultures, P.O. Box 193, San Diego, CA 92038, © Copyright 1997 Modjeskis’ Society ISBN 09657523-0-5 and is also available for distribution under the address of this Society.
All rights to said editions are preserved, as well as translation rights into other languages by the Society combined with interested entities.
Typical signs of Jewish features are: Eyes are usually shiny and both eye lids are heavy and swollen. The lymph bag under the eyes is usually fuller and stands out more than on Gentiles. The high cheekbone as a rule creates a sunken cheek. The nose can only be differentiated by its slightly moving nose wings when viewed from the front during breathing. The upper lip is short and the lower lip stands out and this gives the face a sensual expression.” Source: Twelve volumes “Jewish Encyclopaedia” on all questions pertaining Jewry and the Jewish curious nature and notions.
Adolf Hitler, with high probability a grandson of the Jew Frankenberger. Driven by his boundless hatred towards his own kinsmen, this man brought to reality his Vienna’s youth dream to settle the European Jews in the Orient.
IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 20TH CENTURY the two most important anti-Communists in the United States government were Secretary of the Navy and later Secretary of Defence, James V. Forrestal, and Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy. But they had a great deal more in common than that. The following passage is from pages 147-148 of the 1966 book, The Death of James Forrestal, written anonymously by someone using the pen name, Cornell Simpson:*
There were extraordinary parallels in the lives and deaths of McCarthy and Forrestal—two Irish-Catholic Americans who both rose by their bootstraps to high office in Washington, D.C., and who successively spearheaded the fight against the worldwide Communist conspiracy. Each man was the victim of smear attacks that rose to a pitch of vituperation and vileness previously unmatched in this century. Each man was pathologically hated by every left-winger and subversive in America. Each man died at a most “convenient” and strategic time. And each death beyond doubt altered the course of history.
Appropriately, it was Forrestal who personally alerted freshman Senator McCarthy to the Communist menace and “named names” to him of key persons in our federal government who were consistently shaping our policies and programs to benefit Soviet Russia. It was Forrestal who thus directly inspired McCarthy’s subsequent exposés of Communist influence and subversion in the federal government.
After Forrestal met his violent end, McCarthy moved up to the front lines. And when McCarthy began publicly exposing Communists in the State Department, the Communist party at once openly proclaimed in the Daily Worker and elsewhere that McCarthy was now the Communists’ main enemy. The Daily Worker also called on all Communists and left-wing elements to unite in and give top priority to the fight against “McCarthyism.”
For years, McCarthy continued his important work of investigating and unmasking individual Communists infiltrated into department after department of our federal government—and of exposing and opposing many of the executive department’s foreign and domestic policies. He also wrote two well-documented anti-Communist books. He had two more such books in the works when he died.
IT will readily be conceded, by one who knows Russia and has had opportunity of observing all the different phases of the revolutionary process that the inherent anarchical tendencies of the Russian people could not have failed to let the political pendulum swing very far towards the left. But the most extreme-minded Russian had surely not dreamt of creating an instrument of destruction so complete in its systematic annihilation of every principle of economic life, so satanic in its premeditated violence and cold-blooded murder as that which now constitutes the basis of Bolshevist power.
In this mad anarchical chaos, the natural consequence was the usurpation of the supreme command by that element which, unalterable, and comparable only to itself, has represented, since the very beginning of human history. The acme of the most unscrupulous and most insatiable greed: the Jew.
Scarcely had “Liberty” been achieved (by the help of the London Change and the Russian-Jewish liberalism), than from everywhere, from the very ends of the earth the children of Israel set out to reach their Promised Land of these later days. Bolshevist papers and periodicals were started in Moscow and Petrograd. Trained demagogues, possessing unlimited supplies of money, appeared as members of the Soviet Councils and neither lost time nor hesitated in using all means, however foul they might be, to demoralise the minds of the: Russian people and excite the feelings against one another. And the Russian masses succumbed all the more readily, that they were for the most part illiterate.
May I cite an example: One day there appeared as member of the Petrograd soviet a man quite unknown, who gave his name as Stecklow. He preached the overthrow of democracy, promised universal peace, liberty, bread and gave money to all comers. At last he could no longer avoid producing his papers, which showed him to be a Jew named Nachamkes. To-day he is one of the omnipotent dictators of the Russian press. Cases such as this can he proved by the hundred.
Under the very nose of the liberal government Trotzky-Braunstein (Brownstone), Sinowjeff-Apfelbaum (Appletree) from New York and Lenin from Switzerland appropriated a place in Petrograd for their own use and made it the headquarters of Bolshevism. Many demagogues, carefully trained in the bolshevist seminary at Capri (headmaster: the Jew Rappoport), journeyed all over the country, to Kronstadt (the headquarters of the Navy and to the front. I myself have seen: Jewish students distributing the ‘Pravda’ (Truth) among the wounded, in the hospitals of the Crimea.
The first attack was delivered in July 1917. The sailors from Kronstadt (worked up to the highest pitch mostly by the Jew Roshal) steamed up the Neva, landed in companies and circulated in armoured cars through the streets of Petrograd, discharging their rifles at random wherever and whenever it pleased them. The revolt was suppressed. The leaders were put into prison, the rebels isolated and put under guard.
A year and a month after the Potsdam Declaration was published, Secretary of State Byrnes suddenly left the Paris peace conference and went to Stuttgart where among the German people he attempted to justify and defend America’s policy toward the defeated Reich.
This willingness to place a value on German public opinion marked a fundamental and welcome turning point in our official attitude, for previously we were carrying out our mission in Germany with utter disregard for what the Germans might think of it or us.
The change did not arise from any newly discovered fondness for our defeated subjects. Mr. Byrnes had put his finger on the real reason when he said: “It is not in the interest of the German people or in the interest of world peace that Germany should become a pawn or a partner in a military struggle for power between East and West.”
That is precisely what had already happened. Belatedly, we had come to realize that while we were busily and blindly alienating the German people by carrying out one of the most brutal and terrifying peace programs ever inflicted on a defeated nation, Russia, who had been egging us on, was quietly preparing to come forward as their champion and to offer them an avenue of escape from us through the establishment of a unified, revived, and Communist Reich to be joined to the Soviet Union. This had been made clear by Molotov in July at Paris.
Germany is more than a mere pawn in the struggle for power between world ambitious Communist Russia and the West, she is the major price. World Communism has long coveted Germany as the brightest jewel in its crown. The Kremlin knows and we know that all Europe would have to fall before the combined might of a union between Soviet Russia and a resuscitated Reich.
Such an eventuality cannot be tolerated by Britain who, with a hostile Europe at her back, would find her very existence threatened. Nor could we countenance such a threat to England, because treatment of the British Isles as our first line of defence in the Atlantic is one of the imperatives of our present foreign policy.
Union between Soviet Russia and a sovietized Germany would mean war. To prevent war, we must therefore prevent the fruition of Russia’s design. Hence, it becomes necessary that we attract Germany to our side and keep her there.
IN AUGUST, 1925, ON THE OCCASION OF THE WRITING OF THE SECOND VOLUME, I formulated the fundamental ideas of a National Socialist foreign policy, in the brief time afforded by the circumstances. Within the framework of that book I dealt especially with the question of the Southern Tyrol, which gave rise to attacks against the Movement as violent as they were groundless. In 1926, I found myself forced to have this part of the second volume published as a special edition. I did not believe that by so doing I would convert those opponents who, in the hue and cry over the Southern Tyrol, saw primarily a welcome means for the struggle against the hated National Socialist Movement. Such people cannot be taught better because the question of truth or error, right or wrong, plays absolutely no part for them. As soon as an issue seems suitable for exploitation, partly for political party purposes, partly even for their highly personal interests, the truthfulness or rightness of the matter at hand is altogether irrelevant.
This is all the more the case if they can thereby inflict damage on the cause of the general awakening of our Folk. For the men responsible for the destruction of Germany, dating from the time of the collapse, are her present rulers, and their attitude of that time has not changed in any respect up to now. Just as at that time they cold heartedly sacrificed Germany for the sake of doctrinaire party views or for their own selfish advantage, today they likewise vent their hatred against anyone who contradicts their interests, even though he may have, a thousandfold, all the grounds for a German resurgence on his side. Even more. As soon as they believe the revival of our Folk, represented by a certain name, can be seen, they usually take a position against everything that could emanate from such a name. The most useful proposals, indeed the most patently correct suggestions, are boycotted simply because their spokesman, as a name, seems to be linked to general ideas which they presume they must combat on the basis of their political party and personal views. To want to convert such people is hopeless.
Hence in 1926, when my brochure on the Southern Tyrol was printed, I naturally gave not a second’s thought to the idea that I could make an impression on those who, in consequence of their general philosophical and political attitude, already regarded me as their most vehement opponent. At that time I did entertain the hope that at least some of them, who were not at the outset malicious opponents of our National Socialist foreign policy, would first examine our view in this field and judge it afterward. Without a doubt this has also happened in many cases. Today I can point out with satisfaction that a great number of men, even among those in public political life, have revised their former attitude with respect to German foreign policy. Even when they believed they could not side with our standpoint in particulars, they nevertheless recognised the honourable intentions that guide us here. During the last two years, of course, it has become clearer to me that my writing of that time was in fact structured on general National Socialist insights as a premise.
1. The American Jewish Yearbook of September 14, 1939 until October 2, 1940 (volume 41) states in all of Europe: 5,589,837 Jews.
2a. If Russia is included: 9,394,837 Jews (The Spotlight October 1979, page 7)
3. The same Jewish Yearbook of 1939, page 583: World Jewry: 16,180,000
4. New York Times of February 22, 1948 “from their own secret census”: between 16,150,000 and 19,200, 000
5. A publication of the American Jewish Committee dated 1940: “in 1933: 15,315,359”.
6. Prof. Arthur Rupin of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem: in 1938: 16,717,000
7. The World Almanac of 1945: 15,192,089
8, The World Almanac of 1946: 15,753,638
9. The American Jewish Committee in the World Almanac of 1949: 16,643,120
10. Rabbi Soetendorp in his TV-interview on the Netherlands network in March 1980: World Jewry demography: 14 million Jews in 1980.
This article was translated from the German by Ingrid Rimland.Comments in heavy black are by Gerry Frederics.
Some months ago Ernst* asked me to do a report on Allied atrocities during and after World War II, and toward that end, he sent me some information, among them a book in German titled, “Alliierte Kriegsverbrechen” – Allied War Crimes.
• This refers to Ernst Zuendel, the famed German Canadian freedom fighter.
I started reading it and underlining certain passages, but not for long-because I realized that I was getting nauseated. It was a compilation of first-person testimony as to what happened when the Allies (particularly the Red Army) started to carve up a prostrated and defeated Germany.
I made several attempts to finish this assignment, but I couldn’t do it. I simply couldn’t do it. Even now, I feel a moral obligation to finish it, but even thinking about it makes my palms clammy and my heart race. People in the West have simply no idea what went on in Europe after the Allies began to push the Germans back – from 1943 on!
I have given the material below a lot of thought as to whether or not I should send it to my ZGram readers. It isn’t pretty reading. It was published recently in Der Freiwillige, June 1995, pages 10-11, under the title In Their Terror All Were Alike, written (or edited) by Hans Koppe.
“. . . Since the same old stories of war crimes allegedly committed by the Germans are being parroted over and over again in prayer-wheel fashion, particularly by the younger generations who are too lazy (or deliberately unwilling) to obtain a real grasp of the subject through the study of documents from the archives of our former enemies’ documents which are both accessible and irrefutable – we wish to call to mind the following report which first appeared 30 years ago in the Deutschland Journal of April 23, on p. 7 of issue 17.
WHEN I WAS ASKED ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO whether or not I would consider giving a talk on the subject of Poland — in view of the considerable interest in Poland on the part of the German people and the extent of German assistance programmes to that country — I began to research the “Polish problem” in greater detail than had hitherto been the case. It was not difficult for me to write recollections from my own experience, extending as far back as my earliest childhood and school days, while simultaneously discussing the findings of literature and history. At the request of the listeners, a printed text of my first talk was prepared, followed, some time later, by a further revised and expanded second edition, which has now been superceded by a third.
My first talk was followed by many others. Many questions were raised and innumerable letters received, expressing gratitude for my work of enlightenment, with the request that I publish other information, unknown in Germany, which might contribute to a more accurate appraisal of the Polish national character. I wish to comply with that request on the part of interested readers by writing a second part on falsifications of Polish history.
The enormous quantity of available materials made selection difficult; I had only intended to write a brochure enabling the German reader to see and understand the development of the Polish nation from its earliest Germanic racial origins to its chauvinistic hatred of everything German. In so doing, I made plentiful use of documentation prepared by scientific researchers and historians of an earlier era, as well as of materials dating from more recent research.
At this point, I should like to thank all those who have written to me enclosing clippings, etc. from the various news media, or who have alerted me to certain matters, thus helping me to clarify the topic of a falsified historical past in relation to falsifications of the present day.
THERE IS BUT ONE OPINION as to which country in the world possesses the most powerful secret intelligence service. Without the slightest doubt that country is the Soviet Union, and the name of the monstrous secret organisation without precedent in the history of mankind is the KGB. But on the question as to which country possesses the second most powerful secret organisation, the opinions of specialists differ. Strange as it may seem, the country to which this organisation belongs is also the Soviet Union, and the organisation itself is called the Chief Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff.
This book was written in order to confirm this simple fact.
At first it was conceived as an instructional manual for a narrow circle of specialists. Subsequently it was revised by the author for a wider public. The revision was confined mainly to the excision of certain definitions and technical details which would be of little interest. Even after this, there remained in the book many details of a technical nature, which may sometimes make for difficult reading. But though I may apologise, there is nothing to be done. In order to understand a disease (and the desire to understand a disease implies a desire to fight against it), one must know its pathology as well as its symptoms.
For one of their very first chosen myths, the communists decided to record that the organs of enforcement of the new State were not created until the nineteenth of December 1917. This falsehood was circulated in order to prove that Soviet power, in the first forty-one days of its existence, could dispense with the mass executions so familiar to other revolutions. The falsehood is easily exposed. It is sufficient to look at the editions of the Bolshevist papers for those days which shook the world. The Organs and subsequent mass executions existed from the first hour, the first minute, the first infantile wail of this Soviet power. That first night, having announced to the world the birth of the most bloodthirsty dictatorship in its history, Lenin appointed its leaders. Among them was comrade A. I. Rikov, the head of the People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs which sounds less innocuous in its abbreviation, NKVD. Comrade Rikov was later shot, but not before he had managed to write into the history of the Organs certain bloody pages which the Soviet leadership would prefer to forget about. Fifteen men have been appointed to the post of Head of the Organs, of which three were hounded out of the Soviet government with ignominy. One died at his post. One was secretly destroyed by members of the Soviet government (as was later publicly admitted). Seven comrades were shot or hanged, and tortured with great refinement before their official punishment. We are not going to guess about the futures of three still living who have occupied the post. The fate of the deputy heads has been equally violent, even after the death of comrade Stalin.
THE BOOK, INSIDE THE SOVIET ARMY, IS WRITTEN UNDER THE NAME OF «VIKTOR SUVOROV.» As a defector, under sentence of death in the USSR, the author does not use his own name and has chosen instead that of one of the most famous of Russian generals. This is a book that should command wide attention, not only in the armed forces of the free world, but among the general public as well. It is an account of the structure, composition, operational method, and general outlook of the Soviet military in the context of the Communist regime in the USSR and the party’s total dominion, not only over the Soviet Union, but over the client states of the Warsaw Pact as well.
The book starts with a survey of the higher military leadership and an analysis of the types of armed services, and of the organization of Soviet Army formation. An examination of the Red Army’s mobilization system that follows is of particular interest. The chapters that follow on strategy and tactics and on equipment are also of high interest. The first, on operational method, emphasizes the supreme importance attached in Soviet military thinking to the offensive and the swift exploitation of success. Defensive action is hardly studied at all except as an aspect of attack. The second, on equipment, examines Soviet insistence on simplicity in design and shows how equipment of high technical complexity (the T-72 tank, for instance) is also developed in another form, radically simplified in what the author calls «the monkey model,» for swift wartime production. The last two chapters on «The Soldiers’ Lot» and «The Officer’s Role» will be found by many to be the most valuable and revealing of the whole book. We have here not so much a description of what the Red Army looks like from the outside, but what it feels like inside.
THE two concluding volumes of The Intimate Papers of Colonel House begin with the entrance of the United States into the World War and end with Colonel House’s attempt to secure some compromise on the basis of which the Senate might ratify the Versailles Treaty, including the Covenant of the League of Nations. Their central theme is American participation in the war and the Peace Conference, in so far as the papers of Colonel House shed light on the American effort and Wilsonian policies. Readers of the two preceding volumes will remember that Colonel House, although not an officeholder, occupied a special position in relation to Wilson’s administration at the time the United States became a belligerent. He had been chosen by the President as his personal representative and sent on three separate missions to the European Governments in 1914 and the two following years. As Wilson’s representative he had come in close contact with European leaders during the period of American neutrality.
It was natural that, during the war, President Wilson should look to House for advice on every matter that touched American relations with the Allies and especially on all problems of war aims. He selected him as chief of the organization for preparing the American case at the Peace Conference, appointed him head of the American War Mission to Europe for the coordination of military and industrial efforts, asked him to draft a constitution for a league of nations, and again sent him to Europe as American representative on the Supreme War Council when it arranged the armistice with Germany. At the Peace Conference, House was Commissioner Plenipotentiary, and, because of his intimate personal relations with European statesmen, was constantly used by the President to conduct the most delicate negotiations. During Wilson’s absence from Paris and his illness, the President selected him to take his place on the Supreme Council.
FIFTY YEARS AGO THIS MONTH, CANADA — along with Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and France — declared war on Nazi Germany. The terrible confrontation took six years to reach its conclusion and claimed the lives of perhaps 50-million people, combatants and civilians alike.
Unlike the “Great War” of 1914-18, the Second World War was imbued from the start with an air of righteousness that still strikes us as apt half a century later. Indeed this sense of a just war has been buttressed by post-war accounting, particularly as it brought home the reality of the German concentration camps where — notoriously — more than 6-million Jews were murdered in circumstances that will always cry out for remembrance and atonement.
Postwar historians have properly complicated our understanding of how the war started. (The spinelessness of the Western democracies, for example, has long been seen as almost as crucial as the endemic German ills that gave rise to and sustained Nazism.) Nevertheless, ordinary people have never been in much doubt about the basics. It was Hitler’s Germany that caused the war. In the terrible struggle to defeat the Nazis, most people could agree with Winston Churchill’s famous witticism that even the devil would merit a favourable reference if he sided with the Allies.
Time, though, plays perverse tricks. With this issue, and only coincidentally to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the war’s outbreak, Saturday Night is publishing an oddity: an account of events born in the ashes of the Third Reich that no-one wants to publish — including ourselves. The reason is straightforward. The central revelation in James Bacque’s report, which is adapted from his onerously researched new book entitled Other Losses, concerns the fate of German prisoners of war in the American camps in Europe in 1945 and 1946. The book itself implicates the French camps as well. By even the most conservative statistical reckoning, nearly a million prisoners died of starvation, exposure, and neglect at the hands of two of the victorious Allies. In the case of the Americans, this was accomplished; it needs to be stated very clearly, as a result of orders, issued from the highest levels of command that deliberately contravened the Geneva Convention on the treatment of POWs.
ON 22 JUNE 1941, THE COUNCIL OF THE SUPREME SOVIET imposed martial law over Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Ukraine, White Russia, Karelia, Bessarabia, as well as over the territories of Archangel, Murmansk, Vologda, Leningrad, Kalinin, Ivanovo, Yaroslav, Ryazan-Smolensk, Tula, Kursk, Moscow, Voronezh, Orel, the Crimea, and Krasnodar. General mobilization was ordered in 15 military districts.
Partisan warfare was unleashed one week later. It was a prepared measure in violation of international law for which the Wehrmacht was unprepared. Furthermore, a “Service Regulation for the Partisan War” had been in effect in the Red Army since 1933. As early as January and February 1941, large scale partisan war games were held in various military districts of the Soviet Union by the “Society for the Encouragement of Defence” (Osowiachim), in which the civilian population also took part, as reported by the Army newspaper “Red Star”. Based on these experiments, the Soviet Communist Party created so-called “Destruction Battalions”, even prior to the beginning of the war. When an area was to be abandoned by the Red Army, these destruction battalions were systematically supposed to destroy all businesses, communications installations, medical installations, etc. of any military or commercial importance, and to being partisan warfare as soon as the front was overrun.
HERE is a shocker: Winston Churchill carried on personal correspondence with his “deadly enemy,” Benito Mussolini, not only before but during World War II. More extraordinary still, just wait till you learn the contents of those remarkable letters.
“History shall be kind to me, because intend to write it.” —Winston Churchill
In 1952 Luigi Carissimi-Priori (right) was offered 100,000 pounds by British sources for photocopies of correspondence between Mussolini (front cover) and Churchill (left).
Although still a popular controversy in Italy and, to a lesser degree, Britain and the United States, personal correspondence Winston Churchill carried on with Benito Mussolini before and during World War II is virtually unknown to the rest of the outside world. While such communication between two international statesmen who, publicly at any rate, were deadly enemies may not seem all that significant or even extraordinary, the supposed content of their letters makes them potentially significant in the extreme.
MY REASONS FOR COMMENDING M. CHERADAME’S most instructive work to the earnest attention of my countrymen and countrywomen are three-fold.
In the first place, M. Cheradame stands conspicuous amongst that very small body of politicians who warned Europe betimes of the German danger. The fact that in the past he proved a true prophet gives him a special claim to be heard when he states his views as regards the present and the future.
In the second place, I entertain a strong opinion that M. Cheradame’s diagnosis of the present situation is, in all its main features, correct.
In the third place, in spite of the voluminous war literature which already exists, I greatly doubt whether the special aspect of the case which M. Cheradame wishes to present to the public is fully understood in this country; neither should I be surprised to hear from those who are more qualified than myself to speak on the subject that the same remark applies, though possibly in a less degree, to the public opinion of France.
It is essential that, before the terms of peace are discussed, a clear idea should be formed of the reasons which led the German Government to provoke this war. It is well that, if such a course be at all possible, those who are personally responsible for the numerous acts of barbarity committed by the Germans should receive adequate punishment. But attention to points of this sort, however rational and meritorious, should not in any degree be allowed to obscure the vital importance of the permanent political issues which call loudly for settlement. Otherwise, it is quite conceivable that a peace may be patched up, which may have some specious appearance of being favourable to the Allies, but which would at the same time virtually concede to the Germans all they require in order, after time had been allowed for recuperation, to renew, with increased hope of success, their attempts to shatter modern civilization and to secure the domination of the world.
Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of defeated, truncated, and starving Germany on January 30, 1933, by President Paul von Hindenburg. Jews throughout the world professed to be horrified by news of this event. It was also evident that a campaign against the still unpopular Germans on the Jewish question might possibly be exploited to advance the position of World Jewry. Twenty years later, this turned out to be the case to an extent that few Jews could have foreseen at the time. Dr. Max Nussbaum, the former chief rabbi of the Jewish community in Berlin, declared on April 11, 1953: ‘The position the Jewish people occupy today in the world is-despite the enormous losses ten times stronger than what it was twenty years ago.’
The leaders of the modern German Reich from its foundation in 1871 until Hitler’s appointment in 1933 had usually been friendly toward the Jews. Hitler, however, was outspokenly hostile toward every manifestation of Jewish influence in Germany. The ‘unchangeable’ program of his National Socialist Party, which was first proclaimed at Munich on February 24, 1920, advocated the revocation of concessions granted to the German Jews in the various German states during the period from 1812 to 1848. These concessions bad made German Jews in every respect fully equal to Germans. Hitler was determined to set the clock back on Germany’s treatment of the Jews. His position toward the Jews closely resembled that of Martin Luther, Von den Juden und ihrer Luegen (About the Jews and their Lies, Wittenberg, 1543), and Heinrich von Treitschke, Ein Wort ueber unser Judenthum (A Word About our Jewry, Berlin, 1880). Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor in a government coalition with the conservative German National People’s Party brought him a gigantic step closer to a position where his will might become law in all questions affecting the German Jews.
Hitler’s overt struggle against the Jews had begun the moment be joined the diminutive anti-Jewish National Socialist Party in 1919. He had been a leading contender in the German political arena since his Party acquired 107 Reichstag seats in the September, 1930, German national election. In 1933, this struggle entered a decisive phase. There were approximately 500,000 Jews in Germany when Hitler became Chancellor in January, 1933.
My reasons for commending M. Cheradame’s most instructive work to the earnest attention of my countrymen and countrywomen are three-fold.
In the first place, M. Cheradame stands con- spicuous amongst that very small body of politicians who warned Europe betimes of the German danger. The fact that in the past he proved a true prophet gives him a special claim to be heard when he states his views as regards the present and the future.
In the second place, I entertain a strong opinion that M. Cheradame’s diagnosis of the present situation is, in all its main features, correct.
In the third place, in spite of the voluminous war literature which already exists, I greatly doubt whether the special aspect of the case which M. Cheradame wishes to present to the public is fully understood in this country; neither should I be surprised to hear from those who are more qualified than myself to speak on the subject that the same remark applies, though possibly in a less degree, to the public opinion of France.
It is essential that, before the terms of peace are discussed, a clear idea should be formed of the reasons which led the German Government to provoke this war. It is well that, if v such a course be at all possible, those who are personally responsible for the numerous acts of barbarity committed by the Germans should receive adequate punishment. But attention to points of this sort, however rational and meritorious, should not in any degree be allowed to obscure the vital importance of the permanent political issues which call loudly for settlement. Otherwise, it is quite conceivable that a peace may be patched up, which may have some specious appearance of being favourable to the Allies, but which would at the same time virtually concede to the Germans all they require in order, after time had been allowed for recuperation, to renew, with increased hope of success, their attempts to shatter modern civilization and to secure the domination of the world.
HAVING LOOKED AT THE ANGELS OF MONS this morning we are now going to see what God did on behalf of another section of our Israel people, the Afrikaaner People, our blood kinsfolk in Southern Africa, hence our title.
All the sections of our English speaking people and other related Scandinavian and Holland Dutch people all have great dates in history that we can remember.
Being from Northern Ireland, we remember the events from 1690 when God sent William of Orange to deliver us from the Stuart Monarchy, from tyranny, and the arbitrary power of Romanism. So we have our little saying “Remember 1690!” We think of our American cousins who have their battle cry of “Remember the Alamo!” – how they were overwhelmed by superior Mexican forces but how that became a rallying cry and how they recovered Texas and brought it back into the United States.
Now we are going to look at this part of the Israel people dwelling in the Southern tip of Africa. The significance of which I hope to show you by the time we are finished. Because they too had a defining moment in their history; that defining moment was the 16th December 1838. It was the year of the Battle of Blood River.
Who were these Afrikaaner people, who are these Boer people who are so despised and ridiculed, especially today in the world media and the world press? Who were these people? They were, of course, a section of the dispersed House of Israel living on the Southern tip of Africa.
EVERY INFANTRYMAN IN THE SOVIET ARMY CARRIES WITH HIM A SMALL SPADE. When he is given the order to halt he immediately lies flat and starts to dig a hole in the ground beside him. In three minutes he will have dug a little trench 15 centimetres deep, in which he can lie stretched out flat, so that bullets can whistle harmlessly over his head. The earth he has dug out forms a breastwork in front and at the side to act as an additional cover. If a tank drives over such a trench the soldier has a 50% chance that it will do him no harm. At any moment the soldier may be ordered to advance again and, shouting at the top of his voice, will rush ahead. If he is not ordered to advance, he digs in deeper and deeper.
At first his trench can be used for firing in the lying position. Later it becomes a trench from which to fire in the kneeling position, and later still, when it is 110 centimetres deep, it can be used for firing in the standing position. The earth that has been dug out protects the soldier from bullets and fragments. He makes an embrasure in this breastwork into which he positions the barrel of his gun. In the absence of any further commands he continues to work on his trench. He camouflages it. He starts to dig a trench to connect with his comrades to the left of him. He always digs from right to left, and in a few hours the unit has a trench linking all the riflemen’s trenches together. The unit’s trenches are linked with the trenches of other units. Dug-outs are built and communication trenches are added at the rear. The trenches are made deeper, covered over, camouflaged and reinforced. Then, suddenly, the order to advance comes again. The soldier emerges, shouting and swearing as loudly as he can.
The infantryman uses the same spade for digging graves for his fallen comrades. If he doesn’t have an axe to hand he uses the spade to chop his bread when it is frozen hard as granite. He uses it as a paddle as he floats across wide rivers on a telegraph pole under enemy fire. And when he gets the order to halt, he again builds his impregnable fortress around himself. He knows how to dig the earth efficiently. He builds his fortress exactly as it should be. The spade is not just an instrument for digging: it can also be used for measuring. It is 50 centimetres long. Two spade lengths are a metre. The blade is 15 centimetres wide and 18 centimetres long. With these measurements in mind the soldier can measure anything he wishes.
The infantry spade does not have a folding handle, and this is a very important feature. It has to be a single monolithic object. All three of its edges are as sharp as a knife. It is painted with a green matt paint so as not to reflect the strong sunlight.
The spade is not only a tool and a measure. It is also a guarantee of the steadfastness of the infantry in the most difficult situations. If the infantry have a few hours to dig themselves in, it could take years to get them out of their holes and trenches, whatever modern weapons are used against them.
Theatrically, the Templars disappeared off the scene in 1307, after having secured their future by founding Switzerland in 1291. During this year, the last of the Crusades and the final “retreat” took place, escaping to Europe and Switzerland; thereafter calling the latter Sui-Ilse (Soeurs Isis) or Schw(e)-Iss (Schwester Isis). During the Crusades, the Templars massively butchered civilians in Jerusalem; then butchered some of the later generations in 1933-1945.
During the last Crusade, the last Templar stronghold, Akkon, fell on May 18th, 1291. Only 2 Months later, just the time it took to travel to Europe. Switzerland was founded on August 1″, 1291. This is why the Swiss flag remains a simplified Templar’s flag in the same red and white colours; and why a Templar Warrior’s shield is still shown, with the Templar’s cross on it, at the front of all the Swiss embassies — a real provocation to the Muslim world.
Much of the Gold from ancient Egypt and Jerusalem was transported to Switzerland —-so we can assume that this is where the famous Templar’s treasure has been hoarded. A similar process seems to have happened during the Second World War, where treasure ended up in Switzerland, having been seized from the House of Judah [The Germans] — which would not have included Khazars, Edomites, Kenites, AshkeNAZlm, Pharisees, “Serpent Seed” (“Reptiles”) or Zionists.
SHORTLY AFTER MIDNIGHT on July 4, 1984, the headquarters of the Institute for Historical Review was attacked by terrorists. They did their job almost to perfection: IHR’s office were destroyed, and ninety per cent of its inventory of books and tapes wiped out. To this day the attackers have not been apprehended, and the authorities — local, state, and federal — have supplied little indication that they ever will be.
The destruction of IHR’s offices and stocks meant a crippling blow for Historical Revisionism, the world-wide movement to bring history into accord with the facts in precisely those areas in which it has been distorted to serve the interests of a powerful international Establishment, an Establishment all the more insidious for its pious espousal of freedom of the press. That one of the few independent voices for truth in history on the planet was silenced by flames on America’s Independence Day in the year made infamous by George Orwell must have brought a cynical smile to the face of more than one enemy of historical truth: the terrorists, whose national loyalties certainly lie elsewhere than in America, chose the date well. Had IHR succumbed to the arsonists, what a superb validation of the Orwellian dictum: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”!
One of the chief casualties of the fire was the text of the book you now hold in your hands. Too badly charred to be reproduced for printing plates, over six hundred pages of The Forced War had to be laboriously reset, reproofed, and re-corrected. That this has now been achieved, despite the enormous losses and extra costs imposed by the arson, despite the Institute’s dislocation and its continued harassment, legal and otherwise, by the foes of historical truth, represents a great triumph for honest historiography, for The Forced War, more than a quarter century after it was written, remains the classic refutation of the thesis of Germany’s “sole guilt” in the origins and outbreak of the Second World War.
By attacking one of the chief taboos of our supposedly irreverent and enlightened century, David Hoggan, the author of The Forced War, unquestionably damaged his prospects as a professional academic. Trained as a diplomatic historian at Harvard under William Langer and Michael Karpovich, with rare linguistic qualifications, Hoggan never obtained tenure. Such are the rewards for independent thought, backed by thorough research, in the “land of the free.”
The Forced War was published in West Germany in 1961 as Der erzwungene Krieg by the Verlag der Deutschen Hochschullehrer-Zeitung (now Grabert Verlag) in Tübingen. There it found an enthusiastic reception among Germans, academics and laymen, who had been oppressed by years of postwar propaganda, imposed by the victor nations and cultivated by the West German government, to the effect that the German leadership had criminally provoked an “aggressive” war in 1939. Der erzwungene Krieg has since gone through thirteen printings and sold over fifty thousand copies. The famous German writer and historian Armin Mohler declared that Hoggan had brought World War II Revisionism out of the ghetto” in Germany.
THE JEWS, like other childish people, enjoy pretending, and when pretending brings them the tribute due to the character assumed, they revel in it.
In this way they have obtained much credit, which should not have been given to them.
They were first tricked out in borrowed traditions and supplied with an entirely false idea of themselves about 430 B.C.
Then commenced the Great Jewish Masque, a pretence which has been maintained to the present day.
In recent times it has never lacked support. Indeed, Jewish propaganda has been so insidious and persistent that voluntary aid, in addition to other kinds, has always been available. At a mere hint, troupes of highly placed carpet-baggers don ass’s ears, or a long nose, and vie with each other, and with the kosher mummers, in endeavours to lead the rout.
A SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT VERSION of the Rhodesian drama, in which the Zionist role is explained at some length, is presented in a book published in Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia: Majuta by a Jew, B.A. Kosmin, with the sub-title: A History of the Jewish Community in Zimbabwe.
The author makes no secret of .the fact that in Rhodesia long before the unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) the terms Jew and Zionist were, as he puts it, “almost interchangeable.” He tells us that in 1967, when . the Rhodesians were already feeling the bite of UN-imposed economic sanctions, the, President of the Central African Zionist Organization (CAZO), Mr. A.E. Abramson led a delegation to Prime Minister Ian Smith “to inform him of their planned manpower and financial aid to Israel”, a move which, he adds, “achieved the desired results.”
In the 1930’s, says Dr. Kosmin, the per capita monetary contribution of Rhodesian Jews to the Zionist cause was the highest in the world, “a tradition maintained into the 1970’s in spite of sanctions, which had virtually placed the country in a state of siege.”
Equally disproportionate, it would seem, was the attention lavished on Rhodesia, with its tiny Jewish population, by the world’s Zionist leaders: we read that visitors to the country included Chaim Weizmann, Vladimir Jabotinsky, Nahum Sokolov, Moshe Sharett, Nahum Goldmann, Norman Bentwich, Cecil Roth, Generals Moshe Dayan, Yigal Allon, Chaim Hertzog and Ezer Weizmann.
WHILE 10 MEN A WEEK ARE BEING EXECUTED by American hangmen on sentences by American Judges after prosecution by American prosecutors, the trials are being assailed by another American judge who made an official examination of procedure against war criminals.
Edward Leroy van Roden, president judge of the orphans court of Delaware County, Pa., whose official report is under War Department suppression, is charging in lectures and after dinner speeches that shocking third degree methods were used to obtain confessions from those placed on trial at Dachau military courts. The courts were held where the Nazis had spread terror among inmates of a concentration camp.
WHEN THE VARIOUS LETTERS AND ARTICLES from which I have quoted were written and published, my gloomy prognostications about the coming change in the diplomatic and military status of Britain and Germany were ridiculed.
The German declaration of rearmament in the teeth of the Treaty of Versailles, the re-entry into the Rhinelands, the re-nationalisation of German waterways were treated by Ministers of State and members of the public with extraordinary complacency. Not until Signor Mussolini had shaken all confidence in ‘collective security’ and Herr Hitler had attached to the Reich both Austria and a large part of Czecho-Slovakia, and had threatened the British Empire with war in the process, did my prophecies of 1933 and 1934 cease to be derided.
When Herr Hitler took open power in the January of 1933, I realised that his psychology was very different from that of our own statesmen and very different from that of the men who had led the German republic.
Here was a man whose life had been hard. In boyhood and youth he had been poor and thwarted. In early manhood he had been a serving soldier performing the most dangerous of front-line tasks, those of a battalion runner. He had been decorated for gallantry, had been wounded and gassed. In the years of later manhood he, with other ex-servicemen, had seen his country thrust down into the very mud of world disrepute. He had suffered from the ineptitude of those charged with the Government of his country. He had been affronted by the spectacle of members of an alien race flourishing in Germany and Austria while his own countrymen were in penury. He had attained power only by the use of force combined with a new application of rhetorical and propagandist powers.
WINSTON CHURCHILL has been the most colourful and picturesque leader of the British Tory Party since Benjamin Disraeli. For half a century he has been a challenging figure in our public life. After the outbreak of the Second World War he became as well known in Europe and America as at home, and his admirers regard him as the greatest Englishman of our time. During the war it became almost treason or sacrilege to criticize Mr. Churchill. He was regarded as the voice of Britain, the great heaven-sent leader who had emerged in our dire peril to save us and guide not only Britain but the Western and democratic world to victory over the forces of darkness.
No wonder the Tory Party, in its desperation, decided to cash in on his wartime reputation as our deliverer. Indeed, he was about the only asset the discredited post-war Tories had, and they have played him up, with his manifest approval, to the limit of their ability.
So there has grown up a Churchill legend: of Churchill the one and only national leader who is capable of being the head of a British Government in difficult times, of a man who was always right in the years prior to the war and who during the war guided us with supreme wisdom. The Tories have done their best to bask in his reflected glory, forgetting that the harshest and truest things Winston Churchill ever said in his life were about them.
But there is more to be said about Winston Churchill than is to be found in his own many volumes on war and politics, his autobiographical reminiscences, and the adulatory biographies that have been published in recent years.
Mr. Churchill has contributed copiously to the history of our time, and, of course, no man can really be expected to be completely objective about himself. The prima donna is not the most reliable critic of her own performances. Reading Mr. Churchill’s
memoirs is very much like reading an appreciative drama review written by the actor who has also played the part of hero in the production. Mr. Churchill’s war books are, in the main, justifications and apologia for his own performances.
Now, nobody will deny that Winston Churchill has been pugnacious, courageous, an outstanding personality, a champion all-in wrestler in the political conflicts of his day, that his speeches have been eloquent and have stirred the multitudes, that he has a great command of the English language, that he can tell a good story, that he has a gay versatility and a sense of humour and other qualities which appeal to a large number of the British people, even to many who would rather be carried out of the polling booth dead than vote for him or any of his Tory candidates.
As I transcribed the following booklet by George Pitt-Rivers, which was published in 1920 – during WWI and shortly following the Russian Revolution – I felt nausea, disgust and a grave sense of foreboding for the future of our children… all the little children of the world; for they will be the real victims in a world truly gone mad if those of us who are awake and aware do not take a firm, ceaseless stand for sanity, truth, love and compassion. It won’t take you long to read it – a mere 45 pages, large print in a 5×8 paperback.
This is the book which elicited the letter from Dr. Oscar Levy, admitting that his people have destroyed the countries in which they came to power; created the ‘chosen people myth’, along with a twisted version of Christianity; have brought the world to a shambles having been behind the Revolutions and Wars – both intra and international – throughout history.
I took the time to transcribe it in full because I believe more of you will read it if it’s laid out before you rather than expecting you’ll order it from a seller of suppressed books… if it’s still available. A couple of years ago an intelligent and wise woman who’s become a dear friend, visited for the first time lugging two boxes of books she “thought I might be able to use”. This was among the many which she had had the foresight to buy when they were still available; I am blessed to have become the benefactor of her love and generosity. She is a treasure; her friendship is priceless… as all true friendships are. Thank you, Effie.
All emphasis is the author’s, except one that I emphasized in color because it is a phrase we hear today to justify every evil, murdering, warring ACT OF TERROR committed today by puppet leaders at all levels and in all countries… political, military, religious and educational. Mindless puppets who have traded their souls for “a path that leads always to darkness deeper than before”.
It will surely be your loss if you chose not to avail yourself of this information.
— Jackie — November 5th, 2001.